8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Partnership, trust and respect: NSW's response to COVID‐19 among Aboriginal people

      article-commentary

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aboriginal communities can celebrate gre%at success from navigating the COVID‐19 pandemic throughout 2020 and have demonstrated once again the immense strength and resilience of Aboriginal peoples. As of December 2020, the state of New South Wales (NSW) has had only 45 cases of COVID‐19 among people who identify as Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander, and there have been no subsequent deaths. This represents 1% of all COVID‐19 cases in New South Wales where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people (hereafter Aboriginal people in recognition of Aboriginal people being the First Peoples of New South Wales) comprise 3% of the population. This success contrasts with the experience of COVID‐19 among Indigenous Nations and minority groups internationally, 1 , 2 and with Australia's previous performance during the 2009 (H1N1) influenza pandemic, which disproportionately affected Aboriginal people and saw higher rates of infection, hospitalisation, intensive care admission and death for Aboriginal than for non‐Aboriginal people. 1 , 2 , 3 Early in the pandemic, Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations (ACCHOs) and Aboriginal communities mobilised rapidly to reduce the risk of local COVID‐19 outbreaks, and this is a key reason for the success to date in keeping Aboriginal people safe from COVID‐19. 4 , 5 Supporting these efforts in New South Wales is a comprehensive partnership approach to COVID‐19 from the government health agency and the Aboriginal Community Controlled Health sector. The Aboriginal Health and Medical Research Council of NSW (AH&MRC) is the statewide representative body for the NSW Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations (ACCHOs) and has 47 members across the state. The AH&MRC and NSW Health have a formal partnership agreement that is more than 20 years old. This partnership is coordinated by the AH&MRC and the Centre for Aboriginal Health, NSW Ministry of Health, through monthly meetings focused on agreed priorities. Both parties have increasingly prioritised a strong partnership as a way of ensuring both parties are able to deliver meaningful outcomes for Aboriginal people and communities. The partnership is built upon the principles of self‐determination and collaboration to achieve the shared vision of improving Aboriginal peoples’ health and wellbeing in New South Wales. 6 In 2009, during the (H1N1) influenza pandemic, the AH&MRC and NSW Health built upon their partnership to establish a coordinated response to priority issues, identify gaps in communication and develop and disseminate communication resources. Reflections on the Aboriginal health response to the 2009 pandemic revealed that localised responses, the use of Aboriginal health champions and humour in communication materials and addressing social and community support issues were needed to support Aboriginal communities during infectious disease outbreaks. 7 In addition, there were limited avenues for Aboriginal people and organisations to inform and lead national and statewide pandemic responses. This reflection provided important learnings for the 2020 COVID‐19 response. Partnership, including with non‐government organisations, is a World Health Organization guiding principle for emergency response. 10 Partnerships work when there is a history of collaboration, mutual respect and trust, a shared focus with clear roles, open and frequent communication and adequate resources to participate. 8 Partnerships between Aboriginal and other health services provide a range of potential benefits, including building cultural and clinical capacity, broadening initiatives to better respond to the social determinants of health and health literacy, addressing institutional racism, and facilitating an integrated health response for planning and patient experience purposes. 9 However, challenges can also exist, including power and resource imbalances, differing timelines and competing priorities and different prioritisation of the partnership activities. Here we outline how the AH&MRC and NSW Health used the partnership to deliver a well‐integrated, comprehensive public health response to COVID‐19. We will outline the key areas of focus and activities delivered through the partnership and reflect on the challenges experienced during the pandemic to date, and the strengths of working in partnership to keep Aboriginal communities in New South Wales safe during COVID‐19. Partnership approach In February 2020, when Australia was seeing the first few COVID‐19 cases on our shores, NSW Health and AH&MRC commenced regular meetings to discuss the current situation, potential risks to Aboriginal people in New South Wales and ACCHOs, and strategies for minimising risk. Since February, these meetings have ranged from twice each week to fortnightly depending on the stage of the pandemic and have involved the executive and senior leadership of both partners who were responsible for leading operational, policy, communication, logistical and financial