Identifying evidence-practice gaps and strategies for improvement in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander maternal health care

<div><p>Introduction</p><p>Adverse pregnancy outcomes are more common among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations than non-Indigenous populations in Australia. Later in life, most of the difference in life expectancy between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and non-Indigenous women is due to non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Most Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women attend health services regularly during pregnancy. Providing high-quality care within these appointments has an important role to play in improving the current and future health of women and babies.</p><p>Aim</p><p>This study engaged stakeholders in a theory-informed process to use aggregated continuous quality improvement (CQI) data to identify 1) priority evidence-practice gaps in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander maternal health care, 2) barriers and enablers to high-quality care, and 3) strategies to address identified priorities.</p><p>Methods</p><p>Three phases of reporting and feedback were implemented using de-identified CQI data from 91 health services between 2007 and 2014 (4,402 client records). Stakeholders (n = 172) from a range of professions and organisations participated.</p><p>Results</p><p>Stakeholders identified four priority areas relating to NCDs: smoking, alcohol, psychosocial wellbeing and nutrition. Barriers or enablers to high-quality care included workforce support, professional development, teamwork, woman-centred care, decision support, equipment and community engagement. Strategies to address the priorities included upskilling staff to provide best practice care in priority areas, advocating for availability of healthy food, housing and local referral options, partnering with communities on health promotion projects, systems to facilitate continuity of care and clear referral pathways.</p><p>Conclusions</p><p>This novel use of large-scale aggregate CQI data facilitated stakeholder input on priority evidence-practice gaps in maternal health care in Australia. Evidence-practice gaps relating to NCD risk factors and social determinants of health were prioritised, and stakeholders suggested both healthcare-focussed initiatives and approaches involving the community and the wider health sector. The findings can inform health service planning, advocacy, inter-agency strategies, and future research.</p></div

Prioritised evidence-practice gaps in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander maternal health care and provision of these services 2007–2014, continued: Assessment of emotional wellbeing, discussion of Sudden Unexpected Death in Infancy risk reduction, and discussion of nutrition.

<p>n = number of health centres; patient records.</p

Prioritised evidence-practice gaps in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander maternal health care and provision of these services 2007–2014: Assessment of smoking, alcohol use and social risk factors, and subsequent brief intervention or follow-up.

<p>n = number of health centres; patient records.</p

Additional file 1: of Improving preventive health care in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary care settings

Identified preliminary priority evidence-practice gaps [26]. (DOCX 22 kb

Additional file 1 of Communication and coordination of care for people living with HIV: a qualitative study of the patient perspective

Supplementary Material

Using developmental evaluation to enhance continuous reflection, learning and adaptation of an innovation platform in Australian Indigenous primary healthcare

Effective efforts to strengthen health systems need diverse, multi-stakeholder networks working together on complex or 'wicked' problems such as prevention and control of chronic diseases, solutions to which go beyond the role and capability of one organisation. The contextual complexities inherent in 'wicked' problems mean that solutions warrant a systems approach that encompasses innovation and new ways of thinking about, facilitating and implementing collective decision-making processes and change practices. Innovation platforms are a mechanism for facilitating communication and collaboration among diverse stakeholders, promoting joint action and stimulating innovation. Developmental evaluation is an approach that is increasingly being used to evaluate innovative and emergent programmes and projects, as it enables evaluators to provide real-time feedback so that evaluation findings can be used to guide development and adaptations. Developmental evaluation emphasises learning and adaptation, and aligns well with the implementation of innovation platforms that have continuous reflection, learning and adaptation as a specific design principle. Here, we outline our rationale for applying a developmental evaluation to enhance the formation, functioning and outcomes of an innovation platform aimed at accelerating and strengthening large-scale quality improvement efforts in Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary healthcare. We provide examples to explain how the developmental evaluation findings were used for adaptation of the innovation platform and assess to what extent our application of developmental evaluation was consistent with, and reflective of, its essential principles. Our evaluation aligned strongly with the principles of developmental evaluation, and the approach we took was well suited to situations with a developmental purpose, innovation niche and complexity such as innovation platforms. As a result, along with the increasing interest in multi-stakeholder platforms (e.g. innovation platforms) and the inherent challenges with evaluating these complex networks, we anticipate our use of this approach being of interest globally

Collaboration and knowledge generation in an 18-year quality improvement research programme in Australian Indigenous primary healthcare: a coauthorship network analysis

Objectives Though multidisciplinary research networks support the practice and effectiveness of continuous quality improvement (CQI) programmes, their characteristics and development are poorly understood. In this study, we examine publication outputs from a research network in Australian Indigenous primary healthcare (PHC) to assess to what extent the research network changed over time.Setting Australian CQI research network in Indigenous PHC from 2002 to 2019.Participants Authors from peer-reviewed journal articles and books published by the network.Design Coauthor networks across four phases of the network (2002–2004; 2005–2009; 2010–2014; 2015–2019) were constructed based on author affiliations and examined using social network analysis methods. Descriptive characteristics included organisation types, Indigenous representation, gender, student authorship and thematic research trends.Results We identified 128 publications written by 308 individual authors from 79 different organisations. Publications increased in number and diversity over each funding phase. During the final phase, publication outputs accelerated for organisations, students, project officers, Indigenous and female authors. Over time there was also a shift in research themes to encompass new clinical areas and social, environmental or behavioural determinants of health. Average degree (8.1), clustering (0.81) and diameter (3) indicated a well-connected network, with a core-periphery structure in each phase (p≤0.03) rather than a single central organisation (degree centralisation=0.55–0.65). Academic organisations dominated the core structure in all funding phases.Conclusion Collaboration in publications increased with network consolidation and expansion. Increased productivity was associated with increased authorship diversity and a decentralised network, suggesting these may be important factors in enhancing research impact and advancing the knowledge and practice of CQI in PHC. Publication diversity and growth occurred mainly in the fourth phase, suggesting long-term relationship building among diverse partners is required to facilitate participatory research in CQI. Despite improvements, further work is needed to address inequities in female authorship and Indigenous authorship

presentation_1_An “All Teach, All Learn” Approach to Research Capacity Strengthening in Indigenous Primary Health Care Continuous Quality Improvement.PDF

