1
|
Wilkinson-Stokes M, Yap C, Crellin D, Bange R, Braitberg G, Gerdtz M. How should non-emergency EMS presentations be managed? A thematic analysis of politicians', policymakers', clinicians' and consumers' viewpoints. BMJ Open 2024; 14:e083866. [PMID: 39059805 PMCID: PMC11284875 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-083866] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/02/2024] [Accepted: 06/27/2024] [Indexed: 07/28/2024] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE In 2023, Australian government emergency medical services (EMS) responded to over 4 million consumers, of which over 56% were not classified as an 'emergency', at the cost of AU$5.5 billion. We explored the viewpoints of politicians, policymakers, clinicians and consumers on how these non-emergency requests should be managed. DESIGN A realist framework was adopted; a multidisciplinary team (including paramedicine, medicine and nursing) was formed; data were collected via semistructured focus groups or interviews, and thematic analysis was performed. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS 56 participants were selected purposefully and via open advertisement: national and state parliamentarians (n=3); government heads of healthcare disciplines (n=3); government policymakers (n=5); industry policymakers in emergency medicine, general practice and paramedicine (n=6); EMS chief executive officers, medical directors and managers (n=7); academics (n=8), frontline clinicians in medicine, nursing and paramedicine (n=8); and consumers (n=16). RESULTS Three themes emerged: first, the reality of the EMS workload (theme titled 'facing reality'); second, perceptions of what direction policy should take to manage this ('no silver bullet') and finally, what the future role of EMS in society should be ('finding the right space'). Participants provided 16 policy suggestions, of which 10 were widely supported: increasing public health literacy, removing the Medical Priority Dispatch System, supporting multidisciplinary teams, increasing 24-hour virtual emergency departments, revising undergraduate paramedic university education to reflect the reality of the contemporary role, increasing use of management plans for frequent consumers, better paramedic integration with the healthcare system, empowering callers by providing estimated wait times, reducing ineffective media campaigns to 'save EMS for emergencies' and EMS moving away from hospital referrals and towards community care. CONCLUSIONS There is a need to establish consensus on the role of EMS within society and, particularly, on whether the scope should continue expanding beyond emergency care. This research reports 16 possible ideas, each of which may warrant consideration, and maps them onto the standard patient journey.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matt Wilkinson-Stokes
- Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Celene Yap
- Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Di Crellin
- Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Ray Bange
- School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Queensland, Australia
- School of Health, University of the Sunshine Coast, Sippy Downs, Queensland, Australia
| | - George Braitberg
- Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia
| | - Marie Gerdtz
- Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Albers B, Auer R, Caci L, Nyantakyi E, Plys E, Podmore C, Riegel F, Selby K, Walder J, Clack L. Implementing organized colorectal cancer screening programs in Europe-protocol for a systematic review of determinants and strategies. Syst Rev 2023; 12:26. [PMID: 36849979 PMCID: PMC9969690 DOI: 10.1186/s13643-023-02193-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2022] [Accepted: 02/16/2023] [Indexed: 03/01/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND With a high mortality of 12.6% of all cancer cases, colorectal cancer (CRC) accounts for substantial burden of disease in Europe. In the past decade, more and more countries have introduced organized colorectal cancer screening programs, making systematic screening available to entire segments of a population, typically based on routine stool tests and/or colonoscopy. While the effectiveness of organized screening in reducing CRC incidence and mortality has been confirmed, studies continuously report persistent program implementation challenges. This systematic review will synthesize the literature on organized CRC screening programs. Its aim is to understand what is currently known about the barriers and facilitators that influence the implementation of these programs and about the implementation strategies used to navigate these determinants. METHODS A systematic review of primary studies of any research design will be conducted. CENTRAL, CINAHL, EMBASE, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Scopus will be searched. Websites of (non-)government health care organizations and websites of organizations affiliated with authors of included studies will be screened for unpublished evaluation reports. Existing organized CRC screening programs will be contacted with a request to share program-specific grey literature. Two researchers will independently screen each publication in two rounds for eligibility. Included studies will focus on adult populations involved in the implementation of organized CRC screening programs and contain information about implementation determinants/ strategies. Publications will be assessed for their risk of bias. Data extraction will include study aim, design, location, setting, sample, methods, and measures; program characteristics; implementation stage, framework, determinants, strategies, and outcomes; and service and other outcome information. Findings will be synthesized narratively using the three stages of thematic synthesis. DISCUSSION With its sole focus on the implementation of organized CRC screening programs, this review will help to fill a central knowledge gap in the literature on colorectal cancer screening. Its findings can inform the decision-making in policy and practice needed to prioritize resources for establishing new and maintaining existing programs in the future. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION PROSPERO (CRD42022306580).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bianca Albers
- Institute for Implementation Science in Health Care (IfIS), Medical Faculty, University of Zurich, Universitätstrasse 84, 8006, Zurich, Switzerland.