responses. This close working relationship built on many years of establishing and maintaining trust between the organisations (through timely responses to new issues, maintaining open and transparent communication and joint activities). Importantly, Aboriginal leadership of both organisations and the shared centring of Aboriginal peoples’ expertise and experiences were instrumental to maintaining this trust and informing shared work. There were equal opportunities for either partner to inform the agenda, discussions and actions. Outside of formal meetings, there were many phone calls and emails, which ensured that both partners were informed at every stage of the pandemic, agreed on priorities and were prepared adequately to rapidly respond to the situation as it unfolded. As part of this, local partnerships between ACCHOs and Local Health Districts (LHDs) were encouraged and supported by partners to problem solve local issues and ensure appropriate local planning. Conversely, strong partnerships between some LHDs and local ACCHOs provided valuable advice and examples to inform statewide responses. Specific activities to minimise the risk of COVID‐19 on Aboriginal people in New South Wales can be broadly grouped into five categories. Key activities to respond to COVID‐19 1. Targeted communications campaign The partners worked rapidly early in the pandemic, and have continued a high level of activity, to ensure appropriate messaging around key topics was available to Aboriginal people and services. To ensure communication materials were able to be rapidly developed and disseminated, NSW Health developed resources targeting Aboriginal people, while the AH&MRC developed resources targeting ACCHOs. This meant that while NSW Health and AH&MRC were familiar with the key messages and approaches taken by the partner organisation, delays from requiring two organisational approval pathways were minimised. Communication materials targeted hand hygiene, physical distancing, maintaining healthcare, wearing masks, protecting elders and getting tested, and were across print, television, radio and social media platforms. 2. Support for Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations to continue to deliver COVID‐Safe services Ensuring ACCHOs could continue to deliver necessary health services was a key priority for the partner organisations. Support for ACCHOs included guidance and resources on how to provide COVID‐safe health services, and assistance with procuring personal protective equipment, including direct provision where necessary, as well as providing flexibility in the use of funding and reporting requirements. 3. Increasing access to COVID‐19 testing NSW Health and AH&MRC closely monitored and shared information regarding the epidemiology of cases and potential risks for community transmission of COVID‐19. This assisted with identifying focus areas to support increased testing, either in an ACCHO or Local Health District setting, for sustained COVID‐19 testing or for time‐limited pop‐up clinics. NSW Health and AH&MRC also worked collaboratively with the Commonwealth Department of Health and the Kirby Institute to identify and support five ACCHOs to participate in the national COVID‐19 Point of Care Testing program ensuring rapid diagnosis of COVID‐19 in regional and remote locations. 4. Responding to public health orders, border restrictions and mass gathering events During the COVID‐19 pandemic, there have been ever‐changing legislation and guidance on border closures, travel to remote communities, industry and mass gatherings. The rapid turnaround times of changing guidance have required close and frequent communication between the partner organisations. A large state funeral required close engagement between the partner organisations and other stakeholders to develop and implement a comprehensive risk mitigation strategy involving increased testing capacity (including through point of care testing), enhanced communications, and provision of hand sanitiser, masks and health education material for around 1,000 attendees. No cases of COVID‐19 resulted from this event. 5. Informing the national response On 6 March 2020, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander National Advisory Group on COVID‐19 was established by the Australian Government's Department of Health. This group was established to provide advice to the Australian Government to ensure public health responses to COVID‐19 were appropriate, proportional and focused on equity. Representatives from the AH&MRC and NSW Health have been members of this group from its inception and have contributed to informing key national strategies and activities such as GP respiratory clinics, national health promotion materials, regulations and workforce planning. Box 1: Key strategies to support Aboriginal communities to stay COVID‐free. Aboriginal‐specific communications campaign Clear consistent messaging from partners to ACCHOs and communities Support ACCHOs to provide testing through point of care, or pop‐up and longer term respiratory clinics Ensure reliable and adequate supply of PPE and other consumables through different stages of the pandemic to support business continuity and COVID‐19 testing Ensure national