<p>In Australia, Indigenous people experience poor access to health care and the highest rates of morbidity and mortality of any population group. Despite modest improvements in recent years, concerns remains that Indigenous people have been over-researched without corresponding health improvements. Embedding Indigenous leadership, participation, and priorities in health research is an essential strategy for meaningful change for Indigenous people. To centralize Indigenous perspectives in research processes, a transformative shift away from traditional approaches that have benefited researchers and non-Indigenous agendas is required. This shift must involve concomitant strengthening of the research capacity of Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers and research translators—all must teach and all must learn. However, there is limited evidence about how to strengthen systems and stakeholder capacity to participate in and lead continuous quality improvement (CQI) research in Indigenous primary health care, to the benefit of Indigenous people. This paper describes the collaborative development of, and principles underpinning, a research capacity strengthening (RCS) model in a national Indigenous primary health care CQI research network. The development process identified the need to address power imbalances, cultural contexts, relationships, systems requirements and existing knowledge, skills, and experience of all parties. Taking a strengths-based perspective, we harnessed existing knowledge, skills and experiences; hence our emphasis on capacity “strengthening”. New insights are provided into the complex processes of RCS within the context of CQI in Indigenous primary health care.</p

Collaboration and knowledge generation in an 18-year quality improvement research programme in Australian Indigenous primary healthcare: A coauthorship network analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Though multidisciplinary research networks support the practice and effectiveness of continuous quality improvement (CQI) programmes, their characteristics and development are poorly understood. In this study, we examine publication outputs from a research network in Australian Indigenous primary healthcare (PHC) to assess to what extent the research network changed over time. SETTING: Australian CQI research network in Indigenous PHC from 2002 to 2019. PARTICIPANTS: Authors from peer-reviewed journal articles and books published by the network. DESIGN: Coauthor networks across four phases of the network (2002-2004; 2005-2009; 2010-2014; 2015-2019) were constructed based on author affiliations and examined using social network analysis methods. Descriptive characteristics included organisation types, Indigenous representation, gender, student authorship and thematic research trends. RESULTS: We identified 128 publications written by 308 individual authors from 79 different organisations. Publications increased in number and diversity over each funding phase. During the final phase, publication outputs accelerated for organisations, students, project officers, Indigenous and female authors. Over time there was also a shift in research themes to encompass new clinical areas and social, environmental or behavioural determinants of health. Average degree (8.1), clustering (0.81) and diameter (3) indicated a well-connected network, with a core-periphery structure in each phase (p≤0.03) rather than a single central organisation (degree centralisation=0.55-0.65). Academic organisations dominated the core structure in all funding phases. CONCLUSION: Collaboration in publications increased with network consolidation and expansion. Increased productivity was associated with increased authorship diversity and a decentralised network, suggesting these may be important factors in enhancing research impact and advancing the knowledge and practice of CQI in PHC. Publication diversity and growth occurred mainly in the fourth phase, suggesting long-term relationship building among diverse partners is required to facilitate participatory research in CQI. Despite improvements, further work is needed to address inequities in female authorship and Indigenous authorship

Principles guiding ethical research in a collaboration to strengthen Indigenous primary healthcare in Australia: Learning from experience

Introduction Indigenous communities worldwide are leading calls for all research involving Indigenous people to be underpinned by values and principles articulated by them. Many researchers are explicitly adopting these principles to guide what, where, how and when research is undertaken with Indigenous people. With critical reflection to support the implementation of such principles largely absent from published literature, this paper explores both the implementation of, and the outcomes from a set of guiding principles used in a large-scale Australian research collaboration to improve Indigenous health. Methods In this inductive qualitative study, we adopted a principles-focused evaluation approach. Based on interviews with 35 actors in the collaboration and a review of project documents, we generated themes that were then iteratively discussed, refined and categorised into (1) 'strategies' - activities by which implementation of our guiding principles were recognised; (2) 'outcomes' - results seen from implementing the principles and (3) 'conditions' - aspects of the context that facilitated and constrained implementation of the principles. Results Respondents found it difficult to articulate how the guiding principles were actually implemented, and frequently referred to them as part of the fabric of the collaboration. They viewed the set of principles as mutually reinforcing, and as providing a rudder for navigating complexity and conflict. Implementation of the principles occurred through five strategies - honouring the principles; being dynamic and adaptable; sharing and dispersing leadership; collaborating purposefully and adopting a culture of mutual learning. Outcomes included increased Indigenous leadership and participation; the ability to attract principled and values-driven researchers and stakeholders, and the development of trusting and respectful relationships. The conditions that facilitated the implementation of the principles were collaborating over time; an increasing number of Indigenous researchers and taking an 'innovation platform' approach. Conclusion Our findings show that principles guiding collaborations are valuable in providing a focus, direction and a way of working together when they are collaboratively developed, hold genuine meaning for all members and are implemented within a culture of continuous critical reflection, learning and adaptation, with ongoing reinterpretation of the principles over time