Health Remoteness in Tumby bay region in Australia

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Introduction

Healthcare services are fundamental especially in the current world since they define the level of performance in various settings. This is evident because they influence individual’s productivity levels and wellbeing.

Indeed, stakeholders in the health sector in various jurisdictions should develop viable modalities to foster the provision of quality Medicare to local members.

This is significant in ensuring that the evident issues that affect the quality of health services in various settings are mitigated (Pozgar, 2012). The modalities should foster delivery of superior services in remote, rural and urban areas without discrimination.

This study adopts Tumby bay community that is classified as an ASGC-RA4 society. The community is located in a remote part of southern Australia. The area is selected since it faces distinct health issues that range from culture, political, economical and social disparities.

Thus, this study explores the implications of remote healthcare activities as evident in Tumby bay region in Australia.

Location, its geographical setting and implications of remoteness of health services in the community

As noted, the study adopts Tumby community that is located in the southern part of Australia as the area under focus. The community is located in a remote (ASGC-RA4) setting that lies in the east coast of peninsula region.

Geographically, the society is located in a serene environment that is approximately 45km from port Lincoln (Muecke, Lenthall & Lindeman, 2011). It sits in rich natural resources that remain underexploited over the years due to its remote resource capacity and goodwill.

Key resources that it harbors include pristine beaches, pine trees lined foreshores, fishing grounds and crystal blue waters. These resources can be central in transforming the community socially and economically if they are utilized effectively.

Therefore, authorities in the region should craft viable strategies to facilitate their effective utilization with an aim of steering economic and health development.

The region is classified as a remote area because of the physical and non physical barriers or implications that are evident in the society.

The barriers that affect quality delivery of health services include poor transportation, communication, access to medical centers and sparsely located settlements (Fumiko, Melissa & Jacelle, 2012).

In particular, they have been affecting quality and timely delivery of healthcare services to the locals in the region.

This is evident since health institutions that are available are not easily accessible to many individuals since they are located far away and there are no good roads to aid transportation to the centers.

These elements explain the remoteness level of the region and how they have been the major hindering factors to progress in the community.

Purpose and benefits of the study

This study is purposely set with an aim of conveying credible information pertaining healthcare service delivery in remote areas. It also focuses in establishing how remote factors and performance parameters in remote settings influence the provision of healthcare services (Guadron, 2008).

It seeks to enable key stakeholders in the health sector especially in Australia to understand how remoteness in service delivery can contribute in lowering the quality of medical services.

This is significant in ensuring that authorities within the Tumby region embark on developing clear-cut policies to streamline operations in the settings to boost social and economic integration.

Therefore, understanding on how distinct health issues affects remote locations will foster the development of working strategies to enhance service delivery in Tumby bay region.

The difference between remote locations compared to rural and urban areas including the characteristics of remote settings

Remote locations are areas that are faced with distinct issues that appertain to healthcare, economic, social and culture (Pozgar & Santucci, 2009). The locations are considered remote since they lack the capacity to explore the available resources and turn them into performance strengths.

Individuals in such areas lack proper education, social understanding and the imperativeness of health institutions.

Variably, remote locations are characterized with poor transportation systems, they lack proper social services, they are sparsely populated and they are detached from other communities compared to urban settings (Newton, 2008).

Notably, life in remote areas that is closely similar to life in rural settings cannot be compared to living standards in urban locations.

This is evident since there are strong development initiatives that are always executed in urban settings especially in the health sector to ease access to medical assistance by locals.

Although life in rural areas is somehow similar to life in remote areas, authorities in rural areas are always concerned in making life livable. They put up strong strategic measures that foster growth through effective development plans that are not common in remote areas (Luck & Race, 2011).

Consequently, life in remote areas is completely different from life in urban settings. Urban centers have well established health institutions, transportation systems, and adequate amount of resources such as houses and health equipments.

The centers are also characterized with easy access to various social amenities compared to remote areas. These incentives promote delivery of services to individuals in such settings especially healthcare services that requires high level of effectiveness (McMurray & Clendon, 2011).

For instance, key health institutions are located in close proximity to individuals thus, enhances real time acquisition of medical assistance at times of need.

Social, cultural, physical, political, economic circumstances particular to remote areas

Imperatively, there are several barriers that affect delivery of health services in remote areas. The barriers are socially, culturally, physically, politically and economically instigated (Sumner, 2007). They present unfavorable operating atmosphere that result to low quality of healthcare services.

In Australia, these remote barriers have been impeding individual’s performance levels and in turn affect the economic performance of the nation. This is evident since more than 40% of the nation’s population live in remote or hinterland settings such as Tumby bay (Koutoukidis & Stainton, 2013).

In particular, clear social and economic barriers or circumstances include inferior access to social amenities such as roads, smaller population centers, greater distances, occupational health safety risks and low socio-economic status of the locals.

Physical barriers include poor transportation network, limited amount of resources for example, housing structures that can house hospitals and poor communication systems (Newton, 2008).

Variably, cultural and political barriers include undemocratic political practices and specific cultural attitudes.

These barriers threaten to erode further, the gains that have been made in the nation’s health sector if proper interventions are not put in place. Therefore, the region’s authorities must develop proper plans to counter the effects of the issues highlighted.

