Frailty and use of health and community services by community-dwelling older men: the Concord Health and Ageing in Men Project.

BACKGROUND: frailty is a concept used to describe older people at high risk of adverse outcomes, including falls, functional decline, hospital or nursing home admission and death. The associations between frailty and use of specific health and community services have not been investigated. METHODS: the cross-sectional relationship between frailty and use of several health and community services in the last 12 months was investigated in 1,674 community-dwelling men aged 70 or older in the Concord Health and Ageing in Men study, a population-based study conducted in Sydney, Australia. Frailty was assessed using a modified version of the Cardiovascular Health Study criteria. RESULTS: overall, 158 (9.4%) subjects were frail, 679 (40.6%) were intermediate (pre-frail) and 837 (50.0%) were robust. Frailty was associated with use of health and community services in the last 12 months, including consulting a doctor, visiting or being visited by a nurse or a physiotherapist, using help with meals or household duties and spending at least one night in a hospital or nursing home. Frail men without disability in activities of daily living were twice more likely to have seen a doctor in the previous 2 weeks than robust men (adjusted odds ratio 2.04, 95% confidence interval 1.21-3.44), independent of age, comorbidity and socio-economic status. CONCLUSION: frailty is strongly associated with use of health and community services in community-dwelling older men. The high level of use of medical services suggests that doctors and nurses could play a key role in implementation of preventive interventions.

Responding to Young People's Health Risks in Primary Care: A Cluster Randomised Trial of Training Clinicians in Screening and Motivational Interviewing.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention implementing best practice guidelines recommending clinicians screen and counsel young people across multiple psychosocial risk factors, on clinicians' detection of health risks and patients' risk taking behaviour, compared to a didactic seminar on young people's health. DESIGN: Pragmatic cluster randomised trial where volunteer general practices were stratified by postcode advantage or disadvantage score and billing type (private, free national health, community health centre), then randomised into either intervention or comparison arms using a computer generated random sequence. Three months post-intervention, patients were recruited from all practices post-consultation for a Computer Assisted Telephone Interview and followed up three and 12 months later. Researchers recruiting, consenting and interviewing patients and patients themselves were masked to allocation status; clinicians were not. SETTING: General practices in metropolitan and rural Victoria, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: General practices with at least one interested clinician (general practitioner or nurse) and their 14-24 year old patients. INTERVENTION: This complex intervention was designed using evidence based practice in learning and change in clinician behaviour and general practice systems, and included best practice approaches to motivating change in adolescent risk taking behaviours. The intervention involved training clinicians (nine hours) in health risk screening, use of a screening tool and motivational interviewing; training all practice staff (receptionists and clinicians) in engaging youth; provision of feedback to clinicians of patients' risk data; and two practice visits to support new screening and referral resources. Comparison clinicians received one didactic educational seminar (three hours) on engaging youth and health risk screening. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were patient report of (1) clinician detection of at least one of six health risk behaviours (tobacco, alcohol and illicit drug use, risks for sexually transmitted infection, STI, unplanned pregnancy, and road risks); and (2) change in one or more of the six health risk behaviours, at three months or at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were likelihood of future visits, trust in the clinician after exit interview, clinician detection of emotional distress and fear and abuse in relationships, and emotional distress at three and 12 months. Patient acceptability of the screening tool was also described for the intervention arm. Analyses were adjusted for practice location and billing type, patients' sex, age, and recruitment method, and past health risks, where appropriate. An intention to treat analysis approach was used, which included multilevel multiple imputation for missing outcome data. RESULTS: 42 practices were randomly allocated to intervention or comparison arms. Two intervention practices withdrew post allocation, prior to training, leaving 19 intervention (53 clinicians, 377 patients) and 21 comparison (79 clinicians, 524 patients) practices. 69% of patients in both intervention (260) and comparison (360) arms completed the 12 month follow-up. Intervention clinicians discussed more health risks per patient (59.7%) than comparison clinicians (52.7%) and thus were more likely to detect a higher proportion of young people with at least one of the six health risk behaviours (38.4% vs 26.7%, risk difference [RD] 11.6%, Confidence Interval [CI] 2.93% to 20.3%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.7, CI 1.1 to 2.5). Patients reported less illicit drug use (RD -6.0, CI -11 to -1.2; OR 0·52, CI 0·28 to 0·96), and less risk for STI (RD -5.4, CI -11 to 0.2; OR 0·66, CI 0·46 to 0·96) at three months in the intervention relative to the comparison arm, and for unplanned pregnancy at 12 months (RD -4.4; CI -8.7 to -0.1; OR 0·40, CI 0·20 to 0·80). No differences were detected between arms on other health risks. There were no differences on secondary outcomes, apart from a greater detection of abuse (OR 13.8, CI 1.71 to 111). There were no reports of harmful events and intervention arm youth had high acceptance of the screening tool. CONCLUSIONS: A complex intervention, compared to a simple educational seminar for practices, improved detection of health risk behaviours in young people. Impact on health outcomes was inconclusive. Technology enabling more efficient, systematic health-risk screening may allow providers to target counselling toward higher risk individuals. Further trials require more power to confirm health benefits. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN.com ISRCTN16059206.

