Aboriginal #Nutrition Health and #Sugar : @healthgovau Health Star Rating System review closes 17 August

 ” The Health Star Rating System has been marred by anomalies. Milo powder (44% sugar) increased its basic 1.5 Stars to 4.5 by assuming it will be added to skim milk. About one in every seven products bearing health stars goes against the Department of Health’s own recommendations.

Those of us working in public health question why obvious junk foods get any stars at all.”

See Sugar, sugar everywhere MJA insight article in full Part 3 below

  ” In 2012-13, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people 2 years and over consumed an average of 75 grams of free sugars per day (equivalent to 18 teaspoons of white sugar)1. Added sugars made up the majority of free sugar intakes with an average of 68 grams (or 16 teaspoons) consumed and an additional 7 grams of free sugars came from honey and fruit juice. “

ABS Report abs-indigenous-consumption-of-added-sugars 

See Part 1 below for Aboriginal sugar facts

The Health Star Rating (HSR) Advisory Committee (HSRAC), responsible for overseeing the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the HSR system is undertaking a five year review of the HSR system.

The five year review of the system is well underway, with a public submission process opening on 8 June 2017 on the Australian Department of Health’s online Consultation Hub.

Since the consultation period has been opened there has been strong interest in the system from stakeholders representing a diverse range of views.

To ensure that as much evidence as possible is captured, along with stakeholders’ views on the system, a further two week extension to the consultation period has been agreed and it will now close on 17 August 2017

See full survey details Part 2 Below

Part 1 Aboriginal sugar facts

ABS Report

abs-indigenous-consumption-of-added-sugars

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people consume around 14 per cent of their total energy intake as free sugars, according to data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS).

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that free sugars contribute less than 10 per cent of total energy intake.

Director of Health, Louise Gates, said the new ABS report showed Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are consuming an average of 18 teaspoons (or 75 grams) of free sugars per day (almost two cans of soft drink), four teaspoons more than non-Indigenous people (14 teaspoons or 60 grams).

OTHER KEY FINDINGS

    • Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people derived an average of 14% of their daily energy from free sugars, exceeding the WHO recommendation that children and adults should limit their intake of free sugars to less than 10% of dietary energy.
    • Free sugars made the greatest contribution to energy intakes among older children and young adults. For example, teenage boys aged 14-18 years derived 18 per cent of their dietary energy from free sugars as they consumed the equivalent of 25 teaspoons (106 grams) of free sugars per day. This amount is equivalent to more than two and a half cans of soft drink. Women aged 19-30 years consumed 21 teaspoons (87 grams) of free sugars, which contributed 17 per cent to their total energy intake.
    • The majority (87%) of free sugars were consumed from energy dense, nutrient-poor ‘discretionary’ foods and beverages. Two thirds (67%) of all free sugars consumed by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people came from beverages, led by soft drinks, sports and energy drinks (28%), followed by fruit and vegetable juices and drinks (12%), cordials (9.5%), and sugars added to beverages such as tea and coffee (9.4%), alcoholic beverages (4.9%) and milk beverages (3.4%).
    • Intakes were higher for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living in non-remote areas where the average consumption was 78 grams (18.5 teaspoons), around 3 teaspoons (12 grams) higher than people living in remote areas (65 grams or 15.5 teaspoons).
    • Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people consumed 15 grams (almost 4 teaspoons) more free sugars on average than non-Indigenous people. Beverages were the most common source of free sugars for both populations, however Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people derived a higher proportion of free sugars from beverages than non-Indigenous people (67% compared with 51%).

Part 2 @healthgovau Health Star Rating System review closes 17 August

Introduction

The Health Star Rating (HSR) Advisory Committee (HSRAC), responsible for overseeing the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the HSR system, is undertaking a five year review of the HSR system. The HSR system is a front-of-pack labelling (FoPL) scheme intended to assist consumers in making healthier diet choices. The findings of the review will be provided to the Australia and New Zealand Ministerial Forum on Food Regulation (Forum) in mid‑2019.

In parallel with this consultation on the HSR system five year review, the HSRAC is conducting a dedicated investigation of issues and concerns raised about the form of the food (‘as prepared’) rules in the Guide for Industry to the HSR Calculator. These enable additional nutrients to be taken into account when calculating star ratings based on foods prepared according to on-label directions. A specific consultation process seeking input into this investigation opened on 19 May 2017 and will close at 11.59 pm 30 June 2017. The form of the food (‘as prepared’) consultation can be viewed on the Australian Department of Health’s Consultation Hub.

The HSR system

The HSR system is a public health and consumer choice intervention designed to encourage people to make healthier dietary choices. The HSR system is a voluntary FoPL scheme that rates the overall nutritional profile of packaged food and assigns it a rating from ½ a star to 5 stars. It is not a system that defines what a ‘healthy’ or ‘unhealthy’ food is, but rather provides a quick, standardised way to compare similar packaged foods at retail level. The more stars, the healthier the choice. The HSR system is not a complete solution to assist consumers with choosing foods in line with dietary guidelines, but should be viewed as a way to assist consumers to make healthier packaged food choices.  Other sources of information, such as the Australian Dietary Guidelines and the New Zealand Eating and Activity Guidelines, also assist consumers in their overall food purchasing decisions.

The HSR system aims to:

1. Enable direct comparison between individual foods that, within the overall diet, may contribute to the risk factors of various diet related chronic diseases;

2. Be readily understandable and meaningful across socio-economic groups, culturally and linguistically diverse groups and low literacy/low numeracy groups; and

3. Increase awareness of foods that, within the overall diet, may contribute positively or negatively to the risk factors of diet related chronic diseases.

The HSR system consists of the graphics, including the words ‘Health Star Rating’, the rules identified in the HSR system Style Guide, the algorithm and methodology for calculating the HSR identified in the Guide for Industry to the HSR Calculator, and the education and marketing associated with the HSR implementation.

