The health outcomes and costs of people attending an interdisciplinary chronic disease service in regional Australia : protocol for a longitudinal cohort investigation

Background Rates of chronic disease are escalating around the world. To date health service evaluations have focused on interventions for single chronic diseases. However, evaluations of the effectiveness of new intervention strategies that target single chronic diseases as well as multimorbidity are required, particularly in areas outside major metropolitan centres where access to services, such as specialist care, is difficult and where the retention and recruitment of health professionals affects service provision. Methods This study is a longitudinal investigation with a baseline and three follow-up assessments comparing the health and health costs of people with chronic disease before and after intervention at a chronic disease clinic, in regional Australia. The clinic is led by students under the supervision of health professionals. The study will provide preliminary evidence regarding the effectiveness of the intervention, and evaluate the influence of a range of factors on the health outcomes and costs of the patients attending the clinic. Patients will be evaluated at baseline (intake to the service), and at 3-, 6-, and 12-months after intake to the service. Health will be measured using the SF-36 and health costs will be measured using government and medical record sources. The intervention involves students and health professionals from multiple professions working together to treat patients with programs that include education and exercise therapy programs for back pain, and Healthy Lifestyle programs; as well as individual consultations involving single professions. Discussion Understanding the effect of a range of factors on the health state and health costs of people attending an interdisciplinary clinic will inform health service provision for this clinical group and will determine which factors need to be controlled for in future observational studies. Preliminary evidence regarding changes in health and health costs associated with the intervention will be a platform for future clinical trials of intervention effectiveness. The results will be of interest to teams investigating new chronic disease programs particularly for people with multimorbidity, and in areas outside major metropolitan centres.

Measurement as legitimacy versus legitimacy of measures : Performance evaluation of social enterprise

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to review the growing emphasis on quantifiable performance measures such as social return on investment (SROI) in third sector organisations – specifically, social enterprise – through a legitimacy theory lens. It then examines what social enterprises value (i.e. consider important) in terms of performance evaluation, using a case study approach. Design/methodology/approach Case studies involving interviews, documentary analysis, and observation, of three social enterprises at different life-cycle stages with different funding structures, were constructed to consider “what measures matter” from a practitioner's perspective. Findings Findings highlight a priority on quality outcomes and impacts in primarily qualitative terms to evaluate performance. Further, there is a noticeable lack of emphasis on financial measures other than basic access to financial resources to continue pursuing social goals. Social implications The practical challenges faced by social enterprises – many of which are small to medium sized – in evaluating performance and by implication organisational legitimacy are contrasted with measures such as SROI which are resource intensive and have inherent methodological limitations. Hence, findings suggest the limited and valuable resources of social enterprises would be better allocated towards documenting the actual outcomes and impacts as a first step, in order to evaluate social and financial performance in terms appropriate to each objective, in order to demonstrate organisational legitimacy. Originality/value Findings distinguish between processes which may hold symbolic legitimacy for select stakeholder groups, and processes which hold substantive, cognitive legitimacy for stakeholders more broadly, in the under-researched context of social enterprise.

Food and Brisbane households : dietary, social and health consequences of food insecurity

