Leading primary care under the weight of COVID-19: how leadership was enacted in six australian general practices during 2020.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic challenged health care delivery globally, providing unique challenges to primary care. Australia's primary healthcare system (primarily general practices) was integral to the response. COVID-19 tested the ability of primary health care to respond to the greater urgency and magnitude than previous pandemics. Early reflections highlighted the critical role of leaders in helping organisations negotiate the pandemic's consequences. This study explores how general practice leadership was enacted during 2020, highlighting how leadership attributes were implemented to support practice teams. METHODOLOGY: We performed secondary analysis on data from a participatory prospective qualitative case study involving six general practices in Melbourne, Victoria, between April 2020 and February 2021. The initial coding template based on Miller et al.'s relationship-centred model informed a reflexive thematic approach to data re-analysis, focused on leadership. Our interpretation was informed by Crabtree et al.'s leadership model. RESULTS: All practices realigned clinical and organisational routines in the early months of the pandemic - hierarchical leadership styles often allowing rapid early responses. Yet power imbalances and exclusive communication channels at times left practice members feeling isolated. Positive team morale and interdisciplinary teamwork influenced practices' ability to foster emergent leaders. However, emergence of leaders generally represented an inherent 'need' for authoritative figures in the crisis, rather than deliberate fostering of leadership. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the importance of collaborative leadership during crises while highlighting areas for better preparedness. Promoting interdisciplinary communication and implementing formal leadership training in crisis management in the general practice setting is crucial for future pandemics.

Routine developmental screening in Australian general practice: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Parents' Evaluation of Developmental Status, (PEDS), is a validated screening tool designed for primary health care clinicians to assess child development. Despite widespread use by local government child-nurse services, PEDS has not been tested in Australian general practice. We examined the effect of an intervention that aimed to use PEDS to improve documented assessment of child developmental status during routine general practice consultations. METHODS: The study took place in a single general practice in Melbourne, Australia. The intervention included training of all general practice staff regarding PEDS processes and provision of PEDS questionnaires, scoring and interpretation forms. Mixed methods incorporated audits of clinical records of young children (1 to ≤ 5 years) before and after the intervention, and written questionnaires and a focus group (informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework and COM-B model) with receptionists, practice nurses and general practitioners. RESULTS: Documented developmental status more than doubled after the intervention with almost one in three (30.4%) records documenting the PEDS tool. Overall, staff responses to questionnaires indicated that PEDS processes had been successfully implemented, half of the staff felt PEDS had developed their professional skills and clinicians expressed confidence using the tool (71%). Thematic analysis of the focus group transcript revealed divided reactions to PEDS screening with most barriers arising from general practitioners' motivation to use PEDS tools and perceptions of environmental constraints. CONCLUSIONS: A team-practice intervention that applied PEDS training and implementation, more than doubled documented rates of child developmental status during routine visits. Solutions to underlying barriers could be incorporated into a revised training module. Future studies need to test the tool in more methodologically robust studies that include analysis of the outcomes of developmental surveillance and long-term sustainability of PEDS use in practices.

At the edge of chaos: a prospective multiple case study in Australian general practices adapting to COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: The rapid onset and progressive course of the COVID-19 pandemic challenged primary care practices to generate rapid solutions to unique circumstances, creating a natural experiment of effectiveness, resilience, financial stability and governance across primary care models. We aimed to characterise how practices in Melbourne, Australia modified clinical and organisational routines in response to the pandemic in 2020-2021 and identify factors that influenced these changes. DESIGN: Prospective, qualitative, participatory case study design using constant comparative data analysis, conducted between April 2020 and February 2021. Participant general practitioner (GP) investigators were involved in study design, recruitment of other participants, data collection and analysis. Data analysis included investigator diaries, structured practice observation, documents and interviews. SETTING: The cases were six Melbourne practices of varying size and organisational model. PARTICIPANTS: GP investigators approached potential participants. Practice healthcare workers were interviewed by social scientists on three occasions, and provided feedback on presentations of preliminary findings. RESULTS: We conducted 58 interviews with 26 practice healthcare workers including practice owners, practice managers, GPs, receptionists and nurses; and six interviews with GP investigators. Data saturation was achieved within each practice and across the sample. The pandemic generated changes to triage, clinical care, infection control and organisational routines, particularly around telehealth. While collaboration and trust increased within several practices, others fragmented, leaving staff isolated and demoralised. Financial and organisational stability, collaborative problem solving, creative leadership and communication (internally and within the broader healthcare sector) were major influences on practice ability to negotiate the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the complex influences on primary care practices, and reinforces the strengths of clinician participation in research design, conduct and analysis. Two implications are: telehealth, triage and infection management innovations are likely to continue; the existing payment system provides inadequate support to primary care in a global pandemic.

