RESUMO
The International Society of Nephrology (ISN) region of Oceania and South East Asia (OSEA) is a mix of high- and low-income countries, with diversity in population demographics and densities. Three iterations of the ISN-Global Kidney Health Atlas (GKHA) have been conducted, aiming to deliver in-depth assessments of global kidney care across the spectrum from early detection of CKD to treatment of kidney failure. This paper reports the findings of the latest ISN-GKHA in relation to kidney-care capacity in the OSEA region. Among the 30 countries and territories in OSEA, 19 (63%) participated in the ISN-GKHA, representing over 97% of the region's population. The overall prevalence of treated kidney failure in the OSEA region was 1203 per million population (pmp), 45% higher than the global median of 823 pmp. In contrast, kidney replacement therapy (KRT) in the OSEA region was less available than the global median (chronic hemodialysis, 89% OSEA region vs. 98% globally; peritoneal dialysis, 72% vs. 79%; kidney transplantation, 61% vs. 70%). Only 56% of countries could provide access to dialysis to at least half of people with incident kidney failure, lower than the global median of 74% of countries with available dialysis services. Inequalities in access to KRT were present across the OSEA region, with widespread availability and low out-of-pocket costs in high-income countries and limited availability, often coupled with large out-of-pocket costs, in middle- and low-income countries. Workforce limitations were observed across the OSEA region, especially in lower-middle-income countries. Extensive collaborative work within the OSEA region and globally will help close the noted gaps in kidney-care provision.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To describe and evaluate a programme where medical students designed and implemented Indigenous health placements for students with an interest in rural/Indigenous health. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: In 2011, a student-led programme at the University of Adelaide was set up to give medical students the opportunity to undertake outreach trips and clinical placements in remote Indigenous communities. Twenty-four medical students attended trips to remote communities between 2012 and 2014. Here we evaluate our programme using a single-arm experimental design. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Responses to questionnaire items before and after attending an outreach placement, scored on 6-point Likert scales. RESULTS: Following their remote Indigenous health placement, participants expressed a significantly higher mean likelihood of working in an Indigenous community in the future (3.17 (2.69-3.64) versus 4.00 (3.65-4.35); P < 0.007). Furthermore, after their placement participants felt better prepared to work in Indigenous communities (mean 1.79 (1.44-2.14) versus 3.21 (2.88-3.54); P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A placement programme initiated and run by medical students can provide meaningful exposure to Indigenous health. Implementation of this student-led model in other medical schools may encourage nationwide development of the Indigenous health workforce.