Table of Contents
Chronic health diseases add to the overall burden on the life style of an individual. These conditions can slow the process of recovery and can also give rise to other comorbidities as well. National Strategic Framework for Chronic Conditions can be helpful for Australian to live a healthier life, with the help of effective preventive measures. These measures are not only useful for prevention of chronic illness, but can also be helpful in providing individuals a better means to manage their diseased condition. Tracking the chronic conditions is the biggest challenge within a larger group of population. A strong focus on the preventive measures and initiatives can be very helpful in reducing both volumes and severity of the chronic illness in the individuals. This is also important from the point of view of analyzing for the economic burden and producing a sustainable and viable healthcare system.
The proposed strategic healthcare framework is helpful in evaluating for the guidance of various developmental polices, as well as focuses on the various implementing strategies that can be helpful for common masses. The policy also caters to the requirements of the leadership roles defining in various healthcare sector, so as to safe guard the interest of the people suffering from chronic illness and providing them with a means of advocacy for their individual healthcare rights. This case study will help in analyzing the strengths and weakness of the policy framework and will also evaluate for the desired outcomes post implementation of this policy. It will be an evidence based approach to examine the accuracy of the policy and will thus, be helpful in understanding the possible recommendations to make this framework more efficient.
The health promotion policy frameworks are usually formulated to bring about a direct and visible impact on the larger group of population. It is crucial not only to cater to the needs of the individual but also to spread awareness in them regarding the advanced healthcare solutions that can be helpful in tracking and managing their disease conditions. The report will help in evaluating the various areas of concerns catered by the policy framework (O’Hara, 2018). The deep rooted analysis will be helpful in identifying the gaps for future amendments to be done in the same. The key analysis points will be helpful in determining the healthcare outcomes derived from implementation of the National health policy for chronic illness strategy in common population.
The working of National Health policy framework for chronic illness is segregated into parts. The first part mainly concentrates on setting the scene. This is inclusive of defining the chronic illness, setting the main purpose of the framework and then defining the patient population to be targeted. The first part is also inclusive of defining a set framework for implementation strategies to be formulated (Australian government, 2020). The second part of the policy is to set a vision and certain principles defining the vision in a holistic manner. Upon doing so certain partners are identified that can be helpful in assisting in smooth facilitation of the delivery services for the common masses. The partnership and collaborative approach is the best way out to help in reducing the significant risks caused by the chronic illness and also helping in promoting the appropriate detection and prevention of the same (Song, 2019).
It is also critical from the point of view of enabling proper funding methods to be readily available to be used for future strategy planning and management. The third section of the policy framework is inclusive of ensuring the continuity of the healthcare services and thus, ensuring quality of treatment to be provided to the common masses. It is also inclusive of the taking into deep consideration particular communities and sects that not only lack the main resources to manage their chronic conditions, but are also not that educated about the repercussions these clinical conditions can cause to them, if they are left untreated (Callander, 2017). The policy is thus, also inclusive of various educational and awareness programs that can be help for these communities where the challenges are more than the resources available to deal with the situation (Australian government, 2020). The work is done mainly with the help of information sharing on mutual basis and with the help of community bases supportive system available in place. These support system help the main organizational bodies, by working on ground basis and collecting the crude data, which is otherwise not that easily available to be collected.
One of such community targeted by this policy framework is Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders community (Oetzel, 2017). These population suffer from many chronic diseases such as diabetes, obesity and hypertension and so on. Apart from these diseased condition the habit of smoking and alcohol consumption is also at a very high rate in these communities. This is liable to cause many other chronic illness as well as serve as an attributing risk factor for the development of the same. The time frame for this policy is for review in every three years. The policy works on both identification and prevention of chronic illness, in order to promote healthier lives in Australian population. This is also the main vision of this healthcare policy. The partners are inclusive of governmental sources, non-governmental sources, private sectors, researchers and academics and communities as well individuals themselves. The main areas of focus have been promoting health literacy, shared responsibilities, evidence-based clinical data collection, access to the various resources and strong partnership between the interdisciplinary team (Street, 2019).