The development of Future Health Today: piloting a new platform for identification and management of chronic disease in general practice.

Chronic disease identification and management is a significant issue in Australia, with general practice being the primary contact point for those at risk of, or living with, chronic disease. However, there is a well-described gap between guideline recommendations for chronic disease management and translation in the general practice setting. In 2018, a group of researchers, clinicians and software developers collaborated to develop a tool to support the identification and management of chronic disease in general practice, with the aim to create a platform that met the needs of general practice. The co-design process drew together core principles and expectations for the establishment of a technological platform, called Future Health Today (FHT), which would sit alongside the electronic medical record (EMR) management system within general practice. FHT used algorithms applied to EMR data to identify patients with, or at risk of, chronic disease and requiring review. Using chronic kidney disease as a clinical focus, the FHT prototype was piloted in a large, metropolitan general practice, and a large regional general practice. Based on user feedback, the prototype was further developed and improved. This paper provides a report on the key features and functionalities that participants identified and implemented in practice.

How do general practices respond to a pandemic? Protocol for a prospective qualitative study of six Australian practices.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed healthcare systems worldwide. Primary care providers have been at the forefront of the pandemic response and have needed to rapidly adjust processes and routines around service delivery. The pandemic provides a unique opportunity to understand how general practices prepare for and respond to public health emergencies. We will follow a range of general practices to characterise the changes to, and factors influencing, modifications to clinical and organisational routines within Australian general practices amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a prospective case study of multiple general practices using a participatory approach for design, data collection and analysis. The study is informed by the sociological concept of routines and will be set in six general practices in Melbourne, Australia during the 2020-2021 COVID-19 pandemic. General practitioners associated with the Monash University Department of General Practice will act as investigators who will shape the project and contribute to the data collection and analysis. The data will include investigator diaries, an observation template and interviews with practice staff and investigators. Data will first be analysed by two external researchers using a constant comparative approach and then later refined at regular investigator meetings. Cross-case analysis will explain the implementation, uptake and sustainability of routine changes that followed the commencement of the pandemic. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was granted by Monash University (23950) Human Research Ethics Committees. Practice reports will be made available to all participating practices both during the data analysis process and at the end of the study. Further dissemination will occur via publications and presentations to practice staff and medical practitioners.

Adding saliva testing to oropharyngeal and deep nasal swab testing increases PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 in primary care and children.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the concordance and acceptability of saliva testing with standard-of-care oropharyngeal and bilateral deep nasal swab testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in children and in general practice. DESIGN: Prospective multicentre diagnostic validation study. SETTING: Royal Children's Hospital, and two general practices (cohealth, West Melbourne; Cirqit Health, Altona North) in Melbourne, July-October 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 1050 people who provided paired saliva and oropharyngeal-nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Numbers of cases in which SARS-CoV-2 was detected in either specimen type by real-time polymerase chain reaction; concordance of results for paired specimens; positive percent agreement (PPA) for virus detection, by specimen type. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 54 of 1050 people with assessable specimens (5%), including 19 cases (35%) in which both specimens were positive. The overall PPA was 72% (95% CI, 58-84%) for saliva and 63% (95% CI, 49-76%) for oropharyngeal-nasal swabs. For the 35 positive specimens from people aged 10 years or more, PPA was 86% (95% CI, 70-95%) for saliva and 63% (95% CI, 45-79%) for oropharyngeal-nasal swabs. Adding saliva testing to standard-of-care oropharyngeal-nasal swab testing increased overall case detection by 59% (95% CI, 29-95%). Providing saliva was preferred to an oropharyngeal-nasal swab by most participants (75%), including 141 of 153 children under 10 years of age (92%). CONCLUSION: In children over 10 years of age and adults, saliva testing alone may be suitable for SARS-CoV-2 detection, while for children under 10, saliva testing may be suitable as an adjunct to oropharyngeal-nasal swab testing for increasing case detection.