The HSR system is a joint Australian, state and territory and New Zealand government initiative developed in collaboration with industry, public health and consumer groups. The system is funded by the Australian government, the New Zealand government and all Australian jurisdictions during the initial five year implementation period.

From June 2014, food manufacturers started to apply HSRs to the front of food product packaging. Further information on the HSR system is available on the HSR website. The New Zealand Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) website also provides information on the HSR system in New Zealand.

Purpose and scope of the review
The five year review of the HSR system will consider if, and how well, the objectives of the HSR system have been met, and identify options for improvements to and ongoing implementation of the system (Terms of reference for the five year review).

With a focus on processed packaged foods, the objective of the HSR system is:

To provide convenient, relevant and readily understood nutrition information and /or guidance on food packs to assist consumers to make informed food purchases and healthier eating choices.

The HSRAC has agreed that the areas of communication, system enhancements, and monitoring and governance will be considered when identifying whether the objectives of the HSR system have been achieved.

Although HSRAC will need to be a part of the review process, a degree of independence is required and independent management and oversight of the review is an important factor to ensure credible and unbiased reporting. An independent consultant will be engaged to undertake the review. Specific detail about the scope of the review will be outlined in the statement of requirement for the independent consultant. A timeline for the five year review of the HSR system has been drafted and will be updated throughout the review.

Next steps in the review process

As part of the five year review, HSRAC is seeking evidence based submissions on the consultation questions provided in this discussion paper.

This consultation is open to the public, state and territory governments, relevant government agencies, industry and public health and consumer groups.

Making a submission

The HSRAC is seeking submissions on the merits of the HSR system, particularly in response to the consultation questions below. The aim of the questions is to assist respondents in providing relevant commentary. However, submissions are not limited to answering the questions provided.  Please provide evidence or examples to support comments. Some areas of this review are technical in nature therefore comments on technical issues should be based on scientific evidence and/or supported by research where appropriate. Where possible, please provide citations to published studies or other sources.

While the HSRAC will consider all submissions and proposals put forward, those that are not well supported by evidence are unlikely to be addressed as part of the five year review.

Enquiries specifically relating to this submission process can be made via email to: frontofpack@health.gov.au. Please DO NOT provide submissions by email.

After the consultation period closes the HSRAC will consider the submissions received and will prepare a summary table of the issues raised which will be published on the HSR website. All information within the summary table will be de-identifiable and will not contain any confidential material.

HSRAC will treat information of a confidential nature as such. Please ensure that material supplied in confidence is clearly marked ‘IN CONFIDENCE’ and is provided in a separate attachment to non-confidential material. Information provided in the submissions will only be used for the purpose of the five year review of the HSR system and will not be used for any other purpose without explicit permission.

Please see the Terms of Use and Privacy pages at the bottom of this page for further information on maintaining the security of your data.

For further information about the HSR system, including its resources and governance structure, please refer to the Australian HSR website and the New Zealand MPI website.

Part 3 Sugar Sugar MJA Insights

Originally published Here

IT’S hard to escape sugar, not only in what we eat and drink, but also in the daily news and views that seep into so many corners of our lives.

There’s nothing new about concern over sugar. I can trace my own fights with the sugar industry back to the 1960s, and since their inception in 1981, the Australian Dietary Guidelines have advised limiting sugary foods and drinks. The current emphasis in many articles in newspapers, magazines, popular books and online blogs, however, go further and recommend eliminating every grain of the stuff from the daily diet.

Taking an academic approach to the topic, the George Institute for Global Health has published data based on the analysis of 34 135 packaged foods currently listed in their Australian FoodSwitch database. They found added sugar in 87% of discretionary food products (known as junk foods in common parlance) and also in 52% of packaged foods that can be described as basic or core foods.

The George Institute’s analysis is particularly pertinent to the Department of Health’s Health Star Rating System, and found that some of the anomalies in the scheme could be eliminated by penalising foods for their content of added sugars rather than using total sugars in the product, as is currently the case.

The definition of “added sugars” used in Australia also needs attention, a topic that has been stressed in the World Health Organization’s guidelines. I will return to this later.

In Australia, the nutrition information panel on the label of packaged foods must include the total sugars present. This includes sugars that have been added (known as extrinsic sugars) as well as any sugars present naturally in ingredients such as milk, fruit or vegetables (intrinsic sugars).

There is no medical evidence to suggest that intrinsic sugars are a problem – at least not if they occur in “intact” ingredients. If you consume fruit, for example, the natural dietary fibre and the bulk of the fruit will limit the amount of the fruit’s intrinsic sugars you consume. However, if the sugar is extracted from the structure of the fruit, it becomes easy to consume much larger quantities. Few people could munch their way through five apples, but if you extract their juice, the drink would let you take in all the sugar and kilojoules of five apples in less than a minute.

The Australian Dietary Guidelines do not include advice to restrict fruit itself because there is high level evidence of its health value. The guidelines do, however, recommend that dried fruit and fruit juice be restricted – the equivalent of four dried apricot halves or 125 mL juice consumed only occasionally.

Contrary to the belief of some bloggers, Australia’s dietary guidelines have never suggested replacing fat with sugar. That was a tactic of some food companies who marketed many “low” or “reduced” fat foods where the fat was replaced with sugars or some kind of refined starch.

The wording of Australia’s guideline on sugar has changed. The initial advice to “avoid too much sugar” led to the sugar industry’s multimillion dollar campaign “Sugar, a natural part of life”. This included distributing “educational” material to the general public, politicians, doctors, dentists, pharmacists and other health professionals discussing the importance of a “balanced diet”.

In spite of fierce lobbying by the sugar industry, the next revision of the guidelines retained a sugar guideline, although it was watered down to “eat only moderate amounts of sugars”. Some school canteen operators reported that they had been confronted by sweet-talking sellers of junk foods omitting the word “only” from this guideline.

The evidence for sugar’s adverse effects on dental health have long been known, but the evidence against sugar and its potential role in obesity and, consequently, in type 2 diabetes and other health problems has grown stronger. The most recent revision of the National Health and Medical Research Council’s Dietary Guidelines, therefore, emphasises the need to “limit” added sugars and lists the foods that need particular attention.

