BACKGROUND: Community-driven research in primary healthcare (PHC) may reduce the chronic disease burden in Indigenous peoples. This systematic review assessed the cultural safety of reports of research on PHC use by Indigenous peoples from four countries with similar colonial histories.
METHODS: Medline, CINAHL and Embase were all systematically searched from 1st January 2002 to 4th April 2023. Papers were included if they were original studies, published in English and included data (quantitative, qualitative and/or mixed methods) on primary healthcare use for chronic disease (chronic kidney disease, cardiovascular disease and/or diabetes mellitus) by Indigenous Peoples from Western colonial countries. Study screening and data extraction were undertaken independently by two authors, at least one of whom was Indigenous. The baseline characteristics of the papers were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Aspects of cultural safety of the research papers were assessed using two quality appraisal tools: the CONSIDER tool and the CREATE tool (subset analysis). This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) tool.
RESULTS: We identified 35 papers from Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the United States. Most papers were quantitative (n = 21) and included data on 42,438 people. Cultural safety across the included papers varied significantly with gaps in adequate reporting of research partnerships, provision of clear collective consent from participants and Indigenous research governance throughout the research process, particularly in dissemination. The majority of the papers (94%, 33/35) stated that research aims emerged from communities or empirical evidence. We also found that 71.4% (25/35) of papers reported of using strengths-based approaches by considering the impacts of colonization on reduced primary healthcare access.
CONCLUSIONS: Research on Indigenous PHC use should adopt more culturally safe ways of providing care and producing research outputs which are relevant to community needs by privileging Indigenous voices throughout the research process including dissemination. Indigenous stakeholders should participate more formally and explicitly throughout the process to guide research practices, inclusive of Indigenous values and community needs.

As a result of overlapping social, economic, historical, and political influences, and intersecting experiences of racism, stigma and discrimination within healthcare, Indigenous Peoples in Canada experience inequitable access to healthcare and oncology care. The aim of this paper is to highlight some of the barriers contributing to inequitable access to oncology care, research examining oncology nurses\' perspectives on these barriers and their roles in addressing barriers, and implications for nursing practice. Importantly, the role of nurses is not often considered in relation to healthcare access. By highlighting recent research evidence, I aim to open space to see the valuable work of oncology nurses, and to consider where and how we, as a profession, could better address inequities in access to oncology care for Indigenous Peoples.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis B is endemic amongst the Australian Aboriginal population in the Northern Territory. A participatory action research project identified the lack of culturally appropriate education tools and led to the development of the \"Hep B Story\" app in the Aboriginal language Yolŋu Matha. This paper describes a formal evaluation of the app\'s first version, which informed improvements and translation into a further ten Aboriginal languages.
METHODS: The evaluation employed Participatory Action Research (PAR) principles to work within Indigenous research methodologies and prioritise Indigenous knowledge to improve the app iteratively. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted across the Northern Territory with 11 different language groups. Local Community Based Researchers and Aboriginal Research team members coordinated sessions. The recorded, translated conversations were transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed using an inductive and deductive approach.
RESULTS: Between November 2018 and September 2020, 94 individuals from 11 language groups participated in 25 semi-structured interviews and 10 focus groups. All participants identified as Aboriginal. Most participants felt the app would be culturally appropriate for Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory and improve knowledge surrounding hepatitis B. The information gathered from these interviews allowed for identifying five main themes: support for app, relationships, concept versus language, shame, and perceptions of images, along with errors that required modification.
CONCLUSIONS: A \"real-life\" evaluation of the app was comprehensively completed using a PAR approach blended with Indigenous research methods. This evaluation allowed us to develop an updated and enhanced version of the app before creating the additional ten language versions. An iterative approach alongside strong community engagement was pivotal in ensuring the app\'s cultural safety and appropriateness. We recommend avoiding the use of knowledge-based evaluations in an Aboriginal setting to ensure relevant and culturally appropriate feedback is obtained.

BACKGROUND: Understanding how the general practice medical workforce defines cultural safety may help tailor education and training to better enable community-determined culturally safe practice. This project seeks to explore how Australian general practice registrars define cultural safety with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patients and alignment with an Australian community derived definition of cultural safety.
METHODS: This mixed method study involved a survey considering demographic details of general practice registrars, questionnaire, and semi-structured interviews to explore how general practice registrars defined cultural safety and a culturally safe consultation.
RESULTS: Twenty-six registrars completed the survey. Sixteen registrars completed both the survey and the interview.
CONCLUSIONS: This study shows amongst this small sample that there is limited alignment of general practice registrars\' definitions of cultural safety with a community derived definition of cultural safety. The most frequently cited aspects of cultural safety included accessible healthcare, appropriate attitude, and awareness of differences.

