Interorganisational and interprofessional partnership approaches to achieve more coordinated and integrated primary and community health services: the Australian experience

2009 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie McDonald ◽  
Gawaine Powell Davies ◽  
Mark Fort Harris

Improving collaboration and coordination in primary and community health is a national priority. Two major approaches have been taken: strengthening interorganisational and interprofessional collaboration. This paper reviews current and emerging models of partnerships: divisions of general practice and primary care partnerships (organisational models); and collaboration between general practitioners with practice nurses and with allied health professionals (interprofessional models). The models are reviewed in terms of the governance and formalisation of the partnership arrangements and the level of collaboration they achieve. The organisational models have had different purposes and taken different forms, the ‘hub and spoke’ model of divisions and decentralised ‘network’ relationships of primary care partnerships, both of which have broadly achieved their aims. Interprofessional collaboration involves a complex mix of allegiances and interests that influences the level of collaboration that is achieved. A combination of approaches is needed to achieve more coordinated and integrated primary health care. The implications for several current policy debates are discussed: the establishment of local integrated and comprehensive primary health care centres, regional level primary care organisations and alternative payment mechanisms.

2001 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hal Swerissen ◽  
Jenny Macmillan ◽  
Catuscia Biuso ◽  
Linda Tilgner

This study examined the existing relationship between community health centres and General Practice Divisions in the State of Victoria, including the nature of joint working arrangements and the identification of barriers to greater collaboration. Improved integration of primary health care services has been advocated to improve consumer and population health outcomes and to reduce inappropriate use of acute and extended care services. General practitioners (GPs) and community health centres are two key providers of primary health care with potential for greater integration. The current study conducted telephone interviews with 20 community health centre CEOs and 18 Executive Officers of divisions, which were matched according to catchment boundaries. Results suggest, while some joint planning is occurring, especially on committees, working parties and projects, there is an overall low level of satisfaction with the relationship between community health centres and GPs and GP divisions. Major barriers to greater integration are the financial or business interests of GPs and misunderstanding and differences in perceived roles and ideology between GPs and community health centres. Improved communication, greater contact and referral and follow-up procedures are identified as a means of improving the relationship between GPs, GP divisions and community health centres. Community health centres and general practitioners (GPs) are key providers of primary care (Australian Community Health Association, 1990).


Author(s):  
Catherine Donnelly ◽  
Rachelle Ashcroft ◽  
Amanda Mofina ◽  
Nicole Bobbette ◽  
Carol Mulder

Abstract Aim: The aim of the study was to describe practices that support collaboration in interprofessional primary health care teams, and identify performance indicators perceived to measure the impact of this collaboration from the perspective of interprofessional health providers. Background: Despite the surge of interprofessional primary health care models implemented across Canada, there is little evidence as to whether or not the intended outcomes of primary health care teams have been achieved. Part of the challenge is determining the most appropriate measures that can demonstrate the value of collaborative care. To date, little remains known about performance measurement from the providers contributing to the collaborative care process in interprofessional primary care teams. Having providers from a range of disciplinary backgrounds assist in the development of performance measures can help identify measures most relevant to demonstrate the value of collaborative care on the intended outcomes of interprofessional primary care models. Methods: A qualitative study; part of a larger mixed methods developmental evaluation to examine performance measurement in interprofessional primary health care teams. A stakeholder workshop was conducted at an annual association meeting of interprofessional primary health care teams in the province of Ontario, Canada. Six questions guided the workshop groups and participant responses were documented on worksheets and flip charts. All responses were collected and entered verbatim into a word document. Qualitative analytic strategies were applied to each question. Findings: A total of 283 primary health care providers from 14 health professions working in interprofessional primary health care teams participated. Top three elements of interprofessional collaboration (total n = 628) were communication (n = 146), co-treatment (n = 112) and patient-based conferences (n = 81). Top three performance indicators currently used to demonstrate the value of interprofessional collaboration (total n = 241) were patient experience (n = 71), patient health status (n = 35) and within team referrals (n = 30).


1996 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 92
Author(s):  
Jill Thoroughgood

In this paper, issues are discussed relating to the provision of quality allied health advice, and the focus of the allied health program in primary health care and community health settings in the Peninsula and Torres Strait Region of Queensland, since Regionalisation in 1991. It was apparent to allied health professionals working in community health, that the change process presented an opportunity to influence not only the Regional Health Authority, but also to act as a united voice for the professions and to be advocates for best practice models of care for the community. Why do allied health professionals need to be utilised in an advisory role in community based health settings? What are the impacts on policy, planning, and on the services provided by community health care workers? How can allied health advisers enhance the quality of outcomes of best practice for the consumers of community health programs? Allied health advisers are important for the whole health sector by ensuring that effective and appropriate allied health services are delivered, that there are increases in allied health resources, that there are improvements in health outcomes for clients, that primary health care models of care are implemented, and, finally, that best practice is implemented by the allied health professional.


