Best practice principles for research with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in action: Case study of a safe infant sleep strategy

Culturally Informed Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Evaluations: A Scoping Review

Rigorous and effective evaluations inform policy and service delivery and create evidence of program impacts and outcomes for the communities they are designed to support. Genuine engagement of communities is a key feature of effective evaluation, building trust and enhancing relevancy for communities and providing meaningful outcomes and culturally relevant findings. This applies to Indigenous peoples' leadership and perspectives when undertaking evaluations on programs that involve Indigenous communities. This systematic scoping review sought to explore the characteristics of culturally informed evaluations and the extent of their application in Australia, including the use of specific evaluation tools and types of community engagement. Academic and grey literature were searched between 2003 and 2023, with 57 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Over time, there was an increase in the number of culturally informed evaluations undertaken, predominantly in the health and wellbeing sector. Around a quarter used a tool specifically developed for Indigenous evaluations. Half of the publications included Indigenous authorship; however, most studies lacked detail on how evaluations engaged with communities. This review highlights the need for further development of evaluation tools and standardised reporting to allow for shared learnings and improvement in culturally safe evaluation practices for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.

A Comprehensive Review of Optimal Approaches to Co-Design in Health with First Nations Australians

BACKGROUND

Australia's social, structural, and political context, together with the continuing impact of colonisation, perpetuates health care and outcome disparities for First Nations Australians. A new approach led by First Nations Australians is required to address these disparities. Co-design is emerging as a valued method for First Nations Australian communities to drive change in health policy and practice to better meet their needs and priorities. However, it is critical that co-design processes and outcomes are culturally safe and effective. Aims: This project aimed to identify the current evidence around optimal approaches to co-design in health with First Nations Australians.

METHODS

First Nations Australian co-led team conducted a comprehensive review to identify peer-reviewed and grey literature reporting the application of co-design in health-related areas by and with First Nations Australians. A First Nations Co-Design Working Group (FNCDWG) was established to guide this work and team.A Collaborative Yarning Methodology (CYM) was used to conduct a thematic analysis of the included literature.

RESULTS

After full-text screening, 99 studies were included. Thematic analysis elicited the following six key themes, which included 28 practical sub-themes, relevant to co-design in health with First Nations Australians: First Nations Australians leadership; Culturally grounded approach; Respect; Benefit to First Nations communities; Inclusive partnerships; and Evidence-based decision making.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this review provide a valuable snapshot of the existing evidence to be used as a starting point to guide appropriate and effective applications of co-design in health with First Nations Australians.

Culturally Safe eHealth Interventions With Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People: Protocol for a Best Practice Framework

BACKGROUND

There is growing global evidence on the adoption and effectiveness of eHealth (including mobile health and telehealth) by First Nation peoples including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Although there are frameworks to guide eHealth development, implementation, and evaluation, it is unknown whether they adequately encapsulate the health, cultural, and community-related priorities of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this research program is to prepare a best practice framework that will guide the co-design, implementation, and evaluation of culturally safe eHealth interventions within existing models of health care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The framework will be a synthesis of evidence that represents best practices in eHealth, as determined by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

METHODS

Research activities to develop the best practice framework will occur in stepped but overlapping qualitative research phases with governance from an existing multiagency research collaboration (the Collaboration). The research protocol has been informed by key research frameworks such as the SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) and Developers of Health Research Reporting Guidelines. The seven phases of research will include the following: systematic literature review, scoping review, theme development, theme consultation, Delphi processes for expert reviews, and dissemination.

RESULTS

Members of the Collaboration conceived this research program in August 2020, and a draft was produced in June 2021 with subsequent funding obtained in July 2021. The Collaboration approved the protocol in December 2021. Results for several research phases of the best practice framework development are expected by January 2023, commencing with the systematic literature review and the scoping review.

CONCLUSIONS

The research program outlined in this protocol is a timely response to the growing number of eHealth interventions with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. A best practice framework is needed to guide the rigorous development and evaluation of eHealth innovations to promote genuine co-design and ensure cultural safety and clinical effectiveness for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/34904.

Challenges parents encounter when implementing infant safe sleep advice

AIM

To understand which safe sleep recommendations parents find most challenging to implement, identifying common barriers encountered; and investigate whether challenges are associated with practices employed.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey of 3341 Australian families with young infants who birthed a live baby during April-May 2017. Caregivers were asked about infant care practices and family characteristics. Qualitative free-text items explored challenges faced with current safe sleep recommendations.