and statewide responses are informed by, and respond to the needs of, Aboriginal people Support local partnership for improved community access to testing, integrated supports for cases and contacts and culturally safe contact tracing Address critical food shortages and mitigate risk associated with mass gatherings John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Outcomes COVID‐19 case numbers In total, there were 45 cases of COVID among Aboriginal people in New South Wales as of December 2020, which equates to less than 1% of the total number of cases in the state, with no deaths as a result of COVID‐19 in New South Wales’ Aboriginal people. The rate of confirmed cases among Aboriginal people for that period was 15.4 per 100,000 population. This is dramatically lower than the case rate among the non‐Aboriginal population, which was 47.8 per 100,000 population. COVID‐19 testing Aboriginal status for those receiving a COVID‐19 test is ascertained through linkage with other health information systems. Around 90% of tests can be assigned through this process as being for Aboriginal or non‐Aboriginal people. Overall, the rate of COVID testing across the state was higher among Aboriginal people than non‐Aboriginal people. From 1 April to 1 November 2020, the rate of testing in the Aboriginal population was 361.6 per 1,000 compared to the non‐Aboriginal population, where the rate was 353.5 per 1,000. Reflections on successes and challenges The existing and longstanding genuine partnership between the two organisations in no doubt contributed to an easy collaborative approach that enabled a high degree of effective activity. The trust and respect underpinning the partnership enabled open communication and collaborative work. This trust was reflected in the mutual respect framework in which the partnership operates with each partner respecting the expertise, stakeholders and sphere of influence of the other partner. Similarly, the principles and ways of working were known to each partner, so discussions on priorities and approaches were easily had and unsurprising. Furthermore, partners share the principle of valuing and prioritising Aboriginal ways of knowing and doing enabling appropriate, culturally informed responses led by Aboriginal people. Governance has been an important factor in the success of the response. In addition to the formal partnership agreement between the NSW Health and AH&MRC, coordination of a response to COVID‐19 among Aboriginal people across health sector partner organisations was supported by an AH&MRC Pandemic Toolkit and an NSW Health guideline on pandemic preparedness and response for Aboriginal communities, which helped both organisations define roles and responsibilities of key New South Wales stakeholders. The AH&MRC Pandemic Response Toolkit 12 aims to support ACCHOs to develop comprehensive preparedness and response plans and is designed to be complementary with a seasonal influenza toolkit, and advice and resources from state and Commonwealth health agencies. This toolkit and the NSW Health guideline provided a foundation to enable a series of statewide and local desktop scenario exercises requiring NSW Health and ACCHO collaboration to explore the COVID‐19 Aboriginal health responses and identify any gaps requiring addressing. These exercises were a key strategy in both ensuring COVID‐19 prevention and response strategies were culturally safe, but also to further build local partnerships between NSW Health services and ACCHOs. The ease with which the two organisations collaborated on the COVID‐19 response was at times at odds with other collaborations and partnerships required during the pandemic, particularly between organisations where no or little partnership existed. While the partnership between NSW Health and the AH&MRC enabled a broad range of COVID‐19 response strategies that contributed to low COVID‐19 case numbers and high testing rates, the success of Aboriginal communities during this pandemic is in large part due to Aboriginal people and communities. Aboriginal people and organisations have once again demonstrated strength and resilience, and the ability to keep their own mob safe. Looking ahead As we move into the next phase of the pandemic where vaccines will play a central role in the public health response, the partnership will focus on ensuring appropriate vaccine access for Aboriginal people. In addition, there are many lessons from our collective experience to date that will inform the ongoing partnership, our work with mainstream stakeholders and ongoing support to the community‐controlled health sector. Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge all the staff at AH&MRC and the Centre for Aboriginal Health for their efforts during the COVID‐19 pandemic, in particular Dr Kate Armstrong and Dr Anthony Zheng, and our partners, the Aboriginal community‐controlled health sector and Aboriginal health units in Local Health Districts for their continued work to keep Aboriginal people healthy. We would also like to acknowledge the support and hard work of the broader COVID‐19 response to contributing to the overall success of the New South Wales response to date. This work was completed while Elizabeth Ellis was employed as a trainee on the NSW Public Health Training Program funded by the NSW Ministry of Health. She undertook this work while based at the Centre for Aboriginal Health.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Evidence mounts on the disproportionate effect of COVID-19 on ethnic minorities

