Associations with low rates of postpartum glucose screening after gestational diabetes among Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australian women

Strategies to improve postpartum diabetes screening after GDM are urgently needed, particularly for Indigenous women, especially those living in urban and regional centers, and non-Indigenous women with low socioeconomic statu

Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in far North Queensland, Australia, 2004 to 2010 : midwives' perinatal data most accurate source

Objectives: This study examines the accuracy of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) case-ascertainment in routinely collected data. Methods: Retrospective cohort study analysed routinely collected data from all births at Cairns Base Hospital, Australia, from 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2010 in the Cairns Base Hospital Clinical Coding system (CBHCC) and the Queensland Perinatal Data Collection (QPDC). GDM case ascertainment in the National Diabetes Services Scheme (NDSS) and Cairns Diabetes Centre (CDC) data were compared. Results: From 2004 to 2010, the specificity of GDM case-ascertainment in the QPDC was 99%. In 2010, only 2 of 225 additional cases were identified from the CDC and CBHCC, suggesting QPDC sensitivity is also over 99%. In comparison, the sensitivity of the CBHCC data was 80% during 2004–2010. The sensitivity of CDC data was 74% in 2010. During 2010, 223 births were coded as GDM in the QPDC, and the NDSS registered 247 women with GDM from the same postcodes, suggesting reasonable uptake on the NDSS register. However, the proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women was lower than expected. Conclusion: The accuracy of GDM case ascertainment in the QPDC appears high, with lower accuracy in routinely collected hospital and local health service data. This limits capacity of local data for planning and evaluation, and developing structured systems to improve post-pregnancy care, and may underestimate resources required. Implications: Data linkage should be considered to improve accuracy of routinely collected local health service data. The accuracy of the NDSS for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women requires further evaluation

Postpartum care for Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal women with gestational diabetes mellitus across urban, rural and remote locations : a protocol for a cohort linkage study

Background: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is increasing, along with obesity and type 2 diabetes (T2DM), with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (Aboriginala) women in Australia particularly affected. GDM causes serious complications in pregnancy, birth, and the longer term, for women and their infants. Women with GDM have an eightfold risk of developing T2DM after pregnancy, compared to women without GDM. Indigenous women have an even higher risk, at a younger age, and progress more quickly from GDM to T2DM, compared to non-Indigenous women. If left undetected and untreated, T2DM increases risks in subsequent pregnancies, and can lead to heart disease, stroke, kidney failure, limb amputations and blindness for the woman in the longer term. A GDM diagnosis offers a ‘window of opportunity’ to provide acceptable and effective prevention, treatment, and postpartum care. Low rates of postpartum T2DM screening are reported among non-Aboriginal women in Australia and Indigenous women in other countries, however, data for Aboriginal women in Australia are scarce. A healthy diet, exercise and breastfeeding can delay the onset of T2DM, and together with T2DM screening are recommended elements of postpartum care for women with GDM. This paper describes methods for a study evaluating postpartum care among Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal women with GDM. Methods/Design: This retrospective cohort includes all women who gave birth at Cairns Hospital in far north Queensland, Australia, from 2004 to 2010, coded as having GDM in the Cairns Hospital Clinical Coding system. Data is being linked with the Midwives Perinatal Data Collection, and the three local laboratories. Hospital medical records are being reviewed to validate accuracy of GDM case ascertainment, and gather information on breastfeeding and provision of dietary advice. Survival analysis is being used to estimate time to screening, and rates of progression from GDM to T2DM. Logistic regression is being used to compare postpartum care between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal women, and assess factors that may be associated with provision of postpartum care. Discussion: There are challenges to collecting postpartum data for women with GDM, however, this research is urgently needed to ensure adequate postpartum care is provided for women with GDM

Family-centred interventions by primary healthcare services for Indigenous early childhood wellbeing in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States: A systematic scoping review