Towards optimising chronic kidney disease detection and management in primary care: Underlying theory and protocol for technology development using an Integrated Knowledge Translation approach.

Worldwide, Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD), directly or indirectly, causes more than 2.4 million deaths annually with symptoms generally presenting late in the disease course. Clinical guidelines support the early identification and treatment of CKD to delay progression and improve clinical outcomes. This paper reports the protocol for the codesign, implementation and evaluation of a technological platform called Future Health Today (FHT), a software program that aims to optimise early detection and management of CKD in general practice. FHT aims to optimise clinical decision making and reduce practice variation by translating evidence into practice in real time and as a part of quality improvement activities. This protocol describes the co-design and plans for implementation and evaluation of FHT in two general practices invited to test the prototype over 12 months. Service design thinking has informed the design phase and mixed methods will evaluate outcomes following implementation of FHT. Through systematic application of co-design with service users, clinicians and digital technologists, FHT attempts to avoid the pitfalls of past studies that have failed to accommodate the complex requirements and dynamics that can arise between researchers and service users and improve chronic disease management through use of health information technology.

Future Health Today: codesign of an electronic chronic disease quality improvement tool for use in general practice using a service design approach.

OBJECTIVE: To codesign an electronic chronic disease quality improvement tool for use in general practice. DESIGN: Service design employing codesign strategies. SETTING: General practice. PARTICIPANTS: Seventeen staff (general practitioners, nurses and practice managers) from general practice in metropolitan Melbourne and regional Victoria and five patients from metropolitan Melbourne. INTERVENTIONS: Codesign sessions with general practice staff, using a service design approach, were conducted to explore key design criteria and functionality of the audit and feedback and clinical decision support tools. Think aloud interviews were conducted in which participants articulated their thoughts of the resulting Future Health Today (FHT) prototype as they used it. One codesign session was held with patients. Using inductive and deductive coding, content and thematic analyses explored the development of a new technological platform and factors influencing implementation of the platform. RESULTS: Participants identified that the prototype needed to work within their existing workflow to facilitate automated patient recall and track patients with or at-risk of specific conditions. It needed to be simple, provide visual snapshots of information and easy access to relevant guidelines and facilitate quality improvement activities. Successful implementation may be supported by: accuracy of the algorithms in FHT and data held in the practice; the platform supporting planned and spontaneous interactions with patients; the ability to hide tools; links to Medicare Benefits Schedule; and prefilled management plans. Participating patients supported the use of the platform in general practice. They suggested that use of the platform demonstrates a high level of patient care and could increase patient confidence in health practitioners. CONCLUSION: Study participants worked together to design a platform that is clear, simple, accurate and useful and that sits within any given general practice setting. The resulting FHT platform is currently being piloted in general practices and will continue to be refined based on user feedback.

Strengthening respiratory protection from SARS-CoV-2 in certain general practice contexts.

We recommend a precautionary approach to respiratory protection for healthcare workers potentially exposed to SARS-CoV-2 until the efficacy of surgical masks can be proven.

Improving assessment of child development: Results of a quality improvement intervention in general practice.

AIMS: Parents' Evaluation of Developmental Status (PEDS) is a validated tool used to assess child development that has not previously been tested in Australian general practice. We examined the effect of a Quality-Improvement intervention in a single general practice in Melbourne, Australia, that aimed to use this tool to improve the documented assessment of child developmental surveillance during vaccination visits. METHODS: Mixed methods incorporated audits of clinical records of children aged 1-5 years, before and after intervention, written questionnaires and a focus group (informed by the theoretical domains framework and Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B model)) with clinical and non-clinical staff. RESULTS: After 6 months, developmental surveillance more than doubled and was documented in more than one in three visits (34.1%). Almost one in five (18.6%) vaccination visits included the PEDS tool. Overall, the tool was positively received with staff expressing high levels of comfort asking parents to complete it (92.8%), increasing development of professional skills (71.4% staff) and confidence (55% clinicians) detecting developmental delays. Thematic analysis of the focus group transcript revealed underlying barriers arising from the practice environment, staff capabilities and motivation. CONCLUSIONS: In a whole of practice Quality-Improvement intervention that applied PEDS training and implementation, including the receptionist in the medical team more than doubled documented rates of child developmental surveillance during vaccination visits. Solutions to underlying barriers could be incorporated into a revised training module. Future studies need to test the tool in more methodologically robust studies that include analysis of the outcomes of developmental surveillance.

