Health (il)literacy: Structural vulnerability in the nurse navigator service

Abstract

Chronic disease is increasing in prevalence across the globe, contributing to increased hospital admission and associated healthcare spending. Chronic care management is therefore high on government agendas looking to curb burgeoning health budgets (World Health Organization, 2021). In Australia, one in two hospitalisations and nine out of ten deaths involve chronic conditions (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW), 2020a). The population groups identified as accessing the most healthcare resources are those with multimorbidity, First Nations people, and those over the age of 65 years (AIHW, 2018). This demographic also has more frequent presentations to emergency, subsequent admissions, higher rates of polypharmacy and, due to the multiple specialties involved in their care, frequently fail to attend appointments (Byrne et al.,

Navigating the care of families with a child or children with autistic spectrum disorder

“…The primary reasons for the introduction of nurse navigators were to reduce unnecessary admissions to hospital; to co-ordinate the care of people living with chronic and complex problems; creating partnerships to support continuity of care; and, to lead in any change that may be required as a result of streamlining service provision. Structural vulnerability and feelings of abandonment are concepts that have been identified by the patients with multiple chronic conditions in the nurse navigator evaluation (Byrne et al, 2021). In a study undertaken by Matheson et al, (2013), adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder described multiple barriers to accessing health care that ranged from the negative attitudes of health professional towards them, to challenges in securing an appointment to see a specialist.…”

“…Additionally, navigators work to reduce other costs that are not directly aligned with improved hospital performance. For example, reduced patient travel costs, and alignment of appointments particularly where these were across regional locations (Harvey et al, 2021). Ethical clearance for the project was awarded by Central Queensland University (020740) and Queensland Health (HREC/18/QTDD/8).…”

Operationalizing the structural vulnerability profile within the medical examiner context

“…Structural vulnerability approaches have been increasingly implemented in clinical practice to enable clinicians and public health specialists to recognize social determinants of health and related adverse health outcomes [ 57 ]. Described briefly above, the Structural Vulnerability Assessment Tool, or SVAT, is one such approach [ 52 ].…”

Promoting nurses' and midwives' ethical responsibilities towards vulnerable people: An alignment of research and clinical practice

“…People from disadvantaged or vulnerable backgrounds are over‐represented in poor health statistics (Ford et al, 2021 ) and are often the most frequent seekers of care (Cruwys et al, 2018 ). For many, engaging with health care providers is fraught with challenges, including, but not limited to, access to care, understanding of need and adaptability of services (Byrne et al, 2022 ; Lewis et al, 2012 ). For many, non‐engagement with healthcare providers is reflective of an overall disengagement with institutions more broadly and demonstrates a level of structural vulnerability for the individual.…”