The impact of a 24-hour syringe dispensing machine on a face-to-face needle and syringe program and targeted primary healthcare clinic.

OBJECTIVE: Automatic syringe dispensing machines (ADM) have become an important adjunct to Australia's needle and syringe programs (NSP). However, concerns that they reduce face-to-face contact with health staff and other health interventions remain. We examined changes in the number of needle/syringes dispensed at an ADM and occasions of service at a co-located face-to-face NSP and targeted primary healthcare clinic during the first wave of COVID-19 restrictions. METHODS: We reviewed data from an inner-city harm reduction program during the study period of April 2020 to March 2021 compared to the previous year. Multivariable linear regression models were used to estimate the association between occasions of service and equipment distribution. RESULTS: ADM-dispensed equipment increased significantly by 41.1%, while face-to-face NSP occasions decreased by 16.2%. Occasions provided by the targeted primary healthcare clinic increased by 59.7% per month. CONCLUSION: We have shown that 24-hour ADM access did not adversely affect the number of people using targeted primary healthcare when provided within close proximity. Implication for public health: These findings reinforce the demand for 24-hour needle/syringe access and can be used to support the expanded access to ADMs, especially where people who inject drugs (PWID) have access to appropriate healthcare.

Virtual geriatric clinics and the COVID-19 catalyst: a rapid review.

BACKGROUND: During the current COVID-19 health crisis virtual geriatric clinics have become increasingly utilised to complete outpatient consultations, although concerns exist about feasibility of such virtual consultations for older people. The aim of this rapid review is to describe the satisfaction, clinic productivity, clinical benefit, and costs associated with the virtual geriatric clinic model of care. METHODS: A rapid review of PubMed, MEDLINE and CINAHL databases was conducted up to April 2020. Two independent reviewers extracted the information. Four subdomains were focused on: satisfaction with the virtual geriatric clinic, clinic productivity, clinical benefit to patients, costs and any challenges associated with the virtual clinic process. RESULTS: Nine studies with 975 patients met our inclusion criteria. All were observational studies. Seven studies reported patients were satisfied with the virtual geriatric clinic model of care. Productivity outcomes included reports of cost-effectiveness, savings on transport, and improved waiting list metrics. Clinical benefits included successful polypharmacy reviews, and reductions in acute hospitalisation rates. Varying challenges were reported for both clinicians and patients in eight of the nine studies. Hearing impairments and difficulty with technology added to anxieties experienced by patients. Physicians missed the added value of a thorough physical examination and had concerns about confidentiality. CONCLUSION: Virtual geriatric clinics demonstrate evidence of productivity, benefit to patients, cost effectiveness and patient satisfaction with the treatment provided. In the current suboptimal pandemic climate, virtual geriatric clinics may allow Geriatricians to continue to provide an outpatient service, despite the encountered inherent challenges.