Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Acceptability, Feasibility, and Preliminary Effectiveness of a Wellbeing Coordination Program in an Integrated Health and Social Care Hub: A Mixed Methods Study Cover

Acceptability, Feasibility, and Preliminary Effectiveness of a Wellbeing Coordination Program in an Integrated Health and Social Care Hub: A Mixed Methods Study

Open Access
|Feb 2025

Figures & Tables

Table 1

WBC Program Elements and WBC Role.

WBC PROGRAM ELEMENTSWBC ROLE
Appointment formatUp to six support appointments for families
Care navigationDeveloping wellbeing care plans with goals and service links
Social prescriptionCo-designing nonclinical social prescriptions (e.g., financial counselling, playgroups)
Family connectionMonthly Community Connect sessions for casual caregiver-practitioner engagement and service awareness
Table 2

Instruments Used in Intake and Exit Surveys.

VARIABLESINSTRUMENTSINTAKE SURVEYEXIT SURVEY
Caregiver characteristicsCaregiver age, gender, country of birth, primary languages spoken at home, Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander status, refugee status, educational, and household composition.X
Social isolationFour items from an index of social isolation [22, 23]: unmarried/not cohabiting; infrequent contact with family or friends, and no participation in groups. Items were rated yes/no, with higher scores indicating greater isolation.X
LonelinessThe three-item short form of the Revised UCLA loneliness scale [24]: Items were rated on a 3-point scale (1 = hardly, 3 = often), with higher scores indicated greater loneliness.XX
HealthSix items from a 10-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Global Health [25] assessed caregivers’ general, physical, mental, and social health, and quality of life. Items were rated on a 5-point scale (1 = poor, 5 = excellent), with higher scores indicating better health.XX
Confidence to self-manage health problemsSingle item: ‘How confident are you that you can control and manage most of your health problems?’ [26]. Rating based on a 10-point scale (1 = not at all, 10 = very).XX
Knowledge of local servicesStudy-designed, single item: ‘Do you feel like you have a good knowledge of services in the local area to support your child and family’s health and wellbeing?’ Rating based on a 5-point scale (1 = poor, 5 = excellent).XX
Connection to the communityStudy-designed, single item: ‘Have you experienced a greater connectedness in your community since taking part in the WBC program?’ with participants rating ‘yes’, ‘no’, or ‘somewhat’.-X
Caregiver enablementSix items from a modified Parent Enablement Index [27, 28] assessed caregivers’ ability to cope with life, understand and support their children, maintain health, feel confident about their health, and help themselves. Rating based on a 3-point scale (0 = same or less or not applicable, 1 = not confident at all, 2 = much better). The total score ranges from 0 to 12. Scores above 4 indicate greater enablement as a result of the service [29].X
Feedback on the WBC programSix study-designed question: two on goal achievement and program recommendation (yes/no/other) and four on caregivers’ experiences of being listened to, respected, and supported, rated on a 5-point scale (1 = always, 5 = never).X
Table 3

Sociodemographic Characteristics of Caregivers (n = 29).

PARTICIPANT CHARACTERISTICSn (%)
CAREGIVERS NOT PARTICIPATING IN THE WBC PROGRAM BUT COMPLETING INTERVIEWS (n = 18)CAREGIVERS PARTICIPATING IN THE WBC PROGRAM AND COMPLETING SURVEYS (n = 9)CAREGIVERS PARTICIPATING IN THE WBC PROGRAM AND COMPLETING INTERVIEWS (n = 2)
Age M (SD, Range)38 (8.01, 25–59)38.78 (7.82, 30–53)32 (2.12, 30–33)
Gender
    Female13 (72.2)8 (88.9)2 (100)
Country of birth
    Australia9 (50)5 (55.6)1 (50)
    Asian countries7 (38.9)2 (22.2)0
    African countries2 (11.1)2 (22.2)1 (50)
Primary language spoken
    English9 (50)6 (66.7)2 (100)
Aboriginal and/or Torres Islanders
    Yes1 (11.1)00
Highest level of schooling
    Under Year 12 (final year of schooling)05 (55.5)1 (50)
    Year 12 or equivalent5 (27.8)2 (22.2)1 (50)
    Trade or other certificate-level qualification3 (16.7)1 (11.1)0
    Bachelor’s degree5 (27.8)00
    Postgraduate qualification5 (27.8)00
    Missing01 (11.1)0
Number of children in the household
    14 (22.2)2 (22.2)0
    27 (38.9)5 (55.6)2 (100)
    36 (33.3)1 (11.1)0
    4 or more1 (5.6)1 (11.1)0
Social isolation index
    Unmarried/not cohabitatingN/A6 (66.7)N/A
    Less than monthly contact with other family membersN/A1 (11.1)N/A
    Less than monthly contact with friendsN/A2 (22.2)N/A
    No participation in organisations (e.g., social clubs, residents’ groups)N/A5 (55.6)N/A
Table 4

Demographics of Practitioners (n = 21).

