Search

Background: Increasing numbers of primary care practitioners in refugee resettlement countries are providing care to refugees. Access to trained interpreters is a priority for these practitioners, but there are many barriers to the implementation of interpreted consultations in routine care. There is a lack of international, theoretically informed research. The purpose of this paper is to understand barriers to interpreter use in primary care consultations in four resettlement countries using Normalisation Process Theory. Method: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey with networks of primary care practitioners (PCPs) who care for refugees in Australia, Canada, Ireland and the US (n = 314). We analysed qualitative data from the survey about barriers to interpreter use (n = 178). We completed an inductive thematic analysis, iteratively developed a Normalisation Process Theory (NPT)-informed coding frame and then mapped the emergent findings onto the theory's construct about enacting interpreted consultations. Results: In all four countries, the use of an interpreter presented communication and interaction challenges between providers and patients, which can impede the goals of primary care consultations. Primary care practitioners did not always have confidence in interpreted consultations and described poor professional practice by some interpreters. There was variation across countries, and inconsistency within countries, in the availability of trained interpreters and funding sources. Conclusion: There are shared and differential barriers to implementation of interpreted consultations in a consistent and sustained way in the four countries studied. These findings can be used to inform country-specific and international level policies and interventions focusing on improving skills and resources for interpreted consultations to improve implementation of interpreted primary care consultations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The socio-economic circumstances and health of people with disabilities has been relatively ignored in public health research, policy and practice in Australia and internationally. This is despite emerging evidence that the socio-economic circumstances that people with disabilities live in contributes to their poorer health. Compared to other developed countries, Australians with disabilities are more likely to live in disadvantaged circumstances, despite being an economically prosperous country; it is therefore likely that the socio-economic disadvantage experienced by Australians with disabilities makes a significant contribution to their health. Despite the importance of this issue Australia does not routinely monitor the socio-economic inequalities for people with disabilities. This paper addresses this gap by describing time trends in socio-economic conditions for Australians with and without disabilities according to the severity of the disability and sex. Methods: Cross-sectional analyses of the Australian Bureau of Statistics Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers were carried out at three time points (1998, 2003 and 2009) to estimate the proportions of women and men (aged between 25 and 64 years) who were living on low incomes, had not completed year 12, were not in paid work, living in private rental and experiencing multiple disadvantage (three or more of the indicators). Results: People with disabilities are less likely to have completed year 12, be in paid work and are more likely to be living on low incomes and experiencing multiple disadvantage. These conditions worsened with increasing severity of disability and increased or persisted over time, with most of the increase between 1998 and 2003. While women with milder disabilities tended to fare worse than men, the proportions were similar for those with moderate and severe/profound disabilities. Conclusion: People with disabilities experience high levels of socio-economic disadvantage which has increased or persisted over time and these are likely to translate into poorer health outcomes. A large proportion experience multiple forms of disadvantage, reinforcing the need to tackle disadvantage in a coordinated way across sectors. People with disabilities should be a priority population group for public health. Monitoring socio-economic conditions of people with disabilities is critical for informing policy and assessing the impact of disability reforms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Socioeconomic status (SES) is a major determinant of health. In Australia, areas of socioeconomic disadvantage are characterised by complex health needs and inequity in primary health care provision. General Practice (GP) registrars play an important role in addressing workforce needs, including equitable health care provision in areas of greater socioeconomic disadvantage. We aimed to characterize GP registrars' practice location by level of socioeconomic disadvantage, and establish associations (of registrar, practice, patient characteristics, and registrars' clinical behaviours) with GP registrars training being undertaken in areas of greater socioeconomic disadvantage. Methods: A cross-sectional analysis from the Registrars' Clinical Encounters in Training (ReCEnT) study. ReCEnT is an ongoing, multi-centre, cohort study that documents 60 consecutive consultations by each GP registrar once in each of their three six-monthly training terms. The outcome factor was the practice location's level of socioeconomic disadvantage, defined using the Index of Relative Socio-economic Disadvantage (SEIFA-IRSD). The odds of being in the lowest quintile was compared to the other four quintiles. Independent variables related to the registrar, patient, practice, and consultation. Results: A total of 1,736 registrars contributed 241,945 consultations. Significant associations of training being in areas of most disadvantage included: the registrar being full-time, being in training term 1, being in the rural training pathway; patients being Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, or from a non-English-speaking background; and measures of continuity of care. Conclusions: Training in areas of greater social disadvantage, as well as addressing community need, may provide GP registrars with richer learning opportunities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Of