Sugary drinks have been specifically targeted because the evidence against them is strong and extends beyond epidemiological studies. Double-blind trials now clearly link sugary drinks with weight gain, the only exceptions being a few trials funded by the food industry.

Added sugar is not the only topic for public health concern, and hence the government’s Health Star Rating System was set up to introduce a simple front-of-pack labelling scheme to assist Australians reduce their intake of saturated fat, salt and sugars from packaged foods.

A specially commissioned independent report (Evaluation of scientific evidence relating to Front of Pack Labelling by Dr Jimmy Chun Yu Louie and Professor Linda Tapsell of the School of Health Sciences, University of Wollongong) found that added sugars were the real problem, but the food industry argued that the scheme should include total sugars because this was already a mandatory inclusion on food labels and routine chemical analysis couldn’t determine the source of sugars.

This was a strange argument since food manufacturers know exactly how much sugar they add to any product, just as they know how many “offset” points the Health Star Rating System allows for the inclusion of fruit, vegetable, nuts or legumes. The content of these ingredients is only disclosed on the food label if used in the product’s name.

The Health Star Rating System has been marred by anomalies. Milo powder (44% sugar) increased its basic 1.5 Stars to 4.5 by assuming it will be added to skim milk. About one in every seven products bearing health stars goes against the Department of Health’s own recommendations.

Those of us working in public health question why obvious junk foods get any stars at all.

How can caramel topping or various types of confectionery, such as strawberry flavoured liquorice, each get 2.5 stars? Why do some chocolates sport 3.5 stars, while worthy products such as Greek yoghurt without any added sugars get 1.5 and a breakfast cereal with 27% sugar gets four stars?

The fact that over a third of Australian’s energy intake comes from discretionary products (40% for children) is the elephant in the room for excess weight. We need to reduce consumption of these products and allotting them health stars is not helping.

It’s clearly time to follow our dietary guidelines and limit both discretionary products and added sugar. Of the nutrients used in the current algorithm for health stars, the George Institute’s analysis shows that counting added rather than total sugars has the greatest individual capacity to discriminate between core and discretionary foods.

However, in moving to mandate added sugars on food labels and using added sugars in health stars, it’s vital to define these sugars. The World Health Organization has done so: “Free sugars refer to monosaccharides (such as glucose, fructose) and disaccharides (such as sucrose or table sugar) added to foods and drinks by the manufacturer, cook or consumer, and sugars naturally present in honey, syrups, fruit juices and fruit juice concentrates”.

Regular sugar in Australia could be described as cane juice concentrate. It has no nutrients other than its carbohydrate. Fruit juice concentrates are also just sugars with no nutrients other than carbohydrates. At present the Health Star Rating System allows products using apple or pear juice concentrate to be counted as “fruit” and used to offset the total sugars. This is nonsense, and gives rise to confectionery, toppings and some breakfast cereals scoring stars they do not deserve.

Other ways to boost health stars also need attention. Food technologists boast they can manipulate foods to gain extra stars (Health Star Rating Stakeholders workshop, Sydney, 4 August 2016). For example, adding wheat, milk, soy or other protein powder, concentrated fruit purees or a laboratory-based source of fibre such as inulin will all give extra “offset” points to reduce adverse points from saturated fat, sugar or salt. Indeed, some food technologists have even suggested they could revert to using the especially nasty trans (but technically unsaturated) fatty acid from partially hydrogenated vegetable oils to replace naturally occurring saturated fat.

My alternative is to go for fresh foods and minimise packaged foods. If the stars look too good to be true, check the ingredient list. But remember that Choice found sugar may go by more than 40 different names. Buyer beware!

NACCHO Aboriginal Dental Health @AUS_Dental : It’s #DentalHealthWeek #SugaryDrinksProperNoGood

” Apunipima is participating in a range of activities over the next fortnight to celebrate Dental Health Week (7-13 August)

Our staff will be talking about the link between sugary drinks and tooth decay, and promoting the messages

#SugaryDrinksProperNoGood and #DrinkMoreWaterYoufla,

part of Apunipima’s Healthy Communities social marketing campaign, which aims to reduce sugary drinks consumption among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Cape York.”

From Apunipima’s Healthy Communities Mob Part 2 below

 ” The National Oral Health Plan outlines guiding principles that will underpin Australia’s oral health system and provides national strategic direction including targeted strategies in six Foundation Areas and across four Priority Populations. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People being a priority population.”

Download plan here

 Watch our interview with Aboriginal dentist Gari Watson on NACCHO TV

Part 1 : National Oral Health Plan identifes Aboriginal People as Priority Population

A proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have good oral health. On average, however, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people experience poor oral health earlier in their lifespan and in greater severity and prevalence than the rest of the population. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are also less likely to receive treatment to prevent or address poor oral health, resulting in oral health care in the form of emergency treatment.

  • There is limited representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in the oral health workforce and many dental services are not culturally sensitive. For example, strict appointment times and inflexibility regarding ‘failure to attend’ may result in a fee to the consumer.
  • Trends indicate that the high-level dental decay in deciduous (baby) teeth is rising
  • Aboriginal people aged 15 years and over, attending public dental services, experience tooth decay at three times the rate of their Non-Indigenous counterparts and are more than twice as likely to have advanced periodontal (gum) disease
  • Aboriginal people experience complete tooth loss at almost five times the rate of the non-Indigenous population
  • The rate of potentially preventable dental hospitalisations for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people is higher than other Australians. Accessibility of services is a key factor contributing to the current gap between the oral health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and the rest of the population.
  • More than two in five Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people over the age of 15 defer or avoid dental care due to cost. This is compared with one in eight (12.2%) who delayed or did not go to a GP.

Improving the overall oral health of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people will require more than a focus on oral health behaviours. Culture, individual and community social and emotional wellbeing, history, demography, social position, economic characteristics, biomedical factors, and the available health services within a person’s community all form part of the complex causal web which determines an individual’s oral health status.

