Introduction To Health and Social Care Planning Report Sample

Introduction To Health and Social Care Planning Report

The purpose of this assessment is to apply planning concepts and complexity theory to analyse a real-life planning case study.

Objective

This assessment task addresses these subject learning objectives:

A. Evaluate local circumstances and use evidence based health planning principles, frameworks and processes.

C. Determine the issues impacting health planning and health plan evaluation, including enabling and impeding factors.

D. Effectively communicate complex health service planning issues.

Length: 2000 words (+/- 10%) plus at least one diagram

Formatting requirements

In your submission, apply 12-point font size and double-spaced paragraphs. Ensure the document you upload is easily legible and has been spell checked and proofread before submission. Please ensure your reference list is accurate and complete.

Referencing

A reference list should be submitted at the end of the document with APA 7th formatting applied. A minimum of five (5) quality references should be included. Do use normal ink- text referencing if you use or quite articles, theorists or reports in the usual manner.

Read the article:

Wright M., Hoffman, R., Petrozzi, M. J., & Wise, S. (2022). General practice experiences of Australia’s COVID-19 vaccine rollout: lessons for primary care reform. Australian Health

Review, 46(5), 595–604.

The article describes the experience of general practices involved in the COVID-19 vaccine rollout in New South Wales. It provides a case study of a planning hierarchy, where general practice had to rapidly plan and, replan their activities and resources in response to frequent changes to national level policy and plans.

Use complexity theory and other planning concepts such “Planning goals and principles”,” Core planning principles”, “Approaches to health planning, either population or service based, “Health needs assessment”, “Rational and incremental planning models”, “Disaster planning in health and social care” and “ Planning for crisis events in a dynamic planning environment” to write a report that:

• identifies what went wrong in the planning of the vaccine roll-out at the national level, how it impacted the planning of the front-line services delivering the
vaccines. Include a diagram to illustrate this analysis of this planning hierarchy illustrating how national decisions impacted local GPs planning vaccine delivery
(excluded from the word count);

• discusses how the Federal Government and ATAGI could improve their vaccine planning process for future pandemics.

Solution

Introduction

As discussed in the article "General practice experiences of Australia's COVID-19 vaccine rollout: lessons for primary care reform," primary healthcare providers in Australia encountered several obstacles throughout the implementation of the COVID-19 vaccine. The authors detail the numerous problems that influenced the national vaccine rollout planning and, in turn, the planning of the front-line services that administered the vaccines. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is clear that robust vaccine planning and distribution techniques are essential in advance of the appearance of future pandemics. The Australian government and ATAGI can improve their vaccine planning process in several ways. These strategies have been highlighted.

Challenges Faced and Impact

Access to supplies has been a significant challenge in the vaccine rollout. Firstly, the immunisation strategy of Australia exhibits a significant dependence on the AstraZeneca vaccine, which is subsequently followed by the Pfizer vaccine (Aruru et al. 2021). Additionally, the country has established supply agreements for the vaccines developed by Moderna and Novavax, contingent upon regulatory approval. The organisation was one of the initial entities to declare an agreement with AstraZeneca and additionally emphasised its domestic production capabilities in conjunction with medical enterprise CSL (Benzidia et al. 2019). The preliminary endeavours of the nation in procuring vaccines exhibited a positive outlook.

During the initial stages of implementation, there was a degree of uncertainty regarding the precise quantity of stock that Australia possessed. A conflict with the European Union resulted in a portion of the AstraZeneca purchase being withheld (Cardenas, 2022). The absence of transparent and widely available data has posed a challenge in evaluating the current state of supply levels. Simultaneously, the performance of domestic production has failed to meet anticipated outcomes. The manufacturing process commenced in March. However, the government encountered setbacks in meeting its weekly target of approximately one million doses (Dharampal & Ani, 2020). Subsequently, complications pertaining to an infrequent coagulation disorder linked to the AstraZeneca vaccine exacerbated the circumstances. Two individuals succumbed to the disorder after its onset.

Figure 1: Planning Hierarchy
(Source: Author)

The COVID-19 vaccination campaign in Australia has encountered notable impediments concerning the provision and allocation of vaccines, underscoring the significance of strategic planning and decision-making methodologies at the federal level.

A significant strategic MBA assignment expert determination involved Australia's reliance on the AstraZeneca vaccine as its principal immunisation agent, subsequently succeeded by the Pfizer vaccine. The determination was made after considering multiple variables, such as the effectiveness and security of the vaccines, in addition to the accessibility of the vaccine quantities (Leask et al. 2021). Nevertheless, this course of action was not exempt from its disadvantages, as demonstrated by the ensuing complexities associated with the AstraZeneca vaccine.