2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 52-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feng Lin ◽  
Qihong Sun ◽  
Zhangping Peng ◽  
Jun Cai ◽  
Philip Geanacopoulos ◽  
...  

1995 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 2
Author(s):  
Heather Gardner

The advent of the Australian Journal of Primary Health - Interchange reflects the changes which are taking place in the Australian health sector and the increased and increasing importance of primary health care and community health services. The significant role of primary care in maintaining health and enhancing wellbeing is at last being recognised, and the relationships between primary care, continuing care, and acute care are being redefined and the connections made, so that improvement in continuity of care can be achieved.


2001 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Keleher

As governments attempt to focus more intently on how to deal with alarming measures of health disadvantage and inequities, a reformist gaze seems to have settled on the primary care sector. Simultaneously, in literature about this area, whether intended or not, primary health care and primary care are terms that are increasingly interchanged. This article argues that the slippage in language is counter-productive, first because it disguises the transformative potential of strategies and approaches that can make the fundamental changes necessary to improve health status, and second because the structures and practices of the primary care sector are not necessarily compatible with notions of comprehensive primary health care. There is much to be lost if primary health care and health promotion are disguised as primary care, and not understood for their capacity to make a difference to health inequities although of course in some circumstances, comprehensive primary health care is interdependent with services provided by primary care. In this article, characteristics of primary care and primary health care are juxtaposed to show that if the strengths and limitations of each model are understood, they can be mobilised in collaborative partnerships to deal more effectively with health inequities, than our system has so far been able to do.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
V A Oliveira ◽  
R B David ◽  
L G Mota ◽  
M Barral-Netto ◽  
R P Carreiro ◽  
...  

Abstract Background A strong primary health care (PHC) is associated to better overall health system results. Brazil has good results in PHC in the last decades, integrating 260,000 community health workers (CHW) in 43,000 family health teams (FHT), assisting 90 million people and delivering 500 million health activities yearly, such as home visits, consultations, colposcopy, etc. We address the challenges of incorporating CHA-produced data to official electronic health records, automate its analysis and promote information use by FHT to plan activities & prioritize individuals considering social determinants of health, clinical data and treatment plans. Our study developed a general data protection regulation (GDPR) compliant information system to improve community health agents and family health teams coordination of care in order to address this challenge. Methods The intervention was developed using UX techniques and combines Apps and Web dashboards, issuing digital alerts to the FHT and municipal health manager, regarding individual health status and pending care for each covered individual. The research used the “Monitoring and Evaluating Digital Health Interventions” toolbox by World Health Organization (WHO), and GDPR compliance was attained by terms of use acceptance, pseudonymisation and anonymization procedures. Results Stage 1 and Stage 2 Maturity tests with doctors, nurses and CHA showed good feasibility, usability and user satisfaction of the solution. UX and Qualitative Assessment are reported separately. Conclusions Results so far point that the solution is viable and acknowledged as useful by health professionals. Stage 3 (Pilot) will run in September 2020 in two different cities to test efficacy and health system adherence in real world setting. Digital health interventions are powerful tool to improve health care system performance, particularly in Primary Health Care. Key messages Digital Health Intervention are viable in Primary Care as long as they reduce health profesisonal burden and increase service quality. Brazil is a promising environment for Digital Health. Careful planning, development and deployment are essential in the process.


Healthcare ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 613
Author(s):  
Attà Negri ◽  
Claudia Zamin ◽  
Giulia Parisi ◽  
Anna Paladino ◽  
Giovanbattista Andreoli

The biopsychosocial paradigm is a model of care that has been proposed in order to improve the effectiveness of health care by promoting collaboration between different professions and disciplines. However, its application still faces several issues. A quantitative–qualitative survey was conducted on a sample of general practitioners (GPs) from Milan, Italy, to investigate their attitudes and beliefs regarding the role of the psychologist, the approach adopted to manage psychological diseases, and their experiences of collaboration with psychologists. The results show a partial view of the psychologist’s profession that limits the potential of integration between medicine and psychology in primary care. GPs recognized that many patients (66%) would often benefit from psychological intervention, but only in a few cases (9%) were these patients regularly referred to a psychologist. Furthermore, the referral represents an almost exclusive form of collaboration present in the opinions of GPs. Only 8% of GPs would consider the joint and integrated work of the psychologist and doctor useful within the primary health care setting. This vision of the role of psychologists among GPs represents a constraint in implementing a comprehensive primary health care approach, as advocated by the World Health Organization.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document