Yarning up about out-of-pocket healthcare expenditure in burns with Aboriginal families

Understanding burn injury among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children - results of a two-year cohort study

BACKGROUND

Despite known inequalities, little is understood about the burden and healthcare experiences of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children who sustain a burn injury and their families.

METHODS

The Coolamon Study recruited parents and carers whose children (aged <16 years) were Aboriginal and / or Torres Strait Islander children and had presented to burn units across four Australian states, New South Wales (Sydney), Northern Territory (Darwin), Queensland (Brisbane, Townsville) and South Australia (Adelaide), between 2015 and 2018. Consent was obtained and carers completed baseline and subsequent interviews at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. Data were collected on the injury event, patient care and safety, sociodemographic factors, health related quality of life (PedsQual), and psychological distress (Kessler K-5).

RESULTS

Of the 208 participants, 64 % were male; 26 % were aged less than 2 years and 37 % aged 2-4 years. The most common burn mechanisms were scalds (37 %), contact (33 %) and flame burns (21 %), with more severe burns and flame burns occurring in rural and remote settings. Most carers rated their child's care as either excellent or very good (82 %). Family distress, measured by the K-5, lessened over the 24 months, however the changes were not statistically significant. While 77 % of carers reported that they received enough information, 18 % reported they would have liked more, and 3 % reported no information was provided before treatment. Parents described mixed access to information about the types of support available to them, such as accommodation, meals, travel or cultural support.

CONCLUSION

Data from this cohort provide rich new information about risk factors and care received from point of injury through to rehabilitation for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children with burns, providing unique insights into what is needed for appropriate, culturally safe care.

Indigenous governance, ethics and data collection in Australian clinical registries

OBJECTIVES

To examine Indigenous Governance of Data processes in Australian clinical registries.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS

Audit (via desktop review and interviews) of registries in the Australian Register of Clinical Registries from 17 January 2022 to 30 April 2023.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The number of clinical registries collecting ethnicity data, reporting Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander representation on registry governance or steering committees, and reporting human research ethics committee approval.

RESULTS

A total of 107 clinical registries were reviewed. Of these registries, 65 (61%) collected ethnicity data; when these were grouped by geographical coverage, those most likely to collect ethnicity data were binational (24/40 [60%]), national (19/26 [73%]) or state based (19/26 [73%]). Of the registries that collected ethnicity data, 29 (45%) classified their ethnicity item as Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander. Only eight clinical registries (7%) reported Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander representation on their governance or steering committees. Human research ethics approval was reported in 94 registries (88%), with only 11 (12%) having Aboriginal human research ethics committee approval.

CONCLUSION

Significant variability is evident in clinical registry recording of Indigenous governance of data, meaning that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities remain invisible in data which is used to inform policy, clinical models of care, health services and initiatives. Radical change is required to facilitate meaningful change in quality indicators for clinical registries nationally.

Characterising the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patient journey after a serious road traffic injury and barriers to access to compensation: a protocol

INTRODUCTION

Road safety has been a long-enduring policy concern in Australia, with significant financial burden of road trauma and evident socioeconomic disparities. Transport injuries disproportionately impact individuals in remote areas, those in lower socioeconomic situations, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations. There is a lack of insight into transport injuries in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, absence of Indigenous perspective in published research and limited utilisation of linked data assets to address the inequity. Aim 1 is to determine the breadth, cost and causal factors of serious injury from road traffic crashes in South Australia (SA) and New South Wales (NSW) with a focus on injury prevention. Aim 2 is to identify enablers and barriers to compensation schemes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patients in SA and NSW.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study will be guided by an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Governance Group, applying Knowledge Interface Methodology and Indigenous research principles to ensure Indigenous Data Sovereignty and incorporation of informed perspectives. A mixed-method approach will be undertaken to explore study aims including using big data assets and mapping patient journey.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study will provide valuable insights for the development of focused injury prevention strategies and policies tailored to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. By addressing the specific needs and challenges faced by these communities, the study aims to enhance road safety outcomes and promote equitable access to healthcare and compensation for affected individuals and their families.

Codesigning informative resources for families of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children who sustained a burn injury: a protocol for a participatory action research study

INTRODUCTION

Parents of children hospitalised in a burn unit experience psychological trauma and later post-traumatic stress. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families whose child has been admitted to a burn unit encounter additional burdens through a culturally unsafe healthcare system. Psychosocial interventions can help reduce anxiety, distress and trauma among children and parents. There remains a lack of interventions or resources that reflect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people's perspective of health. The objective of this study is to codevelop a culturally appropriate informative resource to assist Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander parents whose child has been hospitalised in a burn unit.

METHODS

In this participatory research study, the development of a culturally safe resource will build on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families' experiences and voices, complemented by the knowledge and expertise of an Aboriginal Health Worker (AHW) and burn care experts. Data will be collected through recorded yarning sessions with families whose child has been admitted to a burn unit, the AHW and burn care experts. Audiotapes will be transcribed and data will be analysed thematically. Analysis of yarning sessions and resource development will follow a cyclical approach.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by the Aboriginal Health and Medical Research Council (AH&MRC) (1690/20) and the Sydney Children's Hospitals Network ethics committee (2020/ETH02103). Findings will be reported to all participants and will be disseminated with the broader community, the funding body and health workers at the hospital. Dissemination with the academic community will be through peer-reviewed publications and presentations in relevant conferences.

Decolonising qualitative research with respectful, reciprocal, and responsible research practice: a narrative review of the application of Yarning method in qualitative Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health research

BACKGROUND

Indigenous academics have advocated for the use and validity of Indigenous methodologies and methods to centre Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing in research. Yarning is the most reported Indigenous method used in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander qualitative health research. Despite this, there has been no critical analysis of how Yarning methods are applied to research conduct and particularly how they privilege Indigenous peoples.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate how researchers are applying Yarning method to health research and examine the role of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander researchers in the Yarning process as reported in health publications.

DESIGN

Narrative review of qualitative studies.

DATA SOURCES

Lowitja Institute LitSearch January 2008 to December 2021 to access all literature reporting on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health research in the PubMed database. A subset of extracted data was used for this review to focus on qualitative publications that reported using Yarning methods.

METHODS

Thematic analysis was conducted using hybrid of inductive and deductive coding. Initial analysis involved independent coding by two authors, with checking by a third member. Once codes were developed and agreed, the remaining publications were coded and checked by a third team member.

RESULTS

Forty-six publications were included for review. Yarning was considered a culturally safe data collection process that privileges Indigenous knowledge systems. Details of the Yarning processes and team positioning were vague. Some publications offered a more comprehensive description of the research team, positioning and demonstrated reflexive practice. Training and experience in both qualitative and Indigenous methods were often not reported. Only 11 publications reported being Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander led. Half the publications reported Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander involvement in data collection, and 24 reported involvement in analysis. Details regarding the role and involvement of study reference or advisory groups were limited.

CONCLUSION

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people should be at the forefront of Indigenous research. While Yarning method has been identified as a legitimate research method to decolonising research practice, it must be followed and reported accurately. Researcher reflexivity and positioning, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ownership, stewardship and custodianship of data collected were significantly under detailed in the publications included in our review. Journals and other establishments should review their processes to ensure necessary details are reported in publications and engage Indigenous Editors and peer reviewers to uphold respectful, reciprocal, responsible and ethical research practice.