Objective: The aim of the present study was to determine the rates of re-referral to specialist out-patient clinics for patients previously managed and discharged from an advanced practice physiotherapy-led service in three metropolitan hospitals. Methods: A retrospective audit was undertaken of 462 patient cases with non-urgent musculoskeletal conditions discharged between 1 April 2014 and 30 March 2015 from three metropolitan hospitals. These patients had been discharged from the physiotherapy-led service without requiring specialist medical review. Rates and patterns of re-referral to specialist orthopaedic, neurosurgical, chronic pain, or rheumatology services within 12 months of discharge were investigated. Results: Forty-six of the 462 patients (10.0%) who were managed by the physiotherapy-led service were re-referred to specialist medical orthopaedic, neurosurgical, chronic pain or rheumatology departments within 12 months of discharge. Only 22 of these patients (4.8%) were re-referred for the same condition as managed previously and discharged. Conclusions: Ninety-five per cent of patients with non-urgent musculoskeletal conditions managed by an advanced practice physiotherapy-led service at three metropolitan hospitals did not re-present to access public specialist medical services for the same condition within 12 months of discharge. This is the first time that re-presentation rates have been reported for patients managed in advanced practice physiotherapy services and the findings support the effectiveness of these models of care in managing demand for speciality out-patient services. What is known about the topic?: Advanced practice physiotherapy-led services have been implemented to address the needs of patients referred with non-urgent musculoskeletal conditions to hospital specialist out-patient services. Although this model is widely used in Australia, there has been very little information about whether patients managed in these services subsequently re-present for further specialist medical care. What does this paper add?: This paper identifies that the majority (95%) of patients managed by an advanced practice physiotherapy-led service did not re-present for further medical care for the same condition within 12 months of discharge. What are the implications for practitioners?: This paper supports the use of advanced practice physiotherapy-led services in the management of overburdened neurosurgical and orthopaedic specialist out-patient waiting lists.

Objective: Long specialist out-patient waitlists are common in public health facilities, but not all patients require consultation with a medical specialist. Studies of single allied health primary contact services have shown they provide timely, appropriate care and reduce demand on medical specialist out-patient waitlists. This study evaluated the collective benefits across multiple allied health primary contact services and models to determine their clinical effectiveness, safety, timeliness of care and impact on medical specialist out-patient waitlists. Method: Using a prospective observational study design, data were collected and analysed for patients attending 47 allied health primary contact services in Queensland public hospitals over a 2-year period. Outcomes reported are global status, adverse events, wait times and impact on medical specialist out-patient waitlists. Results: In all, 10 634 patients were managed in and discharged from the allied health services. Most adult patients (80%) who attended at least two consultations reported an improvement in health status. No adverse events were attributed to the model of care. Approximately 68%, 44% and 90% of urgent, semi-urgent and non-urgent out-patients respectively were seen within clinically recommended time frames. Between 35% and 89% of patients were removed from out-patient waitlists without medical specialist consultation across the service models. Conclusions: Allied health primary contact services provide safe, effective and timely care. The impact on medical specialist out-patient waitlists varied depending on service model and pathway characteristics. What is known about this topic?: Most studies of allied health primary contact services have focused on the management of patients on orthopaedic specialist out-patient waitlists by a physiotherapist. These studies of either individual services or groups of services with the same model cite benefits, including reduced waiting times, high levels of patient and referrer satisfaction, improved conversion to surgery, cost-effectiveness and more effective utilisation of medical specialists. What does this paper add?: This paper highlights that, collectively, allied health primary contact services are safe, effective and provide timely care. The proportion of patients independently managed and removed from various medical specialist out-patient waitlists and the services involved are reported, demonstrating the variety of service models. This study reports outcomes for primary contact services for which there is a dearth of published literature, including dietician services for patients on gastroenterology waitlists, speech pathology and audiology services for patients on ear, nose and throat waitlists, occupational therapy hand services for patients on orthopaedic waitlists and physiotherapy led pelvic-health services for patients on gynaecology waitlists. Possibilities for efficiency gains are identified and discussed. What are the implications for practitioners?: Health service managers should consider allied health primary contact services as a viable option to increase specialist out-patient capacity. Service model characteristics that maximise impact on medical specialist out-patient waitlist management are highlighted to inform resource allocation.

