Search

Developing high-quality and culturally responsive maternal and infant health services is a critical part of 'closing the gap' in health disparities between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and other Australians. The National Maternity Services Plan led work that describes and recommends Birthing on Country best-practice maternity care adaptable from urban to very remote settings, yet few examples exist in Australia. This paper demonstrates Birthing on Country principles can be applied in the urban setting, presenting our experience establishing and developing a Birthing on Country partnership service model in Brisbane, Australia. An initial World Café workshop effectively engaged stakeholders, consumers and community members in service planning, resulting in a multiagency partnership program between a large inner city hospital and two local Aboriginal Community-Controlled Health Services (ACCHS). The Birthing in Our Community program includes: 24/7 midwifery care in pregnancy to six weeks postnatal by a named midwife, supported by Indigenous health workers and a team coordinator; partnership with the ACCHS; oversight from a steering committee, including Indigenous governance; clinical and cultural supervision; monthly cultural education days and support for Indigenous student midwives through cadetships and placement within the partnership. Three years in, the partnership program is proving successful with clients, as well as showing early signs of improved maternal and infant health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To describe the process of collaborative, contextualised development and implementation of a model of care for adults with symptoms suggestive of attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder in an Aboriginal community-controlled health service. Conclusion: The current article describes an attempt to reduce unmet mental health needs through a systemic approach within a well-established Indigenous community-controlled organisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: With the impact of over two centuries of colonisation in Australia, First Nations families experience a disproportionate burden of adverse pregnancy and birthing outcomes. First Nations mothers are 3–5 times more likely than other mothers to experience maternal mortality; babies are 2–3 times more likely to be born preterm, low birth weight or not to survive their first year. 'Birthing on Country' incorporates a multiplicity of interpretations but conveys a resumption of maternity services in First Nations Communities with Community governance for the best start to life. Redesigned services offer women and families integrated, holistic care, including carer continuity from primary through tertiary services; services coordination and quality care including safe and supportive spaces. The overall aim of Building On Our Strengths (BOOSt) is to facilitate and assess Birthing on Country expansion into two settings - urban and rural; with scale-up to include First Nations-operated birth centres. This study will build on our team's earlier work - a Birthing on Country service established and evaluated in an urban setting, that reported significant perinatal (and organisational) benefits, including a 37% reduction in preterm births, among other improvements. Methods: Using community-based, participatory action research, we will collaborate to develop, implement and evaluate new Birthing on Country care models. We will conduct a mixed-methods, prospective birth cohort study in two settings, comparing outcomes for women having First Nations babies with historical controls. Our analysis of feasibility, acceptability, clinical and cultural safety, effectiveness and cost, will use data including (i) women's experiences collected through longitudinal surveys (three timepoints) and yarning interviews; (ii) clinical records; (iii) staff and stakeholder views and experiences; (iv) field notes and meeting minutes; and (v) costs data. The study includes a process, impact and outcome evaluation of this complex health services innovation. Discussion: Birthing on Country applies First Nations governance and cultural safety strategies to support optimum maternal, infant, and family health and wellbeing. Women's experiences, perinatal outcomes, costs and other operational implications will be reported for Communities, service providers, policy advisors, and for future scale-up. Trial registration: Australia & New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry #ACTRN12620000874910 (2 September 2020). