Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 10 of 73
-
ItemAssociation between COVID-19 vaccination rates and the Australian 'Million Dollar Vax' competition: an observational study(BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2022-08-01)OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between financial incentives from entry into a vaccine competition with the probability of vaccination for COVID-19. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study with adjustment for covariates using logistic regression. SETTING: October and November 2021, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: 2375 respondents of the Taking the Pulse of the Nation survey. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of respondents who had any vaccination, a first dose only, or second dose after the competition opened. RESULTS: Those who entered the competition were 2.27 (95% CI 1.73 to 2.99) times more likely to be vaccinated after the competition opened on 1 October than those who did not enter-an increase in the probability of having any dose of 0.16 (95 % CI 0.10 to 0.21) percentage points. This increase was mostly driven by those receiving second doses. Entrants were 2.39 (95% CI 1.80 to 3.17) times more likely to receive their second dose after the competition opened. CONCLUSIONS: Those who entered the Million Dollar Vax competition were more likely to have a vaccination after the competition opened compared with those who did not enter the competition, with this effect dominated by those receiving second doses.
-
ItemVocational and psychosocial predictors of medical negligence claims among Australian doctors: a prospective cohort analysis of the MABEL survey(BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2022-06-01)OBJECTIVE: To understand the association between medical negligence claims and doctors' sex, age, specialty, working hours, work location, personality, social supports, family circumstances, self-rated health, self-rated life satisfaction and presence of recent injury or illness. DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective cohort study of Australian doctors. PARTICIPANTS: 12 134 doctors who completed the Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life survey between 2013 and 2019. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Doctors named as a defendant in a medical negligence claim in the preceding 12 months. RESULTS: 649 (5.35%) doctors reported being named in a medical negligence claim during the study period. In addition to previously identified demographic factors (sex, age and specialty), we identified the following vocational and psychosocial risk factors for claims: working full time (OR=1.48, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.94) or overtime hours (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.23), working in a regional centre (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.08), increasing job demands (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.30), low self-rated life satisfaction (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.91) and recent serious personal injury or illness (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.72). Having an agreeable personality was mildly protective (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.00). When stratified according to sex, we found that working in a regional area, low self-rated life satisfaction and not achieving work-life balance predicted medical negligence claims in male, but not female, doctors. However, working more than part-time hours and having a recent personal injury or illness predicted medical negligence claims in female, but not male, doctors. Increasing age predicted claims more strongly in male doctors. Personality type predicted claims in both male and female doctors. CONCLUSIONS: Modifiable risk factors contribute to an increased risk of medical negligence claims among doctors in Australia. Creating more supportive work environments and targeting interventions that improve doctors' health and well-being could reduce the risk of medical negligence claims and contribute to improved patient safety.
-
ItemMedical negligence claims and the health and life satisfaction of Australian doctors: a prospective cohort analysis of the MABEL survey(BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2022-05-01)OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between medical negligence claims and doctors' self-rated health and life satisfaction. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Registered doctors practising in Australia who participated in waves 4 to 11 of the Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life (MABEL) longitudinal survey between 2011 and 2018. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-rated health and self-rated life satisfaction. RESULTS: Of the 15 105 doctors in the study, 885 reported being named in a medical negligence claim. Fixed-effects linear regression analysis showed that both self-rated health and self-rated life satisfaction declined for all doctors over the course of the MABEL survey, with no association between wave and being sued. However, being sued was not associated with any additional declines in self-rated health (coef.=-0.02, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.02, p=0.39) or self-rated life satisfaction (coef.=-0.01, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.07, p=0.91) after controlling for a range of job factors. Instead, we found that working conditions and job satisfaction were the strongest predictors of self-rated health and self-rated life satisfaction in sued doctors. In analyses restricted to doctors who were sued, we observed no changes in self-rated health (p=0.99) or self-rated life satisfaction (p=0.59) in the years immediately following a claim. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to prior overseas cross-sectional survey studies, we show that medical negligence claims do not adversely affect the well-being of doctors in Australia when adjusting for time trends and previously established covariates. This may be because: (1) prior studies failed to adequately address issues of causation and confounding; or (2) legal processes governing medical negligence claims in Australia cause less distress compared with those in other jurisdictions. Our findings suggest that the interaction between medical negligence claims and poor doctors' health is more complex than revealed through previous studies.
