Making Big Business Everybody's Business: Aboriginal leaders' perspectives on commercial activities influencing aboriginal health in Victoria, Australia.

BACKGROUND: The commercial determinants of health is a rapidly expanding field of research; however Indigenous perspectives remain notably underrepresented. For Indigenous peoples the intersection of globalisation, colonialism and capitalism may amplify commercially-driven health inequities. This study aimed to explore the perspectives of Aboriginal leaders regarding the influence of commercial activities on Aboriginal health and wellbeing in Victoria, Australia. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with 23 Aboriginal leaders from across five sectors (n = 15 urban, n = 8 rural/regional) were analysed through reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three overarching themes were identified encompassing (i) harmful commercial practices and processes, (ii) improving corporate engagement and (iii) opportunities for self-determination through business. Participants expressed concern over aggressive marketing by the gambling industry, commercial exploitation of Aboriginal culture, the privatisation of public services, and lack of oversignt of corporate social responsibility strategies. Simultaneously, Aboriginal-led businesses were viewed as opportunities for cultural connection, and financial empowerment and self-determination. CONCLUSION: Numerous commercial entities and activities are perceived to influence Aboriginal health and wellbeing. This study highlights the need for stronger policy and regulation to mitigate harmful industry practices while incentivising the potential positive impacts of the commercial activities on Aboriginal health and wellbeing.

Stepped collaborative care for pain and posttraumatic stress disorder after major trauma: a randomized controlled feasibility trial.

PURPOSE: To examine feasibility and acceptability of providing stepped collaborative care case management targeting posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and pain symptoms after major traumatic injury. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants were major trauma survivors in Victoria, Australia, at risk of persistent pain or PTSD with high baseline symptoms. Participants were block-randomized, stratified by compensation-status, to the usual care (n = 15) or intervention (n = 17) group (46% of eligible patients). The intervention was adapted from existing stepped collaborative care interventions with input from interdisciplinary experts and people with lived experience in trauma and disability. The proactive case management intervention targeted PTSD and pain management for 6-months using motivational interviewing, cognitive behavioral therapy strategies, and collaborative care. Qualitative interviews explored intervention acceptability. RESULTS: Intervention participants received a median of 7 h case manager contact and reported that they valued the supportive and non-judgmental listening, and timely access to effective strategies, resources, and treatments post-injury from the case manager. Participants reported few disadvantages from participation, and positive impacts on symptoms and recovery outcomes consistent with the reduction in PTSD and pain symptoms measured at 1-, 3- and 6-months. CONCLUSIONS: Stepped collaborative care was low-cost, feasible, and acceptable to people at risk of PTSD or pain after major trauma.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONAfter hospitalization for injury, people can experience difficulty accessing timely support to manage posttraumatic stress, pain and other concerns.Stepped case management-based interventions that provide individualized support and collaborative care have reduced posttraumatic stress symptom severity for patients admitted to American trauma centers.We showed that this model of care could be adapted to target pain and mental health in the trauma system in Victoria, Australia.The intervention was low cost, acceptable and highly valued by most participants who perceived that it helped them use strategies to better manage post-traumatic symptoms, and to access clinicians and treatments relevant to their needs.

Implementation of telehealth primary health care services in a rural Aboriginal Community-Controlled Health Organisation during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods study.