Background & Aims: Access to sufficient amounts of safe and culturally-acceptable foods is a fundamental human right. Food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical, social, and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life. Food insecurity therefore occurs when the availability or access to sufficient amounts of nutritionally-adequate, culturally-appropriate and safe foods, or, the ability to acquire such foods in socially-acceptable ways, is limited. Food insecurity may result in significant adverse effects for the individual and these outcomes may vary between adults and children. Among adults, food insecurity may be associated with overweight or obesity, poorer self-rated general health, depression, increased health-care utilisation and dietary intakes less consistent with national recommendations. Among children, food insecurity may result in poorer self or parent-reported general health, behavioural problems, lower levels of academic achievement and poor social outcomes. The majority of research investigating the potential correlates of food insecurity has been undertaken in the United States (US), where regular national screening for food insecurity is undertaken using a comprehensive multi-item measurement. In Australia, screening for food insecurity takes place on a three yearly basis via the use of a crude, single-item included in the National Health Survey (NHS). This measure has been shown to underestimate the prevalence of food insecurity by 5%. From 1995 – 2004, the prevalence of food insecurity among the Australian population remained stable at 5%. Due to the perceived low prevalence of this issue, screening for food insecurity was not undertaken in the most recent NHS. Furthermore, there are few Australian studies investigating the potential determinants of food insecurity and none investigating potential outcomes among adults and children. This study aimed to examine these issues by a) investigating the prevalence of food insecurity among households residing in disadvantaged urban areas and comparing prevalence rates estimated by the more comprehensive 18-item and 6-item United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Food Security Survey Module (FSSM) to those estimated by the current single-item measure used for surveillance in Australia and b) investigating the potential determinants and outcomes of food insecurity, Methods: A comprehensive literature review was undertaken to investigate the potential determinants and consequences of food insecurity among developed countries. This was followed by a cross-sectional study in which 1000 households from the most disadvantaged 5% of Brisbane areas were sampled and data collected via mail-based survey (final response rate = 53%, n = 505). Data were collected for food security status, sociodemographic characteristics (household income, education, age, gender, employment status, housing tenure and living arrangements), fruit and vegetable intakes, meat and take-away consumption, presence of depressive symptoms, presence of chronic disease and body mass index (BMI) among adults. Among children, data pertaining to BMI, parent-reported general health, days away from school and activities and behavioural problems were collected. Rasch analysis was used to investigate the psychometric properties of the 18-, 10- and 6-item adaptations of the USDA-FSSM, and McNemar's test was used to investigate the difference in the prevalence of food insecurity as measured by these three adaptations compared to the current single-item measure used in Australia. Chi square and logistic regression were used to investigate the differences in dietary and health outcomes among adults and health and behavioural outcomes among children. Results were adjusted for equivalised household income and, where necessary, for indigenous status, education and family type. Results: Overall, 25% of households in these urbanised-disadvantaged areas reported experiencing food insecurity; this increased to 34% when only households with children were analysed. The current reliance on a single-item measure to screen for food insecurity may underestimate the true burden among the Australian population, as this measure was shown to significantly underestimate the prevalence of food insecurity by five percentage points. Internationally, major potential determinants of food insecurity included poverty and indicators of poverty, such as low-income, unemployment and lower levels of education. Ethnicity, age, transportation and cooking and financial skills were also found to be potential determinants of food insecurity. Among Australian adults in disadvantaged urban areas, food insecurity was associated with a three-fold increase in experiencing poorer self-rated general health and a two-to-five-fold increase in the risk of depression. Furthermore, adults from food insecure households were twoto- three times more likely to have seen a general practitioner and/or been admitted to hospital within the previous six months, compared to their food secure counterparts. Weight status and intakes of fruits, vegetables and meat were not associated with food insecurity. Among Australian households with children, those in the lowest tertile were over 16 times more likely to experience food insecurity compared to those in the highest tertile for income. After adjustment for equivalised household income, children from food insecure households were three times more likely to have missed days away from school or other activities. Furthermore, children from food insecure households displayed a two-fold increase in atypical emotions and behavioural difficulties. Conclusions: Food insecurity is an important public health issue and may contribute to the burden on the health care system through its associations with depression and increased health care utilisation among adults and behavioural and emotional problems among children. Current efforts to monitor food insecurity in Australia do not occur frequently and use a tool that may underestimate the prevalence of food insecurity. Efforts should be made to improve the regularity of screening for food insecurity via the use of a more accurate screening measure. Most of the current strategies that aim to alleviate food insecurity do not sufficiently address the issue of insufficient financial resources for acquiring food; a factor which is an important determinant of food insecurity. Programs to address this issue should be developed in collaboration with groups at higher risk of developing food insecurity and should incorporate strategies to address the issue of low income as a barrier to food acquisition.