If you can't comply with dialysis, how do you expect me to trust you with transplantation? Australian nephrologists' views on indigenous Australians' 'non-compliance' and their suitability for kidney transplantation

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>Indigenous Australians suffer markedly higher rates of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) but are less likely than their non-Indigenous counterparts to receive a transplant. This difference is not fully explained by measurable clinical differences. Previous work suggests that Indigenous Australian patients may be regarded by treating specialists as 'non-compliers', which may negatively impact on referral for a transplant. However, this decision-making is not well understood. The objectives of this study were to investigate: whether Indigenous patients are commonly characterised as 'non-compliers'; how estimations of patient compliance factor into Australian nephrologists' decision-making about transplant referral; and whether this may pose a particular barrier for Indigenous patients accessing transplants.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Nineteen nephrologists, from eight renal units treating the majority of Indigenous Australian renal patients, were interviewed in 2005-06 as part of a larger study. Thematic analysis was undertaken to investigate how compliance factors in specialists' decision-making, and its implications for Indigenous patients' likelihood of obtaining transplants.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Specialists commonly identified Indigenous patients as both non-compliers and high-risk transplant candidates. Definition and assessment of 'compliance' was neither formal nor systematic. There was uncertainty about the value of compliance status in predicting post-transplant outcomes and the issue of organ scarcity permeated participants' responses. Overall, there was marked variation in how specialists weighed perceptions of compliance and risk in their decision-making.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Reliance on notions of patient 'compliance' in decision-making for transplant referral is likely to result in continuing disadvantage for Indigenous Australian ESKD patients. In the absence of robust evidence on predictors of post-transplant outcomes, referral decision-making processes require attention and debate.</p

Public administration reform for Aboriginal affairs: an institutionalist analysis

Persistent underperformance of public policy and program implementation in Aboriginal affairs is widely recognised. We analysed the results of two case studies of attempted reforms in public administration of Aboriginal primary health care in the Northern Territory, using a framework based on the institutionalist and systemic racism literatures, with the aim of better understanding the sources of implementation failure. Implementation of the agreed reforms was unsuccessful. Contributing factors were as follows: strong recognition of the need for change was not sustained; the seeds of change, present in the form of alternative practices, were not built on; there was a notable absence of sustained political/bureaucratic authorisation; and, interacting with all of these, systemic racism had important consequences and implications. Our framework was useful for making sense of the results. It is clear that reforms in Aboriginal affairs will require government authorities to engage with organisations and communities. We conclude that there are four requirements for improved implementation success: clear recognition of the need for change in 'business as usual'; sustainable commitment and authorisation; the building of alternative structures and methods to enable effective power sharing (consistent with the requirements of parliamentary democracy); and addressing the impact of systemic racism on decision-making, relationships, and risk management

Study Protocol – Improving Access to Kidney Transplants (IMPAKT): A detailed account of a qualitative study investigating barriers to transplant for Australian Indigenous people with end-stage kidney disease

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Indigenous Australians are slightly more than 2% of the total Australian population however, in recent years they have comprised between 6 and 10% of new patients beginning treatment for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Although transplant is considered the optimal form of treatment for many ESKD patients there is a pronounced disparity between the rates at which Indigenous ESKD patients receive transplants compared with their non-Indigenous counterparts. The IMPAKT (Improving Access to Kidney Transplants) Interview study investigated reasons for this disparity through a large scale, in-depth interview study involving patients, nephrologists and key decision-making staff at selected Australian transplant and dialysis sites.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The design and conduct of the study reflected the multi-disciplinary membership of the core IMPAKT team. Promoting a participatory ethos, IMPAKT established partnerships with a network of hospital transplant units and hospital dialysis treatment centres that provide treatment to the vast majority of Indigenous patients across Australia. Under their auspices, the IMPAKT team conducted in-depth interviews in 26 treatment/service centres located in metropolitan, regional and remote Australia. Peer interviewing supported the engagement of Indigenous patients (146), and nephrologists (19). In total IMPAKT spoke with Indigenous and non-Indigenous patients (241), key renal nursing and other (non-specialist) staff (95) and a small number of relevant others (28). Data analysis was supported by QSR software. At each site, IMPAKT also documented educational programs and resources, mapped an hypothetical ‘patient journey’ to transplant through the local system and observed patient care and treatment routines.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The national scope, inter-disciplinary approach and use of qualitative methods in an investigation of a significant health inequality affecting Indigenous people is, we believe, an Australian first. An exceptionally large cohort of Indigenous participants provided evaluative comment on their health services in relation to dialysis and transplant. Additionally, the data includes extensive parallel commentary from a cohort of specialists, nurses and other staff. The study considers a ‘patient journey’ to transplant within a diverse range of Australian treatment centre/workplace settings. The IMPAKT Interview study protocol may contribute to improvements in multi-disciplinary, flexible design health services research with hard to reach or vulnerable populations in Australia and elsewhere.</p