INTRODUCTION: Globally, primary care organisations responded rapidly to COVID-19 physical distancing requirements through the adoption of telehealth to maintain the delivery of health care to communities. In Australia, temporary Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) telehealth items were introduced in March 2020 to enable the provision of telehealth services in the primary care setting. These changes included funding for two modes of telehealth delivery: videoconferencing and telephone consultations. As primary care organisations, Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations (ACCHOs) rapidly adopted telehealth consultations to maintain the delivery of primary care services to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander clients. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the implementation (specifically the uptake, acceptability and requirements for delivery) of telehealth primary healthcare services for Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander peoples by a rural ACCHO during COVID-19. METHODS: A single-site convergent-parallel mixed-methods study was undertaken in the context of an ongoing research partnership established between a rural ACCHO and a university department of rural health. De-identified health service data from March 2020 to March 2021 was extracted, including MBS telehealth consultations and client demographics (eg age, gender and postcode). Variables were analysed using descriptive statistics to examine the uptake of telehealth by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander clients. A geographical analysis of postcode data was also undertaken. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken concurrently with a purposive sample of health service personnel (including health professionals) involved in the implementation or delivery of telehealth, and Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander clients who had accessed telehealth, to explore the acceptability of telehealth and requirements for delivery. Thematic analysis using an inductive approach was undertaken. The analyses of quantitative and qualitative findings were merged to identify key concepts pertaining to the uptake, acceptability and requirements for telehealth delivery. RESULTS: During the first year of implementation, 435 telehealth primary healthcare consultations were delivered to Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander clients. Seven health personnel and six Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander clients participated in interviews. Merged findings from an analysis of quantitative and qualitative data were grouped under three concepts: uptake of telehealth consultations by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander clients, maintaining the delivery of ACCHO services during COVID-19, and implications for sustaining telehealth in an ACCHO. Findings identified that telehealth maintained the delivery of ACCHO services to Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander clients across the lifespan during COVID-19, despite a preference for face-to-face consultations. A greater uptake of telephone consultations compared to videoconferencing was identified. Barriers to the utilisation of videoconferencing were largely technology related, highlighting the need for additional support for clients. CONCLUSION: Telehealth was a useful addition to face-to-face consultations when used in the appropriate context such as the administration of long-term medication prescriptions by a GP. Engaging the ACCHO sector in the policy discourse around telehealth is imperative for identifying requirements for ongoing implementation.

Factors influencing infant feeding for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and their families: a systematic review of qualitative evidence.

BACKGROUND: Breastfeeding provides all the necessary energy and nutrients for an infant and provides many benefits for mothers and babies. The effects of colonisation have contributed to reduced prevalence and duration of breastfeeding among Australian Aboriginal women and widespread use of infant formula as a substitute for breastmilk. This review aimed to synthesise qualitative evidence about the factors that influence breastfeeding and infant feeding practices of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and their families. METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Informit and Google Scholar were systematically searched for qualitative studies that included the perspective of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and their families about the factors influencing infant feeding decisions. Included studies were appraised using an Indigenous quality assessment tool and were synthesised via inductive thematic analysis informed by an ecological framework. RESULTS: The search identified 968 studies with 7 meeting the inclusion criteria. Key factors influencing breastfeeding and infant feeding practices of Aboriginal women included cultural practices, normalisation of bottle feeding, shame associated with breastfeeding in public, access to culturally safe nutrition education, support services and health professionals, family/partner support, knowledge of the benefits of breastfeeding, experiences with previous babies and concern that the baby was not getting enough milk. CONCLUSION: The perspectives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women must be considered when providing breastfeeding and infant feeding advice. This can be achieved through Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people designing, implementing, and leading the delivery of education and information regarding breastfeeding and health infant feeding practices that have been influenced by the priorities of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.