'Weighty issues' in GP-led antenatal care: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 50% of women gain weight in excess of gestational weight gain (GWG) recommendations during pregnancy leading to adverse maternal and foetal outcomes and the perpetuation of the cycle of obesity. Antenatal care provided by a general practitioner (GP) in the primary care setting is an important model of care, particularly for women in regional areas where rates of overweight and obesity are highest. The aim of this study is to explore GPs' perceptions and experiences of implementing GWG recommendations in GP-led antenatal care. METHODS: A qualitative exploratory approach recorded GPs' experiences and insights regarding the application of GWG recommendations in practice. Data were collected via semi-structured interviews informed by the revised Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Deductive thematic analysis grouped coded text into TDF domains from which main themes were generated. RESULTS: Twenty GPs (13 female, 7 male) from metropolitan and regional Victoria, Australia participated. Codes related to at least one of 11 TDF domains. Five main themes were apparent: 1) Despite low awareness of guidelines, GWG advice is provided; 2) 'I should do this more'; 3) Lack of everyday resources; 4) Working 'against the odds' at times; and 5) Optimism and reality. GPs were aware of the importance of optimal GWG however, other pregnancy-related issues are given precedence during consultations. Enablers for the implementation of GWG guidelines were practitioner-based and included GPs' strong sense of their professional role to provide advice, and ongoing and trusting relationships with women throughout pregnancy. Barriers were mostly health system-based with limited time, remuneration, and restrictive referral pathways being limiting factors. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to support GPs to provide GWG advice in accordance with current national guidelines. Solutions potentially lie in strategies that promote the effective dissemination and uptake of guidelines, and changes to policy and funding within the health-system so that longer GP-led antenatal care consultations are remunerated and referrals to allied health are accessible to women who require additional support to optimise GWG.

Preventive healthcare for young children: A systematic review of interventions in primary care.

High rates of preventable health problems amongst children in economically developed countries have prompted governments to seek pathways for early intervention. We systematically reviewed the literature to discover what primary care-targeted interventions increased preventive healthcare (e.g. review child development, growth, vision screening, social-emotional health) for preschool children, excluding vaccinations. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases were searched for published intervention studies, between years 2000 and 2014, which reflected preventive health activities for preschool children, delivered by health practitioners. Analysis included an assessment of study quality and the primary outcome measures employed. Of the 743 titles retrieved, 29 individual studies were selected, all originating from the United States. Twenty-four studies employed complex, multifaceted interventions and only two were rated high quality. Twelve studies addressed childhood overweight and 11 targeted general health and development. Most interventions reported outcomes that increased rates of screening, recording and recognition of health risks. Only six studies followed up children post-intervention, noting low referral rates by health practitioners and poor follow-through by parents and no study demonstrated clear health benefits for children. Preliminary evidence suggests that multi-component interventions, that combine training of health practitioners and office staff with modification of the physical environment and/or practice support, may be more effective than single component interventions. Quality Improvement interventions have been extensively replicated but their success may have relied on factors beyond the confines of individual or practice-led behaviour. This research reinforces the need for high quality studies of pediatric health assessments with the inclusion of clinical end-points.