| | - Reto Auer
- Institute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Mittelstrasse 43, 3012, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Laura Caci
- Institute for Implementation Science in Health Care (IfIS), Medical Faculty, University of Zurich, Universitätstrasse 84, 8006, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Emanuela Nyantakyi
- Institute for Implementation Science in Health Care (IfIS), Medical Faculty, University of Zurich, Universitätstrasse 84, 8006, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Ekaterina Plys
- Center for primary care and public health (Unisanté), University of Lausanne, Rue de Bugnon 44, 1010, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Clara Podmore
- Center for primary care and public health (Unisanté), University of Lausanne, Rue de Bugnon 44, 1010, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Franziska Riegel
- Institute for Implementation Science in Health Care (IfIS), Medical Faculty, University of Zurich, Universitätstrasse 84, 8006, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Kevin Selby
- Center for primary care and public health (Unisanté), University of Lausanne, Rue de Bugnon 44, 1010, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Joel Walder
- Institute for Implementation Science in Health Care (IfIS), Medical Faculty, University of Zurich, Universitätstrasse 84, 8006, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Lauren Clack
- Institute for Implementation Science in Health Care (IfIS), Medical Faculty, University of Zurich, Universitätstrasse 84, 8006, Zurich, Switzerland.,Department of Infectious Diseases and Hospital Epidemiology, University Hospital Zurich, Rämistrasse 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Carter SM. Why Does Cancer Screening Persist Despite the Potential to Harm? SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY 2021. [DOI: 10.1177/0971721820960252] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Population screening for early-stage cancer or cancer precursors began in the mid-twentieth century, with the goal of reducing suffering from cancer illness and lengthening average life by preventing cancer deaths. Since the establishment of cancer screening, concerns have emerged that it may be doing considerable harm; despite this, screening practices have remained relatively intractable. This intractability in the face of harm is the central problematic of my analysis. I reinterpret a large study of breast, cervical and prostate cancer screening completed recently by our Australian research group, working across empirical bioethics, public health and social science. I suggest three reasons why cancer screening might persist as it does, and thus reach conclusions about what might be required to make cancer screening systems more responsive to the potential for harm.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stacy M. Carter
- Stacy M. Carter (corresponding author), Australian Centre for Health Engagement, Evidence and Values, School of Health and Society, Building 29, Room 318, University of Wollongong, Northfields Avenue, NSW 2522 Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Holden CA, Frank O, Li M, Manocha R, Caruso J, Turnbull D, Reed RL, Miller CL, Roder D, Olver I. Engagement of General Practice in an Australian Organised Bowel Cancer Screening Program: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Knowledge and Practice. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2020; 21:2099-2107. [PMID: 32711438 PMCID: PMC7573400 DOI: 10.31557/apjcp.2020.21.7.2099] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2020] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Understanding factors causing variation in family physicians/general practitioners (GPs) screening knowledge, understanding and support of organised population-based colorectal cancer (CRC) programs can direct interventions that maximise the influence of a CRC screening recommendation from a GP. This study aims to assess contextual factors that influence knowledge and quality improvement (QI) practice directed to CRC screening in Australian general practice. Methods: A convenience sample of anonymous general practice staff from all Australian states and territories completed a web-based survey. Multivariate analyses assessed the association between CRC screening knowledge and QI-CRC practice scores and patient, organisational and environmental-level contextual factors. Results: Of 1,013 survey starts, 918 respondents (90.6%) completed the survey. Respondents less likely to recommend FOBT screening had lower knowledge and QI practice scores directed to CRC screening. Controlling for individual and practice characteristics, respondents’ rating of the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) support for preventive care, attending external education, and sufficient practice resources to implement QI practice (generally) were the strongest factors associated with QI practice directed towards CRC screening. Knowledge scores were less amenable to the influence of contextual factors explored. Conclusion: More active engagement of family medicine/general practice to improve screening promotion could be achieved through better QI resourcing without changing the fundamental design of population-based CRC screening programs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carol A Holden
- South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Oliver Frank
- Discipline of General Practice, Adelaide Medical School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, and Oakden Medical Centre, Hillcrest, Australia
| | - Ming Li
- Cancer Epidemiology and Population Health, Cancer Research Institute, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia
| | | | - Joanna Caruso
- South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Deborah Turnbull
- School of Psychology, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Richard L Reed
- Discipline of General Practice, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Caroline L Miller
- South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, Australia.,School of Public Health, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
| | - David Roder
- Cancer Epidemiology and Population Health, Cancer Research Institute, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Ian Olver
- School of Psychology, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Holden CA, Frank O, Caruso J, Turnbull D, Reed RL, Miller CL, Olver I. From participation to diagnostic assessment: a systematic scoping review of the role of the primary healthcare sector in the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program. Aust J Prim Health 2020; 26:191-206. [PMID: 32536362 DOI: 10.1071/py19181] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2019] [Accepted: 01/07/2020] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
Primary health care (PHC) plays a vital support role in organised colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs by encouraging patient participation and ensuring timely referral for diagnostic assessment follow up. A systematic scoping review of the current evidence was conducted to inform strategies that better engage the PHC sector in organised CRC screening programs. Articles published from 2005 to November 2019 were searched across five databases. Evidence was synthesised and interventions that specifically require PHC involvement were mapped to stages of the CRC screening pathway. Fifty-seven unique studies were identified in which patient, provider and system-level interventions align with defined stages of the CRC screening pathway: namely, identifying/reminding patients who have not responded to CRC screening (non-adherence) (n=46) and follow up of a positive screen referral (n=11). Self-management support initiatives (patient level) and improvement initiatives (system level) demonstrate consistent benefits along the CRC screening pathway. Interventions evaluated as part of a quality-improvement process tended to report effectiveness; however, the variation in reporting makes it difficult to determine which elements contributed to the overall study outcomes. To maximise the benefits of population-based screening programs, better integration into existing primary care services can be achieved through targeting preventive and quality care interventions along the entire screening pathway.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carol A Holden
- South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, PO Box 11060, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia; and Corresponding author.
