The impact of a streamlined funding application process on application time: Two cross-sectional surveys of Australian researchers

Objective: To examine if streamlining a medical research funding application process saved time for applicants. Design: Cross-sectional surveys before and after the streamlining. Setting: The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia. Participants: Researchers who submitted one or more NHMRC Project Grant applications in 2012 or 2014. Main outcome measures: Average researcher time spent preparing an application and the total time for all applications in working days. Results: The average time per application increased from 34 working days before streamlining (95% CI 33 to 35) to 38 working days after streamlining (95% CI 37 to 39; mean difference 4 days, bootstrap p value <0.001). The estimated total time spent by all researchers on applications after streamlining was 614 working years, a 67-year increase from before streamlining. Conclusions: Streamlined applications were shorter but took longer to prepare on average. Researchers may be allocating a fixed amount of time to preparing funding applications based on their expected return, or may be increasing their time in response to increased competition. Many potentially productive years of researcher time are still being lost to preparing failed applications.

The business of myth-making: Mary Poppins, P.L. Travers and the Disney effect

In just one of the many extraordinary moments during the spectacular Opening Ceremony of the 2012 London Olympic Games, thirty Mary Poppinses floated into the stadium on their umbrellas to battle a 40 foot-long inflatable Lord Voldemort. This multi-million pound extravaganza was telecast to a global audience of over one billion people, highlighting in an extremely effective manner the grandeur and eccentricities of the host nation, and featuring uniquely British icons such as Mr Bean, James Bond, The Beatles and Harry Potter, as well as those quintessential icons of Englishness, the Royal Family, double-decker red buses and the National Health Service.

Rationing in healthcare

Rationing healthcare in some form is inevitable, even in wealthy countries, because resources are scarce and demand for healthcare is always likely to exceed supply. This means that decision-makers must make choices about which health programs and initiatives should receive public funding and which ones should not. These choices are often difficult to make, particularly in Australia, because: - 1 Make explicit rationing based on a national decision-making tool (such as Multi-criteria Decision Analysis) standard process in all jurisdictions. - 2 Develop nationally consistent methods for conducting economic evaluation in health so that good quality evidence on the relative efficiency of various programs and initiatives is generated. - 3 Generate more economic evaluation evidence to inform rationing decisions. - 4 Revise national health performance indicators so that they include true health system efficiency indicators, such as cost-effectiveness. - 5 Apply the Comprehensive Management Framework used to evaluate items on the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) and the Prosthesis List to accelerate disinvestment from low-value drugs and prostheses. - 6 Seek agreement among Commonwealth, state and territory governments to work together to undertake work similar to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in the United Kingdom and the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health.

How do Australian podiatrists manage patients with diabetes The Australian diabetic foot management survey

Background Diabetic foot complications are the leading cause of lower extremity amputation and diabetes-related hospitalisation in Australia. Studies demonstrate significant reductions in amputations and hospitalisation when health professionals implement best practice management. Whilst other nations have surveyed health professionals on specific diabetic foot management, to the best of the authors’ knowledge this appears not to have occurred in Australia. The primary aim of this study was to examine Australian podiatrists’ diabetic foot management compared with best practice recommendations by the Australian National Health Medical Research Council. Methods A 36-item Australian Diabetic Foot Management survey, employing seven-point Likert scales (0 = Never; 7 = Always) to measure multiple aspects of best practice diabetic foot management was developed. The survey was briefly tested for face and content validity. The survey was electronically distributed to Australian podiatrists via professional associations. Demographics including sex, years treating patients with diabetes, employment-sector and patient numbers were also collected. Chi-squared and Mann Whitney U tests were used to test differences between sub-groups. Results Three hundred and eleven podiatrists responded; 222 (71%) were female, 158 (51%) from the public sector and 11–15 years median experience. Participants reported treating a median of 21–30 diabetes patients each week, including 1–5 with foot ulcers. Overall, participants registered median scores of at least “very often” (>6) in their use of most items covering best practice diabetic foot management. Notable exceptions were: “never” (1 (1 – 3)) using total contact casting, “sometimes” (4 (2 – 5)) performing an ankle brachial index, “sometimes” (4 (1 – 6)) using University of Texas Wound Classification System, and “sometimes” (4 (3 – 6) referring to specialist multi-disciplinary foot teams. Public sector podiatrists reported higher use or access on all those items compared to private sector podiatrists (p < 0.01). Conclusions This study provides the first baseline information on Australian podiatrists’ adherence to best practice diabetic foot guidelines. It appears podiatrists manage large caseloads of people with diabetes and are generally implementing best practice guidelines recommendations with some notable exceptions. Further studies are required to identify barriers to implementing these recommendations to ensure all Australians with diabetes have access to best practice care to prevent amputations.

