The effectiveness of implementation in Indigenous Australian healthcare

an overview of literature reviews

Janya McCalman, Roxanne Bainbridge, Nicole Ann Percival, Komla Tsey

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

    4 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    Background: Effective implementation can maximise the beneficial impacts of health services. It is therefore important to review implementation in the context of Indigenous populations, who suffer some of the greatest disadvantage within developed countries. This paper analyses Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (hereafter Indigenous) Australian health implementation reviews to examine the research question: What is the effectiveness of implementation, as reported in the Indigenous Australian health implementation literature?

    Methods: Eight databases were systematically searched to find reviews of Indigenous Australian health services and/or programs where implementation was the focus. Search terms included Aborigin* OR Indigen* OR Torres AND health AND service OR program* OR intervention AND implementation (or like terms) AND Australia AND review. Review findings were analysed through the lens of the PARiHS framework which theorises that successful implementation occurs through the interplay of evidence, context and facilitation. The review followed Cochrane methods but was not registered.

    Results: Six reviews were found; these encompassed 107 studies that considered health service/program implementation. Included studies described many health services implemented across Australia as not underpinned by rigorous impact evaluation; nevertheless implementers tended to prefer evidence-based interventions. Effective implementation was supported by clearly defined management systems, employment of Indigenous health workers as leaders, community control, partnerships, tailoring for diverse places and settings; and active facilitation methods. Short-term funding meant most studies focused on implementation in one site through pilot initiatives. Only two mentioned cost effectiveness. Indigenous Australian studies incorporated two elements not included in the PARiHS reference guide: the value of community control and equity of service provision across sites.

    Conclusions: Comparison of the Indigenous Australian review findings against the PARiHS reference guide elements suggested a fledgling but growing state of Indigenous implementation research, and considerable scope to improve the effectiveness of implementation. Further research is required to explore Indigenous people’s understandings of what is important in healthcare implementation; particularly in relation to the value of community control and equity issues.
    Original languageEnglish
    Article number337
    Pages (from-to)1-13
    Number of pages13
    JournalInternational Journal for Equity in Health
    Volume15
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2016

    Fingerprint

    Health Services
    Delivery of Health Care
    Indigenous Health Services
    Health
    Research
    Population Groups
    Developed Countries
    Lenses
    Cost-Benefit Analysis
    Reference Values
    Databases

    Cite this

    McCalman, Janya ; Bainbridge, Roxanne ; Percival, Nicole Ann ; Tsey, Komla. / The effectiveness of implementation in Indigenous Australian healthcare : an overview of literature reviews. In: International Journal for Equity in Health. 2016 ; Vol. 15, No. 1. pp. 1-13.
    @article{54b54bbf5afb4d2485f158ebe981c31f,
    title = "The effectiveness of implementation in Indigenous Australian healthcare: an overview of literature reviews",
    abstract = "Background: Effective implementation can maximise the beneficial impacts of health services. It is therefore important to review implementation in the context of Indigenous populations, who suffer some of the greatest disadvantage within developed countries. This paper analyses Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (hereafter Indigenous) Australian health implementation reviews to examine the research question: What is the effectiveness of implementation, as reported in the Indigenous Australian health implementation literature?Methods: Eight databases were systematically searched to find reviews of Indigenous Australian health services and/or programs where implementation was the focus. Search terms included Aborigin* OR Indigen* OR Torres AND health AND service OR program* OR intervention AND implementation (or like terms) AND Australia AND review. Review findings were analysed through the lens of the PARiHS framework which theorises that successful implementation occurs through the interplay of evidence, context and facilitation. The review followed Cochrane methods but was not registered.Results: Six reviews were found; these encompassed 107 studies that considered health service/program implementation. Included studies described many health services implemented across Australia as not underpinned by rigorous impact evaluation; nevertheless implementers tended to prefer evidence-based interventions. Effective implementation was supported by clearly defined management systems, employment of Indigenous health workers as leaders, community control, partnerships, tailoring for diverse places and settings; and active facilitation methods. Short-term funding meant most studies focused on implementation in one site through pilot initiatives. Only two mentioned cost effectiveness. Indigenous Australian studies incorporated two elements not included in the PARiHS reference guide: the value of community control and equity of service provision across sites.Conclusions: Comparison of the Indigenous Australian review findings against the PARiHS reference guide elements suggested a fledgling but growing state of Indigenous implementation research, and considerable scope to improve the effectiveness of implementation. Further research is required to explore Indigenous people’s understandings of what is important in healthcare implementation; particularly in relation to the value of community control and equity issues.",
    author = "Janya McCalman and Roxanne Bainbridge and Percival, {Nicole Ann} and Komla Tsey",
    year = "2016",
    doi = "10.1186/s12939-016-0337-5",
    language = "English",
    volume = "15",
    pages = "1--13",
    journal = "International Journal for Equity in Health",
    issn = "1475-9276",
    publisher = "BioMed Central",
    number = "1",

    }

    The effectiveness of implementation in Indigenous Australian healthcare : an overview of literature reviews. / McCalman, Janya; Bainbridge, Roxanne; Percival, Nicole Ann; Tsey, Komla.