The challenges of trying to increase preventive healthcare for children in general practice: results of a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: In Australia, general practice, the linchpin for delivery of preventive health care to large segments of the population, provides child-immunisation and preventive health alongside government services. Despite this, less than half of eligible children complete a Healthy Kids Check (HKC), a preschool preventative health assessment available since 2008. Using a rigorous theoretical process, the barriers that affected delivery and reduced general practitioner and practice nurse motivation to provide HKCs, were addressed. The resulting multifaceted intervention, aimed at increasing the proportion of children receiving evidence informed HKCs from general practice, was piloted to inform a future randomised controlled trial. METHODS: The intervention was piloted in a before and after study at three sites located southeast of Melbourne, between February and October 2014. The HKC-intervention involved: 1) Delivery of training modules that motivated reception and clinical staff by delivering key messages about local prevalence rates and the "Core Story of Child Development" 2) Practical advice to prepare clinics for specific HKC-examinations 3) Workflow advice regarding systems that included all staff in the HKC process, and 4) Provision of a "Community Resources Folder" that enabled decision making and referrals. A major component of the intervention incorporated the promotion of structured developmental screening by the practice team using Parents' Evaluation of Developmental Status. RESULTS: Twenty of 22 practitioners and practice managers agreed to join the study. Post-training questionnaires showed participants had developed their skills working with young children as a result of the training and all respondents believed they had successfully implemented standardised HKC services. Post intervention proportions of children completing HKCs significantly increased in two of the practices and quality improvements in HKC-processes were recorded across all three sites. CONCLUSION: This pilot study confirmed the feasibility of delivering a multi-faceted intervention to increase HKCs from general practice and demonstrated that significant quality improvements could be made. Future studies need to extend the intervention to other states and research the health outcomes of HKCs.

Parents' decision making and access to preventive healthcare for young children: applying Andersen's Model.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Implementing preventive health care for young children provides the best chance of improving health and changing a child's life course. In Australia, despite government support for preventive health care, uptake of preventive services for young children is low. Using Andersen's behavioural model of health-care utilization, we aimed to understand how parents conceptualized their children's preventive health care and how this impacted on access to preventive health-care services. DESIGN: Semi-structured telephone interviews conducted between May and July 2011. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-eight parents of children aged 3-5 years from three diverse socio-economic areas of Melbourne, Australia. RESULTS: Thematic analysis showed parents' access to child preventive health care was determined by birth order of their child, cultural health beliefs, personal health practices, relationship with the health provider and the costs associated with health services. Parents with more than one child placed their own experience ahead of professional expertise, and their younger children were less likely to complete routine preventive health checks. Concerns around developmental delays required validation through family, friends and childcare organizations before presentation to health services. CONCLUSIONS: To improve child preventive health requires increased flexibility of services, strengthening of inter-professional relationships and enhancement of parents' knowledge about the importance of preventive health in early childhood. Policies that encourage continuity of care and remove point of service costs will further reduce barriers to preventive care for young children. Recent reforms in Australia's primary health care and the expansion of child preventive health checks into general practice present a timely opportunity for this to occur.

Barriers and enablers to delivery of the Healthy Kids Check: an analysis informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework and COM-B model.

BACKGROUND: More than a fifth of Australian children arrive at school developmentally vulnerable. To counteract this, the Healthy Kids Check (HKC), a one-off health assessment aimed at preschool children, was introduced in 2008 into Australian general practice. Delivery of services has, however, remained low. The Theoretical Domains Framework, which provides a method to understand behaviours theoretically, can be condensed into three core components: capability, opportunity and motivation, and the COM-B model. Utilising this system, this study aimed to determine the barriers and enablers to delivery of the HKC, to inform the design of an intervention to promote provision of HKC services in Australian general practice. METHODS: Data from 6 focus group discussions with 40 practitioners from general practices in socio-culturally diverse areas of Melbourne, Victoria, were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Many practitioners expressed uncertainty regarding their capabilities and the practicalities of delivering HKCs, but in some cases HKCs had acted as a catalyst for professional development. Key connections between immunisation services and delivery of HKCs prompted practices to have systems of recall and reminder in place. Standardisation of methods for developmental assessment and streamlined referral pathways affected practitioners' confidence and motivation to perform HKCs. CONCLUSION: Application of a systematic framework effectively demonstrated how a number of behaviours could be targeted to increase delivery of HKCs. Interventions need to target practice systems, the support of office staff and referral options, as well as practitioners' training. Many behavioural changes could be applied through a single intervention programme delivered by the primary healthcare organisations charged with local healthcare needs (Medicare Locals) providing vital links between general practice, community and the health of young children.

'Can they really identify mental health problems at the age of three?' Parent and practitioner views about screening young children's social and emotional development.