| | - Oliver Frank
- Discipline of General Practice, University of Adelaide, Helen Mayo North, Frome Road, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia
| | - Joanna Caruso
- South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, PO Box 11060, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia
| | - Deborah Turnbull
- School of Psychology, University of Adelaide, Level 7, Hughes Building, North Terrace Campus, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
| | - Richard L Reed
- College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia
| | - Caroline L Miller
- South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, PO Box 11060, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia; and School of Public Health, University of Adelaide, 57 North Terrace, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
| | - Ian Olver
- School of Psychology, University of Adelaide, Level 7, Hughes Building, North Terrace Campus, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Chandran S, Parker F, Lontos S, Vaughan R, Efthymiou M. Can we ease the financial burden of colonoscopy? Using real-time endoscopic assessment of polyp histology to predict surveillance intervals. Intern Med J 2015; 45:1293-9. [DOI: 10.1111/imj.12917] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/10/2015] [Revised: 09/15/2015] [Accepted: 09/18/2015] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- S. Chandran
- Departments of Gastroenterology; Austin Health; Melbourne Australia
| | - F. Parker
- Anaesthetics; Austin Health; Melbourne Australia
| | - S. Lontos
- Departments of Gastroenterology; Austin Health; Melbourne Australia
- Department of Gastroenterology; Warringal Private Hospital; Melbourne Australia
| | - R. Vaughan
- Departments of Gastroenterology; Austin Health; Melbourne Australia
- Department of Gastroenterology; Warringal Private Hospital; Melbourne Australia
| | - M. Efthymiou
- Departments of Gastroenterology; Austin Health; Melbourne Australia
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
WHAT IS THE ROLE OF COMMUNITY PREFERENCE INFORMATION IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT DECISION MAKING? A CASE STUDY OF COLORECTAL CANCER SCREENING. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2015; 31:241-8. [PMID: 26376934 DOI: 10.1017/s0266462315000367] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to determine the role of community preference information from discrete choice studies of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in health technology assessment (HTA) reports and subsequent policy decisions. METHODS We undertook a systematic review of discrete choice studies of CRC screening. Included studies were reviewed to assess the policy context of the research. For those studies that cited a recent or pending review of CRC screening, further searches were undertaken to determine the extent to which community preference information was incorporated into the HTA decision-making process. RESULTS Eight discrete choice studies that evaluated preferences for CRC screening were identified. Four of these studies referred to a national or local review of CRC screening in three countries: Australia, Canada, and the Netherlands. Our review of subsequently released health policy documents showed that while consideration was given to community views on CRC, policy was not informed by discrete choice evidence. CONCLUSIONS Preferences and values of patients are increasingly being considered "evidence" to be incorporated into HTA reports. Discrete choice methodology is a rigorous quantitative method for eliciting preferences and while as a methodology it is growing in profile, it would appear that the results of such research are not being systematically translated or integrated into HTA reports. A formalized approach is needed to incorporate preference literature into the HTA decision-making process.
