Sustainable primary health care services in rural and remote areas

Innovation and evidence

John Wakerman, John Humphreys

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

    Abstract

    Objective: To highlight how evidence from studies of innovative rural and remote models of service provision can inform global health system reform in order to develop appropriate, accessible and sustainable primary health care (PHC) services to ‘difficult‐to‐service’ communities.

    Methods: The paper synthesises evidence from remote and rural PHC health service innovations in Australia.

    Results: There is a strong history of PHC innovation in Australia. Successful health service models are ‘contextualised’ to address diverse conditions. They also require systemic solutions, which address a range of interlinked factors such as governance, leadership and management, adequate funding, infrastructure, service linkages and workforce. An effective systemic approach relies on alignment of changes at the health service level with those in the external policy environment. Ideally, every level of government or health authority needs to agree on policy and funding arrangements for optimal service development. A systematic approach in addressing these health system requirements is also important. Service providers, funders and consumers need to know what type and level of services they can reasonably expect in different community contexts, but there are gaps in agreed indicators and benchmarks for PHC services. In order to be able to comprehensively monitor and evaluate services, as well as benchmarks, we need adequate national information systems.

    Conclusions: Despite the gaps in our knowledge, we do have a significant amount of information about what works, where and why. At a time of global PHC reform, applying this knowledge will contribute significantly to the development of appropriate, sustainable PHC services and improving access.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)118-124
    Number of pages7
    JournalAustralian Journal of Rural Health
    Volume19
    Issue number3
    Early online date23 May 2011
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Jul 2011

    Fingerprint

    Health Services
    Primary Health Care
    Benchmarking
    Rural Health
    Health Care Reform
    Conservation of Natural Resources
    Health
    Information Systems
    Global Health

    Cite this

    @article{daa1ff75a6d94451b5612308d6086a5c,
    title = "Sustainable primary health care services in rural and remote areas: Innovation and evidence",
    abstract = "Objective: To highlight how evidence from studies of innovative rural and remote models of service provision can inform global health system reform in order to develop appropriate, accessible and sustainable primary health care (PHC) services to ‘difficult‐to‐service’ communities.Methods: The paper synthesises evidence from remote and rural PHC health service innovations in Australia.Results: There is a strong history of PHC innovation in Australia. Successful health service models are ‘contextualised’ to address diverse conditions. They also require systemic solutions, which address a range of interlinked factors such as governance, leadership and management, adequate funding, infrastructure, service linkages and workforce. An effective systemic approach relies on alignment of changes at the health service level with those in the external policy environment. Ideally, every level of government or health authority needs to agree on policy and funding arrangements for optimal service development. A systematic approach in addressing these health system requirements is also important. Service providers, funders and consumers need to know what type and level of services they can reasonably expect in different community contexts, but there are gaps in agreed indicators and benchmarks for PHC services. In order to be able to comprehensively monitor and evaluate services, as well as benchmarks, we need adequate national information systems.Conclusions: Despite the gaps in our knowledge, we do have a significant amount of information about what works, where and why. At a time of global PHC reform, applying this knowledge will contribute significantly to the development of appropriate, sustainable PHC services and improving access.",
    author = "John Wakerman and John Humphreys",
    year = "2011",
    month = "7",
    doi = "10.1111/j.1440-1584.2010.01180.x",
    language = "English",
    volume = "19",
    pages = "118--124",
    journal = "The Australian journal of rural health",
    issn = "1038-5282",
    publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
    number = "3",

    }

    Sustainable primary health care services in rural and remote areas : Innovation and evidence. / Wakerman, John; Humphreys, John.

    In: Australian Journal of Rural Health, Vol. 19, No. 3, 07.2011, p. 118-124.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Sustainable primary health care services in rural and remote areas

    T2 - Innovation and evidence

    AU - Wakerman, John

    AU - Humphreys, John

    PY - 2011/7

    Y1 - 2011/7

    N2 - Objective: To highlight how evidence from studies of innovative rural and remote models of service provision can inform global health system reform in order to develop appropriate, accessible and sustainable primary health care (PHC) services to ‘difficult‐to‐service’ communities.Methods: The paper synthesises evidence from remote and rural PHC health service innovations in Australia.Results: There is a strong history of PHC innovation in Australia. Successful health service models are ‘contextualised’ to address diverse conditions. They also require systemic solutions, which address a range of interlinked factors such as governance, leadership and management, adequate funding, infrastructure, service linkages and workforce. An effective systemic approach relies on alignment of changes at the health service level with those in the external policy environment. Ideally, every level of government or health authority needs to agree on policy and funding arrangements for optimal service development. A systematic approach in addressing these health system requirements is also important. Service providers, funders and consumers need to know what type and level of services they can reasonably expect in different community contexts, but there are gaps in agreed indicators and benchmarks for PHC services. In order to be able to comprehensively monitor and evaluate services, as well as benchmarks, we need adequate national information systems.Conclusions: Despite the gaps in our knowledge, we do have a significant amount of information about what works, where and why. At a time of global PHC reform, applying this knowledge will contribute significantly to the development of appropriate, sustainable PHC services and improving access.

    AB - Objective: To highlight how evidence from studies of innovative rural and remote models of service provision can inform global health system reform in order to develop appropriate, accessible and sustainable primary health care (PHC) services to ‘difficult‐to‐service’ communities.Methods: The paper synthesises evidence from remote and rural PHC health service innovations in Australia.Results: There is a strong history of PHC innovation in Australia. Successful health service models are ‘contextualised’ to address diverse conditions. They also require systemic solutions, which address a range of interlinked factors such as governance, leadership and management, adequate funding, infrastructure, service linkages and workforce. An effective systemic approach relies on alignment of changes at the health service level with those in the external policy environment. Ideally, every level of government or health authority needs to agree on policy and funding arrangements for optimal service development. A systematic approach in addressing these health system requirements is also important. Service providers, funders and consumers need to know what type and level of services they can reasonably expect in different community contexts, but there are gaps in agreed indicators and benchmarks for PHC services. In order to be able to comprehensively monitor and evaluate services, as well as benchmarks, we need adequate national information systems.Conclusions: Despite the gaps in our knowledge, we do have a significant amount of information about what works, where and why. At a time of global PHC reform, applying this knowledge will contribute significantly to the development of appropriate, sustainable PHC services and improving access.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79956262886&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1111/j.1440-1584.2010.01180.x

    DO - 10.1111/j.1440-1584.2010.01180.x

    M3 - Article

    VL - 19

    SP - 118

    EP - 124

    JO - The Australian journal of rural health

    JF - The Australian journal of rural health

    SN - 1038-5282

    IS - 3

    ER -