Role of Aboriginal Health Workers and Liaison Officers in quality care in the Australian acute care setting: a systematic review.

Objective The aim of this study was to identify the contribution of Aboriginal Health Workers and Liaison Officers (AHWLOs) to quality of care in the acute health care setting in Australia. Methods A systematic review of peer-reviewed literature focused on the role of AHWLOs and quality processed and quality outcomes. Authors undertook study selection based on inclusion criteria and performed quality assessment using critical appraisal tools from the Joanna Briggs Institute. Results The search revealed limited literature that met the inclusion criteria, namely four quantitative studies and one mixed-methods study. The settings of the included studies were mental health and cardiac care units within various hospitals. The studies indicated that AHWLOs may have a positive effect on communication between healthcare professionals and patients, rates of discharge against medical advice and continuity of care. Methodological constraints among the included studies made it difficult to establish specific contributions of AHWLOs to quality care markers across acute care units. Conclusions The role of AHWLOs in providing quality care in the acute care setting has received minimal research. The limited existing research highlights the importance of the AHWLO role. For example, AHWLOs may influence patient communication, discharge against medical advice and continuity of care within mental health and cardiac care units. Further, because of methodological constraints among the limited studies, research into the role of AHWLOs in these and other acute care settings is needed to assess effects on a range of specific clinical quality markers. What is known about the topic? Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people experience unacceptable health inequities. AHWLOs are a unique workforce introduced to increase access to culturally safe care and, ultimately, help to address these inequities. What does this paper add? This review explores the current evidence for the contribution of AHWLOs to quality care in the acute care setting. The findings suggest that these professionals may improve communication between patients and medical staff, improve continuity of care and reduce patient discharge against medical advice. However, these findings highlight that the use of quality care markers across acute care settings is needed to generate tangible evidence to help establish the legitimacy of these health professionals. What are the implications for practitioners? AHWLOs have a place in the acute care team. Although further research is required to expand the preliminary evidence base of their effect on quality acute care, this workforce should be supported at the individual, organisational and policy levels to enhance the health and well-being of one the most vulnerable communities in Australia.

A model for (re)building consumer trust in the food system.

The article presents a best practice model that can be utilized by food system actors to assist with (re)building trust in the food system, before, during and after a food incident defined as 'any situation within the food supply chain where there is a risk or potential risk of illness or confirmed illness or injury associated with the consumption of a food or foods' (Commonwealth of Australia. National Food Incident Response Protocol. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, 2012). Interviews were undertaken with 105 actors working within the media, food industry and food regulatory settings across Australia, New Zealand (NZ) and the United Kingdom (UK). Interview data produced strategy statements, which indicated participant views on how to (re)build consumer trust in the food system. These included: (i) be transparent, (ii) have protocols and procedures in place, (iii) be credible, (iv) be proactive, (v) put consumers first, (vi) collaborate with stakeholders, (vii) be consistent, (viii) educate stakeholders and consumers, (ix) build your reputation and (x) keep your promises. A survey was designed to enable participants to indicate their agreement/disagreement with the ideas, rate their importance and provide further comment. The five strategies considered key to (re)building consumer trust were used to develop a model demonstrating best practice strategies for (re)building consumer trust in the food system before, during and after a food incident. In a world where the food system is increasingly complex, strategies for (re)building and fostering consumer trust are important. This study offers a model to do so which is derived from the views and experiences of actors working across the food industry, food regulation and the media.

Obtaining consumer perspectives using a citizens' jury: does the current country of origin labelling in Australia allow for informed food choices?

BACKGROUND: Contemporary food systems are vast and complex, creating greater distance between consumers and their food. Consequently, consumers are required to put faith in a system of which they have limited knowledge or control. Country of origin labelling (CoOL) is one mechanism that theoretically enables consumer knowledge of provenance of food products. However, this labelling system has recently come under Australian Government review and recommendations for improvements have been proposed. Consumer engagement in this process has been limited. Therefore this study sought to obtain further consumer opinion on the issue of CoOL and to identify the extent to which Australian consumers agree with Australian Government recommendations for improvements. METHODS: A citizens' jury was conducted with a sample of 14 South Australian consumers to explore their perceptions on whether the CoOL system allows them to make informed food choices, as well as what changes (if any) need to be made to enable informed food choices (recommendations). RESULTS: Overall, jurors' perception of usefulness of CoOL, including its ability to enable consumers to make informed food choices, fluctuated throughout the Citizens' Jury. Initially, the majority of the jurors indicated that the labels allowed informed food choice, however by the end of the session the majority disagreed with this statement. Inconsistencies within jurors' opinions were observed, particularly following delivery of information from expert witnesses and jury deliberation. Jurors provided recommendations for changes to be made to CoOL, which were similar to those provided in the Australian Government inquiry. CONCLUSIONS: Consumers in this study engaged with the topical issue of CoOL and provided their opinions. Overall, consumers do not think that the current CoOL system in Australia enables consumers to make informed choices. Recommendations for changes, including increasing the size of the label and the label's font, and standardising its position, were made.