The characteristics, implementation and effects of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health promotion tools

A systematic literature search

Janya McCalman, Komla Tsey, Roxanne Bainbridge, Kevin Rowley, Nicole Ann Percival, Lynette Ruth O'donoghue, Jenny Brands, Mary Whiteside, Jenni Judd

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

3 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: Health promotion by and with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (hereafter Indigenous) Australians is critically important given a wide gap in health parity compared to other Australians. The development and implementation of step-by-step guides, instruments, packages, frameworks or resources has provided a feasible and low-resource strategy for strengthening evidence-informed health promotion practice. Yet there has been little assessment of where and how these tools are implemented or their effectiveness. This paper reviews the characteristics, implementation and effects of Indigenous health promotion tools. 


Methods: 
Indigenous health promotion tools were identified through a systematic literature search including a prior scoping study, eight databases, references of other reviews and the authors' knowledge (n = 1494). Documents in the peer reviewed and grey literature were included if they described or evaluated tools designed, recommended or used for strengthening Indigenous Australian health promotion. Eligible publications were entered into an Excel spreadsheet and documented tools classified according to their characteristics, implementation and effects. Quality was appraised using the Dictionary for Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) and Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) tools for quantitative and qualitative studies respectively. 


Results: The review found that Indigenous health promotion tools were widely available. Of 74 publications that met inclusion criteria, sixty (81%) documented tools developed specifically for the Indigenous Australian population. All tools had been developed in reference to evidence; but only 22/74 (30%) publications specified intended or actual implementation, and only 11/74 (15%) publications evaluated impacts of the implemented tools. Impacts included health, environmental, community, organisational and health care improvements. The quality of impact evaluations was strong for only five (7%) studies. 


Conclusions: The small number and generally moderate quality of implementation and evaluation studies means that little is known about how tools work to strengthen Indigenous health promotion practice. The findings suggest that rather than continuing to invest in tool development, practitioners, policy makers and researchers could evaluate the implementation and effects of existing tools and publish the results. There is a need for long-term investment in research to review the current use of health promotion tools and the factors that are likely to enhance their implementation. 

Original languageEnglish
Article number712
Pages (from-to)1-12
Number of pages12
JournalBMC Public Health
Volume14
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Health Promotion
Publications
Community Health Services
Health
Parity
Administrative Personnel
Population Groups
Research Personnel
Databases
Research

Cite this

McCalman, Janya ; Tsey, Komla ; Bainbridge, Roxanne ; Rowley, Kevin ; Percival, Nicole Ann ; O'donoghue, Lynette Ruth ; Brands, Jenny ; Whiteside, Mary ; Judd, Jenni. / The characteristics, implementation and effects of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health promotion tools : A systematic literature search. In: BMC Public Health. 2014 ; Vol. 14. pp. 1-12.
@article{1605471ebd6846c18216c91c2aa85ef8,
title = "The characteristics, implementation and effects of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health promotion tools: A systematic literature search",
abstract = "Background: Health promotion by and with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (hereafter Indigenous) Australians is critically important given a wide gap in health parity compared to other Australians. The development and implementation of step-by-step guides, instruments, packages, frameworks or resources has provided a feasible and low-resource strategy for strengthening evidence-informed health promotion practice. Yet there has been little assessment of where and how these tools are implemented or their effectiveness. This paper reviews the characteristics, implementation and effects of Indigenous health promotion tools.  Methods: Indigenous health promotion tools were identified through a systematic literature search including a prior scoping study, eight databases, references of other reviews and the authors' knowledge (n = 1494). Documents in the peer reviewed and grey literature were included if they described or evaluated tools designed, recommended or used for strengthening Indigenous Australian health promotion. Eligible publications were entered into an Excel spreadsheet and documented tools classified according to their characteristics, implementation and effects. Quality was appraised using the Dictionary for Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) and Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) tools for quantitative and qualitative studies respectively.  Results: The review found that Indigenous health promotion tools were widely available. Of 74 publications that met inclusion criteria, sixty (81{\%}) documented tools developed specifically for the Indigenous Australian population. All tools had been developed in reference to evidence; but only 22/74 (30{\%}) publications specified intended or actual implementation, and only 11/74 (15{\%}) publications evaluated impacts of the implemented tools. Impacts included health, environmental, community, organisational and health care improvements. The quality of impact evaluations was strong for only five (7{\%}) studies.  Conclusions: The small number and generally moderate quality of implementation and evaluation studies means that little is known about how tools work to strengthen Indigenous health promotion practice. The findings suggest that rather than continuing to invest in tool development, practitioners, policy makers and researchers could evaluate the implementation and effects of existing tools and publish the results. There is a need for long-term investment in research to review the current use of health promotion tools and the factors that are likely to enhance their implementation. ",
keywords = "Australia, epidemiology, health promotion, human, Oceanic ancestry group, procedures, standards, Health Promotion, Humans, Oceanic Ancestry Group",
author = "Janya McCalman and Komla Tsey and Roxanne Bainbridge and Kevin Rowley and Percival, {Nicole Ann} and O'donoghue, {Lynette Ruth} and Jenny Brands and Mary Whiteside and Jenni Judd",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1186/1471-2458-14-712",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "1--12",
journal = "BMC Public Health",
issn = "1471-2458",
publisher = "BioMed Central",

}

McCalman, J, Tsey, K, Bainbridge, R, Rowley, K, Percival, NA, O'donoghue, LR, Brands, J, Whiteside, M & Judd, J 2014, 'The characteristics, implementation and effects of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health promotion tools: A systematic literature search', BMC Public Health, vol. 14, 712, pp. 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-712

The characteristics, implementation and effects of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health promotion tools : A systematic literature search. / McCalman, Janya; Tsey, Komla; Bainbridge, Roxanne; Rowley, Kevin; Percival, Nicole Ann; O'donoghue, Lynette Ruth; Brands, Jenny; Whiteside, Mary; Judd, Jenni.

