Train the trainer model : implications for health professionals and farm family health in Australia

Australia is a large country with 60% of land used for agricultural production. Its interior is sparsely populated, with higher morbidity and mortality recorded in rural areas, particularly farmers, farm families, and agricultural workers. Rural health professionals in addressing health education gaps of farming groups have reported using behavioralist approaches. These approaches in isolation have been criticized as disempowering for participants who are identified as passive learners or 'empty vessels.' A major challenge in rural health practice is to develop more inclusive and innovative models in building improved health outcomes. The Sustainable Farm Families Train the Trainer (SFFTTT) model is a 5-day program developed by Western District Health Service designed to enhance practice among health professionals working with farm families in Australia. This innovative model of addressing farmer health asks health professionals to understand the context of the farm family and encourages them to value the experience and existing knowledge of the farmer, the family and the farm business. The SFFTTT program has engaged with health agencies, community, government, and industry groups across Australia and over 120 rural nurses have been trained since 2005. These trainers have successfully delivered programs to 1000 farm families, with high participant completion, positive evaluation, and improved health indicators. Rural professionals report changes in how they approach health education, clinical practice, and promotion with farm families and agricultural industries. This paper highlights the success of SFFTTT as an effective tool in enhancing primary health practice in rural and remote settings. The program is benefiting not only drought ravaged farmers but assisting rural nurses, health agencies, and health boards to engage with farm families at a level not identified previously. Furthermore, nurses and health professionals are now embracing a more 'farmer-centered model of care.'

Health-related beliefs, explanations and actions of older Anglo-Celtic-Australians

This thesis was an exploration of the health-related understandings and experiences of older Anglo-Celtic-Australians from a disadvantaged metropolitan locality. New insights were gained about the relationship between disadvantage and poor health outcomes; particularly the impact of limited self-care practices in combination with difficulties relating to the health care professionals.

Vitamin D and adult bone health in Australia and New Zealand : a position statement

• A significant number of Australians are deficient in vitamin D - it is a fallacy that Australians receive adequate vitamin D from casual exposure to sunlight.

• People at high risk of vitamin D deficiency include elderly people (particularly those in residential care), people with skin conditions where avoidance of sunlight is advised, those with dark skin (particularly if veiled), and those with malabsorption.

• Exposure of hands, face and arms to one-third of a minimal erythemal dose (MED) of sunlight (the amount that produces a faint redness of skin) most days is recommended for adequate endogenous vitamin D synthesis. However, deliberate sun exposure between 10:00 and 14:00 in summer (11:00-15:00 daylight saving time) is not advised.

• If this sun exposure is not possible, then a vitamin D supplement of at least 400IU (10 μg) per day is recommended.

• In vitamin D deficiency, supplementation with 3000-5000 IU ergocalciferol per day (Ostelin [Boots]; 3-5 capsules per day) for 6-12 weeks is recommended.

• Larger-dose preparations of ergocalciferol or cholecalciferol are available in New Zealand, Asia and the United States and would be useful in Australia to treat moderate to severe vitamin D deficiency states in the elderly and those with poor absorption; one or two annual intramuscular doses of 300 000 IU of cholecalciferol have been shown to reverse vitamin D deficiency states.

Working hours and mental health in Australia: evidence from an Australian population-based cohort, 2001-2012

Objectives: This paper assesses the impact of working less than or more than standard full-time hours on mental health, as well as possible differences in this relationship by gender and skill level. Methods: The study design was a longitudinal cohort with 12 annual waves of data collection over the period 2001-2012, yielding a sample of 90 637 observations from 18 420 people. Fixed effects within-person regression was used to control for time invariant confounding. The Mental Component Summary of the Short Form 36 (SF-36) measure was used as the primary outcome measure. Working hours over the preceding year was measured in five categories with standard full-time hours (35-40 h/week) as the reference. Results: Results indicated that when respondents were working 49-59 h (-0.52, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.29, p<0.001) and 60 h or more (-0.47, 95% CI -0.77 to -0.16, p=0.003) they had worse mental health than when they were working 35-40 h/week (reference). The difference in mental health when working 49-59 h was greater for women than for men. There were greater declines in mental health in relation to longer working hours among persons in higher compared to lower occupational skill levels. Conclusions: Study results suggest the need for employers and governments to regulate working hours to reduce the burden of mental ill health in the working population.

Attaching unit costs to Australia`s national survey of mental health and wellbeing

Background: In mental health, policy-makers and planners are increasingly being asked to set priorities. This means that health economists, health services researchers and clinical investigators are being called upon to work together to define and measure costs. Typically, these researchers take available service utilisation data and convert them to costs, using a range of assumptions. There are inefficiencies, as individual groups of researchers frequently repeat essentially similar exercises in achieving this end. There are clearly areas where shared or common investment in the development of statistical software syntax, analytical frameworks and other resources could maximise the use of data.

Aims of the Study: This paper reports on an Australian project in which we calculated unit costs for mental health admissions and community encounters. In reporting on these calculations, our purpose is to make the data and the resources associated with them publicly available to researchers interested in conducting economic analyses, and allow them to copy, distribute and modify them, providing that all copies and modifications are available under the same terms and conditions (i.e., in accordance with the `Copyleft' principle). Within this context, the objectives of the paper are to: (i) introduce the `Copyleft' principle; (ii) provide an overview of the methodology we employed to derive the unit costs; (iii) present the unit costs themselves; and (iv) examine the total and mean costs for a range of single and comorbid conditions, as an example of the kind of question that the unit cost data can be used to address.

Method: We took relevant data from the Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing (NSMHWB), and developed a set of unit costs for inpatient and community encounters. We then examined total and mean costs for a range of single and comorbid conditions.

Results: We present the unit costs for mental health admissions and mental health community contacts. Our example, which explored the association between comorbidity and total and mean costs, suggested that comorbidly occurring conditions cost more than conditions which occur on their own.

Discussion: Our unit costs, and the materials associated with them, have been published in a freely available form governed by a provision termed `Copyleft'. They provide a valuable resource for researchers wanting to explore economic questions in mental health.

Implications for Health Policies: Our unit costs provide an important resource to inform economic debate in mental health in Australia, particularly in the area of priority-setting. In the past, such debate has largely been based on opinion. Our unit costs provide the underpinning to strengthen the evidence-base of this debate.

Implications for Further Research: We would encourage other Australian researchers to make use of our unit costs in order to foster comparability across studies. We would also encourage Australian and international researchers to adopt the `Copyleft' principle in equivalent circumstances. Furthermore, we suggest that the provision of `Copyleft'-contingent funding to support the development of enabling resources for researchers should be considered in the planning of future large-scale collaborative survey work, both in Australia and overseas.