© 2017 The Author(s).Background: Primary healthcare services in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States have embraced the concept of family-centred care as a promising approach to supporting and caring for the health of young Indigenous children and their families. This scoping review assesses the quality of the evidence base and identifies the published literature on family- centred interventions for Indigenous early childhood wellbeing. Methods: Fourteen electronic databases, grey literature sources and the reference lists of Indigenous maternal and child health reviews were searched to identify relevant publications from 2000 to 2015. Studies were included if the intervention was: 1) focussed on Indigenous children aged from conception to 5 years from the abovementioned countries; 2) led by a primary healthcare service; 3) described or evaluated; and 4) scored greater than 50% against a validated scale for family-centredness. The study characteristics were extracted and quality rated. Reported aims, strategies, enablers and outcomes of family-centredcare were identified using grounded theory methods. Results: Eighteen studies (reported in 25 publications) were included. Three were randomised controlled studies; most were qualitative and exploratory in design. More than half of the publications were published from 2012 to 2015. The overarching aim of interventions was to promote healthy families. Six key strategies were to: support family behaviours and self- care, increase maternal knowledge, strengthen links with the clinic, build the Indigenous workforce, promote cultural/ community connectedness and advocate for social determinants of health. Four enablers were: competent and compassionate program deliverers, flexibility of access, continuity and integration of healthcare, and culturally supportive care. Health outcomes were reported for Indigenous children (nutritional status; emotional/behavioural; and prevention of injury and illness); parents/caregivers (depression and substance abuse; and parenting knowledge, confidence and skills); health services (satisfaction; access, utilization and cost) and community/cultural revitalisation. Discussion and conclusion: The evidence for family-centred interventions is in the early stages of development, but suggests promise for generating diverse healthcare outcomes for Indigenous children and their parents/caregivers, as well as satisfaction with and utilisation of healthcare, and community/cultural revitalisation. Further research pertaining to the role of fathers in family-centred care, and the effects and costs of interventions is needed

Family-centred interventions for Indigenous early childhood well-being by primary healthcare services

Primary healthcare, particularly Indigenous-led services, are well placed to deliver services that reflect the needs of Indigenous children and their families. Important characteristics identified by families for primary health care include services that support families, accommodate sociocultural needs, recognise extended family child-rearing practices, and Indigenous ways of knowing and doing business. Indigenous family-centred care interventions have been developed and implemented within primary healthcare services to plan, implement, and support the care of children, immediate and extended family and the home environment. The delivery of family-centred interventions can be through environmental, communication, educational, counselling, and family support approaches. Objectives: To evaluate the benefits and harms of family-centred interventions delivered by primary healthcare services in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the USA on a range of physical, psychosocial, and behavioural outcomes of Indigenous children (aged from conception to less than five years), parents, and families. Search methods: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 22 September 2021. Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs, quasi-RCTs, controlled before-after studies, and interrupted time series of family-centred care interventions that included Indigenous children aged less than five years from Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the USA. Interventions were included if they met the assessment criteria for family-centred interventions and were delivered in primary health care. Comparison interventions could include usual maternal and child health care or one form of family-centred intervention versus another. Data collection and analysis: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. overall health and well-being, 2. psychological health and emotional behaviour of children, 3. physical health and developmental health outcomes of children, 4. family health-enhancing lifestyle or behaviour outcomes, 5. psychological health of parent/carer. 6. adverse events or harms. Our secondary outcomes were 7. parenting knowledge and awareness, 8. family evaluation of care, 9. service access and utilisation, 10. family-centredness of consultation processes, and 11. economic costs and outcomes associated with the interventions. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for our primary outcomes. Main results: We included nine RCTs and two cluster-RCTs that investigated the effect of family-centred care interventions delivered by primary healthcare services for Indigenous early child well-being. There were 1270 mother–child dyads and 1924 children aged less than five years recruited. Seven studies were from the USA, two from New Zealand, one from Canada, and one delivered in both Australia and New Zealand. The focus of interventions varied and included three studies focused on early childhood caries; three on childhood obesity; two on child behavioural problems; and one each on negative parenting patterns, child acute respiratory illness, and sudden unexpected death in infancy. Family-centred education was the most common type of intervention delivered. Three studies compared family-centred care to usual care and seven studies provided some 'minimal' intervention to families such as education in the form of pamphlets or newsletters. One study provided a minimal intervention during the child's first 24 months and then the family-centred care intervention for one year. No studies had low or unclear risk of bias across all domains. All studies had a high risk of bias for the blinding of participants and personnel domain. Family-centred care may improve overall health and well-being of Indigenous children and their families, but the evidence was very uncertain. The pooled effect estimate from 11 studies suggests that family-centred care improved the overall health and well-being of Indigenous children and their families compared no family-centred care (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03 to 0.24; 2386 participants). We are very uncertain whether family-centred care compared to no family-centred care improves the psychological health and emotional behaviour of children as measured by the Infant Toddler Social Emotional Assessment (ITSEA) (Competence domain) (mean difference (MD) 0.04, 95% CI −0.03 to 0.11; 2 studies, 384 participants). We assessed the evidence as being very uncertain about the effect of family-centred care on physical health and developmental health outcomes of children. Pooled data from eight trials on physical health and developmental outcomes found there was little to no difference between the intervention and the control groups (SMD 0.13, 95% CI −0.00 to 0.26; 1961 participants). The evidence is also very unclear whether family-centred care improved family-enhancing lifestyle and behaviours outcomes. Nine studies measured family health-enhancing lifestyle and behaviours and pooled analysis found there was little to no difference between groups (SMD 0.16, 95% CI −0.06 to 0.39; 1969 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was very low-certainty evidence of little to no difference for the psychological health of parents and carers when they participated in family-centred care compared to any control group (SMD 0.10, 95% CI −0.03 to 0.22; 5 studies, 975 parents/carers). Two studies stated that there were no adverse events as a result of the intervention. No additional data were provided. No studies reported from the health service providers perspective or on outcomes for family's evaluation of care or family-centredness of consultation processes. Authors' conclusions: There is some evidence to suggest that family-centred care delivered by primary healthcare services improves the overall health and well-being of Indigenous children, parents, and families. However, due to lack of data, there was not enough evidence to determine whether specific outcomes such as child health and development improved as a result of family-centred interventions. Seven of the 11 studies delivered family-centred education interventions. Seven studies were from the USA and centred on two particular trials, the 'Healthy Children, Strong Families' and 'Family Spirit' trials. As the evidence is very low certainty for all outcomes, further high-quality trials are needed to provide robust evidence for the use of family-centred care interventions for Indigenous children aged less than five years