“Reducing sugary drinks will not only protect their teeth but also their wider health.This is yet another justification for the introduction of a health levy on sugar-sweetened beverages as a preventive public health measure”

This Dental Health Week Michael Moore, CEO of the ( PHAA)  Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) and other members of the Rethink Sugary Drink Alliance are urging Australians to reduce their consumption of sugary drinks.

Read over 25 NACCHO dental articles

Read over 25 NACCHO Nutrition  Articles

Read over 10 NACCHO Articles Sugar Tax

Dental Health Week Website

Dept of Health Dental Website

Part 2  #SugaryDrinksProperNoGood – It’s Dental Health Week!

Apunipima staff will run activities with children and young people as well as hold health information stalls in Weipa, Napranum and Mapoon to promote the campaign messages in Dental Health Week

‘The team will run a workshop for Western Cape College secondary students alongside Dr Matt More, Head of Dental Services for Torres and Cape Hospital and Health Service in Weipa,’ Apunipima Health Promotion Officer Kiarah Cuthbert said.

‘We will be talking to young people about the amount of sugar in popular drinks, such as soft drinks, sports drinks and energy drinks and the impact of that sugar on your teeth and overall health.’

‘From there, we will head to Mapoon to spend time at the primary school yarning with kids about the sugar in drinks. We will also invite the kids to take part in a local art competition with the winner’s work used to promote the #DrinkMoreWaterYoufla message in Mapoon.’

‘Apunipima staff will then hold a health information stall at Napranum store and run an after school activity at Napranum PCYC, where young people will also have the chance to take part in a local art competition to promote the #DrinkMoreWaterYoufla message.

These activities will be supported by Napranum Tackling Indigenous Smoking Health Worker, Ernest Madua who will also be yarning with people about what smoking can do to your teeth and mouth.’

Apunipima Child Health Nurse Robyn Lythall, Chronic Disease Health Worker Georgia Gibson and Dietitian Jarrah Marsh gave kids from Nola’s Daycare and George Bowen Memorial Kindergarten Apunipima ‘Drink More Water Youfla’ water bottles last week which will really save the staff lugging big containers of water!

The bottles are plastic, easily stored in the fridge and will have the children’s photos on them so the kids know which one is theirs!

Big esso (thank you) to the Apunipima teams that helped with this!

The few remaining water bottles are being kept for children receiving their four year old health checks and their immunisations to help them get healthy habits for school.

Staff are encouraging kids coming in for health checks and shots to fill their bottles from the watercooler at the Hopevale Primary Health Care Centre on their way out.

The Healthy Communities Project Team (Cara Laws, Tiffany Williams, Kiarah Cuthbert and Kani Thompson) would like to thank Hopevale staff for sharing the water bottles, which are merchandise from our Sugary Drinks Proper No Good – Drink More Water Youfla campaign.

Picture: Childcare worker Auntie Irene Bambie and Georgia Gibson

Acid, sugar in sugary drinks pose serious threat to teeth

Part 3 Australians urged to choose tap water this Dental Health Week

Many Australians know that sugary drinks are not a healthy dietary choice, but they may not realise the serious damage they cause to teeth.

In line with the theme of Dental Health Week (7–13 August 2017) – Oral Health for Busy Lives, the health and community organisations behind Rethink Sugary Drink are calling on Australians to think of their teeth before reaching for a sugary drink when out and about.

Chair of the Australian Dental Association’s Oral Health Committee, Professor David Manton, said sugary drinks contained sugar and acid that weakens tooth enamel and can lead to tooth decay.

“Dental decay is caused by sugars, especially the type found in sugary drinks. These drinks are often acidic as well. Sugary drinks increase the risk of decay and weaken the tooth enamel, so it’s best to avoid them,” Prof Manton said.

“The best advice is to stick to tap water. Carry a water bottle with you to avoid having to buy energy drinks, soft drinks, sports drinks and other sugary drinks when you’re on the go. You’ll be doing your bank balance a favour too.”

Chair of the Public Health Committee at Cancer Council Australia, Craig Sinclair, said knowing the oral health impacts associated with sugary drinks further highlighted the need for a health levy on these beverages in Australia.

“Australians, and our young people in particular, are drinking huge volumes of sports drinks, energy drinks, soft drinks and frozen drinks on a regular basis – some are downing as much as 1.5 litres a day,” Mr Sinclair said.

“While regular consumption is associated with increased energy intake, weight gain and obesity, it also heightens the risk of tooth decay.

“We know through economic modelling that a 20 per cent health levy on sugar-sweetened beverages could reduce consumption in Australia and prevent thousands of cases of type 2 diabetes, heart disease and stroke over 25 years, while generating $400-$500m each year.

“This extra revenue could be used for public education campaigns and initiatives to prevent chronic disease, reduce dental caries and address childhood obesity.

“While a health levy is not the only solution for reducing sugary drink consumption, if coupled with a range of strategies it could have a significant impact on the amount Australians are drinking and minimise their impact.”

The Rethink Sugary Drink alliance recommends the following actions in addition to a health levy to tackle sugary drink consumption:

  • A public education campaign supported by Australian governments to highlight the health impacts of regular sugary drink consumption
  • Restrictions by Australian governments to reduce children’s exposure to marketing of sugar-sweetened beverages, including through schools and children’s sports, events and activities
  • Comprehensive mandatory restrictions by state governments on the sale of sugar-sweetened beverages (and increased availability of free water) in schools, government institutions, children’s sports and places frequented by children
  • Development of policies by state and local governments to reduce the availability of sugar-sweetened beverages in workplaces, government institutions, health care settings, sport and recreation facilities and other public places.

