Waiting in Pain II: An Updated Analysis of the Multidisciplinary Staffing Levels and Clinical Activity in Australian Specialist Persistent Pain Services

This study provides an update on multidisciplinary staffing and clinical activity in Australian specialist persistent pain services. Of the 109 services identified, 57 responded, met inclusion criteria and completed a study-specific questionnaire detailing service characteristics, staff resources, a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The journal of pain 2024-06, Vol.25 (6), p.104446-104446, Article 104446
Hauptverfasser: MacIntyre, E., Braithwaite, F.A., Stanton, T.R., Burke, A.L.J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This study provides an update on multidisciplinary staffing and clinical activity in Australian specialist persistent pain services. Of the 109 services identified, 57 responded, met inclusion criteria and completed a study-specific questionnaire detailing service characteristics, staff resources, and clinical activities. Where possible, data were compared between the ‘Waiting in Pain’ (WIP) investigations (WIP-I: Dec’08–Jan’10, WIP-II: Jul’16–Feb’18). WIP-II found more pain services (Level 1 centres, rural services) and more full-time equivalent (FTE) staffing (overall, psychiatry, psychology, occupational therapy) than WIP-I. Although Level 1 centres employed more FTE staff (overall, medical) than Level 2 clinics, staffing was comparable when considered relative to clinical activity and this was stable over time for most disciplines. Clinical activity in metropolitan and rural services also remained stable, as did rural service staffing (type, FTE), suggesting that newer clinics replicated existing models. WIP-II highlighted greater diversity in group structures than WIP-I and an associated mean .02FTE allied health staff/patient seen (WIP-I = .03 FTE). Staffing (amounts, types) did not change significantly over time when considered relative to clinical activity, supporting the conclusion that these are workable clinical structures. However, changes in group format (duration, staffing) suggest a shift towards lower-intensity programmes that require less allied health staffing to deliver. This article presents updated data regarding multidisciplinary staffing profiles, clinical activity, and group programme structures within Australian specialist persistent pain services and examines changes since the original investigation. As the only published staffing profile for multidisciplinary pain services, this project provides critical information to inform service (re)design and care delivery. •This is a key update on activity, staffing, and groups in Australian pain services.•Community access has not improved despite the growth in the number of pain clinics.•Staff mix has been fairly consistent over time and new clinics used similar models.•Psychology staffing has increased but occupational therapy/psychiatry remains patchy.•Groups reported using lower-intensity formats, with less allied health staffing.
ISSN:1526-5900
1528-8447
DOI:10.1016/j.jpain.2023.12.003