Primary health care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children

This final report presents the findings from each of the phases of the Engaging Stakeholders in Identifying Priority Evidence-Practice Gaps and Strategies for Improvement in Primary Health Care (ESP) Project. This report is designed for people working in a range of roles including national and jurisdictional policy makers, managers, community-controlled organisations and government health authorities, peak bodies, clinical leaders, researchers, primary health care staff and continuous quality improvement (CQI) practitioners who may have an interest in the interpretation and use of aggregated CQI data to drive decision making. Stakeholders across services and systems that deliver Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary health care (PHC) engaged in a process to analyse and interpret national continuous quality improvement (CQI) data from 132 health centres. We used a consensus process to identify priority evidence-practice gaps in child health care, based on these data. Stakeholders drew on their knowledge and experience working in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander PHC to identify barriers and enablers to addressing the priority evidence- practice gaps, and to suggest strategies to overcome barriers and strengthen enablers to addressing the priority evidence-practice gaps. Important messages emerge from these findings

Chronic illness care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people: final report

This project engage a range of stakeholders across different levels of the primary health care system, including service providers, management, policy-makers and researchers and capture their knowledge on the barriers and enablers to addressing the identified priority-evidence practice gaps and their suggestions on strategies for improvement. Overview The purpose of this project is to engage key stakeholders in the use of aggregate continuous quality improvement (CQI) data to identify and address system-wide evidence-practice gaps in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander chronic illness care. We aimed to engage a range of stakeholders across different levels of the primary health care (PHC) system, including service providers, management, policy-makers and researchers and capture their knowledge on the barriers and enablers to addressing the identified priority-evidence practice gaps and their suggestions on strategies for improvement. Our research has highlighted the wide variation in performance between different aspects of care and between health centres. While many aspects of care are being done well in many health centres, there are important gaps between evidence and practice in some aspects of PHC. System-wide gaps are likely to be due to deficiencies in the broader (PHC) system, indicating that system-level action is required to improve performance. Such system-level action should be developed with a deep understanding of the holistic nature of Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander wellbeing beyond just physical health (including healthy connections to culture, community and country), of the impact of Australian colonist history on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and of how social systems – including the health system - should be shaped to meet the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. This project aims to build on the collective strengths within PHC services in order to continue improving the quality of care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities

Assessing Collaboration in a National Research Partnership in Quality Improvement in Indigenous Primary Health Care: A Network Approach

Background: The ABCD National Research Partnership was formed in mid-2010 as a collaboration to harness the expertise, experiences and resources of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community-controlled peak bodies, government and research organisations to improve the quality of Indigenous primary health care. The aim of this study was to apply social network methods to assess collaboration and functioning of the Partnership at two time-points.Methods: A social network analysis (SNA) survey was conducted in early 2013, with a follow-up survey in mid-2014. In the two survey rounds, online surveys were emailed to one senior person of the organisation participating in the Partnership (2013: 14 organisations; 2014: 11 organisations). The surveys collected data on respondent perceptions of the Partnership as well as social network relationship data. Social network methods were used to apply standardised metrics to assess how well the partnership was functioning as a collaborative three years into its operation, and in its fourth year.Results: Most respondents rated the Partnership as successful in progressing toward its goals. Network density and centrality scores show a well-connected partnership spanning different organisational types and states/territories (Northern Territory, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia, and Far-West New South Wales). High centrality scores reflect high connectivity between key hubs in the network, contributing toward the shared goal of improved Indigenous primary health care. Network diagrams show key structural positions by organisational type, the frequency and intensity of interactions and the strengths and potential vulnerabilities in the partnership network, with comparisons at two time points for the partnership.Conclusions: The study found that the Partnership was effective in securing collaboration across its partners. Partners' contribution of resources reflected their active involvement. There was a high level of agreement on the achievement of the key goals of the Partnership, showing shared sense-making amongst partners. SNA tools assisted with monitoring the network over time to develop strategies supporting connections between partners for sustaining collaborative learning. Study findings identify successful approaches for a research partnership to improve quality of care in Indigenous primary health care and provide encouragement for wider applications for research partnerships and collaborations in Australia and internationally

Impact of policy support on uptake of evidence-based continuous quality improvement activities and the quality of care for Indigenous Australians: a comparative case study.

