Rural community-centred co-planning for sustainable rural health systems.

OBJECTIVE: Sustaining rural healthcare services is challenging because of numerous systemic factors. Rural communities can inform the design of sustainable rural health models; however, further evidence of effective co-design is needed to guide implementation. The study aim was to co-design a series of place-based and evidence-informed rural health models, to improve local health system sustainability. SETTING: A rural region (categorised as Modified Monash Model 5) defined by three adjoining Shires in Central and Northwest Victoria, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: A health executive co-planning network led the co-design, with input and oversight from a broader cross-sector group. Healthcare professionals (n = 44) and consumers and carers (n = 21) participated in interviews, and an online survey was completed by healthcare professionals (n = 11) and consumers and carers (n = 7) to provide feedback on the preliminary results. DESIGN: Community-based participatory action research was applied incorporating co-design methods and systems thinking. Data were collected through qualitative interviews followed by an online feedback survey. Mixed method data analysis (QUAL-quant) was conducted with qualitative directed content analysis of interview transcripts and quantitative descriptive analyses of survey responses to aid prioritisation. RESULTS: Healthcare priorities, strengths and challenges, and proposed rural health models are described. A rural health system sustainability strategy was developed with three integrated pillars: 1. Workforce strengthening, 2. Integrated health services and 3. Innovative models of care. CONCLUSION: Community-centred co-design with rural health stakeholders was effective for generating locally tailored ideas and potential health models that emulate community strengths and resources, and provide a foundation for further planning, implementation and evaluation.

A new survey tool for evaluating pandemic preparedness in health services.

BACKGROUND: Rapid decision-making with limited resources and prior research to draw upon posed challenges for health service leaders globally when preparing for COVID-19. How do health services prepare for a pandemic and evaluate if the preparation has been effective? This study aimed to explore health workers' perceptions and knowledge regarding preparedness for COVID-19 at a regional health service in Australia. METHODS: A 32-item online survey was developed to evaluate preparedness across five scales: 1) Clinical, 2) Communication, 3) Environment, 4) Human Resources, and 5) General Preparedness. Data were analyzed using parametric and non-parametric statistics and qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Ninety-three employees completed the survey, with most working in clinical roles (58.1%). Respondents largely felt the health service was well-prepared (84.0%) and they were personally prepared (74.4%) to respond to COVID-19. Clinical and communication scale scores varied by role type. Respondents faced personal risk and resource shortages impacted their sense of safety; others felt adequately supported. CONCLUSIONS: A coordinated "whole hospital response", accessible and inclusive communication, education, adequate resourcing, and employee wellbeing supports are necessary when preparing health services for sentinel events. This survey tool offers health services an approach to evaluating pandemic preparation. Continued advocacy for resources and wellbeing needs of health workers is paramount in future preparations.

MUC1 immunotherapy against a metastatic mammary adenocarcinoma model: Importance of IFN-gamma.

Immunotherapy using mucin 1 (MUC1) linked to oxidised mannan (MFP) was investigated in an aggressive MUC1+ metastatic tumour, DA3-MUC1 because, unlike many MUC1+ tumour models, DA3-MUC1 is not spontaneously rejected in mice making it an alternative model for immunotherapy studies. Further, DA3-MUC1 cells are resistant to lysis by anti-MUC1 cytotoxic T cells (CTLs). The inability of DA3-MUC1 tumours to be rejected in naïve mice as well as vaccination to MUC1 was attributed to a deficiency of expression of MHC class I molecules on the tumour cell surface. In vitro and in vivo analysis of subcutaneous tumours and lung metastases demonstrated that DA3-MUC1 tumour cells have a low expression (< 6%) of MHC class I which can be upregulated (> 90%) following culturing with IFN-γ. Results from flow cytometry analysis and immunoperoxidase staining indicated that the in vitro up-regulation of MHC class I could be maintained for up to seven days in vivo, without affecting the expression levels of MUC1 antigen. Interestingly, MUC1-specific CTL that lyse DA3-MUC1 targets in vitro were induced in MFP immunised mice but failed to protect mice from a DA3-MUC1 tumour challenge. These results highlight the importance of MHC class I molecules in the induction of anti-tumour immunity and the MFP immune response.