Socioeconomic Position and Health Among Children and Adolescents With CKD Across the Life-Course.

Children and adolescents in families of lower socioeconomic position (SEP) experience an inequitable burden of reduced access to healthcare and poorer health. For children living with chronic kidney disease (CKD), disadvantaged SEP may exacerbate their considerable disease burden. Across the life-course, CKD may also compromise the SEP of families and young people, leading to accumulating health and socioeconomic disadvantage. This narrative review summarizes the current evidence on relationships of SEP with kidney care and health among children and adolescents with CKD from a life-course approach, including impacts of family SEP on kidney care and health, and bidirectional impacts of CKD on SEP. It highlights relevant conceptual models from social epidemiology, current evidence, clinical and policy implications, and provides directions for future research. Reflecting the balance of available evidence, we focus primarily on high-income countries (HICs), with an overview of key issues in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Overall, a growing body of evidence indicates sobering socioeconomic inequities in health and kidney care among children and adolescents with CKD, and adverse socioeconomic impacts of CKD. Dedicated efforts to tackle inequities are critical to ensuring that all young people with CKD have the opportunity to live long and flourishing lives. To prevent accumulating disadvantage, the global nephrology community must advocate for local government action on upstream social determinants of health; and adopt a life-course approach to kidney care that proactively identifies and addresses unmet social needs, targets intervening factors between SEP and health, and minimizes adverse socioeconomic outcomes across financial, educational and vocational domains.

Improving emergency department care for adults presenting with mental illness: a systematic review of strategies and their impact on outcomes, experience, and performance.

Background: Care delivery for the increasing number of people presenting at hospital emergency departments (EDs) with mental illness is a challenging issue. This review aimed to synthesise the research evidence associated with strategies used to improve ED care delivery outcomes, experience, and performance for adults presenting with mental illness. Method: We systematically reviewed the evidence regarding the effects of ED-based interventions for mental illness on patient outcomes, patient experience, and system performance, using a comprehensive search strategy designed to identify published empirical studies. Systematic searches in Scopus, Ovid Embase, CINAHL, and Medline were conducted in September 2023 (from inception; review protocol was prospectively registered in Prospero CRD42023466062). Eligibility criteria were as follows: (1) primary research study, published in English; and (2) (a) reported an implemented model of care or system change within the hospital ED context, (b) focused on adult mental illness presentations, and (c) evaluated system performance, patient outcomes, patient experience, or staff experience. Pairs of reviewers independently assessed study titles, abstracts, and full texts according to pre-established inclusion criteria with discrepancies resolved by a third reviewer. Independent reviewers extracted data from the included papers using Covidence (2023), and the quality of included studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute suite of critical appraisal tools. Results: A narrative synthesis was performed on the included 46 studies, comprising pre-post (n = 23), quasi-experimental (n = 6), descriptive (n = 6), randomised controlled trial (RCT; n = 3), cohort (n = 2), cross-sectional (n = 2), qualitative (n = 2), realist evaluation (n = 1), and time series analysis studies (n = 1). Eleven articles focused on presentations related to substance use disorder presentation, 9 focused on suicide and deliberate self-harm presentations, and 26 reported mental illness presentations in general. Strategies reported include models of care (e.g., ED-initiated Medications for Opioid Use Disorder, ED-initiated social support, and deliberate self-harm), decision support tools, discharge and transfer refinements, case management, adjustments to liaison psychiatry services, telepsychiatry, changes to roles and rostering, environmental changes (e.g., specialised units within the ED), education, creation of multidisciplinary teams, and care standardisations. System performance measures were reported in 33 studies (72%), with fewer studies reporting measures of patient outcomes (n = 19, 41%), patient experience (n = 10, 22%), or staff experience (n = 14, 30%). Few interventions reported outcomes across all four domains. Heterogeneity in study samples, strategies, and evaluated outcomes makes adopting existing strategies challenging. Conclusion: Care for mental illness is complex, particularly in the emergency setting. Strategies to provide care must align ED system goals with patient goals and staff experience.

