PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 9197057

Practice compared. The UK and Australia.

D Gunning
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the processes and cost of management of chronic health problems between a rural general practice in the UK and a similar practice in Australia. Patients were selected from three groups with either diabetes, asthma or depression. DESIGN: Case study, retrospective. This comparison was conducted during a 6 month practice exchange. SETTING: Wagin, Western Australia and Berwick upon Tweed, England. SUBJECTS: Ten people (five men, five women) were selected from each practice, for each disease type. Their records were culled and compared on the basis of how well they had satisfied the requirements of the protocols (where they existed) on the management of each disease. Other comparisons also included the number and cost of consultations, prescriptions and hospital stays. RESULTS: There was no apparent difference in the age/sex distributions of the populations studied. Comparisons of the three disease groups showed: Asthma-results similar on most counts, except hospital admissions. Protocol uniformly poorly followed. Diabetes-results similar, except use/cost of prescription drugs which was much greater in Australia. The UK was much better following its protocol. Depression-Australia again used significantly more prescription drugs. The use and cost of GP/specialist visits was higher overall in Australia. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that a rural UK practice provides more cost effective review of chronic health problems. Further study would be warranted to investigate the impression that this was achieved at the expense of patient and doctor satisfaction.

Explore related subjects

AustraliaChronic DiseaseDrug PrescriptionsEconomics, HospitalFees and ChargesFemaleHumansMalePatient SatisfactionPrimary Health CareReferral and ConsultationRural PopulationUnited KingdomComparative StudyJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

D Gunning. 1997. Practice compared. The UK and Australia.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9197057/

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2026

Whole genome characterisation of Australian and New Zealand OsHV-1 'μVar' like variants over time.

Ostreid herpesvirus 1 (OsHV-1) is a major pathogen of Pacific oysters (Magallana gigas), linked to mass mortality events worldwide and presents a substantial threat to global aquaculture. Since 2010, mortality events have been occurring in Pacific oysters within Australia with the cause being an OsHV-1 microvariant highly similar to OsHV-1 μVar first detected in France, 2008. In this study, fifteen OsHV-1 whole genomes were assembled from Australian and New Zealand mortality events, including twelve newly sequenced genomes and three assembled from public datasets. Whole-genome phylogenetic analyses indicate that Australian and New Zealand OsHV-1 isolates form a distinct clade, separate from European and East Asian genomes, and with moderate regional and temporal divergence across the past 14 years. Across the dataset, multiple biologically relevant mutations were observed in genes of known function, including DNA polymerase, ribonucleotide reductase subunits, and apoptosis-related proteins, though most mutations occurred in uncharacterised genes. These findings highlight the limitations of single-gene typing and support the need for whole-genome approaches in understanding OsHV-1 evolution. Critically, the lack of recent whole-genome data, particularly from East and Southeast Asia, restricts the ability to trace viral origins and detect novel variants, underscoring the need for expanded global OsHV-1 genomic surveillance.

Australia↗
PubMed2026

Interest holder-driven research priorities in sexual and reproductive health for migrant and refugee adolescents and young adults in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and prioritise sexual and reproductive health research priorities for migrant and refugee adolescents and young adults in Australia using a priority setting partnership approach. METHODS: A James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership was conducted with 92 interest holders: 31 youth from migrant and refugee backgrounds and 61 professionals (healthcare providers, researchers, policymakers and community leaders), recruited online and in-person. The priority setting partnership process included a rapid evidence scan, an online uncertainty survey, evidence verification, interim prioritisation and a final consensus workshop. RESULTS: Eighty-three research uncertainties yielded 11 final priorities across four sexual and reproductive health domains: sexual and reproductive health literacy, sexual violence prevention, accessible services and maternal health. A striking divergence emerged between youth and professional priorities only 3 achieved combined high-priority consensus. Youth prioritised a broader range of topics, including abortion access (rated high by youth but low by professionals), while professionals prioritised fewer areas. Two priorities achieved consensus: community-based maternal health support and barriers to reporting gender-based violence. CONCLUSION: This is the first priority setting partnership to identify sexual and reproductive health research priorities for migrant and refugee youth in Australia and to uniquely highlight substantial misalignment between youth and professional priorities. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: These identified priorities provide a foundation for targeted research, culturally responsive policy and more equitable sexual and reproductive health service provision for migrant and refugee adolescents and young adults.

Australia↗