the estimated 10-11 year life expectancy gap between Indigenous (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people) and non-Indigenous Australians, approximately one quarter is attributable to cardiovascular disease (CVD). Risk prediction of CVD is imperfect, but particularly limited for Indigenous Australians. The BIRCH (Better Indigenous Risk stratification for Cardiac Health) project aims to identify and assess existing and novel markers of early disease and risk in Indigenous Australians to optimise health outcomes in this disadvantaged population. It further aims to determine whether these markers are relevant in non-Indigenous Australians.Methods/design: BIRCH is a cross-sectional and prospective cohort study of Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australian adults (≥ 18 years) living in remote, regional and urban locations. Participants will be assessed for CVD risk factors, left ventricular mass and strain via echocardiography, sleep disordered breathing and quality via home-based polysomnography or actigraphy respectively, and plasma lipidomic profiles via mass spectrometry. Outcome data will comprise CVD events and death over a period of five years.Discussion: Results of BIRCH may increase understanding regarding the factors underlying the increased burden of CVD in Indigenous Australians in this setting. Further, it may identify novel markers of early disease and risk to inform the development of more accurate prediction equations. Better identification of at-risk individuals will promote more effective primary and secondary preventive initiatives to reduce Indigenous Australian health disadvantage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A growing body of literature highlights that racial discrimination has negative impacts on child health, although most studies have been limited to an examination of direct forms of racism using cross-sectional data. We aim to provide further insights on the impact of early exposure to racism on child health using longitudinal data among Indigenous children in Australia and multiple indicators of racial discrimination. Methods: We used data on 1239 Indigenous children aged 5-10 years from Waves 1-6 (2008-2013) of Footprints in Time, a longitudinal study of Indigenous children across Australia. We examined associations between three dimensions of carer-reported racial discrimination (measuring the direct experiences of children and vicarious exposure by their primary carer and family) and a range of physical and mental health outcomes. Analysis was conducted using multivariate logistic regression within a multilevel framework. Results: Two-fifths (40%) of primary carers, 45% of families and 14% of Indigenous children aged 5-10 years were reported to have experienced racial discrimination at some point in time, with 28-40% of these experiencing it persistently (reported at multiple time points). Primary carer and child experiences of racial discrimination were each associated with poor child mental health status (high risk of clinically significant emotional or behavioural difficulties), sleep difficulties, obesity and asthma, but not with child general health or injury. Children exposed to persistent vicarious racial discrimination were more likely to have sleep difficulties and asthma in multivariate models than those with a time-limited exposure. Conclusions: The findings indicate that direct and persistent vicarious racial discrimination are detrimental to the physical and mental health of Indigenous children in Australia, and suggest that prolonged and more frequent exposure to racial discrimination that starts in the early lifecourse can impact on multiple domains of health in later life. Tackling and reducing racism should be an integral part of policy and intervention aimed at improving the health of Australian Indigenous children and thereby reducing health disparities between Indigenous and non-Indigenous children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Internationally, men with disabilities have higher rates of social and economic disadvantage and poorer health and wellbeing than men without disabilities. No single study has provided comprehensive, population-level information about the magnitude of such differences among adult men using a well-validated instrument to measure disability.Methods: We analysed baseline data from Ten to Men - an Australian longitudinal study of male health. Ten to Men used a stratified multi-stage cluster random sample design to recruit a national sample of males aged 10 to 55 years residing in private dwellings. Data were collected between October 2013 and July 2014 from 15,988 males. This analysis was restricted to 18-55 year old participants with data available on age and disability (n = 13,569). We compared the demographic, socio-economic characteristics and health and wellbeing of men with and without disabilities using chi squared tests for proportions and t tests for continuous variables. Linear regression adjusted for age was used to assess the association between disability status and health and wellbeing, which were measured using the SF-12 mental and physical health component scores and the Personal Wellbeing Index.Results: Men with disabilities were older and more likely to be born in Australia, speak English at home, be Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and were less likely to be married or de facto, or to live in urban areas. They were less likely to have completed secondary school, be employed and live in affordable housing, and were more likely to live on low incomes, in more socio-economically disadvantaged areas, and in rental accommodation and to experience shortages of money. Among employed men, those with disabilities were less likely to be in high skilled jobs, worked less hours on average, and were more likely to report that they would prefer to work more. Men with disabilities had lower levels of social support and community participation and poorer mental and physical health and overall wellbeing.Conclusion: Adult men with disabilities experience marked social and economic disadvantage and poorer health and wellbeing. Improving the health and wellbeing of disabled men should be a priority for public health researchers and policy-makers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]