It matters who you are and where you live: Commonwealth, state and territory policies for access to care for Australians with chronic kidney disease and their caregivers.

OBJECTIVE: To describe how Commonwealth, state and territory policies address access to care for Australians living with chronic kidney disease (CKD) with an emphasis on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and people residing in rural and remote areas. METHODS: We searched government health department websites for current policies up to March 2022 that addressed access to care for people with CKD. RESULTS: We included 98 policies: 28 were Commonwealth, and 70 were state or territory-based. There was wide variation in the policies for people with CKD in number and type across the jurisdictions. Of CKD specific policies, only three policies were specific for people living with CKD in rural and remote areas and no policies were specific for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. CONCLUSION: There is a lack of CKD-specific policies addressing access to care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and people living in rural and remote communities. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: Despite the known disparities in the burden of CKD there are few policies addressing CKD disparities for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and Australians living in rural and remote areas. Policies that specifically address the barriers to accessing care are required to reduce inequities.

Sociodemographic Drivers of Donor and Recipient Gender Disparities in Living Kidney Donation in Australia.

Background: Females account for 60% of all living kidney donors worldwide. We defined the proportion of female to male donors for living donor kidney transplantation stratified by recipient gender, and explored the factors associated with female kidney donation. Methods: Data from the ANZDATA (Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplantation) and ANZOD (Australian and New Zealand Organ Donor) registries (2002-2019) were used to identify the sociodemographic characteristics and their interactions associated with living donation from female donors. We derived the predicted probabilities from adjusted logistic models using marginal means. Results: Of 3523 living donor pairs, 2203 (63%) recipients were male, and 2012 (57%) donors were female. Male recipients were more likely to receive kidneys from female donors than male donors. Donor and recipient sex association was modified by donor-recipient relationship (P < 0.01), with sensitivity analysis suggesting that spousal donor-recipient pairs drive this interaction. Older recipients residing in regional or remote areas were more likely to receive kidneys from female donors compared with those from major cities (aged ≥60 years: 0.67 [0.63-0.71] vs. aged <60 years: 0.57 [0.53-0.60]). Conclusions: Factors associated with female donation include recipient sex, with spousal donors contributing to the interaction between recipient gender and donor-recipient relationship. Recipient age and location of residence have interactive effects on the likelihood of living donor transplantation from female donors.

Patients' Perspectives, Factors, and Patterns of eHealth Use in Kidney Transplant Recipients.

Introduction: eHealth supports the delivery of relevant health information and management of chronic disease. However, little is known about patients' perspectives and the determinants of eHealth use among kidney transplant recipients. Methods: Kidney transplant recipients aged 18 years and older from 3 transplant units in Australia and the Better Evidence and Translation in Chronic Kidney Disease consumer network completed a survey with free-text responses relating to eHealth uptake. Multivariable regression modeling was used to determine the factors associated with eHealth use. Free-text responses were thematically analyzed. Results: Of the 117 participants who were invited in person and who responded to the email, 91 completed the survey. Sixty-three participants (69%) were current eHealth users (active use of eHealth tools), and 91% had access to eHealth devices, including smartphones (81%) and computers (59%). Most (98%) reported that eHealth improves posttransplant care. Factors associated with increased eHealth use (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]) were higher eHealth literacy scale (eHEALS) score (1.21 [1.06-1.38]) and tertiary education (7.78 [2.19-27.7]). We identified the following 3 themes on eHealth determinants: (i) empowering self-management, (ii) enhancing health services, and (iii) technology burden. Conclusions: Transplant recipients believe that eHealth interventions have the potential to improve their posttransplant care. eHealth interventions should meet the needs of all transplant recipients and be accessible to those with lower educational attainment.