The polices and strategies are then decided on the basis of the information collected from the above mentioned resources and the outcomes and indicators are then defined. These indicators are very fruitful in assisting in monitoring the progress, so that the goals set are met within the stipulated time frame. The designed policy framework can also be defined as a holistic approach as it is inclusive of international, national as well as state defined polices interventions and strategies. The state-based policies are also defined regionally as per the wellness health framework and the most common chronic condition prevailing in these community dwellings (Hays, 2018). Despite being an efficient policy framework, there are certain challenges that are faced by the policy makers, while implementing these strategies for the common masses. The main challenge is faced in the primary care sector, where the healthcare providers are often observed to be working in isolation rather than working in teams. There is also a lack of proper facilities available in these primary care settings and very often there is a prevalence of uncoordinated care provided to the common masses.
There is also an absence or delay of services observed in these sectors, which lead to no resolution of the primary root cause. There is a dire need to reform these areas of concern as well in order to establish strong primary healthcare services. The policy also governs on the basis of evaluating for the various determinant of health such as social environment, physical environment, economic factors and individual factors. Some of these factors can be observed to be falling under the direct jurisdiction of the policy for chronic illness, while the others do not. There is a dire need of responding in a manner that ascertains the equitability of these factors in effectively tacking the healthcare system. This can only be attained by the close coordinate movement of the partners and thus, having a positive impact in the various determinants of health (Wutzke, 2018).These determinants of health have also been helpful in closely monitoring and addressing the risk factors and thus, helping in fostering the protective actions that can be taken appropriately in time for prevention. By doing so, this policy framework has been very helpful in greatly improving the healthcare outcomes in individuals suffering from non-preventable chronic conditions as well.
Healthcare framework and policies are important from the point of view of promoting awareness regarding various health concerns in general population. These policies also provides a basis for keeping a close monitoring on the statistical data and identifying the specific region and group of population to be considered. It also help in keeping a close tracking on the healthcare outcomes that can be observed in the patient population after implementation of the policy framework.
The review of this policy is conducted and reviewed every three years. However, with the growing number of individuals suffering from various chronic condition, it is crucial to keep a record of the rising cases each year. This can be included in the policy framework to make it more efficient as well as to catch the cases before their profound manifestation in the individuals. This will also be helpful in keeping a close watch on prevention strategies for the patient population, enabling them with advanced healthcare solutions as well (Wutzke, 2017).The policies to be implemented should be nationally agreed upon, in order to keep a close watch on the performance measures as well as helping in monitoring the achievements on a close encounter basis. There is a constant increase in the number of cases of chronic illness in Australia and these cases needs an immediate action taking. This is crucial from the point of view of addressing the chronic diseases in order to maximize the healthcare outcomes and thus, improving the health quality of the individuals.
The various partners involved in this process, such as private organizations, governmental and non-governmental organizations should be able to act and influence on an individualized basis, so as to make the whole organizational charter able in its governance regarding its healthcare policies (Kirkham, 2019).The initial step of the framework is mainly based on objectionable level. It is possible that the data may be based on the pre-existing information available from various resources. These indicators can be measureable or non-measureable in nature. The data should be thus, routinely derived in order to rectify the support measures needed in accordance with the same. The framework also lacks an accountability in certain areas of concerns and thus, should be recognized for these areas aptly. It is vital to ensure prevention and management actions that can be helpful in attaining a progress rate in a consistent manner (Smith, 2017). This will also be beneficial for reporting purposes on an organizational front and will thus, be helpful in process of monitoring and achieving anticipated results in the relevant areas of concerns as well as for particular diseased condition.
