The Australian Parliament: A Gendered Organisation

Limited work has been undertaken on the subject of gender and Australian parliamentary institutions. This study of 13 male and 15 female members of the Australian parliament addresses this gap in the literature. Data from the study are used to explore the ways in which the institutions of political office operate as ‘gendered organisations’ (Acker 1990). What emerges from this analysis is the pervasiveness of gender across the processes, practices and discourses of the parliament. This is a space infused with hegemonic masculinity. This gendering is, however, normalised and/or minimised by many of the parliamentarians involved in the study.

Injury prevention in Queensland : report to Queensland Injury Prevention Council

Injury is the fourth leading cause of death in Australia. Injury rates in Queensland are amongst the highest in Australia and 21.5% of people surveyed for this research reported that their lifestyle or that of an immediate family member had been permanently affected by injury. Injury results in over 40,000 hospital admissions and 200,000 attendances at hospital Emergency Departments in Queensland each year. Queensland's death rate from injuries is higher than the national average, with consistently higher rates of deaths related to transport injuries. Queensland statistics also show higher than national average rates of injuries due to falls, homicide and accidental drowning. (Pike, Muller, Baade & Ward, 2000) In 2000-01 injuries represented over $4 billion (or 8%) of total health system expenditure, and 185,000 disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), or 7% of the total morbidity burden of disease and injury in Australia in 2003. (Begg, Vos, Barker, Stevenson, Stanley & Lopez, 2007). Injury is one of seven key health areas identified by the Commonwealth, state and territory governments for priority attention as National Health Priority Areas

The STRATIFY tool and clinical judgment were poor predictors of falling in an acute hospital setting

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of the STRATIFY falls tool with nurses’ clinical judgments in predicting patient falls. Study Design and Setting: A prospective cohort study was conducted among the inpatients of an acute tertiary hospital. Participants were patients over 65 years of age admitted to any hospital unit. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) of the instrument and nurses’ clinical judgments in predicting falls were calculated. Results: Seven hundred and eighty-eight patients were screened and followed up during the study period. The fall prevalence was 9.2%. Of the 335 patients classified as being ‘‘at risk’’ for falling using the STRATIFY tool, 59 (17.6%) did sustain a fall (sensitivity50.82, specificity50.61, PPV50.18, NPV50.97). Nurses judged that 501 patients were at risk of falling and, of these, 60 (12.0%) fell (sensitivity50.84, specificity50.38, PPV50.12, NPV50.96). The STRATIFY tool correctly identified significantly more patients as either fallers or nonfallers than the nurses (P50.027). Conclusion: Considering the poor specificity and high rates of false-positive results for both the STRATIFY tool and nurses’ clinical judgments, we conclude that neither of these approaches are useful for screening of falls in acute hospital settings.