Table 4 Descriptions of the final set of papers in terms of the type of study and the key findings

Aljasir & Alghamdi (2010)

Descriptive cross-sectional design

• Satisfaction with structure of visiting service

• Satisfaction with services provided

• Overall satisfaction compared with primary health care centres

• 35.8% rated the location of the clinic as unsatisfactory

• 20.5% rated the schedule (1/week) as unsatisfactory

• 62.5% indicated the mobile clinic provided a lower quality of service compared with a primary health care centre

• 90.9% suggested that the mobile clinic was not dependable in providing health care in the area

Allen (1996)

Case study

• Number of clients accessing the service

• Reasons for accessing the service

• Cost comparison between Outreach Service and Hospital Service

• 59 clients accessed physiotherapy appointments in the first 4 months

• 30 clients attended for long-standing musculoskeletal pain syndromes, 29 attended for acute musculoskeletal pain/injuries

• $7 to $10 for a hospital occasion of service (15 min direct client contact) compared with $36 for the outreach service

Jackson-Pulver et al. (2010)

Retrospective cross-sectional audit of dental service client records

• Level of dental volunteer involvement, client attendance, and treatment provision

• Perceptions of stakeholders regarding practical arrangements, care provided, and future directions

• The program met a pressing need (eliminated a 2 year waiting list)

• Enhanced workforce development

• Continuity of care was important to virtually all respondents

• Cross-cultural relationships were fostered

McDermott et al. (2001)

Unblinded Cluster RCT

• Weight, blood pressure, eye and foot care, serum lipid levels, glucose monitoring and control, urinary albumin to creatinine ratio, serum creatinine levels

• Administration of recommended vaccines

• Hospitalisation in previous 12 months

• A greater improvement in most measures over the 12 months in the intervention sites

• At follow-up, those in the intervention groups were 40% less likely to be hospitalised for a diabetes-related condition than those in control group

Roberts-Thomson et al. (2010)

Cluster RCT

• Oral health promotion activities in the community

• Personal oral health practices of children

• No significant differences in the uptake of community level oral health promotion activities between the intervention and control communities at the two year follow-up

• No significant difference on the clinical measures between children in the intervention and control groups

Rowley et al. (2008)

Cohort study with population level data as a comparator

• Mortality from all causes and from cardiovascular disease

• Hospitalisation with cardiovascular disease coded as a primary cause of admission

• Mortality significantly lower than that of the NT Indigenous population

• Hospitalisation with CVD as a primary cause was 13/1000 person-years for the cohort, compared with 33/1000 person-years for the NT Indigenous population.

Scrace & Margolis (2009)

Retrospective longitudinal report comparing historical controls with a dedicated fly-in/fly-out primary care skin cancer outreach clinic

• Skin cancer diagnosis and management

• An increase in the number of lesions removed per year

• Four-fold increase in melanoma detection