Pulpotomy for the Management of Irreversible Pulpitis in Mature Teeth (PIP): a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Progression of dental caries can result in irreversible pulpal damage. Partial irreversible pulpitis is the initial stage of this damage, confined to the coronal pulp whilst the radicular pulp shows little or no sign of infection. Preserving the pulp with sustained vitality and developing minimally invasive biologically based therapies are key themes within contemporary clinical practice. However, root canal treatment involving complete removal of the pulp is often the only option (other than extraction) given to patients with irreversible pulpitis, with substantial NHS and patient incurred costs. The European Society of Endodontology's (ESE 2019) recent consensus statement recommends full pulpotomy, where the inflamed coronal pulp is removed with the goal of keeping the radicular pulp vital, as a more minimally invasive technique, potentially avoiding complex root canal treatment. Although this technique may be provided in secondary care, it has not been routinely implemented or evaluated in UK General Dental Practice. METHOD: This feasibility study aims to identify and assess in a primary care setting the training needs of general dental practitioners and clinical fidelity of the full pulpotomy intervention, estimate likely eligible patient pool and develop recruitment materials ahead of the main randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of full pulpotomy compared to root canal treatment in pre/molar teeth of adults 16 years and older showing signs indicative of irreversible pulpitis. The feasibility study will recruit and train 10 primary care dentists in the full pulpotomy technique. Dentists will recruit and provide full pulpotomy to 40 participants (four per practice) with indications of partial irreversible pulpitis. DISCUSSION: The Pulpotomy for the Management of Irreversible Pulpitis in Mature Teeth (PIP) study will address the lack of high-quality evidence in the treatment of irreversible pulpitis, to aid dental practitioners, patients and policymakers in their decision-making. The PIP feasibility study will inform the main study on the practicality of providing both training and provision of the full pulpotomy technique in general dental practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN17973604 . Registered on 28 January 2021. Protocol version Protocol version: 1; date: 03.02.2021.

Selective Caries Removal in Permanent Teeth (SCRiPT) for the treatment of deep carious lesions: a randomised controlled clinical trial in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Dental caries is one of the most prevalent non-communicable disease globally and can have serious health sequelae impacting negatively on quality of life. In the UK most adults experience dental caries during their lifetime and the 2009 Adult Dental Health Survey reported that 85% of adults have at least one dental restoration. Conservative removal of tooth tissue for both primary and secondary caries reduces the risk of failure due to tooth-restoration, complex fracture as well as remaining tooth surfaces being less vulnerable to further caries. However, despite its prevalence there is no consensus on how much caries to remove prior to placing a restoration to achieve optimal outcomes. Evidence for selective compared to complete or near-complete caries removal suggests there may be benefits for selective removal in sustaining tooth vitality, therefore avoiding abscess formation and pain, so eliminating the need for more complex and costly treatment or eventual tooth loss. However, the evidence is of low scientific quality and mainly gleaned from studies in primary teeth. METHOD: This is a pragmatic, multi-centre, two-arm patient randomised controlled clinical trial including an internal pilot set in primary dental care in Scotland and England. Dental health professionals will recruit 623 participants over 12-years of age with deep carious lesions in their permanent posterior teeth. Participants will have a single tooth randomised to either the selective caries removal or complete caries removal treatment arm. Baseline measures and outcome data (during the 3-year follow-up period) will be assessed through clinical examination, patient questionnaires and NHS databases. A mixed-method process evaluation will complement the clinical and economic outcome evaluation and examine implementation, mechanisms of impact and context. The primary outcome at three years is sustained tooth vitality. The primary economic outcome is net benefit modelled over a lifetime horizon. Clinical secondary outcomes include pulp exposure, progession of caries, restoration failure; as well as patient-centred and economic outcomes. DISCUSSION: SCRiPT will provide evidence for the most clinically effective and cost-beneficial approach to managing deep carious lesions in permanent posterior teeth in primary care. This will support general dental practitioners, patients and policy makers in decision making. Trial Registration Trial registry: ISRCTN. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN76503940. Date of Registration: 30.10.2019. URL of trial registry record: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN76503940?q=ISRCTN76503940%20&filters=&sort=&offset=1&totalResults=1&page=1&pageSize=10&searchType=basic-search .

Examining the effectiveness of different dental recall strategies on maintenance of optimum oral health: the INTERVAL dental recalls randomised controlled trial.

