The findings suggest that parents and service providers perceive FCP as positive at Novita, with some areas for improvement. The MPOC-20 and MPOC-SP can be used to measure FCP and to identify service delivery gaps, which warrant further exploration.

No abstract

A challenge facing general practice is improving the diagnosis, management and care of people with dementia. Training and education for primary care professionals about knowledge and attitudes about dementia is needed. Online resources can provide educational opportunities for health professionals with limited access to dementia training. An online educational resource (four modules over 3 h) was designed to assist primary care practitioners to develop a systematic framework to identify, diagnose and manage patients with dementia within their practice. Interviews and questionnaires (knowledge, attitudes, confidence and behavioural intentions), with practice nurses and international medical graduates working in general practices, were used to evaluate the resource. Participants’ knowledge, confidence and attitudes about dementia increased after completing the modules. Participants had strong intentions to apply a systematic framework to identify and manage dementia. In post-module interviews, participants reported increased awareness, knowledge and confidence in assessing and managing people with dementia, corroborating the questionnaire results. This project has demonstrated some early changes in clinical behaviour around dementia care in general practice. Promoting the value of applying a systematic framework with colleagues and co-workers could increase awareness of, and participation in, dementia assessment by other primary care professionals within general practices.

Objective: To examine case studies of good practice in intersectoral action for health as one part of evaluating comprehensive primary health care in six sites in South Australia and the Northern Territory. Methods:Interviews with primary health care workers, collaborating agency staff and service users (Total N=33); augmented by relevant documents from the services and collaborating partners. Results:The value of intersectoral action for health and the importance of partner relationships to primary health care services were both strongly endorsed. Factors facilitating intersectoral action included sufficient human and financial resources, diverse backgrounds and skills and the personal rewards that sustain commitment. Key constraining factors were financial and time limitations, and a political and policy context which has become less supportive of intersectoral action; including changes to primary health care. Conclusions:While intersectoral action is an effective way for primary health care services to address social determinants of health, commitment to social justice and to adopting a social view of health are constrained by a broader health service now largely reinforcing a biomedical model. Implications:Effective organisational practices and policies are needed to address social determinants of health in primary health care and to provide a supportive context for workers engaging in intersectoral action.

An open referral policy led to a high proportion of patients being self-referred, and nearly a third of these were diagnosed with cognitive impairment or dementia. Open referral policies and nurse-led services may overcome some of the barriers to early diagnosis that are currently experienced. Considering an aging population worldwide and the associated increases in cognitive impairment, which benefits from early identification and intervention, this paper provides an alternative model of nurse-led assessment.

Affirming interactions are a key feature of successful therapeutic encounters when time and context do not allow or warrant the full repertoire of patient-centred communication.

This article draws on data from a 5-year project that examined the effectiveness of Comprehensive primary healthcare (CPHC) in local communities. A hallmark of CPHC services is interprofessional teamwork. Drawing from this study, our article presents factors that enabled, or hindered, healthcare teams working interprofessionally in Australian primary healthcare (PHC) services. The article reports on the experiences of teams working in six Australian PHC services (four managed by state governments, one non-government sexual health organisation, and one Aboriginal community-controlled health service) during a time of significant health sector restructure. Findings are drawn from two key methods: an online survey of practitioners and managers (n = 154), and interviews with managers and practitioners (n = 60) from the six study sites. The majority of survey respondents worked with other health professionals in their service to provide interprofessional care to clients. Processes included formal team meetings, case conferencing, referring clients to other health professionals if needed, informal communication with other health professionals about clients, and team-based delivery of care. A range of interrelated factors affected interprofessional work at the services, from contextual, organisational, processual, and relational domains. Funding cuts and policy changes that saw a reorientation and re-medicalisation of South Australian services undermined interprofessional work, while a shared CPHC culture and commitment among some staff was helpful in resisting some of these effects. The co-location of services was a factor in PHC teams working interprofessionally and not only enabled some PHC teams to work more interprofessionally but also created barriers to interprofessional teamwork through disruption resulting from restructuring of services. Our study indicates the importance of decision makers taking into account the potential effects of policy and structural changes on interprofessional teamwork. Decision makers should strive to minimise unintended negative effects of changes on the functioning of interprofessional teams.

Equity of access to services and in health outcomes are key goals of primary health care. This study considers understandings of equity and perceptions of current performance in relation to equity among primary health care service staff, health service executives and funders. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with managers, practitioners and administration staff at five primary health care services in Adelaide and one in Alice Springs, as well as with South Australian funders and regional health service executives (n = 68). Services were responding to health inequity by taking actions to improve equitable access to their service, facilitating equitable access to health care more generally, and advocating and taking action on the social determinants of health inequities. As well as availability, affordability and acceptability, our analysis indicated a fourth dimension of equity of access we named ‘engagement’. Our respondents were less able to point to examples of advocacy or action on the social determinants of health inequities than they were to examples of actions to improve equity of access. These findings indicate current strengths and also scope to encourage a broader and more comprehensive role for primary health care in addressing health inequities.