Australia's strategic planning involved the establishment of supply agreements with Moderna and Novavax, subject to regulatory approval, which was deemed a crucial decision. This decision aimed to enhance the variety of vaccine sources within the country and mitigate reliance on any individual vaccine (Biezen et al. 2022).

Notwithstanding these planning determinations, the implementation has encountered noteworthy obstacles pertaining to the provision and dissemination. The dispute with the European Union has led to a partial withholding of the AstraZeneca acquisition. The lack of accessible and clear data has posed challenges in assessing the present status of supply quantities (Aruru et al. 2021). Furthermore, the efficacy of the indigenous manufacturing process has not met the projected results, resulting in setbacks in achieving the weekly objective of producing one million doses.

The aforementioned challenges underscore the significance of proficient decision-making on a national scale. The process of making decisions pertaining to the vaccine rollout necessitates the consideration of several factors, such as the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, the accessibility of doses, and the intricacies involved in their distribution. The ability to make effective decisions necessitates the availability of dependable data and information, coupled with the capacity to adapt and modify strategies in response to changing circumstances. The AstraZeneca vaccine's challenges also underscore the significance of risk management and contingency planning. The appearance of a rare coagulation anomaly associated with the vaccine highlights the necessity for meticulous surveillance and assessment of vaccine safety and the significance of possessing substitute vaccines.

Applying Complexity Theory To The Scenario

The theoretical framework of complexity theory is utilised to comprehend the behaviour of intricate systems, such as the COVID-19 vaccine rollout in Australia. Complexity theory posits that intricate systems exhibit non-linear interconnections, feedback mechanisms, and emergent properties (Benzidia et al. 2019). This implies that the collective behaviour of the system cannot be deduced from the actions of its constituent parts.

The COVID-19 vaccine rollout in Australia can be regarded as a complex system due to its involvement of various stakeholders and multifaceted factors that interact intricately. Various factors interact in intricate and uncertain manners, such as the virus's behaviour, vaccine efficacy and safety, dose availability, distribution logistics, and public perception and acceptance of the vaccines (Dharampal & Ani, 2020).

According to complexity theory, the effective management of complex systems requires prioritising the analysis of emergent behaviour and patterns over attempts to exert control over individual components. Within the framework of the vaccine rollout, it may be more advantageous to prioritise the examination of general vaccination rates and trends in vaccine acceptance, as opposed to attempting to regulate specific variables such as vaccine supply or distribution at the individual level (Guarini et al. 2022).

Furthermore, the theory of complexity underscores the significance of adaptability and resilience when confronted with uncertainty and unpredictability. The COVID-19 pandemic has been marked by dynamic and unforeseen circumstances, including the emergence of novel virus variants and unanticipated vaccine side effects. According to complexity theory, the ability of systems to adapt to changes and sustain resilience is a key determinant of their long-term success. To summarise, the application of complexity theory offers a valuable framework for comprehending the dynamics of intricate systems such as Australia's COVID-19 vaccine distribution process. Complexity theory can provide valuable insights for decision-making and planning in situations characterised by unpredictability and uncertainty by prioritising adaptability and resilience and highlighting emergent behaviour and patterns.

Effective Decision-Making

In the subject of public policy and planning, there are two separate decision-making models: the Rational Model and the Incremental Model. The rational decision model is predicated on the idea that decision-makers can access all pertinent information, compare and contrast all available options, and choose the best course of action based on a clear set of criteria (Zhang et al. 2019). The incremental model, on the other hand, places more emphasis on prior choices and minor policy tweaks than on major overhauls.

The article emphasises how the lack of a clear and coordinated national rollout plan for the vaccine caused a fragmented and unclear approach at the local level. Given its focus on centralised decision-making, the rational model may have been better suited to this situation for a more coordinated and effective rollout (Wright et al. 2022). The article argues that both models have roles in efficient planning and decision-making, emphasising incremental modifications in response to changing circumstances.

A population's health requirements are identified via the Health Requirements Assessment (HNA) process, which enables healthcare providers to plan and offer efficient healthcare services (Dharampal & Ani, 2020). Data about a population's health condition, health hazards, and health requirements are gathered and analysed throughout this process, and gaps in the availability of healthcare services are also identified. Healthcare providers may use HNA as a crucial tool to ensure they serve the health requirements of their communities.