Collapse
|
8
|
Walters S, Benitez-Majano S, Muller P, Coleman MP, Allemani C, Butler J, Peake M, Guren MG, Glimelius B, Bergström S, Påhlman L, Rachet B. Is England closing the international gap in cancer survival? Br J Cancer 2015; 113:848-60. [PMID: 26241817 PMCID: PMC4559829 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2015.265] [Citation(s) in RCA: 87] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/18/2015] [Revised: 06/19/2015] [Accepted: 06/24/2015] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND We provide an up-to-date international comparison of cancer survival, assessing whether England is 'closing the gap' compared with other high-income countries. METHODS Net survival was estimated using national, population-based, cancer registrations for 1.9 million patients diagnosed with a cancer of the stomach, colon, rectum, lung, breast (women) or ovary in England during 1995-2012. Trends during 1995-2009 were compared with estimates for Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Clinicians were interviewed to help interpret trends. RESULTS Survival from all cancers remained lower in England than in Australia, Canada, Norway and Sweden by 2005-2009. For some cancers, survival improved more in England than in other countries between 1995-1999 and 2005-2009; for example, 1-year survival from stomach, rectal, lung, breast and ovarian cancers improved more than in Australia and Canada. There has been acceleration in lung cancer survival improvement in England recently, with average annual improvement in 1-year survival rising to 2% during 2010-2012. Survival improved more in Denmark than in England for rectal and lung cancers between 1995-1999 and 2005-2009. CONCLUSIONS Survival has increased in England since the mid-1990s in the context of strategic reform in cancer control, however, survival remains lower than in comparable developed countries and continued investment is needed to close the international survival gap.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Walters
- Cancer Survival Group, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK
| | - Sara Benitez-Majano
- Cancer Survival Group, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK
| | - Patrick Muller
- Cancer Survival Group, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK
| | - Michel P Coleman
- Cancer Survival Group, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK
| | - Claudia Allemani
- Cancer Survival Group, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK
| | - John Butler
- Cancer Survival Group, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal Marsden Hospital, London SW3 6JJ, UK
| | - Mick Peake
- Glenfield Hospital, University Hospitals of Leicester, Groby Road, Leicester LE3 9QP, UK
| | - Marianne Grønlie Guren
- Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Ullevaal, PO Box 4956, Nydalen, NO-0424 Oslo, Norway
- K. G. Jebsen Colorectal Cancer Research Centre, Oslo University Hospital, PO Box 4953, Nydalen, NO-0424 Oslo, Norway
| | - Bengt Glimelius
- Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Akademiska sjukhuset, SE-751 85 Uppsala, Sweden
| | | | - Lars Påhlman
- Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, Akademiska sjukhuset, SE-751 85 Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Bernard Rachet
- Cancer Survival Group, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Chandran S, Parker F, Vaughan R, Mitchell B, Fanning S, Brown G, Yu J, Efthymiou M. Right-sided adenoma detection with retroflexion versus forward-view colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81:608-13. [PMID: 25440687 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.08.039] [Citation(s) in RCA: 62] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2014] [Accepted: 08/29/2014] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Colonoscopy and polypectomy can prevent up to 80% of colon cancer; however, a significant adenoma miss rate still exists, particularly in the right side of the colon. OBJECTIVE To assess whether retroflexion in the right side of the colon significantly improves the adenoma detection rate (ADR) over forward-view assessment. DESIGN Multicenter prospective cohort study. SETTING Three tertiary care public and 2 private hospitals. PATIENTS A total of 1351 consecutive adult patients undergoing elective colonoscopy. INTERVENTION Withdrawal from the cecum was performed in the forward view initially and identified polyps removed. Once the hepatic flexure was reached, the cecum was reintubated and the right side of the colon was assessed in the retroflexed view to the hepatic flexure. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS ADR in the retroflexed view when compared with forward-view examination of the right side of the colon. RESULTS Retroflexion was successful in 95.9% of patients, with looping the predominant (69.6%) reason for failure. Forward-view assessment of the right side of the colon identified 642 polyps, of which 531 were adenomas yielding a polyp and ADR of 28.57% and 24.64%, respectively. Retroflexion identified a further 84 polyps of which 75 were adenomas, improving the polyp and ADR to 30.57% and 26.4%, respectively. LIMITATIONS Observational study. CONCLUSION Right-sided retroflexion was successful in most of our cohort with a statistically significant but small increase in ADR. Right-sided retroflexion is safe when performed by experienced endoscopists with no adverse events observed in this cohort. ( CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12613000424707.).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sujievvan Chandran
- Department of Gastroenterology, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Department of Medicine, Austin Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Frank Parker
- Department of Anaesthetics, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Rhys Vaughan
- Department of Gastroenterology, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Department of Medicine, Austin Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Brent Mitchell
- Department of Gastroenterology, Launceston General Hospital, Tasmania, Australia; Calvary Health Care, St. Vincent's Campus, Tasmania, Australia
| | - Scott Fanning
- Department of Gastroenterology, Launceston General Hospital, Tasmania, Australia; Calvary Health Care, St. Vincent's Campus, Tasmania, Australia
| | - Gregor Brown
- Department of Gastroenterology, Alfred Health, Victoria, Australia; Epworth HealthCare, Richmond, Victoria, Australia
| | - Jenny Yu
- Department of Gastroenterology, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Marios Efthymiou
- Department of Gastroenterology, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Lopert R, Viney R. Revolution then evolution: the advance of health economic evaluation in Australia. ZEITSCHRIFT FUR EVIDENZ FORTBILDUNG UND QUALITAET IM GESUNDHEITSWESEN 2014; 108:360-6. [PMID: 25444293 DOI: 10.1016/j.zefq.2014.08.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/16/2014] [Revised: 08/26/2014] [Accepted: 08/28/2014] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
Abstract
All governments face immense challenges in providing affordable healthcare for their citizens, and the diffusion of novel health technologies is a key driver of growth in expenditure for many. Although important methodological and process variations exist around the world, health economic evaluation is increasingly seen as an important tool to support decision-making around the introduction of new health technologies, interventions and programmes in countries of varying stages of economic development. In Australia, the assessment of the comparative cost-effectiveness of new medicines proposed for subsidy under the country's national drug subsidy programme, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, was introduced in the late 1980s and became mandatory in 1993, making Australia the first country to introduce such a requirement nationally. Since then the use of health economic evaluation has expanded and been applied to support decision-making across a broader range of health technologies, as well as to programmes in public health.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ruth Lopert
- LWC Health Pty Ltd, Canberra, Australia; Department of Health Policy, George Washington University, Washington DC.
