Equity of access in rural and metropolitan dementia diagnosis, management, and care experiences: an exploratory qualitative study.

IF 4.5 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Hannah Gulline, Sarah Carmody, Mark Yates, Amelia Bevins, Amy Brodtmann, Samantha M Loi, Yen Ying Lim, Heather Macklin, Karen Glennen, Michael Woodward, Scott Ayton, Darshini Ayton
{"title":"Equity of access in rural and metropolitan dementia diagnosis, management, and care experiences: an exploratory qualitative study.","authors":"Hannah Gulline, Sarah Carmody, Mark Yates, Amelia Bevins, Amy Brodtmann, Samantha M Loi, Yen Ying Lim, Heather Macklin, Karen Glennen, Michael Woodward, Scott Ayton, Darshini Ayton","doi":"10.1186/s12939-025-02434-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The limited allocation of resources to rural and regional communities is a major contributor to healthcare inequities in Australia. Distribution of health service resources between metropolitan and rural communities commonly sees highly populated areas prioritised over more sparsely populated and geographically vast areas. As such, challenges impacting dementia diagnosis, management, and care in metropolitan areas are experienced more acutely in rural areas. This study aimed to examine equity of access to dementia diagnosis, management, and care services amongst people who experienced the process of dementia diagnosis as a patient or significant other (partner/spouse, adult children, siblings, and friends) throughout rural and metropolitan Australia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This exploratory qualitative study consisted of thirty-three online semi-structured interviews with thirty-seven people with experience of the dementia diagnosis process as a patient and/or significant other. Interviews explored symptoms of dementia, health professionals consulted, tests conducted, and challenges faced throughout the diagnosis and post-diagnosis process. Rurality was defined by the Australian Statistical Geography Standard Remoteness Areas (ASGS-RA) and the Modified Monash Model (MMM). Thematic analysis was conducted, with Russell's (2013) Dimensions of Access framework (geography, affordability, availability, acceptability, accommodation, awareness, and timeliness) guiding data analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants were distributed across various regions of Australia: seven interviews from inner regional Australia, five interviews from outer regional Australia, and twenty-one interviews from metropolitan areas. Disparities in access between metropolitan and rural areas emerged in five key dimensions: 1) geography impeding ability to access services; 2) affordability of travel expenses; 3) availability of healthcare and support services; 4) acceptability of available health professionals and services; and 5) awareness of local services and resources. The dimensions of accommodation and timeliness of care were experienced as challenges irrespective of location, with lengthy appointment wait times and difficulty navigating complex systems. However, rurality often compounded the challenges in dementia diagnosis, management, and care.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Significant health inequities persist between rural and metropolitan communities that must be prioritised in endeavours to promote equitable dementia diagnosis, management, and care. Targeted action to address disparities is vital to mitigate the impact of rurality, particularly as clinical practice evolves with research advancements.</p>","PeriodicalId":13745,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Equity in Health","volume":"24 1","pages":"74"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11912628/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for Equity in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-025-02434-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The limited allocation of resources to rural and regional communities is a major contributor to healthcare inequities in Australia. Distribution of health service resources between metropolitan and rural communities commonly sees highly populated areas prioritised over more sparsely populated and geographically vast areas. As such, challenges impacting dementia diagnosis, management, and care in metropolitan areas are experienced more acutely in rural areas. This study aimed to examine equity of access to dementia diagnosis, management, and care services amongst people who experienced the process of dementia diagnosis as a patient or significant other (partner/spouse, adult children, siblings, and friends) throughout rural and metropolitan Australia.

Methods: This exploratory qualitative study consisted of thirty-three online semi-structured interviews with thirty-seven people with experience of the dementia diagnosis process as a patient and/or significant other. Interviews explored symptoms of dementia, health professionals consulted, tests conducted, and challenges faced throughout the diagnosis and post-diagnosis process. Rurality was defined by the Australian Statistical Geography Standard Remoteness Areas (ASGS-RA) and the Modified Monash Model (MMM). Thematic analysis was conducted, with Russell's (2013) Dimensions of Access framework (geography, affordability, availability, acceptability, accommodation, awareness, and timeliness) guiding data analysis.

Results: Participants were distributed across various regions of Australia: seven interviews from inner regional Australia, five interviews from outer regional Australia, and twenty-one interviews from metropolitan areas. Disparities in access between metropolitan and rural areas emerged in five key dimensions: 1) geography impeding ability to access services; 2) affordability of travel expenses; 3) availability of healthcare and support services; 4) acceptability of available health professionals and services; and 5) awareness of local services and resources. The dimensions of accommodation and timeliness of care were experienced as challenges irrespective of location, with lengthy appointment wait times and difficulty navigating complex systems. However, rurality often compounded the challenges in dementia diagnosis, management, and care.

Conclusions: Significant health inequities persist between rural and metropolitan communities that must be prioritised in endeavours to promote equitable dementia diagnosis, management, and care. Targeted action to address disparities is vital to mitigate the impact of rurality, particularly as clinical practice evolves with research advancements.

农村和都市痴呆症诊断、管理和护理经验的公平性:一项探索性质的研究。
背景:有限的资源分配到农村和地区社区是一个主要贡献者在澳大利亚医疗保健不公平。在大都市和农村社区之间分配卫生服务资源时,通常优先考虑人口稠密的地区,而不是人口稀少和地理上广阔的地区。因此,影响大都市地区痴呆症诊断、管理和护理的挑战在农村地区更为严重。本研究旨在检查在澳大利亚农村和大都市中作为患者或重要的其他人(伴侣/配偶、成年子女、兄弟姐妹和朋友)经历痴呆症诊断过程的人群中获得痴呆症诊断、管理和护理服务的公平性。方法:本探索性定性研究包括33个在线半结构化访谈,访谈对象为37名有痴呆诊断过程经验的患者和/或重要他人。访谈探讨了痴呆症的症状、咨询的卫生专业人员、进行的测试以及在整个诊断和诊断后过程中面临的挑战。乡村性由澳大利亚统计地理标准偏远地区(ASGS-RA)和修正莫纳什模型(MMM)定义。通过Russell(2013)的访问框架维度(地理、可负担性、可用性、可接受性、住宿、意识和及时性)指导数据分析,进行了主题分析。结果:参与者分布在澳大利亚的各个地区:7位来自澳大利亚内陆地区,5位来自澳大利亚外围地区,21位来自大都市地区。城市和农村地区在获取服务方面的差异表现在五个关键方面:1)地理位置阻碍了获得服务的能力;2)旅行费用的负担能力;3)提供保健和支助服务;现有卫生专业人员和服务的可接受性;5)了解当地的服务和资源。无论地点如何,住宿和护理及时性方面都面临着挑战,预约等待时间长,难以驾驭复杂的系统。然而,农村往往加剧了痴呆症诊断、管理和护理方面的挑战。结论:农村和城市社区之间存在显著的卫生不平等,必须优先考虑促进公平的痴呆症诊断、管理和护理。针对差异采取有针对性的行动对于减轻乡村性的影响至关重要,尤其是在临床实践随着研究进展而发展的情况下。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
4.20%
发文量
162
审稿时长
28 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal for Equity in Health is an Open Access, peer-reviewed, online journal presenting evidence relevant to the search for, and attainment of, equity in health across and within countries. International Journal for Equity in Health aims to improve the understanding of issues that influence the health of populations. This includes the discussion of political, policy-related, economic, social and health services-related influences, particularly with regard to systematic differences in distributions of one or more aspects of health in population groups defined demographically, geographically, or socially.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信