The success of Australia’s ‘No Jab,No Pay’ policy at a local level; retrospective clinical audit of a single medical practice assessing incidence of catch-up vaccinations

Vaccination is a vital health care initiative to prevent individual and population infection. To increase vaccination rates the federal government implemented the ‘No Jab, No Pay’ policy, where eligibility for several government benefits required children to be fully vaccinated by removing ‘conscientious objections’ and expanding the age range of children whose families receive benefits. This study assesses the impact of this policy at a local area within a single medical practice community in NSW, Australia. A retrospective clinical audit was performed between 2012 and 2017 on a single general practice's vaccination records for children ≤19 years. Catch-up vaccinations were assessed based on age at vaccination. Incidence of catch-up vaccinations was assessed for each of four years before and two years after the implementation of the ‘No Jab, No Pay’ policy in January 2016, along with the age of children and vaccination(s) given. Catch-up vaccinations were assessed temporally either side of implementation of ‘No Jab, No Pay’. Comparing the average annual vaccination catch-up incidence rate of 6.2% pre-implementation (2012–2015), there was an increase to 9.2% in 2016 (p < .001) and 7.8% in 2017 (p = .027). Secondary outcome measurement of catch-up vaccination incidence rates before (2012–2015) and after (2016–2017) ‘No Jab, No Pay’ implementation showed statistically significant increases for children aged 8–11 years (3.2%–5.6%, p = .038), 12–15 years (7.5%–14.7%, p < .001) and 16–19 years (3.3%–10.2%, p < .001) along with a statistically significant reduction in children aged 1–3 years (11.4%–6.2%, p = .015). Also, catch-up rates for DTPa significantly increased after program implementation. This study demonstrates that the Australian federal government vaccination policy ‘No Jab, No Pay’ was coincident with an increase in catch-up vaccinations within a rural NSW community served by one medical practice, especially for older children.     

Stakeholder collaboration in long-term care of older people in Lithuania

Demographic situation, changes in the role of women in society and growing demand for long-term care (LTC) of older people have challenged the ability to meet the growing LTC needs in most developed countries. In countries where responsibility for LTC is still largely laid on families, it is, however, even more critical and calls for improvements in formal LTC systems. More intensive stakeholder collaboration in LTC policy development, organising and delivery are of primary importance in improving LTC systems. Such collaboration, however, is not always successful; thus, it is critical to understand what makes it effective and efficient. In this paper, we specifically look into multistakeholder collaboration in LTC in Lithuania, one of the fastest ageing countries in the EU, with the demand for LTC services growing fast and exceeding the supply despite rising business and NGO engagement. To determine facilitators of such collaboration, we build on the data obtained through eight focus group discussions with all key stakeholder representatives (LTC policymakers, organisers and service providers [public, private and NGOs], 54 participants in total). Our findings indicate that in addition to national and organisational level facilitators studied in prior research, there are important individual level factors, such as meaningfulness at work, concern and care for others, possibility for personal growth and development, satisfaction with supervision, a sense of belonging and role clarity. On the other hand, our results show that collaboration is constrained by a shortage of human resources, increased workload caused by growing LTC demand, bureaucratic requirements, legal restrictions, lack of awareness of LTC service availability among elder persons, and prevailing social norms and attitudes to institutionalised care. Interestingly, a lack of financial resources is not perceived as a major constraint.     

Glycaemic control for patients with severe acute brain injury: Protocol for a systematic review

Background

Hyperglycaemia is common in patients with acute brain injury admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). Many studies have found associations between development of hyperglycaemia and increased mortality in hospitalised patients. However, the optimal target for blood glucose control is unknown. We want to conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis to explore the beneficial and harmful effects of restrictive versus liberal glucose control on patient outcomes in adults with severe acute brain injury.

Methods

We will systematically search medical databases including CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE and trial registries. We will search the following websites for ongoing or unpublished trials: http://www.controlled-trials.com/ , http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ , www.eudraCT.com , http://centerwatch.com/ , The Cochrane Library's CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and CINAHL. Two authors will independently review and select trials and extract data. We will include randomised trials comparing levels of glucose control in our analyses and observational studies will be included to address potential harms. The primary outcomes are defined as all-cause mortality, functional outcome and health-related quality of life. Secondary outcomes include serious adverse events including hypoglycaemia, length of ICU stay and duration of mechanical ventilation, and explorative outcomes including intracranial pressure and infection. Trial Sequential Analysis will be used to investigate the risk of type I error due to repetitive testing and to further explore imprecision. Quality of trials will be evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and quality of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.

Discussion

The results of the systematic review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication. With the review, we hope to inform future randomised clinical trials and improve clinical practice.     

流动人口基层医疗卫生机构首诊现状及影响因素分析

目的:了解流动人口基层首诊现状及其影响因素,为推进流动人口分级诊疗提供实证参考依据。方法:基于2017年全国流动人口动态监测调查数据中82734名最近1次患病(负伤)流动人口数据,利用SPSS 25.0统计软件分析其基层首诊情况及影响因素。结果:82734名最近1次患病(负伤)流动人口中首选到基层医疗卫生机构就诊15936人,基层首诊率仅为19.3%;二分类logistic回归分析结果显示:年龄≥65岁、农业户口、流动时间0~5年、患慢性病、至少参加1项医疗保险,居住地到最近医疗服务机构所需时间≤15 min的流动人口患病后更愿意选择到基层首诊。学历大专及以上、家庭月均收入>10000元、市跨县、东北地区、不愿意落户、自评健康状况为不健康的流动人口患病后更不愿意选择到基层首诊。结论:流动人口患病(负伤)后选择到基层首诊率较低,年龄、受教育程度、户口类型、家庭月均总收入、流动时间、流动范围、流入地区域、落户意愿、自评健康状况、是否患慢性病、有无参加医疗保险、居住地到最近医疗服务机构所需时间是影响流动人口患病(负伤)后选择到基层首诊的主要因素。     

Access to Care: End-to-End Digital Response for COVID-19 Care Delivery

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic disrupted health care, requiring organizational leaders to act quickly to manage the health-related concerns of individuals and communities. The ability to offer a variety of digitally enabled telehealth services with 24/7 access to nurse practitioners and physician assistants allowed us to care for patients in their homes. It reduced the spread of the virus, protected our employees from further disease spread, and provided early interventions to those in need. The roles of nurse practitioner leaders, the enacted strategies, and patient outcomes demonstrate the impact of an innovative digital care delivery model on care across the continuum.