Improving rural and regional access to long-acting reversible contraception and medical abortion through nurse-led models of care, task-sharing and telehealth (ORIENT): a protocol for a stepped-wedge pragmatic cluster-randomised controlled trial in Australian general practice.

INTRODUCTION: Women living in rural and regional Australia often experience difficulties in accessing long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) and medical abortion services. Nurse-led models of care can improve access to these services but have not been evaluated in Australian general practice. The primary aim of the ORIENT trial (ImprOving Rural and regIonal accEss to long acting reversible contraceptioN and medical abortion through nurse-led models of care, Tasksharing and telehealth) is to assess the effectiveness of a nurse-led model of care in general practice at increasing uptake of LARC and improving access to medical abortion in rural and regional areas. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: ORIENT is a stepped-wedge pragmatic cluster-randomised controlled trial. We will enrol 32 general practices (clusters) in rural or regional Australia, that have at least two general practitioners, one practice nurse and one practice manager. The nurse-led model of care (the intervention) will be codesigned with key women's health stakeholders. Clusters will be randomised to implement the model sequentially, with the comparator being usual care. Clusters will receive implementation support through clinical upskilling, educational outreach and engagement in an online community of practice. The primary outcome is the change in the rate of LARC prescribing comparing control and intervention phases; secondary outcomes include change in the rate of medical abortion prescribing and provision of related telehealth services. A within-trial economic analysis will determine the relative costs and benefits of the model on the prescribing rates of LARC and medical abortion compared with usual care. A realist evaluation will provide contextual information regarding model implementation informing considerations for scale-up. Supporting nurses to work to their full scope of practice has the potential to increase LARC and medical abortion access in rural and regional Australia. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (Project ID: 29476). Findings will be disseminated via multiple avenues including a knowledge exchange workshop, policy briefs, conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12622000086763).

Building a practice-based research network for healthcare integration: a protocol paper for a mixed-method project.

INTRODUCTION: Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) are sustained collaborations between healthcare professionals, researchers and members of the community that develop, conduct and report on research relevant to local needs. While PBRNs have traditionally been focused towards primary care practices and their patients, there has been increasing interest in how they may help facilitate healthcare integration. Yet, little is known on the ways in which PBRNs can best integrate with the broader healthcare system, in particular Advanced Health Research and Translation Centres. The overall project aim is to build a sustainable collaboration between a PBRN and an Advanced Health Research and Translation Centre to generate a research platform suitable for planning, undertaking and translating research to improve care across the healthcare continuum. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use a developmental evaluation design. Our iterative approach will be informed by a programme logic model and consists of: preparation work (pre-implementation assessment, literature review, community and stakeholder engagement), adaptation and building for a sustainable collaboration (strategy for recruitment and sustainment of members) and planning for network action (designing and implementing priority initiatives, monitoring and follow-up). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This project was approved by the Monash Health ethics committee (ERM Reference Number: 76281; Monash Health Ref: RES-21-0000-392L) and the Monash University Human Research ethics committee (Reference Number: 29786). Dissemination will take place via various channels, including relevant national and international committees and conferences, peer-reviewed journals and social media. Continuous dissemination to and communication with all participants in this project as well as other relevant stakeholders will help strengthen and sustain the network.

What clinical challenges are associated with diagnosing and managing work-related mental health conditions? A qualitative study in general practice.

OBJECTIVE: When providing care for patients with work-related mental health conditions (MHCs), the general practitioner's (GP) role includes clinical care, patient advocacy and assessment of a patient's ability to work. GPs can experience difficulty representing these competing roles. As clinical guidelines were being developed to assist GPs in providing this care, our aim was to identify the clinical challenges GPs experience when diagnosing and managing patients with work-related MHCs. DESIGN: Qualitative research. SETTING: This study was conducted in general practice and workers' compensation settings across Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-five GPs, seven psychiatrists and nine compensation scheme workers. GPs were eligible to participate if they were actively treating (or treated within the previous three years) patient(s) who had submitted a workers' compensation claim for a MHC. Psychiatrists and compensation scheme workers were eligible to participate if they were active in these roles, as they are best placed to identify additional clinical challenges GPs themselves did not raise. METHOD: Participants were invited by letter to participate in qualitative semi-structured telephone interviews. Prior to each interview, participants were asked to reflect on two case vignettes, each depicting a patient's illness trajectory over 12 months. Data were thematically analysed using inductive and deductive techniques and then categorised by stages of clinical reasoning. RESULTS: Participants reported clinical challenges across four key areas: (1) Diagnosis (identifying appropriate diagnostic tools, determining the severity and work-relatedness of a MHC, and managing the implications of labelling the patient with MHC). (2) Management (determining optimal treatment, recommending work participation). (3) Referral (ambiguity of communication pathways within compensation schemes). (4) Procedure (difficulties navigating compensation systems). CONCLUSION: We found that GPs experienced clinical challenges at all stages of care for people with work-related MHCs. We were also able to identify systemic and procedural issues that influence a GP's ability to provide care for patients with work-related MHCs.

Refining a taxonomy for guideline implementation: results of an exercise in abstract classification.

BACKGROUND: To better understand the efficacy of various implementation strategies, improved methods for describing and classifying the nature of these strategies are urgently required. The aim of this study was to develop and pilot the feasibility of a taxonomy to classify the nature and content of implementation strategies. METHODS: A draft implementation taxonomy was developed based on the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) data collection checklist. The draft taxonomy had four domains (professional, financial, organisational and regulatory) covering 49 distinct strategies. We piloted the draft taxonomy by using it to classify the implementation strategies described in the conference abstracts of the implementation stream of the 2010 Guideline International Network Conference. Five authors classified the strategies in each abstract individually. Final categorisation was then carried out in a face-to-face consensus meeting involving three authors. RESULTS: The implementation strategies described in 71 conference abstracts were classified. Approximately 15.5% of abstracts utilised strategies that could not be categorised using the draft taxonomy. Of those strategies that could be categorised, the majority were professionally focused (57%). A total of 41% of projects used only one implementation strategy, with 29% using two and 31% three or more. The three most commonly used strategies were changes in quality assurance, quality improvement and/or performance measurement systems, changes in information and communication technology, and distribution of guideline materials (via hard-copy, audio-visual and/or electronic means). CONCLUSIONS: Further refinement of the draft taxonomy is required to provide hierarchical dimensions and granularity, particularly in the areas of patient-focused interventions, those concerned with audit and feedback and quality improvement, and electronic forms of implementation, including electronic decision support.