Australian Rural Caregivers' Experiences in Supporting Patients With Kidney Failure to Access Dialysis and Kidney Transplantation: A Qualitative Study.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Caregivers of patients with chronic kidney disease from rural communities play a crucial role in access to dialysis and transplantation, but they face many challenges including geographical distance, financial hardship, and limited support. This study aimed to inform strategies to overcome these challenges by describing the experiences of caregivers of patients with kidney failure from rural Australian communities in accessing kidney replacement therapy. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 18 adult caregivers of Australian rural patients with kidney failure treated with dialysis or kidney transplantation. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Semistructured interviews were conducted. Interview transcripts were thematically analyzed. RESULTS: The 18 participants were aged 20 to 78 years; 13 (72%) were female, and 13 (72%) were the spouse/partner of the patient. We identified 5 themes: devastating social isolation (difficult periods of separation, exclusion from peers, forced relocation); financial dependency and sacrifice (burgeoning out-of-pocket costs, disruption to work life, foregoing autonomy); ongoing psychological trauma (concern for neglect and stress on children, long-term emotional distress); overwhelmed by multifaceted roles and expectations (patient advocacy, uncertainty in navigating multiple health systems); and persistent burden of responsibility (loss of self-identity, ongoing travel requirements, scarcity of psychosocial support, unpreparedness for treatment regime). LIMITATIONS: The study was conducted in a high-income, English-speaking country with universal health insurance, which may limit the transferability of the findings. CONCLUSIONS: Australian rural caregivers of people with kidney failure treated by maintenance dialysis or transplantation experience an exhausting physical, financial, and psychological burden. Strategies to address these profound challenges are needed. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY: This interview-based study elicited the challenges faced by people and family members who care for patients from rural towns who are receiving dialysis or kidney transplantation. The barriers and difficulties reported included traveling long distances, needing to move to larger towns and leaving their homes, feeling concerned for the long-term effects on their children, physical exhaustion, and financial issues. Additional efforts are needed to identify the means by which caregivers and their families in rural towns can obtain support to care for those with kidney failure.

Equity in national policies for Australians with kidney disease.

OBJECTIVE: To describe how the Australian Government Department of Health policies address equity in the management of chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: We searched the websites of the Australian Government Department of Health, Kidney Health Australia, Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet and the National Rural Health Alliance for policies using the search terms: kidney, renal and chronic. RESULTS: We included 24 policies that addressed groups of people that experience health inequities: 23 addressed Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, 18 rural/remote communities, 12 low socioeconomic status groups, six culturally and linguistically diverse communities and four addressed gender disparities. The scope of the policies ranged from broad national frameworks to subsidised access to health services and medicines. Only two policies explicitly addressed equity for patients with CKD. CONCLUSION: CKD outcomes are highly variable across population groups yet Australian Government policies that address access to and the experience of care are limited in both number and their attention to equity issues. Implications for public health: In Australia, some groups of people with CKD have a substantially higher risk of mortality and morbidity than the general CKD population. We advocate for the development and implementation of policies to attain equity for people with CKD.

Patient- and parent proxy-reported outcome measures for life participation in children with chronic kidney disease: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The burden of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and its treatment may severely limit the ability of children with CKD to do daily tasks and participate in family, school, sporting and recreational activities. Life participation is critically important to affected children and their families; however, the appropriateness and validity of available measures used to assess this outcome are uncertain. The aim of this study was to identify the characteristics, content and psychometric properties of existing measures for life participation used in children with CKD. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant register to August 2019 for all studies that used a measure to report life participation in children with CKD. For each measure, we extracted and analyzed the characteristics, dimensions of life participation and psychometric properties. RESULTS: From 128 studies, we identified 63 different measures used to assess life participation in children with CKD. Twenty-five (40%) of the measures were patient reported, 7 (11%) were parent proxy reported and 31 (49%) had both self and parent proxy reports available. Twenty-two were used in one study only. The Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory version 4.0 generic module was used most frequently in 62 (48%) studies. Seven (11%) were designed to assess ability to participate in life, with 56 (89%) designed to assess other constructs (e.g. quality of life) with a subscale or selected questions on life participation. Across all measures, the three most frequent activities specified were social activities with friends and/or family, leisure activities and self-care activities. Validation data in the pediatric CKD population were available for only 19 (30%) measures. CONCLUSIONS: Life participation is inconsistently measured in children with CKD and the measures used vary in their characteristics, content and validity. Validation data supporting these measures in this population are often incomplete and are sparse. A meaningful and validated measure for life participation in children with CKD is needed.