The likely health outcomes & determinants of those outcomes particular to remote areas

Based on the issues that are raised, delivery of healthcare services in Tumby community will remain remote unless drastic measures are undertaken to improve the systems of operation.

The region is not bound to record any positive health outcomes as expected due to lack of access to quality and timely medical services (Alder, 2009).

The likely, social and healthcare outcomes include further detachment of community members, lack of social integration, increased death and low productivity because of inferior capacity to good performance.

Consequently, the area is bound to record poor management of health services, inferior timing and intervention of severe conditions, high disease prevalence and increased impact on particular rates of incidences (Ziliak, 2012).

These are likely and probable outcomes that individuals in remote settings including Tumby should anticipate. They occur due to poor systems of operations, lack of adequate infrastructural support equipments, inadequate personnel and lack of understanding between stakeholders.

These parameters also form the determinants of remote health outcomes in various settings.

The relationship of Primary Health Care principles/philosophy to the experience of health, and to addressing illness

Primary healthcare principles and philosophies revolve around quality, effectiveness, timely service delivery, affordability and adherence to ethical standards that define best practices of health services (Hunter & Biddle, 2012).

The primary principles are set with an aim of promoting quality service delivery and ensure that individual’s wellbeing is protected without discrimination.

Their goal is to ensure that timely medical interventions are provided to patients in various locations including areas that are classified as remote or ASGC-RA4 regions (McMichael, 2003).

The principles relate to the experience of health since they foster the execution of viable medical services that helps in addressing health issues. Evidently, they help in addressing health complications that individuals may have in various locations.

This is essential in ensuring that individual’s performance levels is not compromised at any rate. This explains why authorities, health officials and locals in Tumby region should adopt viable modalities to improve delivery of health services (Barkway, 2009).

They should mobilize resources to enable them build more health centers with an aim of promoting accessibility of the crucial services.

Conclusion and recommendations

Indeed, remote structures of operation especially in the health sector impede delivery of quality Medicare as evident in Tumby community that is located in the southern part of Australia.

The structures lead and expose individuals to severe medical complication that results to low productivity and increase in mortality rate.

These complications arise due to poor coordination of activities, lack of proper infrastructure such as houses where medical assistance can be offered and inaccessible support services.

Others include lower socio-economic status, lack of social integration, occupational health and safety risks and lower educational levels. These elements have greatly contributed in deteriorating the quality of medical assistance in the region.

This is because every activity is being executed under remote guidelines, strategies and systems of operation.

To avert healthcare remoteness in the region, key stakeholders have to come up with working and sustainable solutions to the current issues that affect delivery of quality services in the present day.

Firstly, it is recommended that authorities in health institutions should develop effective resilient strategies to enable them avert ecological and social complications that may affect delivery of key health services to the locals.

Secondly, they should acquire more medical equipments and trained staff to foster delivery of quality and timely medical assistance.

Thirdly, they should re-focus their potentials in correcting socio-economic imbalances by encouraging participation in income generating activities to elevate the status of the community.

References

Alder, B. (2009). Psychology and Sociology Applied to Medicine: An Illustrated Colour Text. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone.

Barkway, P. (2009). Psychology for Health Professionals. Sydney: Churchill Livingstone/Elsevier.

Fumiko, i., Melissa, K. & Jacelle, L. (2012). Effects of Gender, Indigenous Status, and Remoteness to Health Services on the Occurrence of Assault-Related Injuries in Children and Adolescents. Web.

Guadron, B. (2008). Identification of Patterns of Knowing used by Rural Community Health Nurses in Decision-making.

Hunter, B. & Biddle, N. (2012). Survey Analysis for Indigenous Policy in Australia: Social Science Perspectives. Acton, A.C.T: ANU E Press.

Koutoukidis, G. & Stainton, K. (2013). Tabbner’s Nursing care: Theory and Practice. Chatswood, N.S.W: Churchill Livingstone.

Luck, W. & Race, D. (2011). Demographic Change in Australia’s Rural Landscapes: Implications for Society and the Environment. Dordrecht: Springer.

Muecke A, Lenthall S, & Lindeman, M. (2011). Culture Shock and Healthcare Workers in Remote Indigenous Communities of Australia: what do we know and how can we Measure it?. Web.

McMurray, A. & Clendon, J. (2011). Community Health and Wellness: Primary Health Care in practice. Chatswood, N.S.W: Elsevier Australia.

McMichael, J. (2003). Climate Change and Human Health: Risks and Responses. Geneva: World Health Organization.

Newton, W. (2008). Transitions: Pathways towards Sustainable Urban Development in Australia. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer Science.

Pozgar, D. (2012). Legal Aspects of Health Care Administration. Sudbury, Mass: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Pozgar, D. & Santucci, M. (2009). Legal Essentials of Health Care Administration. Sudbury, Mass: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

Sumner, J. (2007). Sustainability and the Civil Commons: Rural Communities in the Age of Globalization. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Ziliak, P. (2012). Appalachian legacy: Economic Opportunity After the War on Poverty. Washington, D.C: Brookings Institution Press.

Click Here To Order Now!