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Australian Nurse Family Partnership Program (ANFPP) is an evidence-based, home visiting program that offers health education, guidance, social and emotional support to first-time mothers having Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander (First Nations) babies. The community-controlled sector identified the need for specialised support for first time mothers due to the inequalities in birthing and early childhood outcomes between First Nations' and other babies in Australia. The program is based on the United States' Nurse Family Partnership program which has improved long-term health outcomes and life trajectories for mothers and children. International implementation of the Nurse Family Partnership program has identified interagency service integration as key to program recruitment, retention, and efficacy. How the ANFPP integrates with other services in an Australian urban setting and how to improve this is not yet known. Our research explores the barriers and enablers to interagency service integration for the Australian Nurse Family Partnership Program ANFPP in an urban setting. Methods: A qualitative study using individual and group interviews. Purposive and snowball sampling was used to recruit clients, staff (internal and external to the program), Elders and family members. Interviews were conducted using a culturally appropriate 'yarning' method with clients, families and Elders and semi-structured interview guide for staff. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed prior to reflexive thematic analysis. Results: Seventy-six participants were interviewed: 26 clients, 47 staff and 3 Elders/family members. Three themes were identified as barriers and three as enablers. Barriers: 1) confusion around program scope, 2) duplication of care, and 3) tensions over 'ownership' of clients. Enablers (existing and potential): 1) knowledge and promotion of the program; 2) cultural safety; and 3) case coordination, co-location and partnership forums. Conclusion: Effective service integration is essential to maximise access and acceptability of the ANFPP; we provide practical recommendations to improve service integration in this context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Strategies to reduce over-representation of Indigenous children in out-of-home care must start in pregnancy given Indigenous babies are 6 % of infants (<1 year), yet 43 % of infants in out-of-home care. To determine if an Indigenous-led, multi-agency, partnership redesign of maternity services decreases the likelihood of babies being removed at birth. Women carrying an Indigenous baby/babies who gave birth at the Mater Mothers' Public Hospital, Brisbane (2013–2019). A prospective, non-randomised, intervention trial evaluated a multi-agency service redesign. Women pregnant with an Indigenous baby birthing at a tertiary hospital were offered standard care or Birthing in Our Community (BiOC) service. We compared likelihood of babies being removed by Child Protection Services (CPS) at birth by model of care. Inverse probability of treatment propensity score weighting controlled baseline confounders and calculated treatment effect. Standardized differences were calculated to assess balance of risk factors for each copy of multiple imputation. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, ACTRN12618001365257. In 2013–2019, 1988 women gave birth to 2044 Indigenous babies, with 40 women having babies removed at birth (9 BiOC, 31 standard care). Adjusted odds of baby removal were significantly lower for mothers in BiOC compared to standard care (AOR 0.37, 95 % CI 0.16, 0.84). In total, 2.0 % of Indigenous babies were removed by CPS; eight times higher than non-Indigenous babies at the same hospital (0.25 %). BiOC reduced removals of newborn Indigenous babies likely disrupting generational cycles of CPS contact, trauma, and maltreatment, and contributing to short and long-term health and wellbeing benefits for mothers and babies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Efforts to address Indigenous health disadvantage require a refocus on urban settings, where a rapidly increasing majority (79%) of Indigenous Australians live. Proximity to mainstream primary care has not translated into health equity, with the majority of the Indigenous burden of disease (73%) remaining in urban areas and urban Indigenous people continuing to face significant barriers in accessing comprehensive and culturally appropriate care. This paper presents a case study of how the Institute for Urban Indigenous Health (IUIH) has strategically responded to these challenges in South East Queensland – home to Australia's largest and equal fastest growing Indigenous population. The IUIH has developed a new regional and systematised model – a regional health 'ecosystem' – for how primary care is delivered and intersects with the broader health system. Through intentional action, which strengthens the self-efficacy of community, the IUIH System of Care has delivered real gains for the Indigenous population of the region and has the capacity to deliver similar improvements in health access and outcomes in other regions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the role of psychiatry in reducing health inequality, as discussed by the Institute for Urban Indigenous Health. Topics include mental and substance use disorders being the leading cause of health loss among Indigenous Australians; and Aboriginal community controlled health organizations related to mental health and social and emotional well-being services.

