Does health assessment improve health outcomes in Indigenous people? An RCT with 13 years of follow-up

Objective: To examine the impact of a multi-component health assessment on mortality and morbidity in Kimberley Aboriginal residents during a 13-year follow-up. Method. A population-based randomised controlled trial using linked hospital, cancer and death records to evaluate outcomes in 620 intervention and 6,736 control subjects. Results: The intervention group had a higher rate of first-time hospitalisation for any reason (IRR = 1.37; 95 % Cl 1.25-1.50), a higher rate of injury-related hospital episodes (IRR = 1.31; 95 % Cl 1.15-1.48) and a higher notification rate of alcohol-related cancers. There was a smaller difference in the rates of multiple hospitalisations (IRR = 1.14; 95 % Cl 0.751.74) and no improvement in overall mortality compared with controls (IRR = 1.08; 95 % Cl 0.91-1.29). Conclusions: There was no overall mortality benefit despite increased health service contact associated with the intervention. Implications: Although not influencing mortality rates, multi-component health assessment may result in a period of increased health service use in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations, thus constituting an 'intervention'. However, this should not be confused with systematic and sustained interventions and investment in community development to achieve better health outcomes.

The 4th International Network of Indigenous Health Knowledge and Development Conference

The International Network of Indigenous Health Knowledge and Development (INIHKD) Conference was held from Monday 24 May to Friday 28 May 2010 at Kiana Lodge, Port Madison Indian Reservation, Suquamish Nation, Washington State, United States of America. The overall theme for the 4th Biennial Conference was ‘Knowing Our Roots: Indigenous Medicines, Health Knowledges and Best Practices’. This article details the experience of participants who were at the INIHKD Conference. It concludes with an encouragement to people to attend the 5th INIHKD Conference in Australia in 2012.

Indigenous Health Scholars Attend the MAI Conference

This short newsletter article discusses the Queensland University of Technology's (QUT) delegation at the 2011 Maori and Indigenous Doctoral (MAI) Conference hosted by Te Whare Wananga o Awanuiarangi (Indigenous University), Whakatane, New Zealand. The newsletter is free to download.

Indigenous health: Embracing and enacting the spirit of change. Opening keynote address

In speaking at the Cardiac Society this morning, I am conscious of this year’s 60th Anniversary. It is 60 years since motivated and impassioned people travelled to form the organisation that became the Cardiac Society. They started an organisation and a movement of sorts which was joined by many others over the years and which brings us to this room on this morning. This started in 1952. What were you doing in 1952? Where you just born and for some of you were? Others here were not born and may be your parents hadn’t even met yet. I want you to gain a sense of this time, of 60 years ago.

Culture in and culture of health promotion: tensions at the interface of Australian Indigenous health promotion

With persisting health inequalities across and between diverse populations, health promotion must consider its engagement with the culture concept in achieving better health for all. By way of a conversation between an Indigenous and non-Indigenous health promotion practitioner, this unique presentation will critically examine the cultural practice of health promotion for Indigenous Australians. Culture becomes the central tenant of this conversation – but not culture in the sense of something to “fix” to improve Indigenous health, or import to make mainstream practices “culturally appropriate”. Rather, the somewhat invisible culture of Australian health promotion practice itself is highlighted. The enthusiasm of mainstream health promotion practice for risk and reductionism supplants biological determinism with a cultural determinism that constructs culture as illness-producing. This is in contrast to Indigenous perspectives of culture in which it is described as integral to individual and community health and well-being. Whilst empowerment features strongly within global health promotion discourses, the preoccupation of health promotion with the inherent deficit/behavioural change approach is an all too convenient distraction from the broader structural factors impacting on the health of Indigenous Australians. That Indigenous Australians have not benefitted from successful public health policy interventions in the same way as the general population is in itself revealing of the culture of health promotion practice in Australia and it is somewhat ironic that the health promotion fraternity seems not to have questioned its own practice. This conversation aims to encourage health promotion practitioners, researchers and policy makers to interrogate the cultural assumptions of their own practice and of the public health system they are part of and consider how to embed and empower the voices and experiences of those who are ‘culturally othered’ within health promotion practice.

Indigenous health issues in Australia

This adaptation of Understanding Pathophysiology by Huether and McCance builds on the strengths of the US edition while tailoring it to the specific needs of Australia and New Zealand undergraduate nursing students.

“We don’t tell people what to do”: Ethical practice and Indigenous health promotion

Health promotion aspires to work in empowering, participatory ways, with the goal of supporting people to increase control over their health. However, buried in this goal is an ethical tension: while increasing people’s autonomy, health promotion also imposes a particular, health promotion-sanctioned version of what is good. This tension positions practitioners precariously, where the ethos of empowerment risks increasing health promotion’s paternalistic control over people, rather than people’s control over their own health. Here in we argue that this ethical tension is amplified in Indigenous Australia, where colonial processes of control over Indigenous lands, lives and cultures are indistinguishable from contemporary health promotion ‘interventions’. Moreover, the potential stigmatisation produced in any paternalistic acts ‘done for their own good’ cannot be assumed to have evaporated within the self-proclaimed ‘empowering’ narratives of health promotion. This issue’s guest editor’s call for health promotion to engage ‘with politics and with philosophical ideas about the state and the citizen’ is particularly relevant in an Indigenous Australian context. Indigenous Australians continue to experience health promotion as a moral project of control through intervention, which contradicts health promotion’s central goal of empowerment. Therefore, Indigenous health promotion is an invaluable site for discussion and analysis of health promotion’s broader ethical tensions. Given the persistent and alarming Indigenous health inequalities, this paper calls for systematic ethical reflection in order to redress health promotion’s general failure to reduce health inequalities experienced by Indigenous Australians.