Co-evolution of Policy Sectors: Health Care and Public Health in five Countries

Cette thèse analyse la co-évolution de deux secteurs dans la politique de la santé: santé publique (public health) et soins aux malades (health care). En d'autres termes, la relation entre les dimensions curative et préventive de la politique de la santé et leur développement dans la durée. Une telle recherche est nécessaire car les problèmes de la santé sont complexes et ont besoin de solutions coordonnées. De plus, les dépenses de la santé ont augmenté sans arrt durant les dernières décennies. Un moyen de réduire une future augmentation des dépenses pourrait consister en davantage d'investissement dans des mesures préventives. En relation avec cette idée, ma recherche analyse les politiques de la santé publique et les soins aux malades de cinq pays: Allemagne, Angleterre, Australie, Etats-Unis et Suisse. En m'appuyant sur la littérature secondaire, des statistiques descriptives et des entretiens avec des experts et des politiciens, j'analyse la relation entre les deux secteurs depuis la fin du dix-neuvième siècle. En particulier, je me focalise sur la relation des deux champs sur trois niveaux: institutions, acteurs et politiques. Mes résultats montrent les similitudes et les différences d'évolution entre les cinq pays. D'un c^oté, lorsque la profession médicale est politiquement active et que le pays consiste en une fédération centralisée ou en un gouvernement unitaire, les deux secteurs sont intégrés au niveau institutionnel, ralliant les professions et groupes d'intérêt des deux secteurs la cause commune dans une activité politique. Par contre, dans tous les pays, les deux secteurs ont co-évolué vers une complémentarité malgré de la politisation des professions et la centralisation du gouvernement. Ces résultats sont intéressants pour la science politique en général car ils soulignent l'importance des professions pour le développement institutionnel et proposent un cadre pour l'analyse de la co-évolution des politiques publiques en général. -- This Ph.D. thesis analyzes the co-evolution of the health care and the public health sectors. In other words, the relation between preventive and curative health policy and its evolution over time. Such research is necessary, because current health problems are complex and might need coordinated solutions. What is more, health expenditures have increased continuously in the last decades. One way to slow down further increase in health spending could be to invest more in preventative health policies. Therefore, I am connecting individual health care and public health into a common analysis, taking Australia, Germany, Switzerland, the UK and the U.S. as examples. Based on secondary literature, descriptive statistics and interviews with experts and policymakers, I am analyzing how the two sectors' relations co-evolved between the late nineteenth and the early twenty-first century. Specifically, I am researching how health care and public health were related on the levels of institutions, actors and policies. My results show that there are differences and similarities in the co-evolution of policy sectors between these countries. On the one hand, when the medical profession was politically active and the country a centralized federation or a unitary state, there was institutional integration and common political advocacy of the sectors' interest groups and professions. On the other hand, in all countries, both sectors co-evolved towards complementarity, irrespectively of the politicization of professions and centralization of government. These findings are interesting for the political science literature at large, because they underline the importance of professions for institutional development and propose an analytical framework for analyzing the co-evolution of policy sectors in general.