Goals and Targets: Applicability to Primary Health Care

1997 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 92
Author(s):  
Debra Smith
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Primary Health Care ◽  
New South ◽  
New South Wales ◽  
Care Staff ◽  
Health Improvement ◽  
Improvement Program ◽  
Primary Health ◽  
South Wales

The importance of outcomes in evaluating and judging health care programs is increasing, particularly in New South Wales. A review of the literature suggests the relevance of outcomes to primary health care might be limited. A small survey of primary care staff working out of Community Health Centres in rural New South Wales (NSW) revealed that staff believe they are often involved in population focus work, while health education and promotion are carried out by staff working with individuals. The identification of the use of primary care strategies is not high unless staff have had experience in a particular area, and the NSW Health Improvement Program is not particularly well understood.

scholarly journals Partnership approach to Indigenous primary health care and diabetes: a case study from regional New South Wales

2007 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne Cooper ◽  
Stephen Moore ◽  
Lyndall Palmer ◽  
Judith Reinhardt ◽  
Michael Roberts ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Primary Health Care ◽  
New South ◽  
New South Wales ◽  
Primary Health ◽  
South Wales ◽  
Partnership Approach

scholarly journals The Future of Health Care: Protocol for Measuring the Potential of Task Automation Grounded in the National Health Service Primary Care System (Preprint)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Willis ◽  
Paul Duckworth ◽  
Angela Coulter ◽  
Eric T Meyer ◽  
Michael Osborne
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Primary Health Care ◽  
National Health Service ◽  
Health Service ◽  
National Health ◽  
Care Staff ◽  
Primary Health ◽  
The Future

BACKGROUND Recent advances in technology have reopened an old debate on which sectors will be most affected by automation. This debate is ill served by the current lack of detailed data on the exact capabilities of new machines and how they are influencing work. Although recent debates about the future of jobs have focused on whether they are at risk of automation, our research focuses on a more fine-grained and transparent method to model task automation and specifically focus on the domain of primary health care. OBJECTIVE This protocol describes a new wave of intelligent automation, focusing on the specific pressures faced by primary care within the National Health Service (NHS) in England. These pressures include staff shortages, increased service demand, and reduced budgets. A critical part of the problem we propose to address is a formal framework for measuring automation, which is lacking in the literature. The health care domain offers a further challenge in measuring automation because of a general lack of detailed, health care–specific occupation and task observational data to provide good insights on this misunderstood topic. METHODS This project utilizes a multimethod research design comprising two phases: a qualitative observational phase and a quantitative data analysis phase; each phase addresses one of the two project aims. Our first aim is to address the lack of task data by collecting high-quality, detailed task-specific data from UK primary health care practices. This phase employs ethnography, observation, interviews, document collection, and focus groups. The second aim is to propose a formal machine learning approach for probabilistic inference of task- and occupation-level automation to gain valuable insights. Sensitivity analysis is then used to present the occupational attributes that increase/decrease automatability most, which is vital for establishing effective training and staffing policy. RESULTS Our detailed fieldwork includes observing and documenting 16 unique occupations and performing over 130 tasks across six primary care centers. Preliminary results on the current state of automation and the potential for further automation in primary care are discussed. Our initial findings are that tasks are often shared amongst staff and can include convoluted workflows that often vary between practices. The single most used technology in primary health care is the desktop computer. In addition, we have conducted a large-scale survey of over 156 machine learning and robotics experts to assess what tasks are susceptible to automation, given the state-of-the-art technology available today. Further results and detailed analysis will be published toward the end of the project in early 2019. CONCLUSIONS We believe our analysis will identify many tasks currently performed manually within primary care that can be automated using currently available technology. Given the proper implementation of such automating technologies, we expect considerable staff resources to be saved, alleviating some pressures on the NHS primary care staff. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPOR DERR1-10.2196/11232

scholarly journals The organisation and delivery of health improvement in general practice and primary care: a scoping study

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (29) ◽  
pp. 1-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Peckham ◽  
Jane Falconer ◽  
Steve Gillam ◽  
Alison Hann ◽  
Sally Kendall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Care ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Primary Health Care ◽  
Health Care Team ◽  
Care Team ◽  
Health Improvement ◽  
Primary Health Care Team ◽  
Primary Health ◽  
Improvement Interventions

BackgroundThis project examines the organisation and delivery of health improvement activities by and within general practice and the primary health-care team. The project was designed to examine who delivers these interventions, where they are located, what approaches are developed in practices, how individual practices and the primary health-care team organise such public health activities, and how these contribute to health improvement. Our focus was on health promotion and ill-health prevention activities.AimsThe aim of this scoping exercise was to identify the current extent of knowledge about the health improvement activities in general practice and the wider primary health-care team. The key objectives were to provide an overview of the range and type of health improvement activities, identify gaps in knowledge and areas for further empirical research. Our specific research objectives were to map the range and type of health improvement activity undertaken by general practice staff and the primary health-care team based within general practice; to scope the literature on health improvement in general practice or undertaken by health-care staff based in general practice and identify gaps in the evidence base; to synthesise the literature and identify effective approaches to the delivery and organisation of health improvement interventions in a general practice setting; and to identify the priority areas for research as defined by those working in general practice.MethodsWe undertook a comprehensive search of the literature. We followed a staged selection process involving reviews of titles and abstracts. This resulted in the identification of 1140 papers for data extraction, with 658 of these papers selected for inclusion in the review, of which 347 were included in the evidence synthesis. We also undertook 45 individual and two group interviews with primary health-care staff.FindingsMany of the research studies reviewed had some details about the type, process or location, or who provided the intervention. Generally, however, little attention is paid in the literature to examining the impact of the organisational context on the way services are delivered or how this affects the effectiveness of health improvement interventions in general practice. We found that the focus of attention is mainly on individual prevention approaches, with practices engaging in both primary and secondary prevention. The range of activities suggests that general practitioners do not take a population approach but focus on individual patients. However, it is clear that many general practitioners see health promotion as an integral part of practice, whether as individual approaches to primary or secondary health improvement or as a practice-based approach to improving the health of their patients. Our key conclusion is that there is currently insufficient good evidence to support many of the health improvement interventions undertaken in general practice and primary care more widely.Future ResearchFuture research on health improvement in general practice and by the primary health-care team needs to move beyond clinical research to include delivery systems and be conducted in a primary care setting. More research needs to examine areas where there are chronic disease burdens – cancer, dementia and other disabilities of old age. Reviews should be commissioned that examine the whole prevention pathway for health problems that are managed within primary care drawing together research from general practice, pharmacy, community engagement, etc.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document