Urologists' referral and radiation oncologists' treatment patterns regarding high-risk prostate cancer patients receiving radiotherapy within 6 months after radical prostatectomy: A prospective cohort analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies have observed low rates of adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy (RP) for high-risk prostate cancer patients. However, it is not clear the extent to which these low rates are driven by urologists' referral and radiation oncologists' treatment patterns. METHOD: The Clinician-Led Improvement in Cancer Care (CLICC) implementation trial was conducted in nine public hospitals in New South Wales, Australia. Men who underwent RP for prostate cancer during 2013-2015 and had at least one high-risk pathological feature of extracapsular extension, seminal vesicle invasion and/or positive surgical margins were included in these analyses. Outcomes were as follows: (i) referral to a radiation oncologist within 4 months after RP ('referred'); (ii) commencement of radiotherapy within 6 months after RP among those who consulted a radiation oncologist ('radiotherapy after consultation'). RESULTS: Three hundred and twenty-five (30%) of 1071 patients were 'referred', and 74 (61%) of 121 patients received 'radiotherapy after consultation'. Overall, the probability of receiving radiotherapy within 6 months after RP was 15%. The probability of being 'referred' increased according to higher 5-year risk of cancer-recurrence (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Only 30% of patients with high-risk features are referred to a radiation oncologist with the likelihood of referral being influenced by the perceived risk of cancer-recurrence as well as the urologist's institutional/personal preference. When patients are seen by a radiation oncologist, 61% receive radiotherapy within 6 months after RP with the likelihood of receiving radiotherapy not being heavily influenced by increasing risk of recurrence. This suggests many suitable patients would receive radiotherapy if referred and seen by a radiation oncologist.

A multidisciplinary team-oriented intervention to increase guideline recommended care for high-risk prostate cancer: A stepped-wedge cluster randomised implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed whether a theoretically conceptualised tailored intervention centred on multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) increased clinician referral behaviours in line with clinical practice guideline recommendations. METHODS: Nine hospital Sites in New South Wales (NSW), Australia with a urological MDT and involvement in a state-wide urological clinical network participated in this pragmatic stepped wedge, cluster randomised implementation trial. Intervention strategies included flagging of high-risk patients by pathologists, clinical leadership, education, and audit and feedback of individuals' and study Sites' practices. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients referred to radiation oncology within 4 months after prostatectomy. Secondary outcomes were proportion of patients discussed at a MDT meeting within 4 months after surgery; proportion of patients who consulted a radiation oncologist within 6 months; and the proportion who commenced radiotherapy within 6 months. Urologists' attitudes towards adjuvant radiotherapy were surveyed pre- and post-intervention. A process evaluation measured intervention fidelity, response to intervention components and contextual factors that impacted on implementation and sustainability. RESULTS: Records for 1071 high-risk post-RP patients operated on by 37 urologists were reviewed: 505 control-phase; and 407 intervention-phase. The proportion of patients discussed at a MDT meeting increased from 17% in the control-phase to 59% in the intervention-phase (adjusted RR = 4.32; 95% CI [2.40 to 7.75]; p < 0·001). After adjustment, there was no significant difference in referral to radiation oncology (intervention 32% vs control 30%; adjusted RR = 1.06; 95% CI [0.74 to 1.51]; p = 0.879). Sites with the largest relative increases in the percentage of patients discussed also tended to have greater increases in referral (p = 0·001). In the intervention phase, urologists failed to provide referrals to more than half of patients whom the MDT had recommended for referral (78 of 140; 56%). CONCLUSIONS: The intervention resulted in significantly more patients being discussed by a MDT. However, the recommendations from MDTs were not uniformly recorded or followed. Although practice varied markedly between MDTs, the intervention did not result in a significant overall change in referral rates, probably reflecting a lack of change in urologists' attitudes. Our results suggest that interventions focused on structures and processes that enable health system-level change, rather than those focused on individual-level change, are likely to have the greatest effect. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12611001251910 ). Registered 6 December 2011.

