PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 7970339

Primary and secondary care integration.

I R McCormick·M A Boyd
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Integration of primary and secondary health care is a goal of the 1993 New Zealand health reforms. Focus groups were selected to raise options and stimulate improved integration between primary and secondary care in the Auckland metropolitan and rural areas. Cooperation, communication, coordination, were considered relevant. Several detailed recommendations were produced. They fell into six groups; (1) liaison committees or meetings, (2) communication, (3) referral admission discharge, (4) joint ventures, (5) horizontal integration and (6) general. A key recommendation was that regional health authorities should fund liaison committees or functions to promote inter provider integration. The findings of the focus groups are placed in context of the wider requirements for integration. These are integrated funding, integrated information systems, integrated purchasing and utilisation management.

Explore related subjects

CommunicationCommunity-Institutional RelationsCooperative BehaviorDelivery of Health CareFocus GroupsHealth Services AccessibilityHospital-Patient RelationsHospital-Physician Joint VenturesHumansInterinstitutional RelationsNew ZealandPatient AdmissionPatient DischargePrimary Health CareReferral and ConsultationRegional Medical ProgramsJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

I R McCormick, M A Boyd. 1994-10-26. Primary and secondary care integration.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7970339/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Information-sharing among couples considering multifetal pregnancy reduction.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the information-sharing strategies of couples considering fetal reduction, and the impact of these strategies on the chances of encountering hostility in their social networks. DESIGN: Cross-sectional design of semistructured qualitative interviews, coded with respect to sharing strategies and level of personally directed hostility encountered. SETTING: Multiple Pregnancy Management Program, Comprehensive Genetics, New York, New York. PATIENT(S) AND INTERVENTION(S): Fifty women and their partners who were making a first visit to our maternal-fetal management facility, in order to consider the possibility of multifetal reduction as a pregnancy-management strategy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Development of information-sharing strategies, and the chances of encountering personally directed hostility regarding multifetal reduction associated with more and less selective strategies. RESULT(S): Four information-sharing strategies emerged from the analysis. Two of these strategies were relatively open (extended network, and both parents). Two other strategies were relatively selective (qualified family and friends, and defended relationship). The selective strategies were significantly less likely to encounter to encounter personally directed hostility (odds ratio, 3.88; 95% confidence intervals, 0.87-17.30). CONCLUSION(S): Selective sharing of information for couples considering multifetal prgnancy reduction is a potentially useful strategy for moderating potentially stressful relationships in their social networks. Clinics should find a way of integrating the discussion of selective sharing into their clinic's cultural repertoire of patient-support services.

Communication↗