The article's authors stress the need for an HNA to enhance the distribution of COVID-19 vaccines in Australia. Vaccine distribution inequalities are cited as a result of a lack of knowledge about the health requirements of various communities (Wright et al. 2022). To guarantee that vaccine distribution is equitable and satisfies the requirements of all communities, the authors contend that a comprehensive HNA, which considers demographic data and social determinants of health, is required.

Figure 2: Pain Points
(Source: Author)

National Decisions

Much discussion and attention have focused on how the federal government has handled the inherent complexity and unpredictability of the planning issue of the COVID-19 vaccination rollout in New South Wales (NSW) (Gureje et al. 2020). Although the federal government has defined a three-phase rollout strategy, there have been considerable challenges in implementing the plan in NSW, notably concerning vaccine supplies.

The Australian Technical Advisory Group (ATAGI) on Immunization is one method the federal government has tried to address the difficulty and unpredictability of vaccine deployment (Petousis-Harris, 2020). The COVID-19 vaccine usage in Australia is subject to recommendations made by ATAGI based on scientific evidence. This strategy guarantees that decisions are based on the most recent scientific data and promotes public confidence in the vaccination.

However, the federal government has also come under fire for handling the delivery of vaccinations, with some contending that it has not gone far enough to ensure Australia has a sufficient supply of vaccines (Rahimi & Abadi, 2020). The speed of the vaccination rollout in NSW has been significantly slowed by this paucity of supplies, making it more difficult to prioritise certain areas and populations.

The NSW government, in contrast, has adopted a more proactive strategy to manage the complexity and unpredictability of the vaccination deployment. This strategy has included initiatives to increase the number of immunisation clinics across the state to improve accessibility, prioritising particular regions and demographics, educating the general public about the vaccine and disseminating information about it, and working with community leaders and healthcare professionals to encourage vaccine acceptance (Shahzad et al. 2019).

In general, there have been mixed results in how the federal government has handled the inherent complexity and unpredictability of the planning problem of the COVID-19 vaccine deployment in NSW. Although the creation of ATAGI has been a step in the right direction towards evidence-based decision-making, the speed and effectiveness of the implementation have been significantly hampered by the insufficient availability of vaccines (Singh & Chattu, 2021). Contrarily, the NSW government's proactive approach to tackling the complexity and ambiguity of the rollout has been more successful in addressing particular issues and fostering vaccination acceptability.

Recommendations

It is imperative to establish a comprehensive and coordinated government vaccine rollout plan that considers the requirements of the elderly and individuals with preexisting medical conditions and the unique needs of different regions across the country (Verger & Dubé, 2020).

To enhance transparency and ensure timely information dissemination, it is recommended to establish unambiguous communication channels and protocols for vaccine distribution, prioritisation, and management of side effects. This should involve aligning planning objectives and principles with the relevant recommendations (Wright et al. 2022).

Establishing robust partnerships with primary healthcare providers such as general practitioners and pharmacists is crucial to effectively implementing the vaccine rollout process locally. This entails collaborating closely with these stakeholders and providing them with appropriate training and resources to ensure the safe and efficient administration of vaccines (Zhang et al. 2019).

Enhance the efficiency of logistics and communication by devising a well-defined and synchronised scheme for the distribution and delivery of vaccines, which encompasses prioritisation tactics, management of the supply chain, and logistics for the transportation and storage of vaccines in partnership with state and territorial administrations. Developing vaccine distribution strategies that address local communities' unique logistical and cultural requirements is crucial. This can be achieved by implementing community outreach initiatives, providing improved telemedicine services, and establishing mobile immunisation clinics (Singh & Chattu, 2021).

To enhance community involvement and trust, it is recommended to partner with local healthcare providers and communities to develop vaccine education and outreach initiatives that are culturally appropriate. These programmes should address historical trauma, foster trust and transparency, and ensure Indigenous perspectives are considered and valued in vaccine planning and implementation.

It is recommended to prioritise equitable vaccine access for all Australians by implementing targeted outreach and education programmes for high-risk populations, including Indigenous communities and those residing in remote and rural areas. This will ensure they are well-informed about the vaccine rollout process and have equal access to vaccines.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 vaccine distribution in Australia encountered notable obstacles. Primary healthcare providers, particularly general practitioners, encountered difficulties in strategising and disseminating vaccines due to restricted availability and a dearth of a unified plan. The aforementioned circumstances resulted in setbacks and ineffectiveness in providing vaccine distribution services. The implementation of primary care reform in Australia is deemed imperative to tackle the aforementioned concerns. Additionally, a synchronised and cooperative approach towards healthcare delivery is warranted. The collaboration between the government and ATAG can result in the development of a comprehensive plan for vaccine distribution. This plan can prioritise transparent communication and strong partnerships with primary healthcare providers, implement a centralised registration system, ensure equitable vaccine access, and establish a robust surveillance system. Implementing these measures can potentially enhance Australia's preparedness for future pandemics and fortify its populace against communicable ailments.

