Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Diversity of primary health are providers for arban Indigenous Australians

Diversity of primary health are providers for arban Indigenous Australians 1. Feighery EC, Ribisl KM, Clark PI, et al. How tobacco companies ensure prime placement of their advertising and products in stores: Interviews with retailers about tobacco company incentive programmes. Tob Control. 2003;12:184-8. 2. Bloom P. Role of slotting fees and trade promotions in shaping how tobacco is marketed in retail stores. Tob Control. 2001;10:340-4. 3. Feighery EC, Ribisl KM, Achabal DD, et al. Retail trade incentives: How tobacco industry practices compare with those of other industries. Am J Public Health. 1999;89(10):1564-6. 4. Laurvick CL, Jamrozik K. Support from retailers for tightening the Western Australian Tobacco Control Act 1990. Tob Control. 2001;10:295. 5. Greaves L. Canada: Demolishing the power walls. Tob Control. 2003;12:7-8. 6. Jalleh G, Donovan RJ. Report of the State Members of Parliament Survey. Perth (AUST): Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer Control, Division of Health Sciences, Curtin University; 2005. References 1. Moynihan R. Who pays for the pizza? Redefining the relationships between doctors and drug companies. 1: Entanglement. Br Med J. 2003;326:1189-92. 2. Smith R. Medical journals and pharmaceutical companies: uneasy bedfellows. Br Med J. 2003;326:202-5. 3. Mansfield, P. Healthy Skepticism: Countering misleading drug promotion. Willunga, SA. Updated 2006 Nov 5. Available from http://www. healthyskepticism.org/ [cited 2006 November 13] Correspondence to: Ms Gwyn Jolley, Department of Public Health, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, South Australia 5001. Fax: (08) 8374 0230; e-mail: gwyn.jolley@flinders.edu.au Correspondence to: Mr Geoffrey Jalleh, Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer Control, Curtin University of Technology, GPO Box U1987, Perth, Western Australia 6845. Fax: (08) 9266 1642; e-mail: g.jalleh@curtin.edu.au Diversity of primary health care providers for urban Indigenous Australians Joan Cunningham Environments, Services and Populations Research Division, Menzies School of Health Research and Institutes of Advanced Studies, Charles Darwin University, Northern Territory Pharmaceutical ads in ANZJPH Gwyn Jolley, Fran Baum, Michael Bentley, Catherine Hurley, Anne Johnson, Angela Lawless and Colin MacDougall Department of Public Health, Flinders University, South Australia We were surprised and disturbed to find the August 2006 issue of the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health contained several full-page advertisements from pharmaceutical companies. We do not recall any editorial discussion or consultation with PHAA members about this move. Our objection is twofold. First, there is ample evidence that professional societies and journals that accept sponsorship Little is known about the utilisation of primary health care services by Indigenous Australians in urban areas.1 In contrast to remote communities, urban areas offer a range of potential service providers, including private general practitioners, Aboriginal community-controlled health services, mainstream community health centres and alternative health practitioners, as well as specialists and public hospitals. The use of particular services depends on a range of factors, including individual preference, cost, access to transport, availability of appointments, etc. Some individuals are likely to use a mix of services, which has potential implications for continuity and co-ordination of care. We collected data in 2003-05 on usual primary care provider 2006 vol. 30 no. 6 AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH Letters reported by 1,004 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander volunteers who participated in the DRUID Study, a study of diabetes and related conditions in urban Indigenous adults in the Darwin region. The study has been described in detail elsewhere.2 Participants were asked where they would normally go if they “had a health problem or needed routine health care”, and which individual practitioner (if any) they would normally see. DRUID participants are not necessarily representative of the Indigenous population of the Darwin region (or of Australia), and the observed proportions may not reflect true population distributions. Despite this limitation, the data highlight the diversity of primary health care providers used by urban Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Private general medical practices were the most commonly named type of service to which DRUID participants said they would go for routine health care (45%). Virtually all private general practices existing in the area at the time of the study were named by at least one participant, and the most-named practice accounted for fewer than 6% of participants. As expected, Aboriginal health services accounted for a significant proportion of services named (32%); this figure may be an underestimate because of difficulties experienced in recruiting patients from these services. About one in eight participants reported either that there was nowhere in particular they would go (11%) or that they would attend the public hospital (1.5%). Males and younger people were more likely to say they did not have a usual care provider. The remaining participants named a community health centre (5%), specialist (1%), more than one provider (3%), or provided insufficient information or named a service outside the area (1%). Only 49% of participants named a specific practitioner, but more than 90 different individuals (including GPs, specialists, nurses and Aboriginal Health Workers) were named. Only five of these practitioners were named by 20 or more participants, while 37 practitioners were named by only one participant each. Given the nature of the study, these data must be interpreted with caution, but one message seems apparent. Although Aboriginal community-controlled health services must clearly play a leadership role in driving improvements in Indigenous health, the diversity of services and practitioners named by DRUID participants indicates both the need – and the likely opportunity – for all health care providers to play a part in improving and maintaining the health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. Type 2 Diabetes, and Bayer HealthCare. The DRUID Study is an in-kind project of the Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal Health. Joan Cunningham was supported by a NHMRC Career Development Award (#283310). http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health Wiley

Diversity of primary health are providers for arban Indigenous Australians

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/diversity-of-primary-health-are-providers-for-arban-indigenous-B8L9VcPpfS