This study aimed to explore the experiences and perspectives of people with osteoarthritis attending the \"Osteoarthritis School\" (OA School) in Nuuk, Greenland to generate insights and lessons that can inform the development of self-management education and exercise interventions for people with other lifestyle conditions in a Greenland context. We conducted a qualitative interpretive description (ID) study based on ten semi-structured interviews with people with hip or knee osteoarthritis. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded. Using ID, we identified three themes: 1) perceptions and experiences of how the OA School intervention was organised (time and place); 2) perspectives and experiences of the education and exercise components (social factors, motivation, and education); and 3) significant change stories (physical and mental improvements and increased knowledge of OA). Social and organisational factors, such as working out with peers and the time and place of the intervention, influenced the participants\' acceptance of the OA School intervention. Knowledge from this study will help us gain insight into what to address when developing future self-management education and exercise interventions in the Greenlandic healthcare system.

UNASSIGNED: Culturally safe service provision is essential to improving social and emotional wellbeing among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, and to eliminating health inequities. Cultural safety is about ensuring that all people have a safe and healing journey through services, regardless of their cultural background. In this project, we aim to (1) understand how Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples conceptualise cultural safety, and (2) co-design a qualitative interview for the next phase of this project, where we plan to learn about experiences of cultural safety within mental health services.
UNASSIGNED: We conducted six focus groups (in one metro and two regional areas, Western Australia). Following an Aboriginal Participatory Action Research methodology, we yarned with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander mental health service users, carers, community members, mental health professionals and Cultural Healers about cultural safety.
UNASSIGNED: Participants described a culturally safe service as one where Aboriginal cultural knowledges, life experiences, issues and protocols are understood and acknowledged, and reported that mainstream mental health services are not currently culturally safe. Participants emphasised the importance of building trust, rapport, reciprocity and following appropriate relational processes when designing a qualitative interview for the next phase.
UNASSIGNED: A lack of cultural safety in mental health services is likely to contribute to the disparity in outcomes between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and non-Indigenous Australians. Embedding cultural safety into research design allows for authentic community engagement and facilitates knowledge sharing around ways to improve cultural safety in mental health services.

UNASSIGNED: Cultural safety is an approach to patient care designed to facilitate respect of patients\' cultural needs and address inequities in care in culturally diverse situations.
UNASSIGNED: Much literature considers culturally safe care during the perinatal period, yet little is known about how patients experience and understand cultural safety. This is despite patient-defined care being one of the definitions of cultural safety.
UNASSIGNED: This scoping review investigates what is known from existing qualitative literature about patients\' experience of cultural safety frameworks in perinatal interventions.
UNASSIGNED: A search for \"cultural safety\" OR \"culturally safe\" in PubMed, Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, Scielo, and Latin America and the Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences returned 2233 results after deduplication. Title-abstract and full-text screenings were conducted to identify qualitative studies of cultural safety from perinatal patients\' perspectives. Seven studies were included in the final analysis. Data were open coded using NVivo.
UNASSIGNED: Three themes were identified: (1) care that acknowledged that their lives were different from patients in the dominant culture, (2) receiving care in community, and (3) care providers who respected their choices and culturally specific knowledge.
UNASSIGNED: This research shows how cultural safety intersects with other equity-based frameworks used in midwifery and obstetrics.
UNASSIGNED: Building on this research could lead to new protocols that address complex social and physical needs of marginalized people during the perinatal period.