Protect your teeth from sugary drinks with these tips:

  • Follow the Australian dietary guidelines: Focus on drinking plenty of tap water (it has no acid, no sugar and no kilojoules), limiting sugary foods and drinks and choosing healthy snacks (e.g. fruits and vegetables).
  • Find out how much sugar is in your favourite drink using the nutrition information panel on your drink or on the Rethink Sugary Drink website – it might surprise you
  • Carry a water bottle and fill up at the tap, so you don’t have to buy a drink if you’re thirsty.
  • Be aware of sugar disguised as a ‘healthy’ ingredient such as honey or rice syrup. It might sound wholesome but these are still sugars and can still cause decay if consumed frequently.
  • If you do drink sugary drinks, use a straw so your teeth are less exposed to the sugar and acid.
  • Take a drink of water, preferably tap water that has been fluoridated, after a sugary or acidic drink to help rinse out your mouth and dilute the sugars.
  • Do not sip a sugary or acidic drink slowly or over a long duration. Doing so exposes your teeth to sugar and acid attacks for longer.

For more information, visit http://www.dentalhealthweek.com.au/

About Rethink Sugary Drink: Rethink Sugary Drink is a partnership between the Apunipima, Australian Dental Association, Australian Dental and Oral Health Therapists’ Association, Cancer Council Australia, Dental Health Services Victoria, Dental Hygienists Association of Australia, Diabetes Australia, Healthier Workplace WA, Heart Foundation, Kidney Health Australia, LiveLighter, The Mai Wiru Sugar Challenge Foundation, Nutrition Australia, Obesity Policy Coalition, Stroke Foundation, Parents’ Voice, the Victorian Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation (VACCHO) and the YMCA to raise awareness of the amount of sugar in sugar-sweetened beverages and encourage Australians to reduce their consumption. Visit www.rethinksugarydrink.org.au for more information.

Part 4  : Sugary drinks erode more than tooth enamel poor oral health brings knock-on effects

This Dental Health Week the Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) and other members of the Rethink Sugary Drink Alliance are urging Australians to reduce their consumption of sugary drinks. “Reducing sugary drinks will not only protect their teeth but also their wider health”, said Michael Moore, CEO of the PHAA. “This is yet another justification for the introduction of a health levy on sugar-sweetened beverages as a preventive public health measure”, he added.

Australia is in the top ten of countries with the highest level of soft drink consumption. Around a third of Australians regularly consume sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) such as soft drinks, flavoured waters and energy drinks. These drinks are widely recognised by dental experts as a major contributor to tooth decay and erosion.

Mr Moore said, “It’s well known that sugary drinks are linked to dental health problems which can lead to significant amounts of discomfort and disability in themselves. However poor oral health is also associated with major chronic health conditions such as heart disease, diabetes and respiratory disease. Additionally, there are often compounding health effects between these types of comorbidities. Sugary drinks also strongly contribute to weight gain and obesity, so they negatively impact on health in multiple ways”.

Mr Moore continued, “At the individual-health level, it’s very important people avoid consuming these drinks on a regular basis, while at the population-health level it’s time we introduce a health levy on sugar-sweetened beverages to reduce the harms they cause.”

“Research shows that a health levy on these drinks will effectively reduce their consumption, especially if implemented as part of a wider approach to address poor nutrition and diet-related disease. What is needed is a national nutrition policy, restrictions on the marketing of sugary drinks toward children, limiting their availability in schools and at events attended by children and young people and public education campaigns about the adverse health impacts of SSBs. These could easily be funded by the revenue generated by the levy”.

The theme of 2017 Dental Health Week is ‘Anywhere Anytime – Oral Health for Busy Lives’, which recognises that many Australians feel they don’t have time to properly care for their oral health due to their busy schedules. However, avoiding sugary foods and beverages which damage teeth is a simple preventive measure people can take and can be encouraged by governments.

“Along with maintaining proper oral health care, one of the easiest things people can do to protect their teeth and in turn their broader health, is to avoid sugar-laden drinks and to favour drinking tap water,” Mr Moore concluded.

 

NACCHO Research Alert : @NRHAlliance Aboriginal health risk factors #rural and #remote populations

 ” Health risk factors like smoking, excessive drinking, illicit drug use, lack of physical activity, inadequate fruit and vegetable intake and overweight have powerful influences on health, and there are frequently clear inter-regional differences between the prevalence of these.

While it can be argued that there is some degree of personal choice involved in whether individuals have a poor health risk profile, there is clear evidence that external factors such as environment, opportunity, and community culture each have very strong influences.

For example, access to affordable healthy food can often be poor in smaller communities and this, coupled with lower incomes in these areas, adversely affects the quality of peoples’ diets, the prevalence of overweight, and consequently the prevalence of chronic disease.”

From the National Rural Health Alliance Research View HERE

National data pertaining to personal health risk factors typically comes from the ABS National Health Survey and the AIHW National Drug Strategy Household Survey (NDSHS). Some State and Territory Health Departments run their own health surveys (which cannot be aggregated nationally with each other or with the ABS survey because of the different methodologies and definitions used (think different State rail gauges). Consequently data describing aspects of health in regional and especially remote areas can be thin (ie with imprecise estimates in some or all areas).

Example 1

Table 14: Fruit and vegetable consumption, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people 15+ years, 2012-13

Roughly 60% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians 15+ in Major cities and regional/rural areas have inadequate fruit intake, closer to 50% in remote areas (compared with around 50% of all Australians 18+ in major cities and regional/rural areas).

Roughly 95% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians 15+ in Major cities and regional/rural areas have inadequate vegetable intake, perhaps higher (98%) in Very remote areas (compared with around 90%-94% of all Australians 18+ in major cities and regional/rural areas).

Example 2

NACCHO provided graphic

Table 16 Below : Overweight and Obesity, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people 15+ years, 2012-13

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in rural/regional and Remote areas (29%-33%) were a little more likely to be overweight than those in Major cities (28%), with those in Very Remote areas (26%) least likely to be overweight.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Inner regional areas (41%) were more likely to be obese than those in Major cities (38%), but those in Outer regional (36%) and remote areas (~33%) were less likely to be obese.