Objective To compare the clinical effectiveness of different frequencies of dental recall over a four-year period.Design A multi-centre, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial with blinded clinical outcome assessment. Participants were randomised to receive a dental check-up at six-monthly, 24-monthly or risk-based recall intervals. A two-strata trial design was used, with participants randomised within the 24-month stratum if the recruiting dentist considered them clinically suitable. Participants ineligible for 24-month recall were randomised to a risk-based or six-month recall interval.Setting UK primary dental care.Participants Practices providing NHS care and adults who had received regular dental check-ups.Main outcome measures The percentage of sites with gingival bleeding on probing, oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), cost-effectiveness.Results In total, 2,372 participants were recruited from 51 dental practices. Of those, 648 were eligible for the 24-month recall stratum and 1,724 participants were ineligible. There was no evidence of a significant difference in the mean percentage of sites with gingival bleeding on probing between intervention arms in any comparison. For those eligible for 24-month recall stratum: the 24-month versus six-month group had an adjusted mean difference of -0.91%, 95% CI (-5.02%, 3.20%); the 24-month group versus risk-based group had an adjusted mean difference of 0.07%, 95% CI (-3.99%, 4.12%). For the overall sample, the risk-based versus six-month adjusted mean difference was 0.78%, 95% CI (-1.17%, 2.72%). There was no evidence of a difference in OHRQoL (0-56 scale, higher score for poorer OHRQoL) between intervention arms in any comparison. For the overall sample, the risk-based versus six-month effect size was -0.35, 95% CI (-1.02, 0.32). There was no evidence of a clinically meaningful difference between the groups in any comparison in either eligibility stratum for any of the secondary clinical or patient-reported outcomes.Conclusion Over a four-year period, we found no evidence of a difference in oral health for participants allocated to a six-month or a risk-based recall interval, nor between a 24-month, six-month or risk-based recall interval for participants eligible for a 24-month recall. However, patients greatly value and are willing to pay for frequent dental check-ups.

Risk-based, 6-monthly and 24-monthly dental check-ups for adults: the INTERVAL three-arm RCT.