          Tony Kirby (2020)
          As the cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continue to increase across the world, evidence is continuing to emerge that the pandemic could be disproportionately affecting people from black, Asian, and minority ethnic (BAME) communities. In the UK, this trend first came to public attention during media reports that showed the first 11 doctors who sadly lost their lives to COVID-19, were all from BAME communities. Following this, various analyses have been published, with one showing that of 106 COVID-19 fatalities in health workers some two thirds (63%) were in BAME people (up to April 22, 2020). The figure was 94% for doctors and 71% for nurses, with the average reduced with the inclusion of other health-care workers (55%). The UK's Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre data, up to April 30, shows that of 6574 patients with COVID-19 in intensive care, one third were from non-white ethnic groups; ethnic minorities make up only 13% of the population as a whole. However, data released by NHS England on April 19 showed that of 13 918 patients in hospitals in England who had tested positive for COVID-19 at time of death, 73·6% were white and 16·2% were of BAME ethnicity—more representative of the proportion of BAME people in the general population. “The problem is that data on deaths and serious illness from COVID-19 among the health-care workforce and their ethnicity is not being routinely published by the government”, explains Dr Chaand Nagpaul, the British Medical Association (BMA) council chair and a general practitioner (GP) in north London, UK. “However, it is a clear and consistent theme from the reports and what we know about those who have died so far, that a disproportionate number of those health-care workers who have tragically lost their lives are from BAME communities.” The UK Health Secretary Matt Hancock has announced that there will be a review into the impact of COVID-19 on BAME communities, led by NHS England and Public Health England (PHE). The UK Government subsequently confirmed that the review will also analyse the effect of gender and obesity, as well as ethnicity. “While the review speaks of looking at existing health data, the BMA believes it is also vital to collect detailed data around occupation for all health-care workers who contract the infection, given that more than 150 are reported to have died, including at least 16 doctors, of whom 94% are from BAME origin”, says Nagpaul. “It is important to ascertain whether there are any occupational factors that have played a part in these health-care workers contracting the virus so that we can learn how to put in place measures to protect all health-care workers.” He adds that many factors affecting the wider ethnic minority community apply to ethnic minority doctors, such as the greater prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, and coronary heart disease, which are thought to increase the severity of COVID-19 infection. “We also know that a large proportion of BAME doctors work in staff grade, specialist, and associate specialist roles, which are crucial, patient-facing roles that are invaluable for the running of the NHS”, adds Nagpaul. “Workplace factors could have a part to play too; for example, a recent BMA survey has found that BAME doctors were twice as likely as white doctors to feel pressured to see patients in high-risk settings without adequate personal protective equipment (PPE). Other BMA research revealed that BAME doctors are twice as likely not to feel confident to raise concerns about safety in the workplace compared with their white colleagues.” Nagpaul raised all these concerns in a letter to Simon Stevens, the chief executive of NHS England, and days later, on April 29, 2020, NHS England wrote to all hospital trusts across England—as well as ambulance services, mental health trusts, and organisations providing community health—asking them to risk assess their BAME workers and where necessary reassign them to duties that leave them less at risk of contracting COVID-19. On May 1, 2020, the UK's Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) published its report, which found that people from ethnic minorities are more likely to live in areas badly affected by COVID-19 infection. However, despite people from ethnic minorities being younger on average than the white British population, and therefore theoretically less susceptible to infection, they were found to have higher death rates. After adjusting for age, sex, and geography, the authors of the IFS report found that the death rate for people of black African descent was 3·5 times higher than for white British people, while for those of black Caribbean and Pakistani descent, death rates were 1·7 times and 2·7 times higher, respectively. In the USA, early data suggest that African Americans are disproportionately affected by COVID-19. In a preliminary study of