Background Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Indigenous Australians) smoke at much higher rates than non-Indigenous people and smoking is an important contributor to increased disease, hospital admissions and deaths in Indigenous Australian populations. Smoking cessation programs in Australia have not had the same impact on Indigenous smokers as on non-Indigenous smokers. This paper describes the outcome of a study that aimed to test the efficacy of a locally-tailored, intensive, multidimensional smoking cessation program. Methods A randomised controlled trial of Aboriginal researcher delivered tailored smoking cessation counselling during face-to-face visits, aiming for weekly for the first four weeks, monthly to six months and two monthly to 12 months. The control ("usual care") group received routine care relating to smoking cessation at their local primary health care service. Data collection occurred at enrolment, six and 12 months. The primary outcome was self-reported smoking cessation with urinary cotinine confirmation at final follow-up (median 13 (interquartile range 12-15) months after enrolment). Results Participants in the intervention (n = 55) and usual care (n = 108) groups were similar in baseline characteristics, except the intervention group was slightly older. At final follow-up the smoking cessation rate for participants assigned to the intervention group (n = 6; 11%), while not statistically significant, was double that of usual care (n = 5; 5%; p = 0.131). A meta-analysis of these findings and a similarly underpowered but comparable study of pregnant Indigenous Australian women showed that Indigenous Australian participants assigned to the intervention groups were 2.4 times (95% CI, 1.01-5.5) as likely to quit as participants assigned to usual care. Conclusions Culturally appropriate, multi-dimensional Indigenous quit smoking programs can be successfully implemented in remote primary health care. Intensive one-on-one interventions with substantial involvement from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander workers are likely to be effective in these settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: With persisting maternal and infant health disparities, new models of maternity care are needed to meet the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australia. To date, there is limited evidence of successful and sustainable programs. Birthing on Country is a term used to describe an emerging evidence-based and community-led model of maternity care for Indigenous families; its impact requires evaluation.Methods: Mixed-methods prospective birth cohort study comparing different models of care for women having Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander babies at two major maternity hospitals in urban South East Queensland (2015-2019). Includes women's surveys (approximately 20 weeks gestation, 36 weeks gestation, two and six months postnatal) and infant assessments (six months postnatal), clinical outcomes and cost comparison, and qualitative interviews with women and staff.Discussion: This study aims to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, sustainability, clinical and cost-effectiveness of a Birthing on Country model of care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families in an urban setting. If successful, findings will inform implementation of the model with similar communities.Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry # ACTRN12618001365257 . Registered 14 August 2018 (retrospectively registered). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Indigenous Australians) smoke at much higher rates than non-Indigenous people and smoking is an important contributor to increased disease, hospital admissions and deaths in Indigenous Australian populations. Smoking cessation programs in Australia have not had the same impact on Indigenous smokers as on non-Indigenous smokers. This paper describes the outcome of a study that aimed to test the efficacy of a locally-tailored, intensive, multidimensional smoking cessation program.Methods: A randomised controlled trial of Aboriginal researcher delivered tailored smoking cessation counselling during face-to-face visits, aiming for weekly for the first four weeks, monthly to six months and two monthly to 12 months. The control ("usual care") group received routine care relating to smoking cessation at their local primary health care service. Data collection occurred at enrolment, six and 12 months. The primary outcome was self-reported smoking cessation with urinary cotinine confirmation at final follow-up (median 13 (interquartile range 12-15) months after enrolment).Results: Participants in the intervention (n = 55) and usual care (n = 108) groups were similar in baseline characteristics, except the intervention group was slightly older. At final follow-up the smoking cessation rate for participants assigned to the intervention group (n = 6; 11%), while not statistically significant, was double that of usual care (n = 5; 5%; p = 0.131). A meta-analysis of these findings and a similarly underpowered but comparable study of pregnant Indigenous Australian women showed that Indigenous Australian participants assigned to the intervention groups were 2.4 times (95% CI, 1.01-5.5) as likely to quit as participants assigned to usual care.Conclusions: Culturally appropriate, multi-dimensional Indigenous quit smoking programs can be successfully implemented in remote primary health care. Intensive one-on-one interventions with substantial involvement from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander workers are likely to be effective in these settings.Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12608000604303). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]