Improving the quality of healthcare: a cross-sectional study of the features of successful clinical networks.

OBJECTIVES: Networks of clinical experts are being established internationally to help embed evidence based care in health systems. There is emerging evidence that these clinical networks can drive quality improvement programs, but the features that distinguish successful networks are largely unknown. We examined the factors that make clinical networks effective at improving quality of care and facilitating system-wide changes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study of 19 state-wide clinical networks that reflected a range of medical and surgical specialty care and were in operation from 2006 to 2008 in New South Wales, Australia. We conducted qualitative interviews with network leaders to characterise potential impacts, and conducted internet surveys of network members to evaluate external support and the organisational and program characteristics of their respective networks. The main outcome measures were median ratings of individual network impacts on quality of care and system-wide changes, determined through independent assessment of documented evidence by an expert panel. RESULTS: We interviewed 19 network managers and 32 network co-chairs; 592 network members completed internet surveys. Three networks were rated as having had high impact on quality of care, and seven as having had high impact on system-wide change. Better-perceived strategic and operational network management was significantly associated with higher ratings of impact on quality of care (coefficient estimate 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.02, 1.69). Better-perceived leadership of the network manager (coefficient estimate 0.47; 95% CI 0.10, 0.85) and strategic and operational network management (coefficient estimate 0.23; 95% CI 0.06, 0.41) were associated with higher ratings of impact on system-wide change. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the largest study of clinical networks undertaken to date. The results suggest that clinical networks that span the health system can improve quality of care and facilitate system-wide change. Network management and leadership, encompassing both strategic and operational elements at the organisational level, appear to be the primary influences on network success. These findings can guide future organisational and system-wide change programs and the development or strengthening of clinical networks to help implement evidence based care to improve service delivery and outcomes.

The EXpert PANel Decision (EXPAND) method: a way to measure the impact of diverse quality improvement activities of clinical networks.

Objectives and importance of study: Evaluating impacts of quality improvement activities across diverse clinical focus areas is challenging. However, evaluation is necessary to determine if the activities had an impact on quality of care and resulted in system-wide change. Clinical networks of health providers aim to provide a platform for accelerating quality improvement activities and adopting evidence based practices. However, most networks do not collect primary data that would enable evaluation of impact. We adapted an established expert panel approach to measure the impacts of efforts in 19 clinical networks to improve care and promote health system change, to determine whether these efforts achieved their purpose. STUDY TYPE: A retrospective cross-sectional study of 19 clinical networks using multiple methods of data collection including the EXpert PANel Decision (EXPAND) method. METHODS: Network impacts were identified through interviews with network managers (n = 19) and co-chairs (n = 32), and document review. The EXPAND method brought together five independent experts who provided initial individual ratings of overall network impact. After attendance at an in-person moderated meeting where aggregate scores were discussed, the experts provided a final rating. Median scores of postmeeting ratings were the final measures of network impact. RESULTS: Among the 19 clinical networks, experts rated 47% (n = 9) as having a limited impact on improving quality of care, 37% (n = 7) as having a moderate impact and 16% (n = 3) as having a high impact. The experts rated 26% (n = 5) of clinical networks as having a limited impact on facilitating system-wide change, 37% (n = 7) as having a moderate impact and 37% (n = 7) as having a high impact. CONCLUSION: The EXPAND method enabled appraisal of diverse clinical networks in the absence of primary data that could directly evaluate network impacts. The EXPAND method can be applied to assess the impact of quality improvement initiatives across diverse clinical areas to inform healthcare planning, delivery and performance. Further research is needed to assess its reliability and validity.

Changing attitudes towards management of men with locally advanced prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy: A follow-up survey of Australia-based urologists.