-
ItemPrevalence of burnout among GPs: a systematic review and meta-analysis(ROYAL COLL GENERAL PRACTITIONERS, 2022-02-21)BACKGROUND: Burnout is a work-related syndrome documented to have negative consequences for GPs and their patients. AIM: To review the existing literature concerning studies published up to December 2020 on the prevalence of burnout among GPs in general practice, and to determine GP burnout estimates worldwide. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic literature search and meta-analysis. METHOD: Searches of CINAHL Plus, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Scopus were conducted to identify published peer-reviewed quantitative empirical studies in English up to December 2020 that have used the Maslach Burnout Inventory - Human Services Survey to establish the prevalence of burnout in practising GPs (that is, excluding GPs in training). A random-effects model was employed. RESULTS: Wide-ranging prevalence estimates (6% to 33%) across different dimensions of burnout were reported for 22 177 GPs across 29 countries were reported for 60 studies included in this review. Mean burnout estimates were: 16.43 for emotional exhaustion; 6.74 for depersonalisation; and 29.28 for personal accomplishment. Subgroup and meta-analyses documented that country-specific factors may be important determinants of the variation in GP burnout estimates. Moderate overall burnout cut-offs were found to be determinants of the variation in moderate overall burnout estimates. CONCLUSION: Moderate to high GP burnout exists worldwide. However, substantial variations in how burnout is characterised and operationalised has resulted in considerable heterogeneity in GP burnout prevalence estimates. This highlights the challenge of developing a uniform approach, and the importance of considering GPs' work context to better characterise burnout.
-
ItemGeneral Practice Statistics in Australia: Pushing a Round Peg into a Square Hole(MDPI, 2022-02-09)In Australia, general practice forms a core part of the health system, with general practition ers (GPs) having a gatekeeper role for patients to receive care from other health services. GPs manage the care of patients across their lifespan and have roles in preventive health care, chronic condition management, multimorbidity and population health. Most people in Australia see a GP once in any given year. Draft reforms have been released by the Australian Government that may change the model of general practice currently implemented in Australia. In order to quantify the impact and effectiveness of any implemented reforms in the future, reliable and valid data about general practice clinical activity over time, will be needed. In this context, this commentary outlines the historical and current approaches used to obtain general practice statistics in Australia and highlights the benefits and limitations of these approaches. The role of data generated from GP electronic health record extractions is discussed. A methodology to generate high quality statistics from Australian general practice in the future is presented.
-
ItemEditors' introduction(WILEY, 2017-09-01)
-
ItemAustralia's superior skilled migration outcomes compared with Canada's(WILEY, 2021-11-26)
-
ItemEuropean and Australasian Econometrics and Health Economics Workshop papers Introduction(WILEY-BLACKWELL, 2016-09-01)
-
ItemHours worked by general practitioners and waiting times for primary care(WILEY, 2018-10-01)The decline in the working hours of general practitioners (GPs) is a key factor influencing access to health care in many countries. We investigate the effect of changes in hours worked by GPs on waiting times in primary care using the Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life longitudinal survey of Australian doctors. We estimate GP fixed effects models for waiting time and use family circumstances to instrument for GP's hours worked. We find that a 10% reduction in hours worked increases average patient waiting time by 12%. Our findings highlight the importance of GPs' labor supply at the intensive margin in determining the length of time patients must wait to see their doctor.
-
ItemAccuracy of patient recall for self-reported doctor visits: Is shorter recall better?(WILEY, 2018-11-01)In health economics, the use of patient recall of health care utilisation information is common, including in national health surveys. However, the types and magnitude of measurement error that relate to different recall periods are not well understood. This study assessed the accuracy of recalled doctor visits over 2-week, 3-month, and 12-month periods by comparing self-report with routine administrative Australian Medicare data. Approximately 5,000 patients enrolled in an Australian study were pseudo-randomised using birth dates to report visits to a doctor over three separate recall periods. When comparing patient recall with visits recorded in administrative information from Medicare Australia, both bias and variance were minimised for the 12-month recall period. This may reflect telescoping that occurs with shorter recall periods (participants pulling in important events that fall outside the period). Using shorter recall periods scaled to represent longer periods is likely to bias results. There were associations between recall error and patient characteristics. The impact of recall error is demonstrated with a cost-effectiveness analysis using costs of doctor visits and a regression example predicting number of doctor visits. The findings have important implications for surveying health service utilisation for use in economic evaluation, econometric analyses, and routine national health surveys.