There is also a major lack in the reporting mechanism of the data available from various resources. The reports formulation have to be recognized on a national basis and keeping the role of the Australian healthcare system as a strong and intact one. The marginalization of these reports is necessary from the point of view of attaining the desired goals and objectives of the framework system as anticipated (Erdiaw, 2016).This reporting mechanism for the data should be based on, building a framework in sync with the existing one. It should also be able to follow the guidelines of the international reporting standards as set by the Australian health agencies. The data fetched should be able to fulfill all of the reporting commitment guidelines and should be able to dully oblige by the same. There is also a certain improvement needed in terms of a collaborative approach between states and territories (Pancer, 2018). This can be done with the help of relevant experts and good documentation to support the framework foundational grounds. The progress on the documentation process can also be kept on an individualized basis and can be attained at regular intervals as well. The comparison of the tracking with the main bodies keeping a record of the data of population having chronic diseases can also be done on regional basis. This will be helpful in identifying specific regions or particular population sects that needs to be considered on priority basis for the purpose of developing implementation strategies for the same.
Australian government, Department of health, 2020. Retrieved from https://www.health.gov.au/resources/publications/national-strategic-framework-for-chronic-conditions 2020.
Callander, E. J., Corscadden, L., & Levesque, J. F. (2017). Out-of-pocket healthcare expenditure and chronic disease–do Australians forgo care because of the cost?. Australian Journal of Primary Health, 23(1), 15-22.
Erdiaw-Kwasie, M. O., &Alam, K. (2016). Towards understanding digital divide in rural partnerships and development: A framework and evidence from rural Australia. Journal of Rural Studies, 43, 214-224.
Hays, R., &Sen Gupta, T. (2018). Developing a general practice workforce for the future. Australian Journal of General Practice, 47(8), 502.
Kirkham, R., Maple-Brown, L. J., Freeman, N., Beaton, B., Lamilami, R., Hausin, M., ...& Cass, A. (2019). Incorporating Indigenous knowledge in health services: A consumer partnership framework. Public Health, 176, 159-162.
O’Hara, R., Rowe, H., Roufeil, L., & Fisher, J. (2018). Should endometriosis be managed within a chronic disease framework? An analysis of national policy documents. Australian Health Review, 42(6), 627-634.
Oetzel, J., Scott, N., Hudson, M., Masters-Awatere, B., Rarere, M., Foote, J., ...&Ehau, T. (2017). Implementation framework for chronic disease intervention effectiveness in Māori and other indigenous communities. Globalization and health, 13(1), 69.
Pancer, Z., Moore, M., Wenham, J. T., &Burridge, M. (2018). The challenge of generalist care in remote Australia: Beyond aeromedical retrieval. Australian Journal of Rural Health, 26(3), 188-193.
Smith, D., Harvey, P., Lawn, S., Harris, M., &Battersby, M. (2017). Measuring chronic condition self-management in an Australian community: factor structure of the revised Partners in Health (PIH) scale. Quality of Life Research, 26(1), 149-159.
Song, H. J., Dennis, S., Levesque, J. F., & Harris, M. F. (2019). What matters to people with chronic conditions when accessing care in Australian general practice? A qualitative study of patient, carer, and provider perspectives. BMC Family Practice, 20(1), 79.
Street, T. D., Somoray, K., Richards, G. C., & Lacey, S. J. (2019). Continuity of care for patients with chronic conditions from rural or remote Australia: A systematic review. Australian Journal of Rural Health, 27(3), 196-202.
Wutzke, S., Morrice, E., Benton, M., & Wilson, A. (2017). What will it take to improve prevention of chronic diseases in Australia? A case study of two national approaches. Australian Health Review, 41(2), 176-181.
Wutzke, S., Morrice, E., Benton, M., Milat, A., Russell, L., & Wilson, A. (2018). Australia's National Partnership Agreement on Preventive Health: critical reflections from states and territories. Health Promotion Journal of Australia, 29(3), 228-235.
Remember, at the center of any academic work, lies clarity and evidence. Should you need further assistance, do look up to our Nursing Assignment Help
Proofreading and Editing$9.00Per Page
Consultation with Expert$35.00Per Hour
Live Session 1-on-1$40.00Per 30 min.
Doing your Assignment with our resources is simple, take Expert assistance to ensure HD Grades. Here you Go....