| | - Rosalie Viney
- Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology, Sydney and Chair, Economics Subcommittee, Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Chandran S, Parker F, Vaughan R, Efthymiou M. The current practice standard for colonoscopy in Australia. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 79:473-9. [PMID: 24332081 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2013.10.050] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/15/2013] [Accepted: 10/30/2013] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite having one of the highest rates per capita for colonoscopy worldwide, colorectal cancer remains the second most commonly diagnosed malignancy in Australia. OBJECTIVE Our aim was to document colonoscopy/polypectomy practice nationwide and assess whether significant differences exist. DESIGN Observational study. SETTING Online survey conducted nationally in 2012. PARTICIPANTS Medical practitioners registered with the Gastroenterological Society of Australia practicing colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS Rates of polypectomy techniques for varying polyp sizes, postpolypectomy bleeding prophylaxis techniques, and adenoma detection practices. To assess whether variations exist according to practice location, specialty, and experience and comparison of practice with a previous American cohort. RESULTS Of the 846 members contacted, 244 (28.8%) responded. The cohort consisted primarily of consultant gastroenterologists (182/244, 74.6%). The cold-snare technique was preferred (165/244, 67.6%) for polyps 3 mm in size; however, this decreased rapidly with increasing polyp size (5 mm [120/244, 49.2%] and 7-9 mm [18/244, 7.4%]). EMR was the preferred method of resection for polyps 7 to 9 mm in size (148/244, 60.7%). The withdrawal technique predominantly consisted of double-passing high-risk areas and rectal retroflexion (134/244, 54.9%). Significant differences across specialty, location, and experience included polypectomy method for diminutive polyps, the use of EMR, and retroflexion. LIMITATIONS Survey-based study and response rate. CONCLUSION Although variations in colonoscopy and polypectomy practice exist, the majority of our cohort performs cold-snare polypectomy for diminutive polyps and pass high-risk, poorly visualized areas twice on withdrawal. This is a significant shift in practice from that of the U.S. cohort studied 10 years earlier.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sujievvan Chandran
- Department of Gastroenterology, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia
| | - Frank Parker
- Department of Anesthetics, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia
| | - Rhys Vaughan
- Department of Gastroenterology, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia
| | - Marios Efthymiou
- Department of Gastroenterology, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Chubak J, Rutter CM, Kamineni A, Johnson EA, Stout NK, Weiss NS, Doria-Rose VP, Doubeni CA, Buist DSM. Measurement in comparative effectiveness research. Am J Prev Med 2013; 44:513-9. [PMID: 23597816 PMCID: PMC3631525 DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2013.01.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/30/2012] [Revised: 10/09/2012] [Accepted: 01/08/2013] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
Comparative effectiveness research (CER) on preventive services can shape policy and help patients, their providers, and public health practitioners select regimens and programs for disease prevention. Patients and providers need information about the relative effectiveness of various regimens they may choose. Decision makers need information about the relative effectiveness of various programs to offer or recommend. The goal of this paper is to define and differentiate measures of relative effectiveness of regimens and programs for disease prevention. Cancer screening is used to demonstrate how these measures differ in an example of two hypothetical screening regimens and programs. Conceptually and algebraically defined measures of relative regimen and program effectiveness also are presented. The measures evaluate preventive services that range from individual tests through organized, population-wide prevention programs. Examples illustrate how effective screening regimens may not result in effective screening programs and how measures can vary across subgroups and settings. Both regimen and program relative effectiveness measures assess benefits of prevention services in real-world settings, but each addresses different scientific and policy questions. As the body of CER grows, a common lexicon for various measures of relative effectiveness becomes increasingly important to facilitate communication and shared understanding among researchers, healthcare providers, patients, and policymakers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica Chubak
- Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA 98101, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Bae S, Asadi M, Jones I, McLaughlin S, Bui A, Steele M, Tie J, Gibbs P. Second primary colorectal cancer in the era of prevalent screening and imaging. ANZ J Surg 2013; 83:963-7. [DOI: 10.1111/ans.12136] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/24/2013] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Susie Bae
- Department of Medical Oncology; Royal Melbourne Hospital; Parkville Victoria Australia
- Department of Medical Oncology; Western Hospital; Footscray Victoria Australia
- BioGrid Australia; Parkville Victoria Australia
| | - Muslim Asadi
- Department of Medical Oncology; Western Hospital; Footscray Victoria Australia
| | - Ian Jones
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Melbourne Hospital; Parkville Victoria Australia
| | - Stephen McLaughlin
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Western Hospital; Footscray Victoria Australia
| | - Andrew Bui
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Austin Health; Heidelberg Victoria Australia
