Judith Katzenellenbogen

Objective
To determine the effect of cultural security training (CST) for health professionals and access to an Aboriginal Brain Injury Coordinator (ABIC) for Aboriginal Australians with stroke or traumatic brain injury (TBI).

Design
A stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial; the intervention package consisted of CST for hospital professionals and 6-month access to ABICs providing education, support, liaison and advocacy; the commencement order of the intervention phase was randomised.

Setting
Four urban and four rural hospitals in Western Australia, 2018–2022.

Participants
Aboriginal adults ≥ 18 years hospitalised with stroke or TBI.

Main Outcome Measures
Primary outcome was quality of life (Euro QOL–5D-3L Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS)) score at 26 weeks post-injury. Secondary outcomes were modified Rankin Scale, Functional Independence Measure, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Modified Caregiver Strain Index at 12 and 26 weeks, rehabilitation occasions of service, hospital compliance with minimum processes of care (MPC), acceptability of interventions, feasibility of ABIC role and costs.

Results
In total, 108 participants recruited (target 312), 75% rural residents; 26-week outcomes assessment completed for 78% of participants. The adjusted mean QoL showed no significant difference (p = 0.83). The MPC outcome favored the intervention group, adjusted difference in means 6.8% at 26 weeks, 95% CI (0.40%, 13.26%). There were no significant differences between control and intervention groups for other secondary outcomes.

Conclusions
CST and implementation of an ABIC were feasible, acceptable and improved care processes for a predominantly rural population. Health outcomes did not differ. The effects of the COVID-19 context are discussed.

Trial Registration
ACTRN12618000139279

Context
Comprehensive Primary Health Care (CPHC) is an interconnected, holistic, and strengths-based health and wellbeing approach fundamental to Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations (ACCHOs) in Australia. However, policy and funding trends increasingly threaten the capacity of ACCHOs to deliver CPHC by imposing burdensome administrative and accountability requirements. A central constraint is the marginalisation of culturally informed data measures and tools that could enable improved development, implementation, evaluation and reporting of CHPC services and programs. To mitigate this, ACCHOs must be enabled to take charge of collecting and using meaningful data to increase self-determination and drive impactful policy and service delivery. Central to this approach is the capacity, skills, and infrastructure to collect and use culturally informed data and tools that align with community needs and organisational imperatives.

Materials and methods
This project will undertake an Aboriginal participatory action research (APAR) mixed methods developmental evaluation approach to Aboriginal Data Sovereignty (ADS) initiatives. The project will be conducted both centrally and across the regional sites of the South West Aboriginal Medical Service (SWAMS), an ACCHO in regional Western Australia. Activities to initiate the APAR process include the development and training of a Community Research Panel to lead/facilitate APAR projects. A series of regional workshops will be held to build data literacy (including regional population health data) and identify innovative culturally-informed health and wellbeing data measures and tools for selected health priorities. Project team Aboriginal academic researchers and Aboriginal researchers at SWAMS will ensure the inclusion of Aboriginal research methods (Aboriginal ways of knowing, being and doing). Data collection will include both quantitative and qualitative data which will be analysed to identify the enabling processes and community and organisational outcomes as they align to the principles of ADS.

Discussion and next steps
The protocol herein describes the first phase of a two-phase project, where the second phase will implement the new and/or adapted data measures and tools established in phase one of the project. This project will build capacity towards evidence-based decision making by ACCHOs and support self-determination by enabling local, real-time evaluation of the integrated models of care that ACCHOs deliver.

Background
Healing Right Way (HRW) aimed to improve health outcomes for Aboriginal Australians with stroke or traumatic brain injury by facilitating system-level access to culturally secure rehabilitation services. Using a stepped-wedge randomised controlled trial (RCT) design (ACTRN12618000139279, 30/01/2018), a two-pronged intervention was introduced in four rural and four urban hospitals, comprising 1.Cultural security training (CST) for staff and 2.Training/employment of Aboriginal Brain Injury Coordinators (ABIC) to support Aboriginal patients for 6-months post-injury. Three-quarters of recruited patients lived rurally. The main outcome measure was quality-of-life, with secondary outcomes including functional measures, minimum processes of care (MPC); number rehabilitation occasions of service received, and improved hospital experience. Assessments were undertaken at baseline, 12- and 26-weeks post-injury. Only MPCs and hospital experience were found to improve among intervention patients.

We report on the process evaluation aiming to support interpretation and translation of results.

Methods
Using mixed methods, the evaluation design was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Data sources included minutes, project logs, surveys, semi-structured interviews, and observations.