data compiled from hospitals in 14 US states, African Americans represented 33% of COVID-19 hospitalisations, despite only making up 18% of the total population studied. In another analysis, among COVID-19 deaths for which race and ethnicity data were available, death rates from COVID-19 in New York City (NY, USA) among black or African American people (92·3 deaths per 100 000 population) and Hispanic or Latino people (74·3) were substantially higher than that of white (45·2) or Asian (34·5) people. “Studies are underway to confirm these data and understand and potentially reduce the impact of COVID-19 on the health of racial and ethnic minorities”, a spokesperson from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirmed to The Lancet Respiratory Medicine. Chronic conditions, such as diabetes, asthma, hypertension, kidney disease, and obesity, are all more common in African American than white populations; all of these conditions have been associated with worse outcomes in COVID-19. However, the CDC states many other factors could be involved, such as people from ethnic minorities being more likely to live in more densely populated areas and housing, to use public transport more, and to work in lower paid service jobs without sick pay, meaning they would be more likely to go to work under all circumstances, increasing the risk of exposure. “I do not think that the pattern we are seeing in COVID-19 deaths for African Americans is solely due to pre-existing health conditions”, says Thomas A LaVeist, Dean of the School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine at Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, USA. “Race disparities in those diseases are not large enough to fully explain the COVID-19 death disparity. For example, there are no racial differences in obesity among men. Also, especially in the southern US states, white people also have extremely high rates of obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and the other chronic diseases.” LaVeist says it is difficult to have definitive views on the cause of ethnic disparities in COVID-19 mortality until the overall infection rate has been established in different racial groups. “Are African Americans more likely to have been exposed to the virus? They seem to be more likely than others to work in jobs that place them at risk, such as check-out clerks and delivery drivers, and less likely to have jobs that allow them to work from home.” He adds that most southern states with larger ethnic minority populations have declined to expand Medicaid, which has reduced the number of poorer residents with regular access to primary health care. “Each of these factors, many of them the result of policy decisions, play a role in producing disproportionate death rates among African Americans”, he says. In Australia, steps have been taken to protect Indigenous Australians living in remote and rural locations, mainly through the introduction of extremely strict limitations on travel in or out of these communities. “It's important to stress that the majority of Indigenous Australians live in urban or regional areas—large and small cities mainly on the coast of Australia. While a lot of focus is on remote communities, a high proportion of Indigenous Australians in urban and regional areas have the same elevated risk of serious COVID-19 illness due to multiple chronic conditions and are at risk of rapid spread due to a high prevalence of overcrowding”, explains Jason Agostino, medical advisor to the National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation and Lecturer in General Practice at the Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia. At the time of writing, Australia's latest COVID-19 epidemiology report (including data up to April 26, 2020) showed there were only 52 cases of COVID-19 among Indigenous Australians, representing less than 1% of Australia's cases despite Indigenous Australians being 3·3% of the population. “So far there have not been any cases in Indigenous Australians in remote or very remote regions”, explains Agostino. “Through the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander COVID-19 Advisory Group and other forums we are able to identify strategies to address community priorities. An early and positive step to prevent spread was the additional travel restrictions put in place for many remote communities at the request of community leaders.” However, institutional problems remain, in particular some communities have overcrowded housing and have no facilities to safely isolate and quarantine infected or suspected cases. “There has also been insufficient support to enable health-care staff to quarantine before entering remote communities. If a health service wants to enforce the 14-day quarantine for locum staff, they have to bear that cost”, says Agostino. Should an outbreak occur, protocols have been developed for early transfer of cases and their close contacts out of communities and into regional centres, and the Australian Federal Government recently announced additional funding for retrieval services. The risks of COVID-19 to Indigenous communities could not be clearer. More than 1 in 3 Indigenous Australian adults report having either cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or renal disease, and onset of these diseases often occurs 20 years earlier than the non-Indigenous population. Smoking rates are also much higher, with approximately 40% of adults smoking, more than double that seen in the non-Indigenous population. “The 2009 H1N1 influenza epidemic showed what can happen to Indigenous Australians”, says Agostino. “During that outbreak, rates of admission to the intensive care unit and mortality were some 4-times higher in Indigenous Australians compared with the non-Indigenous population.” He concludes that “while Australia's Federal and State and Territory Governments have put in place some good measures, the success so far is due to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people taking the lead and protecting their communities. Indigenous Australians began a network of community-controlled health organisations in the 1970s and this so-called whole of community, whole of person approach to health care is what is helping protect them in this early stage of the pandemic.” © 2020 Jim West/Science Photo Library 2020 Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Disproportionate impact of pandemic (H1N1) 2009 influenza on Indigenous people in the Top End of Australia's Northern Territory.

            To describe the impact of pandemic (H1N1) 2009 influenza (nH1N1) on Indigenous people in the Top End of the Northern Territory at community, hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) levels. We analysed influenza notifications for the Top End from 1 June to 31 August 2009, as well as data on patients admitted through Top End emergency departments with an influenza-like illness. In addition, data on patients with nH1N1 who were admitted to Royal Darwin Hospital (RDH) and the RDH ICU were prospectively collected and analysed. Age-adjusted notification rates for nH1N1 cases, Top End hospital admission rates for patients with nH1N1 and RDH ICU admission rates for patients with nH1N1, stratified by Indigenous status. There were 918 nH1N1 notifications during the study period. The age-adjusted hospital admission rate for nH1N1 was 82 per 100 000 (95% CI, 68-95) estimated resident population (ERP) overall, with a markedly higher rate in the Indigenous population compared with the non-Indigenous population (269 per 100 000 versus 29 per 100 000 ERP; adjusted incidence rate ratio, 12 [95% CI, 7.8-18]). Independent predictors of ICU admission compared with hospitalisation were hypoxia (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 4.5; CI, 1.5-13.1) and chest x-ray infiltrates (aOR, 4.3; CI, 1.5-12.6) on hospital admission. Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 influenza had a disproportionate impact on Indigenous Australians in the Top End, with hospitalisation rates higher than those reported elsewhere in Australia and overseas. These findings have implications for planning hospital and ICU capacity during an influenza pandemic in regions with large Indigenous populations. They also confirm the need to improve health and living circumstances and to prioritise vaccination in this population.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found

              First Nations peoples leading the way in COVID ‐19 pandemic planning, response and management

              Engaging First Nations peoples in public health emergencies is critical to reducing health inequities Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (respectfully hereafter First Nations) peoples of Australia have experienced poorer health outcomes than the rest of the Australian population during recent pandemics.1, 2 In 2009, during the H1N1 influenza pandemic, diagnosis rates, hospitalisations and intensive care unit admissions occurred at five, eight and three times, respectively, the rates recorded among non‐Indigenous people.1, 2, 3 The vulnerability of First Nations peoples to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) is well understood by community leaders and non‐Aboriginal policy makers and clinicians alike. The risks for First Nations peoples from COVID‐19 taking hold are immense — the oldest continuous culture on the planet is at risk. This is because of all of the following interrelated factors: an already high burden of chronic diseases; longstanding inequity related to service provision and access to health care, especially because 20% of First Nations peoples live in remote and very remote areas; and pervasive social and economic disadvantage in areas such as housing, education and employment. Moreover, many of the interventions put in place to curb the spread of COVID‐19 are counter cultural or difficult to implement because of crowded housing and extended family groups living together. This means interruption of cultural life in order to be consistent with new social isolation concepts. Using lessons learnt from the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic, First Nations clinicians, public health practitioners and researchers are strategically leading the way in public health planning, response and management for COVID‐19 alongside our non‐Indigenous dedicated allies. The omission of First Nations peoples from the 2009 National Action Plan for Human Influenza