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, patients are encouraged to attend dental recall appointments at regular 6-month intervals, irrespective of their risk of developing dental disease. Stakeholders lack evidence of the relative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different recall strategies and the optimal recall interval for maintenance of oral health. OBJECTIVES: To test effectiveness and assess the cost-benefit of different dental recall intervals over a 4-year period. DESIGN: Multicentre, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial with blinded clinical outcome assessment at 4 years and a within-trial cost-benefit analysis. NHS and participant perspective costs were combined with benefits estimated from a general population discrete choice experiment. A two-stratum trial design was used, with participants randomised to the 24-month interval if the recruiting dentist considered them clinically suitable. Participants ineligible for 24-month recall were randomised to a risk-based or 6-month recall interval. SETTING: UK primary care dental practices. PARTICIPANTS: Adult, dentate, NHS patients who had visited their dentist in the previous 2 years. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised to attend for a dental check-up at one of three dental recall intervals: 6-month, risk-based or 24-month recall. MAIN OUTCOMES: Clinical - gingival bleeding on probing; patient - oral health-related quality of life; economic - three analysis frameworks: (1) incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained, (2) incremental net (societal) benefit and (3) incremental net (dental health) benefit. RESULTS: A total of 2372 participants were recruited from 51 dental practices; 648 participants were eligible for the 24-month recall stratum and 1724 participants were ineligible. There was no evidence of a significant difference in the mean percentage of sites with gingival bleeding between intervention arms in any comparison. For the eligible for 24-month recall stratum: the 24-month (n = 138) versus 6-month group (n = 135) had an adjusted mean difference of -0.91 (95% confidence interval -5.02 to 3.20); the risk-based (n = 143) versus 6-month group had an adjusted mean difference of -0.98 (95% confidence interval -5.05 to 3.09); the 24-month versus risk-based group had an adjusted mean difference of 0.07 (95% confidence interval -3.99 to 4.12). For the overall sample, the risk-based (n = 749) versus 6-month (n = 737) adjusted mean difference was 0.78 (95% confidence interval -1.17 to 2.72). There was no evidence of a difference in oral health-related quality of life between intervention arms in any comparison. For the economic evaluation, under framework 1 (cost per quality-adjusted life-year) the results were highly uncertain, and it was not possible to identify the optimal recall strategy. Under framework 2 (net societal benefit), 6-month recalls were the most efficient strategy with a probability of positive net benefit ranging from 78% to 100% across the eligible and combined strata, with findings driven by the high value placed on more frequent recall services in the discrete choice experiment. Under framework 3 (net dental health benefit), 24-month recalls were the most likely strategy to deliver positive net (dental health) benefit among those eligible for 24-month recall, with a probability of positive net benefit ranging from 65% to 99%. For the combined group, the optimal strategy was less clear. Risk-based recalls were more likely to be the most efficient recall strategy in scenarios where the costing perspective was widened to include participant-incurred costs, and in the Scottish subgroup. LIMITATIONS: Information regarding factors considered by dentists to inform the risk-based interval and the interaction with patients to determine risk and agree the interval were not collected. CONCLUSIONS: Over a 4-year period, we found no evidence of a difference in oral health for participants allocated to a 6-month or a risk-based recall interval, nor between a 24-month, 6-month or risk-based recall interval for participants eligible for a 24-month recall. However, people greatly value and are willing to pay for frequent dental check-ups; therefore, the most efficient recall strategy depends on the scope of the cost and benefit valuation that decision-makers wish to consider. FUTURE WORK: Assessment of the impact of risk assessment tools in informing risk-based interval decision-making and techniques for communicating a variable recall interval to patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN95933794. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme [project numbers 06/35/05 (Phase I) and 06/35/99 (Phase II)] and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 60. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Traditionally, dentists have encouraged both patients at low risk and patients at high risk of developing dental disease to attend their dental practices for regular 6-month 'check-ups'. There is, however, little evidence available for either patients or dentists to use when deciding on the best dental recall interval (i.e. time between dental check-ups) for maintaining oral health. In this study, we wanted to find out, for adult patients who regularly attend the dentist, what interval of time between dental check-ups maintains optimum oral health and represents value for money. A total of 2372 adults who regularly attended 51 different dental practices across Scotland, Northern Ireland, England and Wales were involved. Patients aged 18 years or over who received all or part of their care as NHS patients were randomly allocated to groups to receive a check-up either every 6 months, at an individualised recall interval based on their own risk of oral disease (risk-based recall), or every 24 months (if considered at low risk by their dentist). The recruited adults completed questionnaires at their first trial appointment and then every year of the 4-year study. Their attendance at recall appointments was recorded and they received a clinical assessment taken by study staff at the end of their involvement at year 4. After 4 years, there was no evidence of a difference in the oral health of patients allocated to a 6-month or variable risk-based recall interval. For patients considered by their dentists to be suitable for a 24-month recall interval, there was no difference between those in the 24-month, 6-month or risk-based recall intervals. However, people greatly value and are willing to pay for frequent dental check-ups. The recall strategy that offers the best value for money to patients and the NHS, therefore, depends on what people and decision-makers wish to value within a health-care system.