Paths to improving care of Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women following gestational diabetes

Aim: To understand enablers and barriers influencing postpartum screening for type 2 diabetes following gestational diabetes in Australian Indigenous women and how screening might be improved. Background: Australian Indigenous women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are less likely than other Australian women to receive postpartum diabetes screening. This is despite a fourfold higher risk of developing type 2 diabetes within eight years postpartum. Methods: We conducted interviews with seven Indigenous women with previous GDM, focus groups with 20 Indigenous health workers and workshops with 24 other health professionals. Data collection included brainstorming, visualisation, sorting and prioritising activities. Data were analysed thematically using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Barriers are presented under the headings of ‘capability’, ‘motivation’ and ‘opportunity’. Enabling strategies are presented under ‘intervention’ and ‘policy’ headings. Findings: Participants generated 28 enabling environmental, educational and incentive interventions, and service provision, communication, guideline, persuasive and fiscal policies to address barriers to screening and improve postpartum support for women. The highest priorities included providing holistic social support, culturally appropriate resources, improving Indigenous workforce involvement and establishing structured follow-up systems. Understanding Indigenous women’s perspectives, developing strategies with health workers and action planning with other health professionals can generate context-relevant feasible strategies to improve postpartum care after GDM. Importantly, we need evidence which can demonstrate whether the strategies are effective

Low rates of postpartum T2DM screening among Indigenous and non-Indigenous women with GDM in Far North Queensland (Australia : 2004-2010

Objectives: This study examines the accuracy of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) case-ascertainment in routinely collected data. Methods: Retrospective cohort study analysed routinely collected data from all births at Cairns Base Hospital, Australia, from 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2010 in the Cairns Base Hospital Clinical Coding system (CBHCC) and the Queensland Perinatal Data Collection (QPDC). GDM case ascertainment in the National Diabetes Services Scheme (NDSS) and Cairns Diabetes Centre (CDC) data were compared. Results: From 2004 to 2010, the specificity of GDM case-ascertainment in the QPDC was 99%. In 2010, only 2 of 225 additional cases were identified from the CDC and CBHCC, suggesting QPDC sensitivity is also over 99%. In comparison, the sensitivity of the CBHCC data was 80% during 2004–2010. The sensitivity of CDC data was 74% in 2010. During 2010, 223 births were coded as GDM in the QPDC, and the NDSS registered 247 women with GDM from the same postcodes, suggesting reasonable uptake on the NDSS register. However, the proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women was lower than expected. Conclusion: The accuracy of GDM case ascertainment in the QPDC appears high, with lower accuracy in routinely collected hospital and local health service data. This limits capacity of local data for planning and evaluation, and developing structured systems to improve post-pregnancy care, and may underestimate resources required. Implications: Data linkage should be considered to improve accuracy of routinely collected local health service data. The accuracy of the NDSS for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women requires further evaluation