In: BMC Public Health, Vol. 14, 712, 2014, p. 1-12.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The characteristics, implementation and effects of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health promotion tools

T2 - A systematic literature search

AU - McCalman, Janya

AU - Tsey, Komla

AU - Bainbridge, Roxanne

AU - Rowley, Kevin

AU - Percival, Nicole Ann

AU - O'donoghue, Lynette Ruth

AU - Brands, Jenny

AU - Whiteside, Mary

AU - Judd, Jenni

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Background: Health promotion by and with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (hereafter Indigenous) Australians is critically important given a wide gap in health parity compared to other Australians. The development and implementation of step-by-step guides, instruments, packages, frameworks or resources has provided a feasible and low-resource strategy for strengthening evidence-informed health promotion practice. Yet there has been little assessment of where and how these tools are implemented or their effectiveness. This paper reviews the characteristics, implementation and effects of Indigenous health promotion tools.  Methods: Indigenous health promotion tools were identified through a systematic literature search including a prior scoping study, eight databases, references of other reviews and the authors' knowledge (n = 1494). Documents in the peer reviewed and grey literature were included if they described or evaluated tools designed, recommended or used for strengthening Indigenous Australian health promotion. Eligible publications were entered into an Excel spreadsheet and documented tools classified according to their characteristics, implementation and effects. Quality was appraised using the Dictionary for Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) and Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) tools for quantitative and qualitative studies respectively.  Results: The review found that Indigenous health promotion tools were widely available. Of 74 publications that met inclusion criteria, sixty (81%) documented tools developed specifically for the Indigenous Australian population. All tools had been developed in reference to evidence; but only 22/74 (30%) publications specified intended or actual implementation, and only 11/74 (15%) publications evaluated impacts of the implemented tools. Impacts included health, environmental, community, organisational and health care improvements. The quality of impact evaluations was strong for only five (7%) studies.  Conclusions: The small number and generally moderate quality of implementation and evaluation studies means that little is known about how tools work to strengthen Indigenous health promotion practice. The findings suggest that rather than continuing to invest in tool development, practitioners, policy makers and researchers could evaluate the implementation and effects of existing tools and publish the results. There is a need for long-term investment in research to review the current use of health promotion tools and the factors that are likely to enhance their implementation. 

AB - Background: Health promotion by and with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (hereafter Indigenous) Australians is critically important given a wide gap in health parity compared to other Australians. The development and implementation of step-by-step guides, instruments, packages, frameworks or resources has provided a feasible and low-resource strategy for strengthening evidence-informed health promotion practice. Yet there has been little assessment of where and how these tools are implemented or their effectiveness. This paper reviews the characteristics, implementation and effects of Indigenous health promotion tools.  Methods: Indigenous health promotion tools were identified through a systematic literature search including a prior scoping study, eight databases, references of other reviews and the authors' knowledge (n = 1494). Documents in the peer reviewed and grey literature were included if they described or evaluated tools designed, recommended or used for strengthening Indigenous Australian health promotion. Eligible publications were entered into an Excel spreadsheet and documented tools classified according to their characteristics, implementation and effects. Quality was appraised using the Dictionary for Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) and Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) tools for quantitative and qualitative studies respectively.  Results: The review found that Indigenous health promotion tools were widely available. Of 74 publications that met inclusion criteria, sixty (81%) documented tools developed specifically for the Indigenous Australian population. All tools had been developed in reference to evidence; but only 22/74 (30%) publications specified intended or actual implementation, and only 11/74 (15%) publications evaluated impacts of the implemented tools. Impacts included health, environmental, community, organisational and health care improvements. The quality of impact evaluations was strong for only five (7%) studies.  Conclusions: The small number and generally moderate quality of implementation and evaluation studies means that little is known about how tools work to strengthen Indigenous health promotion practice. The findings suggest that rather than continuing to invest in tool development, practitioners, policy makers and researchers could evaluate the implementation and effects of existing tools and publish the results. There is a need for long-term investment in research to review the current use of health promotion tools and the factors that are likely to enhance their implementation. 

KW - Australia

KW - epidemiology

KW - health promotion

KW - human

KW - Oceanic ancestry group

KW - procedures

KW - standards

KW - Health Promotion

KW - Humans

KW - Oceanic Ancestry Group

U2 - 10.1186/1471-2458-14-712

DO - 10.1186/1471-2458-14-712

M3 - Article

VL - 14

SP - 1

EP - 12

JO - BMC Public Health

JF - BMC Public Health

SN - 1471-2458

M1 - 712

ER -