Overall, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Inner Regional areas were most likely to be overweight/obese (70%), those in Major cities, Outer Regional and Remote areas were less likely to be overweight/obese (~66%), while those in Very Remote areas were the least likely to be overweight/obese (59% )

At the time of writing, the most recent National Health Survey was conducted in 2014-15[1], while the most recent AIHW NDSHS[2] was conducted in 2016, with most recently available results from the 2013 NDSHS. The most recent ABS Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Survey[3] was conducted in 2012-13.

Some organisations (eg the Public Health Information Development Unit (PHIDU)) have calculated modelled estimates for small areas (eg SLA’s and PHN’s), where the prevalence of some risk factors has been predicted based on the age, sex and socioeconomic profile of the population living there.

Some sites (eg ABS) present risk factor data as crude rates, other sites (eg PHIDU) present risk factor data as age-standardised rates.  The advantage of the age-standardised rates is that the effect of age is largely removed from inter-population comparisons.

For example, older populations (eg those in rural/regional areas) would be expected to have higher average blood pressure than younger (eg Major cities) populations even though the underlying age-specific rates happened to be identical in both populations (because older people tend to have higher blood pressure than younger people).

While crude rates for the older population will be higher, the age-standardised rates in such a comparison would be the same – indicating a higher rate that is entirely explainable by the older age of one of the populations.

Both crude and age standardised rates are useful in understanding the health of rural and remote populations.

 


[1] http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/4364.0.55.001

[3] http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4727.0.55.0012012-13?OpenDocumentSmoking

Table 1: Smoking status, by remoteness, 2013 and 2014-15

MC

IR

OR/Remote

Percentage

Current daily smoker (18+) (crude) 2014-15 (a)

13.0

16.7

20.9

Current smoker (18+) (Age standardised) 2014-15 (b) (includes daily, weekly, social etc smoking)

14.6

19.0

22.4

MC

IR

OR

Remote+ Very Remote

Current smoker (daily, weekly, or fortnightly) 14+ (crude) 2013 (c)

14.2

17.6

22.6

24.6

Current smoker (daily, weekly, or fortnightly) 14+ (Age standardised) 2013 (d)

14.2

18.6

23.6

24.4

Mean number of cigarettes smoked per week, smokers aged 14 years or older 2013 (e)

85.9

113.1

109.4

126.2

Sources:

Compared with Major cities (13%), the prevalence of daily smoking by people 18 years and older in Inner regional (17%) and Outer regional/Remote areas (21%) is higher.

The NDSH survey reflects these trends albeit with a slightly different age group (14+) and a different definition of smoking (daily plus less frequently), but the NDSH survey adds detail for remote areas where smoking rates are higher again (around 25% versus around 23% in Outer regional).

In addition, the average number of cigarettes smoked by each smoker is higher in regional/rural areas (~110/week) than in Major cities (86/week), and higher again (126/week) in remote areas.

 

Smoking – exposure, uptake, establishment, quitting

Table 2: Smoking characteristics by Remoteness, 2013, 2014 and 2014-15

MC

IR

OR

remote

8.8

17.8

19.3

27.8

Proportion of pregnant women who gave birth and smoked at any time during the pregnancy (2013, crude, National Perinatal Data Collection, exposure tables, Table 5.1.2 )

8.5

17.0

18.9

27.5

Proportion of pregnant women who gave birth and smoked in the first 20 weeks of pregnancy (2013, crude, National Perinatal Data Collection) exposure tables, Table 5.2.2)

3.6

3.1

4.1

*9.4

Proportion of dependent children (aged 0–14) who live in a household with a daily smoker who smokes inside the home (2013, crude, NDSHS exposure tables, Table 6.3)

2.5

2.0

2.7

*2.9

Proportion of adults aged 18 or older who live in a household with a daily smoker who smokes inside the home (2013, crude, NDSHS, exposure tables, Table 7.3)

16.2

15.4

14.7

15.5

Average age at which people aged 14–24 first smoked a full cigarette (2013, crude, NDSHS, uptake tables, Table 9.3)

17.8

22.7

17.8

28.3

Proportion of 12–17 year old secondary school students smoking at least a few puffs of a cigarette (2014, crude, Australian Secondary Students Alcohol and Drug Survey 2014, uptake tables, Table 10.3

54.7

61.1

64.9

67.2

Proportion of persons (aged 18 or older) who have smoked a full cigarette (2013, crude,  NDSHS, uptake tables, Table 10.8)

2.5

3.4

2.5

3.7

Proportion of secondary school students (aged 12–17) who have smoked more than 100 cigarettes in their lifetime (2014, crude, Australian Secondary Students Alcohol and Drug Survey 2014, transition tables, Table 2.3)

20.2

25.9

44.1

45.2

Proportion of young people (aged 18–24) who have smoked more than 100 cigarettes in their lifetime (2013, crude, NDSHS, transition tables, Table 2.6)

21.3

16.8

19.0

15.5

Quitting: Proportion successfully gave up for more than a month (2013, crude, NDSHS, cessation tables, Table 4.3)

29.2

34.2

31.7

32.9

Quitting, Proportion unsuccessful (2013, crude, NDSHS, cessation tables, Table 4.3)

46.3

48.0

47.4

45.2

Quitting: Proportion any attempt (2013, crude, NDSHS, cessation tables, Table 4.3)

35.2

36.3

36.1

36.0

Mean age at which ex-smokers aged 18 or older reported no longer smoking (2013, crude, NDSHS, cessation tables, Table 11.2)

53.1

51.5

46.3

45.0

The proportion of ever smokers aged 18 or older who did not smoke in the last 12 months (2013, crude, NDSHS, cessation tables, Table 12.3)

4.9

6.0

4.8

7.0

Proportion of secondary school students (aged 12–17) who were weekly smokers (2014, crude, Australian Secondary Students Alcohol and Drug Survey 2014, established tables, Table 1.3)

6.9

9.3

6.8

10.4

Proportion of secondary school students (aged 12–17) who were monthly smokers (2014, crude, Australian Secondary Students Alcohol and Drug Survey 2014, established tables, Table 13.3)

13.0

16.7

21.2

18.8

Proportion of adults aged 18 or older who are daily smokers (2014-15, crude, ABS NHS, established tables, Table 3.3)

10.9

7.8

2.9

n.p.