References (2)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
ISSN
1326-0200
eISSN
1753-6405
DOI
10.1111/j.1467-842X.2006.tb00793.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

1. Feighery EC, Ribisl KM, Clark PI, et al. How tobacco companies ensure prime placement of their advertising and products in stores: Interviews with retailers about tobacco company incentive programmes. Tob Control. 2003;12:184-8. 2. Bloom P. Role of slotting fees and trade promotions in shaping how tobacco is marketed in retail stores. Tob Control. 2001;10:340-4. 3. Feighery EC, Ribisl KM, Achabal DD, et al. Retail trade incentives: How tobacco industry practices compare with those of other industries. Am J Public Health. 1999;89(10):1564-6. 4. Laurvick CL, Jamrozik K. Support from retailers for tightening the Western Australian Tobacco Control Act 1990. Tob Control. 2001;10:295. 5. Greaves L. Canada: Demolishing the power walls. Tob Control. 2003;12:7-8. 6. Jalleh G, Donovan RJ. Report of the State Members of Parliament Survey. Perth (AUST): Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer Control, Division of Health Sciences, Curtin University; 2005. References 1. Moynihan R. Who pays for the pizza? Redefining the relationships between doctors and drug companies. 1: Entanglement. Br Med J. 2003;326:1189-92. 2. Smith R. Medical journals and pharmaceutical companies: uneasy bedfellows. Br Med J. 2003;326:202-5. 3. Mansfield, P. Healthy Skepticism: Countering misleading drug promotion. Willunga, SA. Updated 2006 Nov 5. Available from http://www. healthyskepticism.org/ [cited 2006 November 13] Correspondence to: Ms Gwyn Jolley, Department of Public Health, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, South Australia 5001. Fax: (08) 8374 0230; e-mail: gwyn.jolley@flinders.edu.au Correspondence to: Mr Geoffrey Jalleh, Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer Control, Curtin University of Technology, GPO Box U1987, Perth, Western Australia 6845. Fax: (08) 9266 1642; e-mail: g.jalleh@curtin.edu.au Diversity of primary health care providers for urban Indigenous Australians Joan Cunningham Environments, Services and Populations Research Division, Menzies School of Health Research and Institutes of Advanced Studies, Charles Darwin University, Northern Territory Pharmaceutical ads in ANZJPH Gwyn Jolley, Fran Baum, Michael Bentley, Catherine Hurley, Anne Johnson, Angela Lawless and Colin MacDougall Department of Public Health, Flinders University, South Australia We were surprised and disturbed to find the August 2006 issue of the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health contained several full-page advertisements from pharmaceutical companies. We do not recall any editorial discussion or consultation with PHAA members about this move. Our objection is twofold. First, there is ample evidence that professional societies and journals that accept sponsorship Little is known about the utilisation of primary health care services by Indigenous Australians in urban areas.1 In contrast to remote communities, urban areas offer a range of potential service providers, including private general practitioners, Aboriginal community-controlled health services, mainstream community health centres and alternative health practitioners, as well as specialists and public hospitals. The use of particular services depends on a range of factors, including individual preference, cost, access to transport, availability of appointments, etc. Some individuals are likely to use a mix of services, which has potential implications for continuity and co-ordination of care. We collected data in 2003-05 on usual primary care provider 2006 vol. 30 no. 6 AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH Letters reported by 1,004 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander volunteers who participated in the DRUID Study, a study of diabetes and related conditions in urban Indigenous adults in the Darwin region. The study has been described in detail elsewhere.2 Participants were asked where they would normally go if they “had a health problem or needed routine health care”, and which individual practitioner (if any) they would normally see. DRUID participants are not necessarily representative of the Indigenous population of the Darwin region (or of Australia), and the observed proportions may not reflect true population distributions. Despite this limitation, the data highlight the diversity of primary health care providers used by urban Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Private general medical practices were the most commonly named type of service to which DRUID participants said they would go for routine health care (45%). Virtually all private general practices existing in the area at the time of the study were named by at least one participant, and the most-named practice accounted for fewer than 6% of participants. As expected, Aboriginal health services accounted for a significant proportion of services named (32%); this figure may be an underestimate because of difficulties experienced in recruiting patients from these services. About one in eight participants reported either that there was nowhere in particular they would go (11%) or that they would attend the public hospital (1.5%). Males and younger people were more likely to say they did not have a usual care provider. The remaining participants named a community health centre (5%), specialist (1%), more than one provider (3%), or provided insufficient information or named a service outside the area (1%). Only 49% of participants named a specific practitioner, but more than 90 different individuals (including GPs, specialists, nurses and Aboriginal Health Workers) were named. Only five of these practitioners were named by 20 or more participants, while 37 practitioners were named by only one participant each. Given the nature of the study, these data must be interpreted with caution, but one message seems apparent. Although Aboriginal community-controlled health services must clearly play a leadership role in driving improvements in Indigenous health, the diversity of services and practitioners named by DRUID participants indicates both the need – and the likely opportunity – for all health care providers to play a part in improving and maintaining the health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. Type 2 Diabetes, and Bayer HealthCare. The DRUID Study is an in-kind project of the Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal Health. Joan Cunningham was supported by a NHMRC Career Development Award (#283310).

Journal

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public HealthWiley

Published: Dec 1, 2006

There are no references for this article.