The Australian journal of rural health · 2024
Experiences and impact of a rural Australian high-risk foot service: A multiple-methods study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tehan Peta Ellen, Donnelly Hailey, Martin Emma, Peterson Benjamin, Hawke Fiona
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Most podiatry-led high-risk foot services (HRFS) in Australia are located in metropolitan areas or large regional centres. In rural areas, where there are limited specialist services, individuals with diabetes-related foot ulceration are more likely to undergo amputation. This study aimed to explore clinicians' perceptions of a recently implemented HRFS in rural New South Wales, Australia, and compare trends of amputation and hospitalisation prior to and post-implementation of the service.
SETTING: Rural HRFS in Tamworth, New South Wales, Australia.
PARTICIPANTS: Health professionals working within the HRFS were recruited to participate.
DESIGN: This was a multiple-methods study. For the qualitative arm, semi-structured interviews were conducted, which were analysed using a reflexive thematic approach. The quantitative arm of the study utilised a retrospective analytic design which applied an interrupted time series to compare amputation and hospitalisation trends pre- and post-implementation of the HRFS utilising diagnostic and procedural ICD codes.
RESULTS: The qualitative arm of the study derived three themes: (1) navigating the divide, (2) rural community and rural challenges and (3) professional identity. Results of the interrupted time series indicate that there was a downward trend in major amputations following implementation of the HRFS; however, this was not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: Clinicians were aware of the inequity in DFD outcomes between rural and metropolitan areas and were committed to improving outcomes, particularly with respect to First Nations peoples. Future research will explore service use and amputation rates in the longer term to further evaluate this specialised multidisciplinary care in a rural community.
SETTING: Rural HRFS in Tamworth, New South Wales, Australia.
PARTICIPANTS: Health professionals working within the HRFS were recruited to participate.
DESIGN: This was a multiple-methods study. For the qualitative arm, semi-structured interviews were conducted, which were analysed using a reflexive thematic approach. The quantitative arm of the study utilised a retrospective analytic design which applied an interrupted time series to compare amputation and hospitalisation trends pre- and post-implementation of the HRFS utilising diagnostic and procedural ICD codes.
RESULTS: The qualitative arm of the study derived three themes: (1) navigating the divide, (2) rural community and rural challenges and (3) professional identity. Results of the interrupted time series indicate that there was a downward trend in major amputations following implementation of the HRFS; however, this was not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: Clinicians were aware of the inequity in DFD outcomes between rural and metropolitan areas and were committed to improving outcomes, particularly with respect to First Nations peoples. Future research will explore service use and amputation rates in the longer term to further evaluate this specialised multidisciplinary care in a rural community.