S.TRUEMAN PhD THESIS 2016

30

relation to the case. Second, it is useful to compare the allied health professions with the other professions previously mentioned to observe whether trends in distribution are consistent. Third, mental health patients have poorer general health than non-mental health patients, and therefore require more allied health services (AIHW, 2014; Lambert, Velakoulis & Pantelis, 2003; O’Sullivan, Gilbert & Ward, 2006; Robson & Gray, 2006; Smith, 2008). Further, living in remote Australia increases mental health patients’ risk of poorer general health (AIHW, 2012; Harrison et al., 2010; Humphreys & Wakerman, 2008), and accordingly, per capita they are substantial consumers of these allied health services. Finally, a case study methodology requires a holistic investigation, and hence provides further justification for the inclusion of all allied health practitioners. Table 1.12 Number of Pharmacists, Physiotherapists, Optometrists, Chiropractors and Podiatrists by Remoteness Classification Index, 2012 (Source: AIHW, 2013)

Major Cities

Inner Regional Outer Regional

Remote/ Very Remote

Pharmacist

16,225 16,129

3,301 2,621

1,506 1,069

279 240

Physiotherapist

Optometrist Chiropractor

3,169 3,033 2,509

600 718 563

233 241 210

27 36 29

Podiatrist

With reference to Table 1.12, it is clear that with increasing remoteness there are fewer available allied health services. It is not clear from the AIHW report (2012) how or whether these data include Fly-In, Fly-Out (FIFO) clinicians who are based in another remote classification index, yet work regularly in another; for example, a clinician who resides in an ‘inner regional’ area may FIFO to remote or very remote communities as a