PRACTITIONER CHARACTERISTICSn(%)
Age
    18–34 years4 (19.1)
    35–44 years9 (42.8)
    45–54 years4 (19.0)
    55–64 years4 (19.1)
Gender
    Female18 (85.7)
Role
    Paediatrician/paediatric fellow3 (14.3)
    General practitioner2 (9.5)
    Nurse6 (28.6)
    Allied health (speech pathologist, dietician)2 (9.5)
    Social worker2 (9.5)
    Financial counsellor1 (4.8)
    Lawyer5 (23.8)
Number of years in role
    < 2 years2 (9.5)
    3–5 years6 (28.6)
    6–10 years6 (28.6)
    >10 years7 (33.3)
Table 5

Referral Characteristics (n = 56).

REFERRAL CHARACTERISTICSn(%)
Referrals received by the wellbeing coordinator56 (100)
    Appropriate referrals48 (86)
Referral received from
    Internal (in the Hub)29 (52)
    External (outside the Hub)10 (18)
    Self-referral17 (30)
Referrer roles
    Self-referral17 (30)
    Paediatrician14 (25)
    Paediatric fellow10 (18)
    Speech Pathologist5 (9)
    Universal maternal and child health nurse4 (7)
    Dietician3 (5)
    Other3 (6)
Reasons for referrala
    Socially isolated13 (23)
    New to area16 (29)
    Overwhelmed with service navigation50 (89)
    NDIS support35 (63)
    New diagnosis13 (23)
    Waiting for services25 (45)
Contact attempts to engage families (Range: 0 –11)
    033 (59)
    1–313 (23)
    4–68 (14)
    ≥102 (4)
Families accepted and booked in to see WBC40 (71)
Families attended the initial appointment (actively engaged)36 (64)
Appointments per family attending initial appointments (Range: 1–22)
    1–6 appointments26 (72)
    7–12 appointments7 (19)
    13–18 appointments1 (3)
    ≥19 appointments2 (6)
Wellbeing plans developed33 (92)
Referrals generated in wellbeing plans
    Internal referrals26 (41)
    External referrals38 (59)

[i] aCould be multiple reasons for referral.

Table 6

Changes in Caregiver Outcomes from Intake and Exit Surveys (n = 9).

VARIABLES (RANGE OF SCORES)INTAKE SURVEY M (SD) /N (%)*EXIT SURVEY M (SD) /N (%)*
Loneliness (3–9)5.13 (1.96)5.00 (1.77)
Global health (1–5)
    General health2.89 (1.27)3.22 (1.20)
    Physical health3.22 (1.39)3.22 (1.09)
    Quality of life3.00 (1.23)3.33 (1.12)
    Mental health2.67 (1.00)3.33 (1.23)
    Social activities and relationships2.22 (.83)3.67 (.87)
    Usual activities and roles3.78 (.67)3.56 (1.13)
Confidence in controlling and managing health (1–10)6.13 (2.75)8.11 (2.09)
Knowledge of services to support child and family’s health and wellbeing (1–5)2.78 (1.20)3.00 (1.00)
Caregiver enablement (0–12)N/A6.63 (3.85)
Greater connectedness in the community since taking part in the WBC program*
    YesN/A5 (55.6)
    NoN/A2 (22.2)
    SomewhatN/A2 (22.2)
Achieved the goals set out in the wellbeing plan*
    YesN/A6 (66.7)
    NoN/A1 (11.1)
    OtherN/A2 (22.2)
Feedback on the wellbeing coordinator
    Listened carefully (1–5)N/A1.00 (0)
    Show respect (1–5)N/A1.00 (0)
    Spend enough time with families (1–5)N/A1.00 (0)
Recommend the WBC Program to others*
    YesN/A9 (100)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.8644 | Journal eISSN: 1568-4156
Language: English
Submitted on: Apr 26, 2024
Accepted on: Jan 14, 2025
Published on: Feb 19, 2025
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2025 Lingling Chen, Natalie White, Emma Patten, Danielle Barth, Leanne N. Constable, Teresa Hall, Ashraful Kabir, Harriet Hiscock, Sarah Loveday, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.