    In: International Journal for Equity in Health, Vol. 15, No. 1, 337, 2016, p. 1-13.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - The effectiveness of implementation in Indigenous Australian healthcare

    T2 - an overview of literature reviews

    AU - McCalman, Janya

    AU - Bainbridge, Roxanne

    AU - Percival, Nicole Ann

    AU - Tsey, Komla

    PY - 2016

    Y1 - 2016

    N2 - Background: Effective implementation can maximise the beneficial impacts of health services. It is therefore important to review implementation in the context of Indigenous populations, who suffer some of the greatest disadvantage within developed countries. This paper analyses Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (hereafter Indigenous) Australian health implementation reviews to examine the research question: What is the effectiveness of implementation, as reported in the Indigenous Australian health implementation literature?Methods: Eight databases were systematically searched to find reviews of Indigenous Australian health services and/or programs where implementation was the focus. Search terms included Aborigin* OR Indigen* OR Torres AND health AND service OR program* OR intervention AND implementation (or like terms) AND Australia AND review. Review findings were analysed through the lens of the PARiHS framework which theorises that successful implementation occurs through the interplay of evidence, context and facilitation. The review followed Cochrane methods but was not registered.Results: Six reviews were found; these encompassed 107 studies that considered health service/program implementation. Included studies described many health services implemented across Australia as not underpinned by rigorous impact evaluation; nevertheless implementers tended to prefer evidence-based interventions. Effective implementation was supported by clearly defined management systems, employment of Indigenous health workers as leaders, community control, partnerships, tailoring for diverse places and settings; and active facilitation methods. Short-term funding meant most studies focused on implementation in one site through pilot initiatives. Only two mentioned cost effectiveness. Indigenous Australian studies incorporated two elements not included in the PARiHS reference guide: the value of community control and equity of service provision across sites.Conclusions: Comparison of the Indigenous Australian review findings against the PARiHS reference guide elements suggested a fledgling but growing state of Indigenous implementation research, and considerable scope to improve the effectiveness of implementation. Further research is required to explore Indigenous people’s understandings of what is important in healthcare implementation; particularly in relation to the value of community control and equity issues.

    AB - Background: Effective implementation can maximise the beneficial impacts of health services. It is therefore important to review implementation in the context of Indigenous populations, who suffer some of the greatest disadvantage within developed countries. This paper analyses Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (hereafter Indigenous) Australian health implementation reviews to examine the research question: What is the effectiveness of implementation, as reported in the Indigenous Australian health implementation literature?Methods: Eight databases were systematically searched to find reviews of Indigenous Australian health services and/or programs where implementation was the focus. Search terms included Aborigin* OR Indigen* OR Torres AND health AND service OR program* OR intervention AND implementation (or like terms) AND Australia AND review. Review findings were analysed through the lens of the PARiHS framework which theorises that successful implementation occurs through the interplay of evidence, context and facilitation. The review followed Cochrane methods but was not registered.Results: Six reviews were found; these encompassed 107 studies that considered health service/program implementation. Included studies described many health services implemented across Australia as not underpinned by rigorous impact evaluation; nevertheless implementers tended to prefer evidence-based interventions. Effective implementation was supported by clearly defined management systems, employment of Indigenous health workers as leaders, community control, partnerships, tailoring for diverse places and settings; and active facilitation methods. Short-term funding meant most studies focused on implementation in one site through pilot initiatives. Only two mentioned cost effectiveness. Indigenous Australian studies incorporated two elements not included in the PARiHS reference guide: the value of community control and equity of service provision across sites.Conclusions: Comparison of the Indigenous Australian review findings against the PARiHS reference guide elements suggested a fledgling but growing state of Indigenous implementation research, and considerable scope to improve the effectiveness of implementation. Further research is required to explore Indigenous people’s understandings of what is important in healthcare implementation; particularly in relation to the value of community control and equity issues.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84960931195&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1186/s12939-016-0337-5

    DO - 10.1186/s12939-016-0337-5

    M3 - Article

    VL - 15

    SP - 1

    EP - 13

    JO - International Journal for Equity in Health

    JF - International Journal for Equity in Health

    SN - 1475-9276

    IS - 1

    M1 - 337

    ER -