Pathways between foodways and wellbeing for first nations Australians.

BACKGROUND: Supporting the health and wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (hereafter respectfully referred to as First Nations peoples) is a national priority for Australia. Despite immense losses of land, language, and governance caused by the continuing impact of colonisation, First Nations peoples have maintained strong connections with traditional food culture, while also creating new beliefs, preferences, and traditions around food, which together are termed foodways. While foodways are known to support holistic health and wellbeing for First Nations peoples, the pathways via which this occurs have received limited attention. METHODS: Secondary data analysis was conducted on two national qualitative datasets exploring wellbeing, which together included the views of 531 First Nations peoples (aged 12-92). Thematic analysis, guided by an Indigenist research methodology, was conducted to identify the pathways through which foodways impact on and support wellbeing for First Nations peoples. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Five pathways through which wellbeing is supported via foodways for First Nations peoples were identified as: connecting with others through food; accessing traditional foods; experiencing joy in making and sharing food; sharing information about food and nutrition; and strategies for improving food security. These findings offer constructive, nationally relevant evidence to guide and inform health and nutrition programs and services to harness the strengths and preferences of First Nations peoples to support the health and wellbeing of First Nations peoples more effectively.

What Matters 2 Adults (WM2Adults): Understanding the Foundations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Wellbeing.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people experience a greater range of health and social disadvantages compared to other Australians. Wellbeing is a culturally-bound construct, and to date, a national evidence base around the components of wellbeing for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people is lacking. Understanding and measurement of wellbeing for this population is critical in achieving health equity. This paper aims to identify and describe the foundations of wellbeing for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults. This national qualitative study was underpinned by an Indigenist research approach which privileges the voices of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults were purposively recruited from around Australia between September 2017 and September 2018 to participate in Yarning Circles, led by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander researchers. Yarning Circles were audio recorded, transcribed and analyzed. A Collaborative Yarning Methodology was used, which incorporated reflexive thematic analysis to identify and describe the foundations of wellbeing reported by participants. A total of 359 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults participated. Our analysis revealed five foundations of wellbeing: belonging and connection; holistic health; purpose and control; dignity and respect; and basic needs. These foundations were deeply interwoven by three interconnected aspects of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander life: family, community and culture. The findings of this study will substantially aid our efforts to develop a new wellbeing measure for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults. The iterative Indigenist methods used in this study provide a robust research methodology for conducting large-scale, nationally-relevant qualitative research with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Policies and practices that are informed by our results have the potential to address outcomes that are meaningful for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

Wellbeing of Indigenous Peoples in Canada, Aotearoa (New Zealand) and the United States: A Systematic Review.

Despite the health improvements afforded to non-Indigenous peoples in Canada, Aotearoa (New Zealand) and the United States, the Indigenous peoples in these countries continue to endure disproportionately high rates of mortality and morbidity. Indigenous peoples' concepts and understanding of health and wellbeing are holistic; however, due to their diverse social, political, cultural, environmental and economic contexts within and across countries, wellbeing is not experienced uniformly across all Indigenous populations. We aim to identify aspects of wellbeing important to the Indigenous people in Canada, Aotearoa and the United States. We searched CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO and PubMed databases for papers that included key Indigenous and wellbeing search terms from database inception to April 2020. Papers that included a focus on Indigenous adults residing in Canada, Aotearoa and the United States, and that included empirical qualitative data that described at least one aspect of wellbeing were eligible. Data were analysed using the stages of thematic development recommended by Thomas and Harden for thematic synthesis of qualitative research. Our search resulted in 2669 papers being screened for eligibility. Following full-text screening, 100 papers were deemed eligible for inclusion (Aotearoa (New Zealand) n = 16, Canada n = 43, United States n = 41). Themes varied across countries; however, identity, connection, balance and self-determination were common aspects of wellbeing. Having this broader understanding of wellbeing across these cultures can inform decisions made about public health actions and resources.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people's domains of wellbeing: A comprehensive literature review.

