Knowledge and motivation: two elements of health literacy that remain low with regard to nurse practitioners in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: This paper presents analysis of consumer focus groups that were undertaken as a part of the project to develop the now current Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia's Nurse Practitioner Standards for Practice. METHODS: Six focus groups were conducted with consumers around Australia, including urban and remote areas. One purpose for these groups was to explore what was known of nurse practitioners and whether consumers could articulate the difference between the regulated titles of enrolled nurse, registered nurse and nurse practitioner. RESULTS: Consumers' knowledge of nurses' roles in the Australian primary healthcare system, and hence system literacy (particularly in terms of navigating the system), was low. Of perhaps greatest importance is the fact that those consumers with low health systems literacy also exhibited a low level of motivation to seek new knowledge. Many consumers relied on the medical profession to direct care. CONCLUSION: The low levels of health literacy raise questions of how to meaningfully include health consumers in innovative health-related policy work.

Development of the Nurse Practitioner Standards for Practice Australia.

This article describes the context and development of the new Nurse Practitioner Standards for Practice in Australia, which went into effect in January 2014. The researchers used a mixed-methods design to engage a broad range of stakeholders who brought both political and practice knowledge to the development of the new standards. Methods included interviews, focus groups, surveys, and work-based observation of nurse practitioner practice. Stakeholders varied in terms of their need for detail in the standards. Nonetheless, they invariably agreed that the standards should be clinically focussed attributes. The pillars common in many advanced practice nursing standards, such as practice, research, education, and leadership, were combined and expressed in a new and unique clinical attribute.

What primary health-care services are Australian consumers willing to accept from nurse practitioners? A National Survey.

BACKGROUND: Nurses are becoming increasingly important as providers of primary health care in Australia. In November 2010, Medicare provider rights and Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme rights for nurse practitioners, working in private practice and in collaboration with a medical practitioner, were introduced in Australia. Although international evidence suggests that nurse practitioners would be appropriate and acceptable providers of care at the first point of contact, such as primary health care, there is little Australian evidence about what care consumers are willing to accept from nurse practitioners. OBJECTIVES: To ascertain what care Australian health-care consumers would accept from nurse practitioners in this setting. PARTICIPANTS: Australian adults over 18 years of age. METHODS: National Survey delivered online. Information about the survey was disseminated through a media campaign, stakeholder engagement and through the health-care consumer networks nationally. RESULTS: The total number of respondents that started the survey was n = 1883. Ninety-five percentage (n = 1784) of respondents completed the survey. The majority of respondents were women, aged 25-54 years, had completed tertiary education and had an annual household income of more than A$80,000. The majority of the respondents (n = 1562, 87%) said they would be prepared to see a nurse practitioner for some of their primary health-care needs. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest consumers are accepting of a range of activities undertaken by nurse practitioners in primary health care and this has relevance for primary health-care workforce mix and organization, particularly for areas that are underserved by medical practitioners.

How acceptable are primary health care nurse practitioners to Australian consumers?

International evidence indicates that nurses working in primary care can provide effective care and achieve positive health outcomes for patients similar to that provided by doctors. Nurse practitioners employed in primary health care perform some tasks previously exclusive to the GP role due to their advanced skills, knowledge and training. In November 2010 Medicare provider rights and Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme rights were provided for nurse practitioners working in private practice, and in collaboration with a medical practitioner. However, there is limited evidence about how acceptable nurse practitioners are to Australian consumers and what knowledge consumers have of the nurse practitioner role in the delivery of primary health care. The aim of this study was to examine Australian health care consumers' perceptions of nurse practitioners working in primary health care. This paper reports on the results of seven focus groups (n = 77 participants) conducted around Australia. Focus groups participants were asked how acceptable nurse practitioners are as provides of primary health care. Although there was some confusion about the role of nurse practitioners and how this role differed from other primary health care nurses, participants in the focus groups were very positive about nurse practitioners and would find them acceptable in providing primary health care.

ACT Transition from Hospital to Home Orthopaedic Survey: a cross-sectional survey of unplanned 30-day readmissions for patients having total hip arthroplasty.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify patient, hospital and transitional factors associated with unplanned 30-day readmissions in patients who had a total hip arthroplasty (THA). DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey was performed. All patients attending a 6-week follow-up after a THA in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) at four public and private clinics in the ACT from 1 February 2018 to 31 January 2019, were invited to complete an ACT Transition from Hospital to Home Orthopaedic Survey. PARTICIPANTS: Within the ACT, 431 patients over the age of 16 attending their 6-week post-surgery consultation following a THA entered and completed the survey (response rate 77%). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcome measure was self-reported readmissions for any reason within 30 days of discharge after a THA. Multiple logistic regression was used to estimate ORs of factors associated with unplanned 30-day readmissions. RESULTS: Of the 431 participants (representing 40% of all THAs conducted in the ACT during the study period), 27 (6%) were readmitted within 30 days of discharge. After controlling for age and sex, patients who did not feel rested on discharge were more likely to be readmitted within 30 days than those who felt rested on discharge (OR=5.75, 95% CI: (2.13 to 15.55), p=0.001). There was no association between post-hospital syndrome (ie, in-hospital experiences of pain, sleep and diet) overall and readmission. Patients who suffered peripheral vascular disease (PVD) were significantly more likely to have an unplanned 30-day readmission (OR=16.9, 95% CI: (3.06 to 93.53), p=0.001). There was no significant difference between private and public patient readmissions CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals should develop strategies that maximise rest and sleep during patients' hospital stay. Diagnosis and optimum treatment of pre-existing PVD prior to THA should also be a priority to minimise the odds of subsequent unplanned readmissions.

Understanding factors affecting 30-day unplanned readmissions for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA): the ACT Transition from Hospital to Home Orthopaedics Survey.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate factors associated with unplanned 30-day readmissions following a total knee arthroplasty (TKA), including association with post-hospital syndrome, patient enablement and transition from hospital to home. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A cross-sectional written survey of public and private patients attending a 6-week follow-up appointment after TKA at one of four clinical services in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) between 1 February 2018 and 31 January 2019. Multiple logistic regression analyses were used to measure associations between patient, hospital and transitional care factors with unplanned 30-day readmissions, while controlling for known confounders. RESULTS: Of the 380 participants who completed the survey (n=380, 54% of TKAs undertaken over the study period), 3.4% (n=13; 95% CI: 1.8 to 5.8) were subsequently readmitted within 30 days of discharge after a primary hospitalisation. Public patients were significantly more likely to be readmitted within 30 days compared with private patients (adjusted OR=6.31, 95% CI: 1.59 to 25.14, p=0.009), and patients who attended rehabilitation were significantly less likely to be readmitted within 30 days of discharge than those who did not (adjusted OR=0.16, 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.57, p=0.005). There were no associations between post-hospital syndrome or patient enablement and 30-day readmissions in this study. CONCLUSION: Reasons underlying the difference in unplanned readmission rates for public versus private patients need to be explored, including differences in surgical waiting times and the consequences for impairment and disease complexity. Strategies to foster increased participation post-surgical rehabilitation programmes need to be developed as an avenue to mitigate the burden of unplanned 30-day readmissions on individuals and health systems.