Family-centred interventions for Indigenous early childhood well-being by primary healthcare services

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To assess the effects of family-centred interventions for Indigenous early childhood well-being, delivered by primary healthcare services in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the USA, on a range of physical, psychosocial and behavioural outcomes of Indigenous children, parents and families. © 2016 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

Healing the past by nurturing the future: Co-designing perinatal strategies for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander parents experiencing complex trauma: Framework and protocol for a community-based participatory action research study

Introduction Child maltreatment and other traumatic events can have serious long-term physical, social and emotional effects, including a cluster of distress symptoms recognised as 'complex trauma'. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (Aboriginal) people are also affected by legacies of historical trauma and loss. Trauma responses may be triggered during the transition to parenting in the perinatal period. Conversely, becoming a parent offers a unique life-course opportunity for healing and prevention of intergenerational transmission of trauma. This paper outlines a conceptual framework and protocol for an Aboriginal-led, community-based participatory action research (action research) project which aims to co-design safe, acceptable and feasible perinatal awareness, recognition, assessment and support strategies for Aboriginal parents experiencing complex trauma. Methods and analysis This formative research project is being conducted in three Australian jurisdictions (Northern Territory, South Australia and Victoria) with key stakeholders from all national jurisdictions. Four action research cycles incorporate mixed methods research activities including evidence reviews, parent and service provider discussion groups, development and psychometric evaluation of a recognition and assessment process and drafting proposals for pilot, implementation and evaluation. Reflection and planning stages of four action research cycles will be undertaken in four key stakeholder workshops aligned with the first four Intervention Mapping steps to prepare programme plans. Ethics and dissemination Ethics and dissemination protocols are consistent with the National Health and Medical Research Council Indigenous Research Excellence criteria of engagement, benefit, transferability and capacity-building. A conceptual framework has been developed to promote the application of core values of safety, trustworthiness, empowerment, collaboration, culture, holism, compassion and reciprocity. These include related principles and accompanying reflective questions to guide research decisions. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ

Parenting after a history of childhood maltreatment: A scoping review and map of evidence in the perinatal period

Background and aims Child maltreatment is a global health priority affecting up to half of all children worldwide, with profound and ongoing impacts on physical, social and emotional wellbeing. The perinatal period (pregnancy to two years postpartum) is critical for parents with a history of childhood maltreatment. Parents may experience ‘triggering’ of trauma responses during perinatal care or caring for their distressed infant. The long-lasting relational effects may impede the capacity of parents to nurture their children and lead to intergenerational cycles of trauma. Conversely, the perinatal period offers a unique life-course opportunity for parental healing and prevention of child maltreatment. This scoping review aims to map perinatal evidence regarding theories, intergenerational pathways, parents’ views, interventions and measurement tools involving parents with a history of maltreatment in their own childhoods. Methods and results We searched Medline, Psychinfo, Cinahl and Embase to 30/11/2016. We screened 6701 articles and included 55 studies (74 articles) involving more than 20,000 parents. Most studies were conducted in the United States (42/55) and involved mothers only (43/55). Theoretical constructs include: attachment, social learning, relational-developmental systems, family-systems and anger theories; ‘hidden trauma’, resilience, post-traumatic growth; and ‘Child Sexual Assault Healing’ and socioecological models. Observational studies illustrate sociodemographic and mental health protective and risk factors that mediate/moderate intergenerational pathways to parental and child wellbeing. Qualitative studies provide rich descriptions of parental experiences and views about healing strategies and support. We found no specific perinatal interventions for parents with childhood maltreatment histories. However, several parenting interventions included elements which address parental history, and these reported positive effects on parent wellbeing. We found twenty-two assessment tools for identifying parental childhood maltreatment history or impact. Conclusions Perinatal evidence is available to inform development of strategies to support parents with a history of child maltreatment. However, there is a paucity of applied evidence and evidence involving fathers and Indigenous parents