Proportion of smokers aged 18 or older who are occasional smokers (smoke weekly or less than weekly) (2014-15, crude, ABS NHS, established tables, Table 14.3)

40.1

44.7

42.3

52.7

Proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people aged 18 or older who are daily smokers (2012-13, crude, ABS Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Survey 2012–13, established tables, Table 8i.3)

Source: http://www.aihw.gov.au/alcohol-and-other-drugs/data/ (sighted 11/7/17)
Note: Those estimates above with asterix have large standard errors and should be treated carefully.

Women in rural and remote areas were much more likely to smoke during pregnancy, with 28% of women in remote areas smoking during pregnancy, compared with 18-19% in regional/rural areas, and 9% in Major cities.

It is unclear whether exposure to environmental tobacco smoke varies by remoteness.

Young people outside major cities appeared to have their first cigarette at an earlier age (~15 years as opposed to ~16 years in Major cities.

Secondary school students in Inner regional (~23%) and remote (~28%) areas were more likely to have had at least a few puffs of a cigarette than those in major cities (~18%).

While 20% of young people in Major cities had smoked more than 100 cigarettes in their lifetime, 26%, 44% and 45% of young people in Inner regional, Outer regional and remote areas had done so.

People outside Major cities were as likely or slightly more likely to have attempted to quit smoking, but were less likely to be successful (and more likely to be unsuccessful).

A higher proportion of secondary students outside Major cities were weekly or monthly smokers (6%, 5% and 7% in IR, OR and remote areas versus 5% in Major cities weekly, 9%, 7%, and 10% in IR, OR and remote areas versus 7% in Major cities monthly).

Table 3: Current daily smoker, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people 15+ years, by Remoteness, 2012-13

MC

IR

OR

R

VR

Crude Percent

Current daily smoker

36.2

40.9

39.8

47.4

51.1

Source: http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4727.0.55.0012012-13?OpenDocument Table 2 (sighted 12/7/17)

Prevalence of smoking amongst Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people 15 years and older is around 35%-40% in Major cities and regional/rural areas, and close to 50% in remote areas. Note that while the pattern is similar in Table 2 and Table 3 above, the figures for 18+ and 15+ year olds are slightly different.

Smoking Trends

Table 4: Comparison of declines in smoking rate estimates across remoteness areas, people 18+, based on ABS NHS surveys, 2001 to 2011-12

Survey year

MC

IR

OR/Rem

Australia

Crude percent daily smokers

2001

21.9

21.9

26.5

22.4

2004-05

19.9

23.0

26.2

21.3

2007-08

17.5

20.1

26.1

18.9

2011-12

14.7

18.3

22.2

16.1

2014-15

13.0

16.7

20.9

14.5

Source: ABS National Health Surveys

From Table 4 above, rates of smoking have clearly declined in Major cities areas, but have been slower to decline in Inner regional and Outer regional/Remote areas. Rates of smoking in rural areas, apparently static last decade, now appear to be declining. Rates in Major cities and Inner regional areas have declined to 0.59 and 0.76 times the 2001 rates in these areas. The 2014-15 rate in Outer regional areas is 0.79 times the 2001 rate.

Figure 1: Daily smokers 18 years and older, 2007-08, 2011-12 and 2014-15, NHS

Figure 1: Daily smokers 18 years and older, 2007-08, 2011-12 and 2014-15, NHS

Source: ABS NHS http://www.aihw.gov.au/alcohol-and-other-drugs/data/ established tables, Table 3.3 (sighted 11/7/17)

Figure 2: Smokers 14 years and older, 2007, 2010 and 2013, NDSHS

Figure 2: Smokers 14 years and older, 2007, 2010 and 2013, NDSHS

Source: AIHW NDSHS http://www.aihw.gov.au/alcohol-and-other-drugs/data/ tobacco smoking table S3.12 (sighted 11/7/17)

Note: Smokers include daily, weekly and less frequent smokers.

Figures 1 and 2 above both show clear declines in Major cities and Inner regional areas, but the trend in Outer regional and Remote areas is less clear, with ABS data showing a decline in daily smoking rates for people aged 18+ between 2007-8 and 2014-15, but NDSHS data showing little change in smoking rates for people 14+ between 2007 and 2013.

Alcohol

Table 5: Alcohol risk status, by remoteness, 2013 and 2014-15

Alcohol consumption

MC

IR

OR/Rem

Exceeded 2009 NHMRC lifetime risk guidelines, people 18+, crude %, 2014-15 (a)

16.3

18.4

23.4

Exceeded 2009 NHMRC lifetime risk guidelines, people 15+, age standardised %, 2014-15 (b)

15.7

17.4

22.0

Exceeded 2009 NHMRC single occasion risk guidelines, people 18+, crude %, 2014-15 (a)

42.7

48.5

46

MC

IR

OR

R/VR

Abstainer/ex-drinker, crude %, 14+, 2013 (c)

23.1

18.9

20.5

17.5

Low lifetime risk, crude %, 14+, 2013 (c)

60.2

62

56.9

47.6

High lifetime risk, crude %, 14+, 2013 (c)

16.7

19.1

22.6

34.9

low single occasion risk, crude %, 14+, 2013 (c)

40.4

41.8

38.1

30.8

Single occasion risk less than weekly, crude %, 14+, 2013 (c)

23.5

24.4

23.6

22.8

Single occasion risk at least weekly, crude %, 14+, 2013 (c)

13

14.9

17.8

28.9

Sources:

Table 6: Alcohol consumption against 2009 NHMRC guidelines, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people 15+ years, by Remoteness 2012-13

MC

IR

OR

R

VR

Percent

Exceeded lifetime risk guidelines

18.0

18.7

18.2

22.5

14.3

Exceeded single occasion risk guidelines

56.7

57.4

50.7

59.0

41.4

Source: http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4727.0.55.0012012-13?OpenDocument Table 2 (sighted 12/7/17)

The figures in Table 6 are not strictly comparable with those for the total population in Table 5, because  Table 6 refers to people who are 15 years and older, while Table 5 refers to people who are 18 years and older.

