Factors shaping intersectoral action in primary health care services

Abstract

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.

Change management in an environment of ongoing primary health care system reform: A case study of Australian primary health care services

“…We conducted 2 rounds of interviews with practitioners and managers from the case study sites. The first round of interviews (2009‐2010) sought participants' views on the range and quality of PHC services, including multidisciplinary care, community and advocacy work, and issues of access to PHC services . The follow‐up interviews, conducted in 2013 to 2014, in particular, focused on changes that occurred in policy, structure, funding, and human resources within the participating services since the time of the first interview.…”

“…The first round of interviews (2009-2010) sought participants' views on the range and quality of PHC services, including multidisciplinary care, community and advocacy work, and issues of access to PHC services. [33][34][35][36] The follow-up interviews, conducted in 2013 to 2014, in particular, focused on changes that occurred in policy, structure, funding, and human resources within the participating services since the time of the first interview. This paper presents the findings from the second round of interviews on the content of changes over the 5-year period and how these changes have been implemented and managed within their services.…”

Case study of a decolonising Aboriginal community controlled comprehensive primary health care response to alcohol‐related harm

“…c) People’s Alcohol Action Coalition . We interviewed two Congress staff, three staff from partner organisations and one community member who were all active in the alcohol action coalition 26 . We also collected reports and media releases from the coalition.…”

Preventing alcohol-related harm in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities: The experience of an Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Service in Central Australia

“…This could include advocacy to address issues of control at an individual level (client empowerment), organisational level (by supporting and working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations), and at a state or national level (eg by supporting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander calls for treaties or representative bodies). 3,23,24 Population-level approaches to the prevention of alcohol-related harm…”

“…Reorienting general practice to support population-level prevention, including of alcohol-related harm in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, will require a shift in remuneration by government. [22][23][24] The Health Care Homes trials with needs-based capitation funding are an opportunity to enable general practice to be more active in population-level work.…”