Four evaluation questions provided a basis for systematic determination of the quality of the trial. Findings from separate sources were combined to synthesise the emerging themes that addressed the evaluation questions. Three components were considered separately: the trial process, CST and ABIC.

Results
The complex HRW trial was implemented to a satisfactory level despite challenging setting factors, particularly rural–urban system dynamics. Patient recruitment constraints could not be overcome. The vulnerability of stepped-wedge designs to time effects influenced recruitment and trial results, due to COVID. Despite relatively high follow-up, including to rural/remote areas, data points were reduced. The lack of culturally appropriate assessment tools influenced the quality/completeness of assessment data. The ABIC role was deemed feasible and well-received. The CST involved complex logistics, but rated highly although online components were often incomplete. Project management was responsive to staff, patients and setting factors.

Conclusions
Despite mostly equivocal results, the ABIC role was feasible within mainstream hospitals and the CST was highly valued. Learnings will help build robust state-wide models of culturally secure rehabilitation for Aboriginal people after brain injury, including MPC, workforce, training and follow-up.

Background
This report provides the theory, method and practice of culturally secure translation and knowledge exchange in the Healing Right Way Clinical Trial (2017–2022), outlining activities to date. Healing Right Way was a stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial conducted in Western Australia, aimed at enhancing rehabilitation services and quality of life for Aboriginal Australians following acquired brain injury. The trial translation plan was aspirational and action-oriented, with its implementation iterative and ongoing. Translational activities aimed to inform service and research planning for Aboriginal people with brain injury. Situated in the intercultural space, the work guards against undertaking activities that are monocultural, colonial and appropriating in favour of work that is authentically viewed through the dual lens of whiteness and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ways of knowing, being and doing, and is strengths-based.

Methods
Three translational and knowledge exchange components were identified, relating to the role of Aboriginal Brain Injury Coordinators, cultural training of hospital staff and the research process itself. Knowledge plans were developed for key audiences, with potential translation products to be monitored for ongoing impact.

Results
Results demonstrate that translational and knowledge exchange were iteratively embedded throughout the trial life cycle. Data sources included community engagement, partnership meetings and interviews. Activities involved presentations to diverse audiences including bureaucrats, community and participants.

Conclusions
This report provides a snapshot of the first translation knowledge exchange plan and activities constructed in relation to brain injury rehabilitation services for Aboriginal people. Challenges encountered, as well as successes to date, are discussed.

Background
Healing Right Way (HRW) aimed to improve health outcomes for Aboriginal Australians with stroke or traumatic brain injury by facilitating system-level access to culturally secure rehabilitation services. Using a stepped-wedge randomised controlled trial (RCT) design (ACTRN12618000139279, 30/01/2018), a two-pronged intervention was introduced in four rural and four urban hospitals, comprising 1.Cultural security training (CST) for staff and 2.Training/employment of Aboriginal Brain Injury Coordinators (ABIC) to support Aboriginal patients for 6-months post-injury. Three-quarters of recruited patients lived rurally. The main outcome measure was quality-of-life, with secondary outcomes including functional measures, minimum processes of care (MPC); number rehabilitation occasions of service received, and improved hospital experience. Assessments were undertaken at baseline, 12- and 26-weeks post-injury. Only MPCs and hospital experience were found to improve among intervention patients.
We report on the process evaluation aiming to support interpretation and translation of results.

Methods
Using mixed methods, the evaluation design was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Data sources included minutes, project logs, surveys, semi-structured interviews, and observations.
Four evaluation questions provided a basis for systematic determination of the quality of the trial. Findings from separate sources were combined to synthesise the emerging themes that addressed the evaluation questions. Three components were considered separately: the trial process, CST and ABIC.

Results
The complex HRW trial was implemented to a satisfactory level despite challenging setting factors, particularly rural–urban system dynamics. Patient recruitment constraints could not be overcome. The vulnerability of stepped-wedge designs to time effects influenced recruitment and trial results, due to COVID. Despite relatively high follow-up, including to rural/remote areas, data points were reduced. The lack of culturally appropriate assessment tools influenced the quality/completeness of assessment data. The ABIC role was deemed feasible and well-received. The CST involved complex logistics, but rated highly although online components were often incomplete. Project management was responsive to staff, patients and setting factors.

Conclusions
Despite mostly equivocal results, the ABIC role was feasible within mainstream hospitals and the CST was highly valued. Learnings will help build robust state-wide models of culturally secure rehabilitation for Aboriginal people after brain injury, including MPC, workforce, training and follow-up.