Objective: Faced with longstanding and increasing demand for specialist out-patient appointments that was unable to be met through usual medical consultant led care, Metro North Hospital and Health Service in 2014–15 established 11 allied health primary contact out-patient models of care. Methods: The models involved six different allied health professions and nine specialist out-patient departments. Results: All the allied health models have been endorsed for continuation following demonstration of their contribution to managing demand on specialist out-patient services. Conclusion: This paper describes key features of the allied health primary contact models of care and presents preliminary data including new case throughput, effect on wait times and enablers and challenges for clinic establishment. What is known about the topic?: Allied health clinics have been demonstrated to result in high patient, referrer and consultant satisfaction, and are a cost-effective management strategy for wait list demand. In Queensland, physiotherapy-led orthopaedic clinics have been operating since 2005. What does this paper add?: This paper describes the establishment of 11 allied health primary contact models of care in speciality out-patient areas including Ear, Nose and Throat, Gynaecology, Urology, Neurology, Neurosurgery, Orthopaedics and Plastic Surgery, and involving speech pathologists, audiologists, physiotherapists, occupational therapists and podiatrists as primary contact practitioners. Observations of enablers for and challenges to implementation are presented as key lessons. What are the implications for practitioners?: The new allied health primary contact models of care described in this paper should be considered by health service executives, allied health leaders and specialist out-patient departments as one strategy to address unacceptably long specialist wait lists.

Advanced physiotherapist-led services have been embedded in specialist orthopaedic and neurosurgical outpatient departments across Queensland, Australia, to ameliorate capacity constraints. Simulation modelling has been used to inform the optimal scale and professional mix of services required to match patient demand. The context and the value of simulation modelling in service planning remain unclear. We aimed to examine the adoption, context and costs of using simulation modelling recommendations to inform service planning. Using an implementation science approach, we undertook a prospective, qualitative evaluation to assess the use of discrete event simulation modelling recommendations for service re-design and to explore stakeholder perspectives about the role of simulation modelling in service planning. Five orthopaedic and neurosurgical services in Queensland, Australia, were selected to maximise variation in implementation effectiveness. We used the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR) to guide the facilitation and analysis of the stakeholder focus group discussions. We conducted a prospective costing analysis in each service to estimate the costs associated with using simulation modelling to inform service planning. Four of the five services demonstrated adoption by inclusion of modelling recommendations into proposals for service re-design. Four CFIR constructs distinguished and two CFIR constructs did not distinguish between high versus mixed implementation effectiveness. We identified additional constructs that did not map onto CFIR. The mean cost of implementation was AU$34,553 per site (standard deviation = AU$737). To our knowledge, this is the first time the context of implementing simulation modelling recommendations in a health care setting, using a validated framework, has been examined. Our findings may provide valuable insights to increase the uptake of healthcare modelling recommendations in service planning.

To explore patient characteristics predictive of a poor response to multidisciplinary non-surgical rehabilitation of three common orthopaedic conditions within a tertiary care service. A retrospective audit of medical records of patients who had undergone multidisciplinary non-surgical management of their knee osteoarthritis (KOA, n = 190), shoulder impingement syndrome (SIS, n = 199), or low back pain (LBP, n = 242) within a multisite tertiary care service was undertaken. Standardised clinical measures recorded by the service at the initial consultation were examined using a base binary logistic regression model to determine their relationship with a poor response to management (ie. not achieving a minimal clinically important improvement in the condition disability measure pre-post management). Factors predictive of a poor response following non-surgical management included;; higher levels of anxiety (OR 1.11, P < 0.02) and lower functional score (OR 0.76, P < 0.04) for KOA, higher number of comorbidities (OR 1.16, P < 0.03) for SIS, and coexisting cervical or thorax pain (OR 2.1, P = 0.04) and lower pain self-efficacy (OR 0.98, P = 0.02) for LBP. General health issues may present a barrier to achieving favourable outcomes in response to multidisciplinary non-surgical rehabilitation for the management of common orthopaedic conditions in a tertiary care setting. Clinicians may need to consider these broader patient issues when designing management strategies for patients with these conditions.

This study explored variations in the primary service and clinical outcomes of a state-wide advanced practice physiotherapist-led service embedded in public medical specialist orthopaedic and neurosurgical outpatient services across Queensland, Australia. An audit of the service database over a six-year period was taken from 18 service facilities. The primary service and clinical outcomes were described. Variations in these outcomes between facilities were explored with a regression analysis adjusting for known patient- and service-related characteristics. The findings showed substantial positive impacts of the advanced practice model across all facilities, with 69.4% of patients discharged without a need for medical specialist review (primary service outcome), consistent with 68.9% of patients reporting clinically important improvements in their condition (primary clinical outcome). However, 15 facilities significantly varied from the state average for the primary service outcome (despite only three facilities varying in the primary clinical outcome). While this disparity in the primary service outcomes appears to be influenced by potentially modifiable differences in the service-related processes between facilities, these process differences only explained part of the variation. This study described the subsequent development of a new, more comprehensive set of service evaluation metrics to better inform future service planning.