There are significant health and social disparities between the world's Indigenous and non-Indigenous people on factors likely to influence quality of life (QOL) and wellbeing. However, these disparities in wellbeing are not captured in conventional QOL instruments, as they often do not include dimensions that are likely to be relevant to Indigenous people. The objective of this comprehensive literature review was to identify these wellbeing domains for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australia (hereafter, respectfully referred to collectively as Indigenous Australians). We searched PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Econlit, CINAHL, and Embase (from inception to June 2017, and updated in March 2019), and grey literature sources using keywords relating to adult Indigenous Australians' QOL and wellbeing. From 278 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, 95 were included in a thematic analysis. This synthesis revealed nine broad interconnected wellbeing dimensions: autonomy, empowerment and recognition; family and community; culture, spirituality and identity; Country; basic needs; work, roles and responsibilities; education; physical health; and mental health. The findings suggest domains of wellbeing relevant to and valued by Indigenous Australians that may not be included in existing QOL and wellbeing instruments, domains that may be shared with Indigenous populations globally. This indicates the need for a tailored wellbeing instrument that includes factors relevant to Indigenous Australians. Developing such an instrument will ensure meaningful, culturally-relevant measurement of Indigenous Australians' wellbeing.

Traditional and Complementary Medicine Use Among Indigenous Cancer Patients in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Cancer 'patients' are increasingly using traditional indigenous and complementary medicines (T&CM) alongside conventional medical treatments to both cure and cope with their cancer diagnoses. To date T&CM use among Indigenous cancer patients from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States has not been systematically reviewed. METHODS: We systematically searched bibliographic databases to identify original research published between January 2000 and October 2017 regarding T&CM use by Indigenous cancer patients in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States. Data from records meeting eligibility criteria were extracted and appraised for quality by 2 independent reviewers. RESULTS: Twenty-one journal articles from 18 studies across all 4 countries met our inclusion criteria. T&CM use ranged from 19% to 57.7% (differing across countries). T&CM was mostly used concurrently with conventional cancer treatments to meet their spiritual, emotional, social, and cultural needs; however, bush, traditional, and herbal medicines were used in a minority of cases as an alternative. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the importance of T&CM use to Indigenous cancer patients across these 4 countries; we identified multiple perceived spiritual, emotional and cultural benefits to its use. The patient's perception of their health professional's attitudes toward T&CM in some cases hindered or encouraged the patient's disclosure. Additional research is required to further explore the use and disclosure of T&CM among Indigenous cancer patients to help inform and ensure effective, safe, coordinated care for Indigenous cancer patients that relies on shared open decision making and communication across patients, communities, and providers.

The use of psychosocial criteria in Australian patient selection guidelines for kidney transplantation.

Psychosocial criteria are increasingly being included in practice guidelines for determining patient suitability for kidney transplantation. Although intended to promote evidence-based decision-making, if poorly defined, the inclusion of psychosocial criteria has the potential to reduce transparency in patient selection and equity of access. We reviewed all Australian practice guidelines concerning patient suitability for kidney transplantation and qualitatively analysed their inclusion of, and approach towards, psychosocial criteria. Transplant Directors from all Australian adult transplant units were invited to submit their unit's guidelines for this national research audit. All 16 units (100%) submitted some form of documentation. We analysed only those documents that were purposely structured tools for directing patient selection (eight guidelines used in 10 transplant units). Content analysis was performed on the abstracted psychosocial criteria. Psychosocial criteria--particularly non-compliance and smoking--were commonly included. In general, the psychosocial criteria were ill-defined and lacking in substantiating evidence and recommendations for assessment or action. Our results reveal that current Australian patient selection guidelines for kidney transplantation incorporate poorly defined psychosocial criteria that vary greatly. Furthermore, there appears to be a weak evidence base underpinning their inclusion. The use of psychosocial criteria in this manner decreases the transparency of patient selection and increases the potential for subjective estimates of social worth to influence patient selection. The priority given to such criteria in transplant guidelines requires attention and debate.