Objectives: To examine the impact of state/territory policy support on (1) uptake of evidence-based continuous quality improvement (CQI) activities and (2) quality of care for Indigenous Australians. Design: Mixed-method comparative case study methodology, drawing on quality-of-care audit data, documentary evidence of policies and strategies and the experience and insights of stakeholders involved in relevant CQI programmes. We use multilevel linear regression to analyse jurisdictional differences in quality of care. Setting: Indigenous primary healthcare services across five states/territories of Australia. Participants: 175 Indigenous primary healthcare services. Interventions: A range of national and state/territory policy and infrastructure initiatives to support CQI, including support for applied research. Primary and secondary outcome measures: (i) Trends in the consistent uptake of evidence-based CQI tools available through a research-based CQI initiative (the Audit and Best Practice in Chronic Disease programme) and (ii) quality of care (as reflected in adherence to best practice guidelines). Results: Progressive uptake of evidence-based CQI activities and steady improvements or maintenance of high-quality care occurred where there was long-term policy and infrastructure support for CQI. Where support was provided but not sustained there was a rapid rise and subsequent fall in relevant CQI activities. Conclusions: Health authorities should ensure consistent and sustained policy and infrastructure support for CQI to enable wide-scale and ongoing improvement in quality of care and, subsequently, health outcomes. It is not sufficient for improvement initiatives to rely on local service managers and clinicians, as their efforts are strongly mediated by higher system-level influences

Encouraging translation and assessing impact of the Centre for Research Excellence in Integrated Quality Improvement: Rationale and protocol for a research impact assessment

Introduction: There is growing recognition among health researchers and funders that the wider benefits of research such as economic, social and health impacts ought to be assessed and valued alongside academic outputs such as peer-reviewed papers. Research translation needs to increase and the pathways to impact ought to be more transparent. These processes are particularly pertinent to the Indigenous health sector given continued concerns that Indigenous communities are over-researched with little corresponding improvement in health outcomes. This paper describes the research protocol of a mixed methods study to apply FAIT (Framework to Assess the Impact from Translational health research) to the Centre for Research Excellence in Integrated Quality Improvement (CRE-IQI). FAIT will be applied to five selected CRE-IQI Flagship projects to encourage research translation and assess the wider impact of that research. Methods and analysis: Phase I will develop a modified programme logic model for each Flagship project including identifying process, output and impact metrics so progress can be monitored. A scoping review will inform potential benefits. In phase II, programme logic models will be updated to account for changes in the research pathways over time. Audit and feedback will be used to encourage research translation and collect evidence of achievement of any process, output and interim impacts. In phase III, three proven methodologies for measuring research impact—Payback, economic assessment and narratives—will be applied. Data on the application of FAIT will be collected and analysed to inform and improve FAIT’s performance

Service Level Factors Associated with Cervical Screening in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Primary Health Care Centres in Australia

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women have significantly higher cervical cancer incidence and mortality than other Australian women. In this study, we assessed the documented delivery of cervical screening for women attending Indigenous Primary Health Care (PHC) centres across Australia and identified service-level factors associated with between-centre variation in screening coverage. We analysed 3801 clinical audit records for PHC clients aged 20–64 years from 135 Indigenous PHC centres participating in the Audit for Best Practice in Chronic Disease (ABCD) continuous quality improvement (CQI) program across five Australian states/territories during 2005 to 2014. Multilevel logistic regression models were used to identify service-level factors associated with screening, while accounting for differences in client-level factors. There was substantial variation in the proportion of clients who had a documented cervical screen in the previous two years across the participating PHC centres (median 50%, interquartile range (IQR): 29–67%), persisting over years and audit cycle. Centre-level factors explained 40% of the variation; client-level factors did not reduce the between-centre variation. Screening coverage was associated with longer time enrolled in the CQI program and very remote location. Indigenous PHC centres play an important role in providing cervical screening to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women. Thus, their leadership is essential to ensure that Australia’s public health commitment to the elimination of cervical cancer includes Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women. A sustained commitment to CQI may improve PHC centres delivery of cervical screening; however, factors that may impact on service delivery, such as organisational, geographical and environmental factors, warrant further investigation

Determinants of access to chronic illness care – a mixed-methods evaluation of a national multifaceted chronic disease package for Indigenous Australians

Objectives: Indigenous Australians have a disproportionately high burden of chronic illness, and relatively poor access to healthcare. This paper examines how a national multicomponent programme aimed at improving prevention and management of chronic disease among Australian Indigenous people addressed various dimensions of access.  Design: Data from a place-based, mixed-methods formative evaluation were analysed against a framework that defines supply and demand-side dimensions to access. The evaluation included 24 geographically bounded ‘sentinel sites’ that included a range of primary care service organisations. It drew on administrative data on service utilisation, focus group and interview data on community members’ and service providers’ perceptions of chronic illness care between 2010 and 2013. Setting: Urban, regional and remote areas of Australia that have relatively large Indigenous populations.  Participants: 670 community members participated in focus groups; 374 practitioners and representatives of regional primary care support organisations participated in in-depth interviews.   Results: The programme largely addressed supplyside dimensions of access with less focus or impact on demand-side dimensions. Application of the access framework highlighted the complex inter-relationships between dimensions of access. Key ongoing challenges are achieving population coverage through a national programme, reaching high-need groups and ensuring provision of ongoing care.    Conclusions: Strategies to improve access to chronic illness care for this population need to be tailored to local circumstances and address the range of dimensions of access on both the demand and supply sides. These findings highlight the importance of flexibility in national programme guidelines to support locally determined strategies.&nbsp