Enhancing health care equity with Indigenous populations: evidence-based strategies from an ethnographic study.

BACKGROUND: Structural violence shapes the health of Indigenous peoples globally, and is deeply embedded in history, individual and institutional racism, and inequitable social policies and practices. Many Indigenous communities have flourished, however, the impact of colonialism continues to have profound health effects for Indigenous peoples in Canada and internationally. Despite increasing evidence of health status inequities affecting Indigenous populations, health services often fail to address health and social inequities as routine aspects of health care delivery. In this paper, we discuss an evidence-based framework and specific strategies for promoting health care equity for Indigenous populations. METHODS: Using an ethnographic design and mixed methods, this study was conducted at two Urban Aboriginal Health Centres located in two inner cities in Canada, which serve a combined patient population of 5,500. Data collection included in-depth interviews with a total of 114 patients and staff (n = 73 patients; n = 41 staff), and over 900 h of participant observation focused on staff members' interactions and patterns of relating with patients. RESULTS: Four key dimensions of equity-oriented health services are foundational to supporting the health and well-being of Indigenous peoples: inequity-responsive care, culturally safe care, trauma- and violence-informed care, and contextually tailored care. Partnerships with Indigenous leaders, agencies, and communities are required to operationalize and tailor these key dimensions to local contexts. We discuss 10 strategies that intersect to optimize effectiveness of health care services for Indigenous peoples, and provide examples of how they can be implemented in a variety of health care settings. CONCLUSIONS: While the key dimensions of equity-oriented care and 10 strategies may be most optimally operationalized in the context of interdisciplinary teamwork, they also serve as health equity guidelines for organizations and providers working in various settings, including individual primary care practices. These strategies provide a basis for organizational-level interventions to promote the provision of more equitable, responsive, and respectful PHC services for Indigenous populations. Given the similarities in colonizing processes and Indigenous peoples' experiences of such processes in many countries, these strategies have international applicability.

Closing the health equity gap: evidence-based strategies for primary health care organizations.

INTRODUCTION: International evidence shows that enhancement of primary health care (PHC) services for disadvantaged populations is essential to reducing health and health care inequities. However, little is known about how to enhance equity at the organizational level within the PHC sector. Drawing on research conducted at two PHC Centres in Canada whose explicit mandates are to provide services to marginalized populations, the purpose of this paper is to discuss (a) the key dimensions of equity-oriented services to guide PHC organizations, and (b) strategies for operationalizing equity-oriented PHC services, particularly for marginalized populations. METHODS: The PHC Centres are located in two cities within urban neighborhoods recognized as among the poorest in Canada. Using a mixed methods ethnographic design, data were collected through intensive immersion in the Centres, and included: (a) in-depth interviews with a total of 114 participants (73 patients; 41 staff), (b) over 900 hours of participant observation, and (c) an analysis of key organizational documents, which shed light on the policy and funding environments. RESULTS: Through our analysis, we identified four key dimensions of equity-oriented PHC services: inequity-responsive care; trauma- and violence-informed care; contextually-tailored care; and culturally-competent care. The operationalization of these key dimensions are identified as 10 strategies that intersect to optimize the effectiveness of PHC services, particularly through improvements in the quality of care, an improved 'fit' between people's needs and services, enhanced trust and engagement by patients, and a shift from crisis-oriented care to continuity of care. Using illustrative examples from the data, these strategies are discussed to illuminate their relevance at three inter-related levels: organizational, clinical programming, and patient-provider interactions. CONCLUSIONS: These evidence- and theoretically-informed key dimensions and strategies provide direction for PHC organizations aiming to redress the increasing levels of health and health care inequities across population groups. The findings provide a framework for conceptualizing and operationalizing the essential elements of equity-oriented PHC services when working with marginalized populations, and will have broad application to a wide range of settings, contexts and jurisdictions. Future research is needed to link these strategies to quantifiable process and outcome measures, and to test their impact in diverse PHC settings.

Enhancing measurement of primary health care indicators using an equity lens: An ethnographic study.

INTRODUCTION: One important goal of strengthening and renewal in primary healthcare (PHC) is achieving health equity, particularly for vulnerable populations. There has been a flurry of international activity toward the establishment of indicators relevant to measuring and monitoring PHC. Yet, little attention has been paid to whether current indicators: 1) are sensitive enough to detect inequities in processes or outcomes of care, particularly in relation to the health needs of vulnerable groups or 2) adequately capture the complexity of delivering PHC services across diverse groups. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the discourse regarding what ought to be considered a PHC indicator and to provide some concrete examples illustrating the need for modification and development of new indicators given the goal of PHC achieving health equity. METHODS: Within the context of a larger study of PHC delivery at two Health Centers serving people facing multiple disadvantages, a mixed methods ethnographic design was used. Three sets of data collected included: (a) participant observation data focused on the processes of PHC delivery, (b) interviews with Health Center staff, and (c) interviews with patients. RESULTS: Thematic analysis suggests there is a disjuncture between clinical work addressing the complex needs of patients facing multiple vulnerabilities such as extreme levels of poverty, multiple chronic conditions, and lack of housing and extant indicators and how they are measured. Items could better measure and monitor performance at the management level including, what is delivered (e.g., focus on social determinants of health) and how services are delivered to socially disadvantaged populations (e.g., effective use of space, expectation for all staff to have welcoming and mutually respectful interactions). New indicators must be developed to capture inputs (e.g., stability of funding sources) and outputs (e.g., whole person care) in ways that better align with care provided to marginalized populations. CONCLUSIONS: The current emphasis on achieving greater equity through PHC, the continued calls for the renewal and strengthening of PHC, and the use of monitoring and performance indicators highlight the relevance of ensuring that there are more accurate methods to capture the complex work of PHC organizations.

Development of health equity indicators in primary health care organizations using a modified Delphi.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop a core set of indicators that could be used for measuring and monitoring the performance of primary health care organizations' capacity and strategies for enhancing equity-oriented care. METHODS: Indicators were constructed based on a review of the literature and a thematic analysis of interview data with patients and staff (n = 114) using procedures for qualitatively derived data. We used a modified Delphi process where the indicators were circulated to staff at the Health Centers who served as participants (n = 63) over two rounds. Indicators were considered part of a priority set of health equity indicators if they received an overall importance rating of>8.0, on a scale of 1-9, where a higher score meant more importance. RESULTS: Seventeen indicators make up the priority set. Items were eliminated because they were rated as low importance (<8.0) in both rounds and were either redundant or more than one participant commented that taking action on the indicator was highly unlikely. In order to achieve health care equity, performance at the organizational level is as important as assessing the performance of staff. Two of the highest rated "treatment" or processes of care indicators reflects the need for culturally safe and trauma and violence-informed care. There are four indicators that can be used to measure outcomes which can be directly attributable to equity responsive primary health care. DISCUSSION: These indicators and subsequent development of items can be used to measure equity in the domains of treatment and outcomes. These areas represent targets for higher performance in relation to equity for organizations (e.g., funding allocations to ongoing training in equity-oriented care provision) and providers (e.g., reflexive practice, skill in working with the health effects of trauma).