References

Aruru, M., Truong, H. A., & Clark, S. (2021). Pharmacy Emergency Preparedness and Response (PEPR): a proposed framework for expanding pharmacy professionals’ roles and contributions to emergency preparedness and response during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 17(1), 1967-1977. https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.sapharm.2020.04.002

Benzidia, S., Ageron, B., Bentahar, O., & Husson, J. (2019). Investigating automation and AGV in healthcare logistics: a case study based approach. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 22(3), 273-293. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2018.1518414

Biezen, R., Kaufman, J., Hoq, M., Manski-Nankervis, J. A., Sanci, L., Bell, J. S., ... & Danchin, M. (2022). Factors impacting COVID-19 vaccine decision making in older adults and people with underlying conditions in Victoria, Australia: A cross-sectional survey. Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics, 2147770. https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2022.2147770

Cardenas, N. C. (2022). COVID-19 vaccine strategy: promoting a coordinated multilateral strategic policy among European Union, United States, Latin America and the Caribbean. Journal of Public Health, 44(3), e442-e443. https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdab281

Dharampal, R., & Ani, C. (2020). The emotional and mental health needs of young carers: What psychiatry can do. BJPsych bulletin, 44(3), 112-120. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjb.2019.78

Guarini, E., Mori, E., & Zuffada, E. (2022). Localising the Sustainable Development Goals: a managerial perspective. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 34(5), 583-601. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBAFM-02-2021-0031

Gureje, O., Appiah-Poku, J., Bello, T., Kola, L., Araya, R., Chisholm, D., ... & Seedat, S. (2020). Effect of collaborative care between traditional and faith healers and primary health-care workers on psychosis outcomes in Nigeria and Ghana (COSIMPO): a cluster randomised controlled trial. The Lancet, 396(10251), 612-622. https://doi.org/10.1016%2FS0140-6736(20)30634-6

Leask, J., Carlson, S. J., Attwell, K., Clark, K. K., Kaufman, J., Hughes, C., ... & Danchin, M. H. (2021). Communicating with patients and the public about COVID-19 vaccine safety: recommendations from the Collaboration on Social Science and Immunisation. Med J Aust, 215(1), 9-12. https://www.mja.com.au/system/files/2021-05/Leask%20mja21.00474%20%28corrected%29%20-%2017%20May%202021.pdf

Petousis-Harris, H. (2020). Assessing the safety of COVID-19 vaccines: a primer. Drug safety, 43(12), 1205-1210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-020-01002-6

Rahimi, F., & Abadi, A. T. B. (2020). Transparency and information sharing could help abate the COVID-19 pandemic. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 41(11), 1366-1367. https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2020.173
review of vaccines, 19(11), 991-993. https://doi.org/10.1080/14760584.2020.1825945

Shahzad, M., Upshur, R., Donnelly, P., Bharmal, A., Wei, X., Feng, P., & Brown, A. D. (2019). A population-based approach to integrated healthcare delivery: a scoping review of clinical care and public health collaboration. BMC Public Health, 19(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7002-z

Singh, B., & Chattu, V. K. (2021). Prioritising 'equity'in COVID-19 vaccine distribution through Global Health Diplomacy. Health Promotion Perspectives, 11(3), 281. https://doi.org/10.34172%2Fhpp.2021.36

Stobart, A., & Duckett, S. (2022). Australia's Response to COVID-19. Health Economics, Policy and Law, 17(1), 95-106. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744133121000244
Verger, P., & Dubé, E. (2020). Restoring confidence in vaccines in the COVID-19 era. Expert

Wright M., Hoffman, R., Petrozzi, M. J., & Wise, S. (2022). General practice experiences of Australia’s COVID-19 vaccine rollout: lessons for primary care reform. Australian Health Review, 46(5), 595–604. https://doi.org/10.1071/AH22121

Zhang, L., Qiao, F., Wang, J., & Zhai, X. (2019). Equipment health assessment based on improved incremental support vector data description. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 51(5), 3205-3216. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2019.2919468