OBJECTIVE: To report the views of parents, general practitioners and practice nurses on the proposed changes to incorporate social and emotional health checks of three-year-olds into the Healthy Kids Check, a one-off pre-school health assessment delivered through general practice. METHOD: Participants were recruited from three socio-culturally diverse urban areas of Melbourne for a qualitative study involving 28 parent interviews and six focus groups with a total of 40 practitioners. Participants discussed child social and emotional development, health-seeking and preventive health care for young children. Transcripts were thematically analysed. RESULTS: Common themes showed: (i) Although both parents and practitioners were receptive to the idea of social and emotional screening, parents had limited knowledge about mental health issues for young children and the need for early intervention. (ii) All groups questioned the current capabilities of practice staff to identify problems, and practitioners expressed a need for further training and tools. (iii) Parents and practitioners cautioned that screening may increase parental anxiety and lead to unnecessary referrals. Practitioners countered this with examples of cases not recognised by parents. (iv) Participants questioned the value of earlier identification of problems without effective and accessible therapeutic pathways. CONCLUSIONS: For programmes to be effective, parents need to be reminded of the benefits of early intervention and encouraged to attend preventive health appointments. Practitioners require further training and tools specific to the primary care setting. Further investment in specialist and allied health services is considered essential to assure better outcomes for young children's mental health following screening and referral. Practitioners welcome a more collaborative relationship with other professionals (e.g. early educators) in assessing children's social and emotional development. General practice has the capability but requires a more structured approach to assessing the social and emotional health of young children.

Immunogenicity and safety of an investigational combined haemophilus influenzae type B-Neisseria meningitidis serogroups C and Y-tetanus toxoid conjugate vaccine.

BACKGROUND: Neisseria meningitidis serogroups B, C, and Y cause most meningococcal disease in industrialized countries. A Haemophilus influenzae type b-meningococcal serogroups C and Y-tetanus toxoid conjugate vaccine (HibMenCY-TT) was evaluated. METHODS: A total of 1104 infants (randomized 3:1:1) were vaccinated at 2, 4, and 6 months with HibMenCY-TT, MenC-CRM197 + Hib-TT, or Hib-TT. At 12 to 15 months, HibMenCY-TT and MenC-CRM-primed children received HibMenCY-TT; Hib-TT-primed received N. meningitidis serogroup B Hib-outer membrane protein complex. Antibody concentrations and rabbit/human complement serum bactericidal antibody titers (rSBA/hSBA) were determined. Safety was monitored after each dose (diary cards for first 31 days) until 6 months postdose 4. RESULTS: Postdose 3, rates of antipolyribosylribitol phosphate ≥ 1 µg/mL and rSBA-MenC ≥1:128 in HibMenCY-TT recipients were noninferior to licensed controls. Percentages reaching 0.15 µg/mL (1.0 µg/mL postdose 3) and antipolyribosylribitol phosphate GMC were significantly higher after HibMenCY-TT than Hib-TT postdose 2 and postdose 3. The GMC remained significantly higher before and after dose 4. Proportions of HibMenCY-TT recipients with rSBA ≥ 1:8 were 95.6% (MenC), 98.6% (MenY) postdose-2, ≥ 99% for MenC/Y postdose 3 and 4; hSBA ≥ 1:4 were 95.5% (MenC), 89.8% (MenY) postdose 2, >97% for MenC/Y postdose 3 and 4. HibMenCY-TT had a similar safety profile to control vaccines. CONCLUSIONS: HibMenCY-TT induced noninferior Hib and MenC responses compared with monovalent Hib and MenC conjugates with a comparable safety profile. Bactericidal antibodies against MenC/Y were induced after 2 doses of HibMenCY-TT.

How to perform a 'Healthy Kids Check'.

BACKGROUND: The Healthy Kids Check aims to gather health information, identify health problems and promote healthy lifestyles around the time of the 4 years of age vaccinations. It consists of a checklist of examinations and assessments, six of which are mandatory. OBJECTIVE: A series of evidence based examinations that fulfil the mandatory requirements for a Healthy Kids Check and which can be applied in general practice are proposed. Consideration is also given to nonmandatory examinations and additional assessments which have some evidence for their application. DISCUSSION: The proposed examination enables general practitioners to remain positively engaged with families and contribute toward the health surveillance of preschool children. Changes to the Medicare Benefits Schedule, which support time based reimbursement for preventive healthcare may encourage greater uptake of the Healthy Kids Check.