Reinforce chapter themes with free access to two journal articles for each chapter and further online readings. Select chapters will also include suggested weblinks.
Journal Article 22.1: Braithwaite, J., Hibbert, P., Blakely, B., Plumb, J., Hannaford, N., Cameron Long, J. and Marks, D. (2017) ‘Health system frameworks and performance indicators in eight countries: A comparative international analysis’, SAGE Open Medicine 5.
Description: Performance indicators are a popular mechanism for measuring the quality of healthcare to facilitate both quality improvement and systems management. Few studies make comparative assessments of different countries’ performance indicator frameworks. This study identifies and compares frameworks and performance indicators used in selected Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development health systems to measure and report on the performance of healthcare organizations and local health systems. Countries involved are Australia, Canada, Denmark, England, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Scotland and the United States. Identification of comparable international indicators and analyses of their characteristics and of their broader national frameworks and contexts were undertaken. Two dimensions of indicators – that they are nationally consistent (used across the country rather than just regionally) and locally relevant (measured and reported publicly at a local level, for example, a health service) – were deemed important. The most commonly used domains in performance frameworks were safety, effectiveness and access. The search found 401 indicators that fulfilled the ‘nationally consistent and locally relevant’ criteria. Of these, 45 indicators are reported in more than one country. Cardiovascular, surgery and mental health were the most frequently reported disease groups. These comparative data inform researchers and policymakers internationally when designing health performance frameworks and indicator sets.
Journal Article 22.2: Tuckett, A., Henwood, T., Oliffe, J. L., Koble-Alexander, T. L. and Rin Kim, J. (2015) ‘A comparative study of Australian and New Zealand male and female nurses health: A sex comparison and gender analysis’, American Journal of Men's Health 10(6): 450–58.
Description: The aim of this research was to compare the health and lifestyle behaviors between male and female nursing professionals. Biological, workplace, and lifestyle factors as well as health behaviors and outcomes are reported as different between male and female nurses. Although male nurses show distinct health-related patterns and experience health disparities at work, few studies have investigated health differences by sex in a large cohort group of nursing professionals. This observation study of Australian and New Zealand nurses and midwives drew data from an eCohort survey. A cohort of 342 females was generated by SPSS randomization (total N = 3625), to compare against 342 participating males. Measures for comparison include health markers and behaviors, cognitive well-being, workplace and leisure-time vitality, and functional capacity. Findings suggest that male nurses had a higher BMI, sat for longer, slept for less time, and were more likely to be a smoker than their female nurse counterparts. Men were more likely to report restrictions in bending, bathing, and dressing. In relation to disease, male nurses reported greater rates of respiratory disease and cardiovascular disease, including a three times greater incidence of myocardial infarction, and were more likely to have metabolic problems. In contrast, however, male nurses were more likely to report feeling calm and peaceful with less worries about their health. Important for nurse workforce administrators concerned about the well-being of their staff, the current study reveals significant sex differences and supports the need for gender-sensitive approaches to aid the well-being of male nurses.