RESULTS

Nearly one-third (n = 1033, 31%) of caregivers reported difficulty with at least one safe sleep recommendation. Infant sleep position and avoiding bed-sharing were identified as the most challenging recommendations. Caregivers described barriers which influenced consistency in uptake of advice. Families who described difficulty with a recommendation were significantly less likely to consistently employ that advice compared to those who did not report difficulty (sleep position: 198/473,42% vs 2548/2837,90% [p < 0.0001]; own sleep space: (269/344,78% vs 1331/2884,46% [p < 0.0001]). When families encountered challenges, they often proposed alternate strategies with an inference their substitute action compensated potential increased risk.

CONCLUSION

Many families encounter difficulties implementing safe sleep advice; these challenges negatively impact care practices. Effective interventions meeting individual family needs, to provide safe sleep environments consistently, are necessary to improve sleep-related infant care and further reduce infant mortality.

A Box to Put the Baby in: UK Parent Perceptions of Two Baby Box Programmes Promoted for Infant Sleep

Between 2016 and 2019, two different infant sleeping-box interventions were implemented in England: (1) shallow polypropylene baby boxes were distributed via a feasibility study to families with Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) risk factors; and (2) a commercial–health system partnership scheme distributed cardboard baby boxes to new mothers in particular locations. We conducted parent evaluations of both interventions at the time of implementation. The views of 79 parents receiving polypropylene boxes and 77 parents receiving cardboard boxes were captured using online questionnaires and telephone interviews. Participants provided feedback on education received about using the box, their perception of the box design and materials, their experiences of using the box they received, and whether they would recommend it to others. Parents appreciated that both boxes provided a portable space to place their baby near them anywhere in the home, discouraging other riskier practices. The polypropylene box was rated more favourably regarding transparency, hygiene, and portability outside the home. A minority of parents found the idea of putting their baby in any box unappealing; however, younger mothers and smokers particularly appreciated the ability to safely co-sleep with their babies using the shallower box. Overall, the versatility of the polypropylene box scheme was more positively evaluated than the cardboard baby box scheme, which, stripped of its social value as part of a larger welfare provision, had minimal value for parents that received it.

Priority setting: Consensus for Australia's infant safe sleeping public health promotion programme

AIM

To develop focused priorities to inform the revision of Australia's Sudden Unexpected Death in Infancy (SUDI) risk reduction public health programme.

METHODS

A content expert consensus research activity was designed using two consensus techniques. The two-phase study employed a Delphi process (phase 1) and a Nominal Group workshop technique (phase 2). The Delphi invited 56 national and international content experts. The Nominal Group comprised 17 Australasian experts and stakeholders to ensure priority setting was relevant to the Australian context.

RESULTS

Phase 1 established a ranked thematic list of 10 key SUDI risk reduction themes. Phase 2 addressed three nominal questions producing prioritised lists for: key-message wording; contextual information and strategies to support caregiver implementation of key messages; and considerations in redesigning and dissemination of a safe sleep campaign. The top four priority themes were: sleep position, sleep space, smoking and surface-sharing.

CONCLUSION

This two-phase priority setting was successful in establishing clearly defined infant safe sleep priorities. International content expert participation in phase 1 strengthened priority setting outcomes while phase 2 ensured final outcomes provided a strong national focus reflective of identified needs of Australian families. Findings provide a foundation from which important components can be considered when revising and developing future SUDI risk reduction programmes.

Building Trust: A Cross-Cultural Narrative Process

The transition to fatherhood is a complex journey scarcely researched in Australian First Nations populations. Historical and political legacy, along with cultural traditions must be taken into consideration before exploring the experiences of Australia's First Nations expectant fathers, especially when the experience is related to the millennia honored “women's business.” This article shares the challenges, opportunities, and rewards the authors experienced while researching with Australia's First Nations men who supported their partners during childbirth in a hospital setting. Ethical insights and input from all members of the research team ensured that culturally safe strategies were used to address all encountered difficulties. Building a trusting relationship with the local community was fundamental to the legitimacy, richness, and success of this research project. Lessons learned from this experience can provide an insight to non-Indigenous researchers choosing to conduct or support research with Australia's First Nations people in a respectful and meaningful manner.