4.4 Article

Care for chronic conditions for indigenous Australians: Key informants' perspectives on policy

Journal

HEALTH POLICY
Volume 92, Issue 2-3, Pages 211-217

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2009.03.012

Keywords

Chronic conditions; Indigenous health; Policy environment; Australia

Funding

  1. Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal Health
  2. Commission for Safety and Quality in Health Care
  3. NHMRC [283303]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The WHO's 2002 global report. Innovative Care for Chronic Conditions proposes a comprehensive framework for health systems to meet the challenges posed by chronic conditions. This paper uses the policy environment component of the WHO framework as a lens through which to examine key informants' perspectives on the management and prevention of chronic conditions in rural and remote Aboriginal communities in Australia. Methods: Twenty one semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of stakeholders, including senior commonwealth, state/territory and regional public servants and health service staff. All of the interviews were audio recorded, from which written summaries were produced. These summaries were then content analysed to build a composite picture of this area. Findings: The results indicate substantial success in developing national and sub-national strategies and refining funding and reporting arrangements. But much work remains to be done in strengthening partnerships, developing and retaining the workforce, and further shifting the focus from acute to chronic conditions. Conclusions: This paper provides a snapshot of the main policy issues, as identified by key informants, facing chronic disease management in rural and remote Indigenous communities in Australia. It has the potential to contribute to new national policy directions in indigenous health. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available