INTRODUCTION: This study examined whether there has been change among Australia-based urologists' knowledge, attitudes and beliefs relating to guideline-recommended adjuvant radiotherapy for men with adverse pathologic features following radical prostatectomy since a prior survey in 2012 and investigated associations between attitudes and treatment preferences. METHODS: A nationwide survey of Australia-based urologist members of the Urological Society of Australia and New Zealand. RESULTS: Ninety-six respondents completed the 2015 survey (30% response rate) compared with 157 (45% response rate) in 2012. There was no significant change in awareness of national clinical practice guidelines for the management of prostate cancer. When considering adjuvant against salvage radiotherapy, urologists were significantly less favourable towards adjuvant radiotherapy in 2015 than in 2012 for two of three hypothetical clinical case scenarios with a high 10-year risk of biochemical relapse according to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center nomograms (P < 0.001 for both cases). In 2015, urologists were less positive overall towards the recommendation for post-operative adjuvant radiotherapy for men with locally advanced prostate cancer than in 2012 (P < 0.001), reflecting a significant change across a number of attitudes and beliefs. Of note, urologists felt other urologists would more likely be critical if they routinely referred the target patient group for radiotherapy in 2015 compared with 2012 (P = 0.007). CONCLUSION: In 2015 Australia-based urologists were less favourable towards adjuvant radiotherapy over watchful waiting for men with high-risk pathologic features post-prostatectomy than in 2012. We could find no new published research that precipitated this change in attitude.

Knowledge, attitudes and beliefs towards management of men with locally advanced prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy: an Australian survey of urologists.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate Australian urologists' knowledge, attitudes and beliefs, and the association of these with treatment preferences relating to guideline-recommended adjuvant radiotherapy for men with adverse pathologic features following radical prostatectomy. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A nationwide mailed and web-based survey of Australian urologist members of the Urological Society of Australia and New Zealand (USANZ). RESULTS: 157 surveys were included in the analysis (45% response rate). Just over half of respondents (54%) were aware of national clinical practice guidelines for the management of prostate cancer. Urologists' attitudes and beliefs towards the specific recommendation for post-operative adjuvant radiotherapy for men with locally advanced prostate cancer were mixed. Just over half agreed the recommendation is based on a valid interpretation of the underpinning evidence (54.1%, 95% CI [46%, 62.2%]) but less than one third agreed adjuvant radiotherapy will lead to improved patient outcomes (30.2%, 95% CI [22.8%, 37.6%]). Treatment preferences were varied, demonstrating clinical equipoise. A positive attitude towards the clinical practice recommendation was significantly associated with treatment preference for adjuvant radiotherapy (rho = 0.520, P < 0.0001). There was stronger preference for adjuvant radiotherapy in more recently trained urologists (registrars) while preference for watchful waiting was greater in more experienced urologists (consultants) (b = 0.156, P = 0.034; 95% CI [0.048, 1.24]). Urologists' attitudes towards clinical practice guidelines in general were positive. CONCLUSION: There remains clinical equipoise among Australian urologists in relation to adjuvant radiotherapy for men with adverse pathologic features following radical prostatectomy.

What are the reasons for clinical network success? A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical networks have been established to improve patient outcomes and processes of care by implementing a range of innovations and undertaking projects based on the needs of local health services. Given the significant investment in clinical networks internationally, it is important to assess their effectiveness and sustainability. This qualitative study investigated the views of stakeholders on the factors they thought were influential in terms of overall network success. METHOD: Ten participants were interviewed using face-to-face, audio-recorded semi-structured interviews about critical factors for networks' successes over the study period 2006-2008. Respondents were purposively selected from two stakeholder groups: i) chairs of networks during the study period of 2006-2008 from high- moderate- and low-impact networks (as previously determined by an independent review panel) and ii) experts in the clinical field of the network who had a connection to the network but who were not network members. Participants were blind to the performance of the network they were interviewed about. Transcribed data were coded and analysed to generate themes relating to the study aims. RESULTS: Themes relating to influential factors critical to network success were: network model principles; leadership; formal organisational structures and processes; nature of network projects; external relationships; profile and credibility of the network. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides clinical networks with guidance on essential factors for maximising optimal network outcomes and that may assist networks to move from being a 'low-impact' to 'high-impact' network. Important ingredients for successful clinical networks were visionary and strategic leadership with strong links to external stakeholders; and having formal infrastructure and processes to enable the development and management of work plans aligned with health priorities.