| | - Malcolm Steele
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Box Hill Hospital; Box Hill Victoria Australia
| | - Jeanne Tie
- Department of Medical Oncology; Royal Melbourne Hospital; Parkville Victoria Australia
- Department of Medical Oncology; Western Hospital; Footscray Victoria Australia
- Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research; Parkville Victoria Australia
| | - Peter Gibbs
- Department of Medical Oncology; Royal Melbourne Hospital; Parkville Victoria Australia
- Department of Medical Oncology; Western Hospital; Footscray Victoria Australia
- BioGrid Australia; Parkville Victoria Australia
- Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research; Parkville Victoria Australia
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Ait Ouakrim D, Lockett T, Boussioutas A, Keogh L, Flander LB, Winship I, Giles GG, Hopper JL, Jenkins MA. Screening practices of Australian men and women categorized as "at or slightly above average risk" of colorectal cancer. Cancer Causes Control 2012; 23:1853-64. [PMID: 23011536 PMCID: PMC3508400 DOI: 10.1007/s10552-012-0067-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2012] [Accepted: 09/11/2012] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Australia has one of the highest incidences of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the world. In 2006, the federal government introduced a screening program consisting of a one-off fecal occult blood test offered to people turning 50, 55, or 65 years. We conducted a population-based study to estimate CRC screening practices existing outside the current program. METHODS A total of 1887 unaffected subjects categorized "at or slightly above average risk" of CRC were selected from the Australasian Colorectal Cancer Family Registry. We calculated the proportions of participants that reported appropriate, under- and over-screening according to national guidelines. We performed a logistic regression analysis to evaluate associations between over-screening and a set of socio-demographic factors. RESULTS Of 532 participants at average risk of CRC, eligible for screening, 4 (0.75 %) reported appropriate screening, 479 (90 %) reported never having been screened, 18 (3 %) reported some but less than appropriate screening, and 31 (6 %) reported over-screening. Of 412 participants aged 50 years or over, slightly above average risk of CRC, 1 participant (0.25 %) reported appropriate screening, 316 (77 %) reported no screening, and 11 (3 %) reported some but less than appropriate screening. Among participants under age 50 years, 2 % of those at average risk and 10 % of those slightly above average risk reported over-screening. Middle-aged people, those with a family history of CRC and those with a university degree, were more likely to be over-screened. CONCLUSION Overall, the level of CRC screening participation was low and the vast majority of screening tests undertaken were inappropriate in terms of timing, modality, or frequency.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Driss Ait Ouakrim
- Centre for Molecular, Environmental, Genetic & Analytic Epidemiology, School of Population Health, The University of Melbourne, Level 3, 207 Bouverie Street, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Christou A, Thompson SC. Colorectal cancer screening knowledge, attitudes and behavioural intention among Indigenous Western Australians. BMC Public Health 2012; 12:528. [PMID: 22809457 PMCID: PMC3481427 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-528] [Citation(s) in RCA: 63] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2011] [Accepted: 06/26/2012] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Indigenous Australians are significantly less likely to participate in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening compared to non-Indigenous people. This study aimed to identify important factors influencing the decision to undertake screening using Faecal Occult Blood Testing (FOBT) among Indigenous Australians. Very little evidence exists to guide interventions and programmatic approaches for facilitating screening uptake in this population in order to reduce the disparity in colorectal cancer outcomes. Methods Interviewer-administered surveys were carried out with a convenience sample (n = 93) of Indigenous Western Australians between November 2009-March 2010 to assess knowledge, awareness, attitudes and behavioural intent in regard to CRC and CRC screening. Results Awareness and knowledge of CRC and screening were low, although both were significantly associated with exposure to media advertising (p = 0.008; p < 0.0001). Nearly two-thirds (63%; 58/92) of respondents reported intending to participate in screening, while a greater proportion (84%; 77/92) said they would participate on a doctor’s recommendation. Multivariate analysis with logistic regression demonstrated that independent predictors of screening intention were, greater perceived self-efficacy (OR = 19.8, 95% CI = 5.5-71.8), a history of cancer screening participation (OR = 6.8, 95% CI = 2.0-23.3) and being aged 45 years or more (OR = 4.5, 95% CI = 1.2-16.5). A higher CRC knowledge score (medium vs. low: OR = 9.9, 95% CI = 2.4-41.3; high vs. low: 13.6, 95% CI = 3.4-54.0) and being married or in a de-facto relationship (OR = 6.9, 95% CI = 2.1-22.5) were also identified as predictors of intention to screen with FOBT. Conclusions Improving CRC related knowledge and confidence to carry out the FOBT self-screening test through education and greater promotion of screening has the potential to enhance Indigenous participation in CRC screening. These findings should guide the development of interventions to encourage screening uptake and reduce bowel cancer related deaths among Indigenous Australians.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aliki Christou
- Centre for International Health, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, Western Australia.
| | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Geddie H, Dobrow MJ, Hoch JS, Rabeneck L. A prospective multiple case study of the impact of emerging scientific evidence on established colorectal cancer screening programs: a study protocol. Implement Sci 2012; 7:51. [PMID: 22656648 PMCID: PMC3441348 DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-51] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2012] [Accepted: 06/01/2012] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Health-policy decision making is a complex and dynamic process, for which strong evidentiary support is required. This includes scientifically produced research, as well as information that relates to the context in which the decision takes place. Unlike scientific evidence, this "contextual evidence" is highly variable and often includes information that is not scientifically produced, drawn from sources such as political judgement, program management experience and knowledge, or public values. As the policy decision-making process is variable and difficult to evaluate, it is often unclear how this heterogeneous evidence is identified and incorporated into "evidence-based policy" decisions. Population-based colorectal cancer screening poses an ideal context in which to examine these issues. In Canada, colorectal cancer screening programs have been established in several provinces over the past five years, based on the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) or the fecal immunochemical test. However, as these programs develop, new scientific evidence for screening continues to emerge. Recently published randomized controlled trials suggest that the use of flexible sigmoidoscopy for population-based screening may pose a greater reduction in mortality than the FOBT. This raises the important question of how policy makers will address this evidence, given that screening programs are being established or are already in place. This study will examine these issues prospectively and will focus on how policy makers monitor emerging scientific evidence and how both scientific and contextual evidence are identified and applied for decisions about health system improvement. METHODS This study will employ a prospective multiple case study design, involving participants from Ontario, Alberta, Manitoba, Nova Scotia, and Quebec. In each province, data will be collected via document analysis and key informant interviews. Documents will include policy briefs, reports, meeting minutes, media releases, and correspondence. Interviews will be conducted in person with senior administrative leaders, government officials, screening experts, and high-level cancer system stakeholders. DISCUSSION The proposed study comprises the third and final phase of an Emerging Team grant to address the challenges of health-policy decision making and colorectal cancer screening decisions in Canada. This study will contribute a unique prospective look at how policy makers address new, emerging scientific evidence in several different policy environments and at different stages of program planning and implementation. Findings will provide important insight into the various approaches that are or should be used to monitor emerging evidence, the relative importance of scientific versus contextual evidence for decision making, and the tools and processes that may be important to support challenging health-policy decisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hannah Geddie
- Cancer Services & Policy Research Unit, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Mark J Dobrow
- Health Policy Management & Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jeffrey S Hoch
- Health Policy Management & Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Pharmacoeconomics Research Unit, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Keenan Research Centre, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Linda Rabeneck
- Health Policy Management & Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Prevention and Cancer Control, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Flitcroft KL, St John DJB, Howard K, Carter SM, Pignone MP, Salkeld GP, Trevena LJ. A comparative case study of bowel cancer screening in the UK and Australia: evidence lost in translation? J Med Screen 2011; 18:193-203. [PMID: 22106435 DOI: 10.1258/jms.2011.011066] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES (i) To document the current state of the English, Scottish, Welsh, Northern Irish and Australian bowel cancer screening programmes, according to seven key characteristics, and (ii) to explore the policy trade-offs resulting from inadequate funding. SETTING United Kingdom and Australia. METHODS A comparative case study design using document and key informant interview analysis. Data were collated for each national jurisdiction on seven key programme characteristics: screening frequency, population coverage, quality of test, programme model, quality of follow-up, quality of colonoscopy and quality of data collection. A list of optimal features for each of the seven characteristics was compiled, based on the FOBT screening literature and our detailed examination of each programme. RESULTS Each country made different implementation choices or trade-offs intended to conserve costs and/or manage limited and expensive resources. The overall outcome of these trade-offs was probable lower programme effectiveness as a result of compromises such as reduced screening frequency, restricted target age range, the use of less accurate tests, the deliberate setting of low programme positivity rates or increased inconvenience to participants from re-testing. CONCLUSIONS Insufficient funding has forced programme administrators to make trade-offs that may undermine the potential net population benefits achieved in randomized controlled trials. Such policy compromise contravenes the principle of evidence-based practice which is dependent on adequate funding being made available.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K L Flitcroft
- Health Policy, Screening and Test Evaluation Program, Sydney School of Public Health, Edward Ford Building, A27, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Ait Ouakrim D, Boussioutas A, Lockett T, Winship I, Giles GG, Flander LB, Keogh L, Hopper JL, Jenkins MA. Screening practices of unaffected people at familial risk of colorectal cancer. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2011; 5:240-7. [PMID: 22030089 DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.capr-11-0229] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