BACKGROUND: Indigenous people who use unregulated drugs (IPWUD) face significant barriers to care, including sparse availability of culturally safe health services. Integrating Indigenous traditional and cultural treatments (TCT) into health service delivery is one way to enhance culturally safe care. In a Canadian setting that implemented cultural safety reforms, we sought to examine the prevalence and correlates of client perceptions of primary care provider awareness of TCT among IPWUD.
METHODS: Data were derived from two prospective cohort studies of PWUD in Vancouver, Canada between December 2017 and March 2020. A generalized linear mixed model with logit-link function was used to identify longitudinal factors associated with perceived provider awareness of TCT.
RESULTS: Among a sample of 507 IPWUD who provided 1200 survey responses, a majority (n = 285, 56%) reported their primary care provider was aware of TCT. In multiple regression analyses, involvement in treatment decisions always (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] = 3.6; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.6-7.8), involvement in treatment decisions most or some of the time (AOR = 3.3; 95% CI: 1.4-7.7), comfort with provider or clinic (AOR = 2.7; 95% CI: 1.5-5.0), and receiving care from a social support worker (AOR = 1.5; 95% CI: 1.0-2.1) were positively associated with provider awareness of TCT.
CONCLUSIONS: We found high levels of perceived provider awareness of TCT and other domains of culturally safe care within a cohort of urban IPWUD. However, targeted initiatives that advance culturally safe care are required to improve healthcare and health outcomes for IPWUD, who continue to bear a disproportionate burden of substance use harms.

The inclusion of Indigenous cultures, known as the cultural determinants of health, in healthcare policy and health professional education accreditation and registration requirements, is increasingly being recognised as imperative for improving the appalling health and well-being of Indigenous Australians. These inclusions are a strengths-based response to tackling the inequities in Indigenous Australians\' health relative to the general population. However, conceptualising the cultural determinants of health in healthcare practice has its contextual challenges, and gaps in implementation evidence are apparent. In this paper, we provide a case example, namely the Katherine Hospital, of how healthcare services can implement the cultural determinants of health into clinical practice. However, to be effective, health professionals must concede that Australia\'s Indigenous peoples\' knowledges involving cultural ways of being, knowing and doing must co-exist with western and biomedical knowledges of health practice. We use the Katherine Hospital ABC Radio National Background Briefing interview, which was mentioned by two research participants in a 2020 study, as an example of good practice that we can learn from. Additionally, the six Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health actions contained in the 2nd Edition of the Australian National Safety and Quality Health Service Standards provide governance and accountability examples of how to enable Indigenous people\'s cultures and their knowledges in the provision of services. The role of non-Indigenous clinical allies and accomplices is imperative when embedding and enacting Indigenous Australians\' cultures in service systems of health. When Indigenous Peoples access mainstream hospitals, deep self-reflection by allies and accomplices is necessary to enable safe, quality care, and treatment that is culturally safe and free from racism. Doing so can increase cultural responsiveness free of racism, thereby reducing the inherent power imbalances embedded within mainstream health services.

BACKGROUND: First Nations peoples in colonised countries often feel culturally unsafe in hospitals, leading to high self-discharge rates, psychological distress and premature death. To address racism in healthcare, institutions have promised to deliver cultural safety training but there is limited evidence on how to teach cultural safety. To that end, we created Ask the Specialist Plus: a training program that focuses on improving healthcare providers intercultural communication skills to improve cultural safety. Our aim is to describe training implementation and to evaluate the training according to participants.
METHODS: Inspired by cultural safety, Critical Race Theory and Freirean pedagogy, Ask the Specialist Plus was piloted at Royal Darwin Hospital in Australia\'s Northern Territory in 2021. The format combined listening to an episode of a podcast called Ask the Specialist with weekly, one-hour face-to-face discussions with First Nations Specialists outside the clinical environment over 7 to 8 weeks. Weekly surveys evaluated teaching domains using five-point Likert scales and via free text comments. Quantitative data were collated in Excel and comments were collated in NVivo12. Results were presented following Kirkpatrick\'s evaluation model.
RESULTS: Fifteen sessions of Ask the Specialist Plus training were delivered. 90% of participants found the training valuable. Attendees enjoyed the unique format including use of the podcast as a catalyst for discussions. Delivery over two months allowed for flexibility to accommodate clinical demands and shift work. Students through to senior staff learnt new skills, discussed institutionally racist systems and committed to behaviour change. Considering racism is commonly denied in healthcare, the receptiveness of staff to discussing racism was noteworthy. The pilot also contributed to evidence that cultural safety should be co-taught by educators who represent racial and gender differences.
CONCLUSIONS: The Ask the Specialist Plus training program provides an effective model for cultural safety training with high potential to achieve behaviour change among diverse healthcare providers. The training provided practical information on how to improve communication and fostered critical consciousness among healthcare providers. The program demonstrated that training delivered weekly over two months to clinical departments can lead to positive changes through cycles of learning, action, and reflection.