An Aboriginal-led consortium approach to chronic disease action for health equity and holistic wellbeing.

ISSUE ADDRESSED: The Wellbeing Economy, which places human and ecological wellbeing at the centre of policy making, aligns with holistic Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander conceptualisations of health and wellbeing. In order to address chronic diseases in South Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations, the South Australian Aboriginal Chronic Disease Consortium (Consortium) is fostering action in ways that align both with the Wellbeing Economy and with Health in All Policies (HiAP) approaches. METHODS: In June 2017, the Consortium was established as a collaborative partnership between government and non-government organisations, researchers, Aboriginal organisations and communities to lead the effective implementation of three state-wide chronic disease plans. A coordinating centre was funded to support and progress the work of the Consortium. RESULTS: During its first 5 years, the Consortium has developed a foundation for sustained system reform through partnering with stakeholders, leading projects and initiatives, advocating for key priorities, leveraging existing infrastructure and funding, supporting services, and coordinating delivery of priority actions using innovative approaches. CONCLUSIONS: Through the Consortium governance structure, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community members, policy actors, service providers and researchers oversee, drive, influence and support the implementation of priority action initiatives. Sustained funding, competing priorities of partner organisations and project evaluation are constant challenges. SO WHAT?: A consortium approach provides direction and shared priorities, which foster collaboration across and between organisations, service providers and the Aboriginal community. Aligning with HiAP approaches and the Wellbeing Economy, it harnesses knowledge, networks and partnerships that support project implementation and reduce duplication.

Implementation and prospective evaluation of the Country Heart Attack Prevention model of care to improve attendance and completion of cardiac rehabilitation for patients with cardiovascular diseases living in rural Australia: a study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Despite extensive evidence of its benefits and recommendation by guidelines, cardiac rehabilitation (CR) remains highly underused with only 20%-50% of eligible patients participating. We aim to implement and evaluate the Country Heart Attack Prevention (CHAP) model of care to improve CR attendance and completion for rural and remote participants. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: CHAP will apply the model for large-scale knowledge translation to develop and implement a model of care to CR in rural Australia. Partnering with patients, clinicians and health service managers, we will codevelop new approaches and refine/expand existing ones to address known barriers to CR attendance. CHAP will codesign a web-based CR programme with patients expanding their choices to CR attendance. To increase referral rates, CHAP will promote endorsement of CR among clinicians and develop an electronic system that automatises referrals of in-hospital eligible patients to CR. A business model that includes reimbursement of CR delivered in primary care by Medicare will enable sustainable access to CR. To promote CR quality improvement, professional development interventions and an accreditation programme of CR services and programmes will be developed. To evaluate 12-month CR attendance/completion (primary outcome), clinical and cost-effectiveness (secondary outcomes) between patients exposed (n=1223) and not exposed (n=3669) to CHAP, we will apply a multidesign approach that encompasses a prospective cohort study, a pre-post study and a comprehensive economic evaluation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Southern Adelaide Clinical Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/20/SAC/78) and by the Department for Health and Wellbeing Human Research Ethics Committee (2021/HRE00270), which approved a waiver of informed consent. Findings and dissemination to patients and clinicians will be through a public website, online educational sessions and scientific publications. Deidentified data will be available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12621000222842.

Alternative models of cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review.

The traditional hospital-based model of cardiac rehabilitation faces substantial challenges, such as cost and accessibility. These challenges have led to the development of alternative models of cardiac rehabilitation in recent years. The aim of this study was to identify and critique evidence for the effectiveness of these alternative models. A total of 22 databases were searched to identify quantitative studies or systematic reviews of quantitative studies regarding the effectiveness of alternative models of cardiac rehabilitation. Included studies were appraised using a Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool and the National Health and Medical Research Council's designations for Level of Evidence. The 83 included articles described interventions in the following broad categories of alternative models of care: multifactorial individualized telehealth, internet based, telehealth focused on exercise, telehealth focused on recovery, community- or home-based, and complementary therapies. Multifactorial individualized telehealth and community- or home-based cardiac rehabilitation are effective alternative models of cardiac rehabilitation, as they have produced similar reductions in cardiovascular disease risk factors compared with hospital-based programmes. While further research is required to address the paucity of data available regarding the effectiveness of alternative models of cardiac rehabilitation in rural, remote, and culturally and linguistically diverse populations, our review indicates there is no need to rely on hospital-based strategies alone to deliver effective cardiac rehabilitation. Local healthcare systems should strive to integrate alternative models of cardiac rehabilitation, such as brief telehealth interventions tailored to individual's risk factor profiles as well as community- or home-based programmes, in order to ensure there are choices available for patients that best fit their needs, risk factor profile, and preferences.