Our objective was to determine screening practices of unaffected people in the general population at moderately increased and potentially high risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) because of their family history of the disease. A total of 1,627 participants in the Australasian Colorectal Cancer Family Registry study were classified into two CRC risk categories, according to the strength of their family history of the disease. We calculated the proportion of participants that adhered to national CRC screening guidelines by age group and for each familial risk category. We carried out a multinomial logistic regression analysis to evaluate the associations between screening and sociodemographic factors. Of the 1,236 participants at moderately increased risk of CRC, 70 (6%) reported having undergone guideline-defined "appropriate" screening, 251 (20%) reported some, but less than appropriate screening, and 915 (74%) reported never having had any CRC screening test. Of the 392 participants at potentially high risk of CRC, three (1%) reported appropriate screening, 140 (36%) reported some, but less than appropriate screening, and 249 (64%) reported never having had any CRC screening test. On average, those of middle age, higher education, and who had resided in Australia longer were more likely to have had screening for CRC. The uptake of recommended screening by unaffected people at the highest familial risk of developing CRC is extremely low. Guidelines for CRC screening are not being implemented in the population. More research is needed to identify the reasons so as to enable development of strategies to improve participation in screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Driss Ait Ouakrim
- Centre for Molecular, Environmental, Genetic and Analytic Epidemiology, School of Population Health, The University of Melbourne and The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Peerson A, Saunders M. Men's Health Literacy in Australia: In Search of a Gender Lens. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2011. [DOI: 10.3149/jmh.1002.111] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
|
20
|
Pignone MP, Flitcroft KL, Howard K, Trevena LJ, Salkeld GP, St John DJB. Costs and cost-effectiveness of full implementation of a biennial faecal occult blood test screening program for bowel cancer in Australia. Med J Aust 2011; 194:180-5. [PMID: 21401458 DOI: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2011.tb03766.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/20/2010] [Accepted: 11/07/2010] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To examine the costs and cost-effectiveness of full implementation of biennial bowel cancer screening for Australian residents aged 50-74 years. DESIGN AND SETTING Identification of existing economic models from 1993 to 2010 through searches of PubMed and economic analysis databases, and by seeking expert advice; and additional modelling to determine the costs and cost-effectiveness of full implementation of biennial faecal occult blood test screening for the five million adults in Australia aged 50-74 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Estimated number of deaths from bowel cancer prevented, costs, and cost-effectiveness (cost per life-year gained [LYG]) of biennial bowel cancer screening. RESULTS We identified six relevant economic analyses, all of which found colorectal cancer (CRC) screening to be very cost-effective, with costs per LYG under $55,000 per year in 2010 Australian dollars. Based on our additional modelling, we conservatively estimate that full implementation of biennial screening for people aged 50-74 years would have gross costs of $150 million, reduce CRC mortality by 15%-25%, prevent 300-500 deaths from bowel cancer, and save 3600-6000 life-years annually, for an undiscounted cost per LYG of $25,000-$41,667, compared with no screening, and not taking cost savings as a result of treatment into consideration. The additional expenditure required, after accounting for reductions in CRC incidence, savings in CRC treatment costs, and existing ad-hoc colonoscopy use, is likely to be less than $50 million annually. CONCLUSIONS Full implementation of biennial faecal occult blood test screening in Australia can reduce bowel cancer mortality, and is an efficient use of health resources that would require modest additional government investment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael P Pignone
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cecil G Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
21
|
Flitcroft K, Gillespie J, Salkeld G, Carter S, Trevena L. Getting evidence into policy: The need for deliberative strategies? Soc Sci Med 2011; 72:1039-46. [PMID: 21419539 DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.01.034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/17/2010] [Revised: 12/07/2010] [Accepted: 01/24/2011] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
Getting evidence into policy is notoriously difficult. In this empirical case study we used document analysis and key informant interviews to explore the Australian federal government's policy to implement a national bowel cancer screening programme, and the role of evidence in this policy. Our analysis revealed a range of institutional limitations at three levels of national government: within the health department, between government departments, and across the whole of government. These limitations were amplified by the pressures of the 2004 Australian federal election campaign. Traditional knowledge utilisation approaches, which rely principally on voluntarist strategies and focus on the individual, rather than the institutional level, are often insufficient to ensure evidence-based implementation. We propose three alternative models, based on deliberative strategies which have been shown to work in other settings: review of the evidence by a select group of experts whose independence is enshrined in legislation and whose imprimatur is required before policy can proceed; use of an advisory group of experts who consult widely with stakeholders and publish their review findings; or public discussion of the evidence by the media and community groups who act as more direct conduits to the decision-makers than researchers. Such deliberative models could help overcome the limitations on the use of evidence by embedding public review of evidence as the first step in the institutional decision-making processes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kathy Flitcroft
- Screening and Test Evaluation Program, Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Edward Ford building, A27 Fisher Road, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
22
|
Saunders MH, Peerson A. Fifteen years of bowel cancer screening policy in Australia: putting evidence into practice? Med J Aust 2010; 193:621-2. [DOI: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2010.tb04083.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2010] [Accepted: 09/12/2010] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Anita Peerson
- School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Hingston GR. Fifteen years of bowel cancer screening policy in Australia: putting evidence into practice? Med J Aust 2010; 193:622. [DOI: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2010.tb04084.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Guy R Hingston
- Rural Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Port Macquarie, NSW
| |
Collapse
|