Innovative telemedicine and mobile phone technology in the management of diabetic foot ulcers

Background Diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) are a leading cause of diabetes-related hospitalisation and can be costly to manage without access to appropriate expert care. Within Queensland and indeed across many parts of Australia, there is an inequality in accessing specialist services for individuals with DFU. Recent National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) diabetic foot guidelines recommend remote expert consultation with digital imaging should be made available to people with DFU to improve their clinical outcomes. Telemedicine appears to show promise in improving access to diabetic foot specialist services; however diabetic foot telemedicine models to date have relied upon videoconferencing, store and forward technology and/or customised appliances to obtain digital imagery which all require either expensive infrastructure or a timed reply to the request for advice. Whilst mobile phone advice services have been used with success in general diabetes management and telehealth services have improved diabetic foot outcomes, the rapid emergence in the use of mobile phones has established a need to review the role that various forms of telemedicine play in the management of DFU. The aim of this paper is to review traditional telemedicine modalities that have been used in the management of DFU and to compare that to new and innovative technology that are emerging. Process Studies investigating the management of DFU using various forms of telemedicine interventions will be included in this review. They include the use of videoconferencing technology, hand held digital still photography purpose built imaging devices and mobile phone imagery. Electronic databases (Pubmed, Medline and CINAHL) will be searched using broad MeSH terms and keywords that cover the intended area of interest. Findings It is anticipated that the results of this narrative review will provide delegates of the 2015 Australasian Podiatry Conference an insight into the types of emerging innovative diagnostic telemedicine technologies in the management of DFU against the backdrop of traditional and evidence based modalities. It is anticipated that the findings will drive further research in the area of mobile phone imagery and innovation in the management of DFU.

Diffusing research into routine midwifery practice

This research applied Greenhalgh et al's (2005) organisational change theoretical framework and a case study method approach to explore the process of implementing a smoking cessation intervention for pregnant women. The study was carried out according to the principles laid down in the National statement on ethical conduct in human research, produced by the National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia. Ethical approval for the research was sought and received from Queensland University of Technology human research ethics committee, prior to the start of the study. The sample constituted four participants who had been involved in the process of disseminating a training programme for midwives to implement a smoking cessation intervention. Eight semi-structured interviews were undertaken with these participants and the interviews and background programme data were subjected to theoretical analysis. The data were analysed through the lens of the Greenhalgh et al (2005) framework. The result was a disaggregation and (re)aggregation of data in the formation of an analytical outcome (Charmaz, 2006).

Protocol for assessing maternal, environmental and epigenetic risk factors for dental caries in children

Background Expenditure on dental and oral health services in Australia is $3.4 billion AUD annually. This is the sixth highest health cost and accounts for 7 % of total national health expenditure. Approximately 49 % of Australian children aged 6 years have caries experience in their deciduous teeth and this is rising. The aetiology of dental caries involves a complex interplay of individual, behavioural, social, economic, political and environmental conditions, and there is increasing interest in genetic predisposition and epigenetic modification. Methods The Oral Health Sub-study; a cross sectional study of a birth cohort began in November 2012 by examining mothers and their children who were six years old by the time of initiation of the study, which is ongoing. Data from detailed questionnaires of families from birth onwards and data on mothers’ knowledge, attitudes and practices towards oral health collected at the time of clinical examination are used. Subjects’ height, weight and mid-waist circumference are taken and Body Mass Index (BMI) computed, using an electronic Bio-Impedance balance. Dental caries experience is scored using the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS). Saliva is collected for physiological measures. Salivary Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid (DNA) is extracted for genetic studies including epigenetics using the SeqCap Epi Enrichment Kit. Targets of interest are being confirmed by pyrosequencing to identify potential epigenetic markers of caries risk. Discussion This study will examine a wide range of potential determinants for childhood dental caries and evaluate inter-relationships amongst them. The findings will provide an evidence base to plan and implement improved preventive strategies.

General Practitioner Antimicrobial Stewardship Programme Study (GAPS): protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

Background There is a strong link between antibiotic consumption and the rate of antibiotic resistance. In Australia, the vast majority of antibiotics are prescribed by general practitioners, and the most common indication is for acute respiratory infections. The aim of this study is to assess if implementing a package of integrated, multifaceted interventions reduces antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections in general practice. Methods/design This is a cluster randomised trial comparing two parallel groups of general practitioners in 28 urban general practices in Queensland, Australia: 14 intervention and 14 control practices. The protocol was peer-reviewed by content experts who were nominated by the funding organization. This study evaluates an integrated, multifaceted evidence-based package of interventions implemented over a six month period. The included interventions, which have previously been demonstrated to be effective at reducing antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections, are: delayed prescribing; patient decision aids; communication training; commitment to a practice prescribing policy for antibiotics; patient information leaflet; and near patient testing with C-reactive protein. In addition, two sub-studies are nested in the main study: (1) point prevalence estimation carriage of bacterial upper respiratory pathogens in practice staff and asymptomatic patients; (2) feasibility of direct measures of antibiotic resistance by nose/throat swabbing. The main outcome data are from Australia’s national health insurance scheme, Medicare, which will be accessed after the completion of the intervention phase. They include the number of antibiotic prescriptions and the number of patient visits per general practitioner for periods before and during the intervention. The incidence of antibiotic prescriptions will be modelled using the numbers of patients as the denominator and seasonal and other factors as explanatory variables. Results will compare the change in prescription rates before and during the intervention in the two groups of practices. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted with the general practitioners and practice staff (practice nurse and/or practice manager) from the intervention practices on conclusion of the intervention phase to assess the feasibility and uptake of the interventions. An economic evaluation will be conducted to estimate the costs of implementing the package, and its cost-effectiveness in terms of cost per unit reduction in prescribing. Discussion The results on the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, acceptability and feasibility of this package of interventions will inform the policy for any national implementation.