Applications of system dynamics modelling to support health policy.

INTRODUCTION: The value of systems science modelling methods in the health sector is increasingly being recognised. Of particular promise is the potential of these methods to improve operational aspects of healthcare capacity and delivery, analyse policy options for health system reform and guide investments to address complex public health problems. Because it lends itself to a participatory approach, system dynamics modelling has been a particularly appealing method that aims to align stakeholder understanding of the underlying causes of a problem and achieve consensus for action. The aim of this review is to determine the effectiveness of system dynamics modelling for health policy, and explore the range and nature of its application. METHOD: A systematic search was conducted to identify articles published up to April 2015 from the PubMed, Web of Knowledge, Embase, ScienceDirect and Google Scholar databases. The grey literature was also searched. Papers eligible for inclusion were those that described applications of system dynamics modelling to support health policy at any level of government. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Six papers were identified, comprising eight case studies of the application of system dynamics modelling to support health policy. No analytic studies were found that examined the effectiveness of this type of modelling. Only three examples engaged multidisciplinary stakeholders in collective model building. Stakeholder participation in model building reportedly facilitated development of a common 'mental map' of the health problem, resulting in consensus about optimal policy strategy and garnering support for collaborative action. The paucity of relevant papers indicates that, although the volume of descriptive literature advocating the value of system dynamics modelling is considerable, its practical application to inform health policy making is yet to be routinely applied and rigorously evaluated. CONCLUSION: Advances in software are allowing the participatory model building approach to be extended to more sophisticated multimethod modelling that provides policy makers with more powerful tools to support the design of targeted, effective and equitable policy responses for complex health problems. Building capacity and investing in communication to promote these modelling methods, as well as documenting and evaluating their applications, will be vital to supporting uptake by policy makers.

Clinician-led improvement in cancer care (CLICC)--testing a multifaceted implementation strategy to increase evidence-based prostate cancer care: phased randomised controlled trial--study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines have been widely developed and disseminated with the aim of improving healthcare processes and patient outcomes but the uptake of evidence-based practice remains haphazard. There is a need to develop effective implementation methods to achieve large-scale adoption of proven innovations and recommended care. Clinical networks are increasingly being viewed as a vehicle through which evidence-based care can be embedded into healthcare systems using a collegial approach to agree on and implement a range of strategies within hospitals. In Australia, the provision of evidence-based care for men with prostate cancer has been identified as a high priority. Clinical audits have shown that fewer than 10% of patients in New South Wales (NSW) Australia at high risk of recurrence after radical prostatectomy receive guideline recommended radiation treatment following surgery. This trial will test a clinical network-based intervention to improve uptake of guideline recommended care for men with high-risk prostate cancer. METHODS/DESIGN: In Phase I, a phased randomised cluster trial will test a multifaceted intervention that harnesses the NSW Agency for Clinical Innovation (ACI) Urology Clinical Network to increase evidence-based care for men with high-risk prostate cancer following surgery. The intervention will be introduced in nine NSW hospitals over 10 months using a stepped wedge design. Outcome data (referral to radiation oncology for discussion of adjuvant radiotherapy in line with guideline recommended care or referral to a clinical trial of adjuvant versus salvage radiotherapy) will be collected through review of patient medical records. In Phase II, mixed methods will be used to identify mechanisms of provider and organisational change. Clinicians' knowledge and attitudes will be assessed through surveys. Process outcome measures will be assessed through document review. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted to elucidate mechanisms of change. DISCUSSION: The study will be one of the first randomised controlled trials to test the effectiveness of clinical networks to lead changes in clinical practice in hospitals treating patients with high-risk cancer. It will additionally provide direction regarding implementation strategies that can be effectively employed to encourage widespread adoption of clinical practice guidelines. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12611001251910.