Purpose: Colonisation and continuing discrimination have significantly and negatively impacted the physical, social and emotional wellbeing of First Nations peoples globally. In Australia, Aboriginal cultures thrive despite ongoing barriers to health care. This paper describes challenges and new initiatives for Australian Aboriginal people with acquired communication disability after brain injury and their alignment with the global aims forming the Sustainable Development Goals.

Result: Research undertaken by an Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal multidisciplinary team over a decade in Western Australia identified and responded to mismatches between community needs and services. Initiatives described include the Missing Voices, Healing Right Way, Brain Injury Yarning Circles and Wangi/Yarning Together projects. Recommendations implemented related to (a) greater incorporation of Aboriginal cultural protocols and values within services, (b) more culturally secure assessment and treatment tools, (c) support after hospital discharge, (d) Aboriginal health worker involvement in support. Implementation includes cultural training of hospital staff, trialling new assessment and treatment methods, and establishing community-based Aboriginal Brain Injury Coordinator positions and relevant peer support groups.

Conclusion: Culturally secure brain injury rehabilitation in Australia is in its infancy. Our initiatives challenge assumptions about worldviews and established Western biomedical models of healthcare through incorporating Indigenous methodologies and leadership, and community-driven service delivery. This commentary paper focuses on Sustainable Development Goals 3, 16 and 17.

Aims: To determine whether the research processes and interventions were implemented as planned and investigate how complex contextual factors influenced trial outcomes.

Methods: This prospective mixed-methods process evaluation used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to guide data collection and inform analysis. We gathered qualitative and quantitative site-specific data throughout HRW, including staff interviews, project logs, meeting minutes, participant surveys. These data related to (1)implementation of trial processes (research design, recruitment/sample, follow-up, data collection); (2)CST; and (3)ABIC role, with fidelity and intervention integrity also examined.

Results: Both interventions were implemented broadly as planned, with diversity of culture, geography and administrative systems navigated throughout. The ABIC role refined over the study, with additional training/support introduced to the ABIC team as needed. Despite logistical challenges, mainly related to site/system-specific barriers, CST reached the target attendance numbers, with positive feedback and face-to-face sessions preferred. Sub-optimal identification of eligible hospital patients, COVID-19 and next-of-kin consent legislation were major reasons for under-recruitment (and impacted statistical power). The ~80% follow-up post-discharge was exemplary, given most participants returned to rural areas post-discharge, however, the volume/complexity of assessments made their completion challenging. HRW was under-resourced given the complex responses required to address system and contextual challenges.

Conclusion: In the context of COVID-19 and despite inconclusive results, HRW successfully implemented interventions, with completion and intervention fidelity achieved. The process evaluation documents significant lessons and makes recommendations for future research and rehabilitation services for Aboriginal people.

In this article, we explore the benefits of recognizing the impact of intersectionality on access to, and provision of, brain injury care in a First Nations context. While disadvantage and discrimination are often associated with the intersection of culture, gender, disability, and socioeconomic disadvantage, it is only when these factors are explored together that clinicians can really understand what people need to recover and thrive following acquired brain injury. In this article, we challenge speech-language pathologists to examine their own practices, to look beyond Western models of health and constraints of many current institutional models of care and ways of framing research, to acknowledge historical and ongoing colonizing influences, and to engage with community-led solutions. We provide a model of Aboriginal-led care, where intersection of discrimination and marginalization is minimized and the multiple components of the individual, carers/communication partners, and the environment become empowering factors instead.

Objective
Recruitment in research can be challenging in Australian Aboriginal contexts. We aimed to evaluate the SToP (See, Treat, Prevent skin infections) trial recruitment approach for
Aboriginal families to identify barriers and facilitators and understand the utility of the visual resource used.

Methods
This qualitative participatory action research used purposive sampling to conduct six semistructured interviews with staff and five yarning sessions with Aboriginal community members from the nine communities involved in the SToP trial that were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim before thematic analysis.

Findings
Community members valued the employment of local Aboriginal facilitators who used the flipchart to clearly explain the importance of healthy skin and the rationale for the SToP trial while conducting recruitment. A prolonged process, under-developed administrative systems and stigma of the research topic emerged as barriers.

Conclusion
Partnering with a local Aboriginal organisation, employing Aboriginal researchers, and utilising flip charts for recruitment was seen by some as successful. Strengthening governance with more planning and support for recordkeeping emerged as future success factors.

Implications for public health
Our findings validate the importance of partnership for this critical phase of a research project. Recruitment strategies should be co-designed with Aboriginal research partners. Further, recruitment rates for the SToP trial provide a firm foundation for building partnerships between organisations and ensuring Aboriginal perspectives determine recruitment
methods.