Pandemic4, 5 not only disadvantaged those who most needed protection but failed to identify First Nations peoples as being a high risk population group. Research following the 2009 pandemic found that a one‐size‐fits‐all approach to infectious disease emergencies is unlikely to work — partnerships between communities and government agencies for the management of public health emergencies could be improved,6, 7 and future pandemics should ensure that First Nations peoples are appropriately engaged as active and equal participants in pandemic preparedness, response, recovery and evaluation.6, 8 During the early days of the COVID‐19 pandemic, we as a community have proactively proceeded to ensure that this occurs. Recognising that public health measures, containment strategies and risk communication often do not consider the socio‐economic, historical or cultural context of First Nations peoples, it is appropriate that First Nations peoples lead the way in pandemic planning. Pandemic plans developed and implemented with First Nations peoples leading will likely mitigate risks and avoid the oversights of the 2009 response. On 6 March 2020, the Australian Government Department of Health convened the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Group on COVID‐19 to provide advice on preparedness, response and recovery planning. The Advisory Group works on principles of shared decision making, power sharing, two‐way communication, self‐determination, leadership and empowerment. The Advisory Group is co‐chaired by the National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation with the Department of Health and includes membership from the Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisation sector, state and territory government representatives, and First Nations communicable disease experts.9 The Advisory Group links to the Communicable Diseases Network Australia and reports to the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee. The brief is to ensure that all stages of the pandemic are considered with an equity lens and are proportional to the risk of disease in communities; to discuss and work through logistic issues related to the pandemic, especially in planning phases; and to ensure that these actions are locally led, holistic and culturally safe for communities. The group initially met three times per week and currently meets twice weekly via video or teleconference. The Advisory Group has provided strategic input into the development of the national management and operational plans for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations,10 and has significantly contributed to the series of national COVID‐19 guidelines.11 To prepare communities for COVID‐19, Advisory Group actions and advocacy have included: Legislative changes: Strong advocacy and input to government has minimised non‐essential travel by visitors to remote communities.12 The enactment of the Biosecurity Act 2015 (Cth) has enabled placement of restrictions on state and territory as well as national borders. In addition, many Aboriginal Land Councils have closed access and refused to issue new permits for visitors to communities within their remit. Development of national guidelines on COVID‐19: National guidelines are being developed to ensure that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are accorded priority in the national response.11 Separate guidance focused on remote communities has also been developed, addressing circumstances and logistic challenges in these areas, such as medical evacuation, community‐wide screening, limited isolation and quarantine spaces if initial COVID‐19 cases are detected in this setting. Health services planning: Almost all communities with significant First Nations populations have been in preparedness mode and have enacted local action plans to respond to COVID‐19. In many cases, this has extended beyond the development of a local plan and has included initiatives such as reconfiguring clinics to facilitate testing, isolation of suspected cases, and preparing staff in infectious disease training relevant to COVID‐19. The Commonwealth Government has expanded telehealth services (phone and video‐based calls with health providers), ensuring that people with chronic disease and other health conditions can receive consultations. Establishing rapid testing in remote communities: The Advisory Group is working with the Kirby Institute to rapidly establish increased COVID‐19 testing capacity in communities across Australia using point‐of‐care platforms (nucleic acid amplification testing) that provide a result within 45 minutes from a nasopharyngeal swab. Overall, 85 rapid testing platforms will be placed in remote and regional settings, using a hub‐and‐spoke model. Trained existing health care workers in communities will be provided with online training in the use of the platforms. This strategy will greatly enhance the ability to rapidly provide test results, reducing times from between 3–10 days to within a few hours for most communities across Australia. This strategy will enable contacts to be tested early and ensure that local action plans and strategies are enacted to minimise community transmission. Infrastructure planning: Many