Mobile primary health care clinics for Indigenous populations in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States: a systematic scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Mobile clinics have been used to deliver primary health care to populations that otherwise experience difficulty in accessing services. Indigenous populations in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States experience greater health inequities than non-Indigenous populations. There is increasing support for Indigenous-governed and culturally accessible primary health care services which meet the needs of Indigenous populations. There is some support for primary health care mobile clinics implemented specifically for Indigenous populations to improve health service accessibility. The purpose of this review is to scope the literature for evidence of mobile primary health care clinics implemented specifically for Indigenous populations in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States. METHODS: This review was undertaken using the Joanna Brigg Institute (JBI) scoping review methodology. Review objectives, inclusion criteria and methods were specified in advance and documented in a published protocol. The search included five academic databases and an extensive search of the grey literature. RESULTS: The search resulted in 1350 unique citations, with 91 of these citations retrieved from the grey literature and targeted organisational websites. Title, abstract and full-text screening was conducted independently by two reviewers, with 123 citations undergoing full text review. Of these, 39 citations discussing 25 mobile clinics, met the inclusion criteria. An additional 14 citations were snowballed from a review of the reference lists of included citations. Of these 25 mobile clinics, the majority were implemented in Australia (n = 14), followed by United States (n = 6) and Canada (n = 5). No primary health mobile clinics specifically for Indigenous people in New Zealand were retrieved. There was a pattern of declining locations serviced by mobile clinics with an increasing population. Furthermore, only 13 mobile clinics had some form of evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: This review identifies geographical gaps in the implementation of primary health care mobile clinics for Indigenous populations in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States. There is a paucity of evaluations supporting the use of mobile clinics for Indigenous populations and a need for organisations implementing mobile clinics specifically for Indigenous populations to share their experiences. Engaging with the perspectives of Indigenous people accessing mobile clinic services is imperative to future evaluations. REGISTRATION: The protocol for this review has been peer-reviewed and published in JBI Evidence Synthesis (doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-D-19-00057).

A Patient's Perspective: Bridging the Transition Following Radiation Therapy for Patients with Breast Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: As the number of women surviving breast cancer grows, it becomes increasingly important to investigate their unique psychosocial and physical needs in the post-treatment period. The period of transition from patient to survivor is a time fraught with physical and emotional challenges. This qualitative study was conducted to gain insight into the perspective of breast cancer patients transitioning to survivorship after receiving RT in Alberta. METHODS: Ten patients receiving radiation therapy (RT) for breast cancer in Alberta participated in an open-ended telephone interview two to three weeks following the cessation of treatment. The data was analyzed using a qualitative interpretive phenomenological approach. Data was clustered and categorized, and emerging themes were examined. RESULTS: Though participants reported to be satisfied with the care and information they received, a need for more robust and detailed skin care education was identified. Patients expressed a sense of anxiety around returning to normalcy following RT, and described feeling lonely, and unsure of themselves in the post-treatment period. A post-treatment phone call may allow Radiation Therapists (RTTs) to mitigate the ongoing needs of patients in the period between their last day of treatment and their first follow-up visit. CONCLUSION: This project has given us an opportunity to hear the voice of the patient, thus laying the groundwork to allow for a more patient-centred approach to the transition of care following RT. The data gathered suggests possible areas for development of interventions and supports for breast cancer patients as they transition into survivorship.

SafeSpot: an innovative app and mental health support package for Scottish schools - a qualitative analysis as part of a mixed methods study.

AIMS: The aim of the study was to investigate teachers' and pupils' perceptions about the effect of the SafeSpot mental health curriculum on the well-being of young people and on their knowledge of mental health conditions. This trial intends to determine the acceptability and benefits of web and mobile technology in delivering emotional well-being in schools, through use of the SafeSpot programme. BACKGROUND: With 10% of young people aged 5 to 16 diagnosed with a mental disorder, there is pressure for schools to address their pupils' emotional well-being. However, many educators report that their schools have insufficient provisions and feel inadequately equipped to support pupils' mental health. METHODS: This qualitative analysis was embedded within a randomly allocated stepped-wedge design, conducted in six West of Scotland secondary schools. A total of 2320 pupils (aged 11 to 14 years) and 90 teachers were included. Young people's understanding of health-seeking, and teacher's confidence in delivering and accessing well-being information was assessed qualitatively. RESULTS: Qualitative analysis revealed themes highlighting the beneficial nature of SafeSpot, including pupil engagement, content of tutorials, perceived impact of SafeSpot and level of training provided for teachers. CONCLUSIONS: Web technology could potentially offer a more structured way for staff to support their pupils' mental health, whilst reducing stigma. SafeSpot was perceived, by pupils and teachers, to be engaging.