Predicting health programme participation: A gravity‐based, hierarchical modelling approach

Statistical analyses of health program participation seek to address a number of objectives compatible with the evaluation of demand for current resources. In this spirit, a spatial hierarchical model is developed for disentangling patterns in participation at the small area level, as a function of population-based demand and additional variation. For the former, a constrained gravity model is proposed to quantify factors associated with spatial choice and account for competition effects, for programs delivered by multiple clinics. The implications of gravity model misspecification within a mixed effects framework are also explored. The proposed model is applied to participation data from a no-fee mammography program in Brisbane, Australia. Attention is paid to the interpretation of various model outputs and their relevance for public health policy.

The Queensland liver transplant programme: The first two years

Orthotopic liver transplantation began in Brisbane in January 1985. During the first two years of the programme an assessment committee evaluated 55 patients (38 adults, 17 children). Patients were either accepted for transplantation, rejected as unsuitable or deferred for elective reassessment. All of the 10 adults who were rejected for transplantation because they had 'too advanced' disease died within four months of assessment. Six children who were accepted for transplantation died before a suitable donor liver could be found. In the first two years, 21 orthotopic liver transplantations were performed on 18 patients (adults, 13 patients; children, five patients). Fifteen of 21 grafts were procured from within Queensland. Twelve (67%) patients are alive at three to 23 months and all have been discharged from hospital. Deaths in adults were due to sepsis (three patients), aspiration pneumonitis (one patient), rejection and hepatic artery thrombosis (one patient) and the recurrence of a hepatocellular carcinoma five months after discharge from hospital (one patient). Two patients underwent a second transplantation procedure because of chronic rejection at four months and at 11 months, respectively, after the initial operation. One patient received a second transplant for primary graft failure at four days after the operation. A scoring system which considered the presence of pre-operative patient factors, such as coma, ascites, malnutrition and previous abdominal surgery, partly predicted the operative blood loss and patient survival. In conclusion, orthotopic liver transplantation is being performed in Australia with survival rates that are comparable with those of established overseas units.

Liver transplantation in children: Experience with the development of an Australian pilot programme. The Queensland Liver Transplantation Programme

Children with end-stage liver disease now form a major sub-group of patients considered suitable for liver transplantation (ltp), and enjoy better survival statistics after transplantation than do adults. Since June 1984, a paediatric ltp programme has been developed in Brisbane with an initial working relationship and ongoing close links with two USA centres (Pittsburgh, and the UCLA Medical Center). Fourteen children with end-stage liver disease have been referred to the Queensland Liver Transplantation Programme for formal assessment. Following frank, informed discussion with their parents, 10 of these children were offered the option of ltp. During the transition stage, two infants with biliary atresia were referred to UCLA at their parents' request and, subsequently, eight children aged from 9 months to 6 years have been placed on a transplant candidacy list in Brisbane. A donor procurement team with access to a Queensland Government jet has been available to cover all mainland States except Western Australia. Six of the children have now had orthotopic ltp (two children at the UCLA Medical Center; four children at the Royal Children's Hospital, Brisbane). One UCLA patient died with a non-functioning graft, and one Brisbane patient died 5 weeks post-transplant with rejection, hepatic artery thrombosis and sepsis. The other four children are alive and well, three with normal liver function and one with unexplained intrahepatic cholestasis, during the 1-20 month follow-up to date. Three further children have died of their liver disease without a donor of an appropriate blood group and size being found, and one patient still awaits a suitable donor. The experience of these authors suggests that ltp is a major advance in the treatment of paediatric liver disease, and that the procedure can be carried out successfully in Australia with initial results comparable with leading overseas centres. The procedure requires the full array of services of a major paediatric tertiary care facility, an intensive team effort with awareness of the special needs of children, and a widespread procurement capability. A major problem for Australia is the procurement of sufficient numbers of optimal paediatric donor livers.