communities have planned additional spaces for isolation and quarantine in the advent of an outbreak in communities, which is especially challenging in the context of already overcrowded housing. In some cases, the minerals and exploration industry has offered communities unused accommodation and facilities during the COVID‐19 period. Expanding testing sites: The Commonwealth Department of Health has facilitated the opening of general practitioner‐led respiratory clinics, including some in Aboriginal community controlled health services. Workforce planning: There is much ongoing discussion about the need to protect and maintain workforces in Aboriginal health care settings. Much of remote Australia is reliant on locum staff who will require quarantining before starting clinical activities within communities, but this places additional strain on existing workforce capacity. Recent outbreaks among health care workers in remote Australia highlight the vulnerability of remote community populations. Health promotion materials: Targeted communication resources for First Nations peoples have been developed.13 Health organisations have stepped up and developed local resources appropriate for their own community populations. Many of these can be found on the National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation website (https://www.naccho.org.au/). Other organisations have also created health education materials to help inform and educate their community populations. In many cases, development of culturally specific resources has been conducted by Aboriginal health workers and practitioners. Epidemiological tracking of COVID‐19: Work has commenced to ensure accurate and timely surveillance of cases among First Nations peoples. This will enable responses to be actioned swiftly and prevent loss of precious time in an outbreak situation. Infectious disease modelling to help inform approaches: Mathematical models are being used to investigate the best approaches to use in communities once cases are identified. Additional social distancing, isolation, quarantine measures, contact tracing, and testing strategies are currently being developed to inform responses. Advocacy: Significant advocacy across all levels of the response continue, such as the ongoing need for adequate supply of personal protective equipment for the Aboriginal community controlled health services sector, quarantine measures and testing guidelines. Pandemics are a serious public health risk for First Nations communities here and globally. Measures to reduce COVID‐19 risk have been addressed swiftly, based on lessons learnt from the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic response. The involvement of communities has been fundamental to early change and action. Making space for First Nations peoples to define the issues, determine the priorities and suggest solutions for culturally informed strategies that address local community needs may reduce health inequities and has the potential to influence system changes. Privileging First Nations voices, within a culturally appropriate governance structure, to develop and implement planning, response and management protocols, can make a real difference. The model has the potential to be replicated where public health agencies and First Nations practitioners and researchers have developed shared understanding. Only time will tell now how we will fare over the coming months. Competing interests No relevant disclosures. Provenance Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Megan.campbell2@health.nsw.gov.au
                Journal
                Aust N Z J Public Health
                Aust N Z J Public Health
                10.1111/(ISSN)1753-6405
                AZPH
                Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                1326-0200
                1753-6405
                28 June 2021
                August 2021
                28 June 2021
                : 45
                : 4 ( doiID: 10.1111/azph.v45.4 )
                : 315-317
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Centre for Aboriginal Health NSW Ministry of Health, NSW Health
                [ 2 ] Aboriginal Health & Medical Research Council of NSW
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence to: Dr Megan Campbell, Centre for Aboriginal Health, NSW Ministry of Health, NSW Health; e‐mail: Megan.campbell2@ 123456health.nsw.gov.au
                Article
                AZPH13138
                10.1111/1753-6405.13138
                8441659
                34181296
                a232451f-cef6-43c4-8c19-6c62676e07db
                © 2021 The Authors

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

                History
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 1, References: 12, Pages: 3, Words: 2754
                Funding
                Funded by: NSW Ministry of Health , doi 10.13039/501100008810;
                Categories
                Commentary
                Commentary
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                August 2021
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.0.7 mode:remove_FC converted:15.09.2021

                Comments

                Comment on this article