The percentage of the 15+ ATSI population exceeding 2009 NHMRC Lifetime risk guidelines is around 15-20% with little apparent inter-regional variation, compared with, for the total population 18+,  16% in Major cities, increasing to 23% in Outer regional/remote areas.

The percentage of the 15+ ATSI population exceeding the 2009 single occasion risk guidelines is around 50-60%, and around 40% in Very remote areas, compared with, for the total population 18+,  40-50% in Major cities, rural and regional areas.

Alcohol trends

Table 7: Type of alcohol use and treatment for alcohol, by remoteness area (per 1,000 population)

MC

IR

OR

R/VR

single occasion risk (monthly) 2004

287

304

321

370

2007

285

292

312

437

2010

274

312

329

413

2013

250

273

315

422

lifetime risk 2004

200

215

234

262

2007

199

210

238

314

2010

189

225

251

310

2013

167

191

226

349

very high risk – yearly 2004

167

185

206

243

2007

172

183

206

288

2010

161

183

218

266

2013

151

166

194

258

very high risk – monthly 2004

77

84

104

130

2007

78

89

100

153

2010

79

94

113

154

2013

70

70

100

170

very high risk – weekly 2004

21

27

41

38

2007

24

28

24

50

2010

37

43

54

78

2013

27

28

38

70

Closed treatment episodes 2004–05

61

72

60

58

2007–08

76

84

80

129

2010–11

69

96

87

135

2013–14

68

79

93

155

Source: NDSHS,  http://www.aihw.gov.au/alcohol-and-other-drugs/data/  alcohol -supplementary data tables, Table S18

Notes:
Single occasion risk (monthly): Had more than 4 standard drinks at least once a month
Lifetime risk: On average, had more than 2 standard drinks per day
Very high risk (yearly): Had more than 10 standard drinks at least once a year
Very high risk (monthly): Had more than 10 standard drinks at least once a month
Very high risk (weekly): Had more than 10 standard drinks at least once a week

There is a clear increase in the prevalence of people who drink alcohol in such a way as to increase their single occasion risk (eg from car accident, assault, fall, etc) and their lifetime risk (eg from chronic disease – liver disease, dementia, cancer etc) as remoteness increases.

In 2013, single occasion risk ranged from 25% of people 14 years or older in major cities to 42% of people in remote areas, while lifetime risk increased from 17% in major cities to 35% in remote areas.

In 2013, The prevalence of people who drank more than 10 standard drinks in one sitting at least once per week, increased from just under 3% in Major cities to 7% in remote areas.

In 2013-14, there were just under 70 closed treatment episodes per 1,000 people living in Major cities, increasing to around 80 and 90 per 1,000 population in Inner and Outer regional areas, to 155 per 1,000 people living in remote Australia.

 

Illicit drug use 2013

Table 8: Illicit drug use, “recent users” 14+, 2013

MC IR OR remote

Crude percent

Cannabis

9.8

10.0

12.0

13.6

Ecstasy

2.9

1.5

1.6

*1.8

Meth/amphetamine

2.1

1.6

2.0

*4.4

Cocaine

2.6

0.8

*1.1

*2.5

Any illicit drug

14.9

14.1

16.7

18.7

Source: AIHW National Drug Strategy Household Survey, 2013. http://www.aihw.gov.au/alcohol-and-other-drugs/data/  Illicit drug use (supplementary) tables S5.6, S5.11, S5.17, S5.21, S5.26.

Note: * indicates large standard error (therefore some degree of uncertainty)

Illicit drug use appears to be higher in Outer regional and remote areas compared with Major cities and Inner regional areas, in large part due to higher rates of cannabis use in these areas, but with apparent lower use of ecstasy and cocaine in regional areas compared with Major cities.

 

Physical activity

Table 9: Physical inactivity, people 18+, 2014-15

MC

IR

OR/Remote

Percentage of people aged 18+ who undertook no or low exercise in the previous week (crude) (a)

64.3

70.1

72.4

Percentage of people aged 18+ who undertook no or low exercise in the previous week (age standardised) (b)

64.8

68.6

71

Sources:
(a) ABS NHS (http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4364.0.55.0012014-15?OpenDocument Table 6.3)
(b) PHIDU (ABS NHS data) (http://phidu.torrens.edu.au/social-health-atlases/data#social-health-atlas-of-australia-remoteness-areas) sighted 18/7/2017

Note that level of exercise is based on exercise undertaken for fitness, sport or recreation in the last week.

Physical inactivity appears to be more prevalent with remoteness, increasing from 65% of people in Major cities to 71% in Outer regional/remote areas.

Table 10: Average daily steps, 2011-12

MC

IR

OR/Rem

Average daily steps, 18+ years, 2011-12 (a)

7,393

7,388

7,527

Average daily steps, 5-17years, 2011-12 (b)

9,097

9,266

9,160

Sources:

In 2011-12, adults living in Outer regional/Remote areas took slightly more steps than those living in Major cities or Inner regional areas, while the number of steps taken by children and adolescents in regional/Remote areas was slightly greater compared with those in Major cities.

Table 11: Average time spent on physical activity and sedentary behaviour by persons aged 18+, 2011-12

MC

IR

OR/Remote

Australia

Hours

Physical activity(a)

3.9

3.4

3.9

3.8

Sedentary behaviour (leisure only)(b)

29.3

28.0

27.9

28.9

Sedentary behaviour (leisure and work)(b)

40.2

35.2

36.0

38.8

Notes:
(a) Includes walking for transport/fitness, moderate and vigorous physical activity.
(b) Sedentary is defined as sitting or lying down for activities.

Source: ABS 2011-12 Australian Health Survey (Physical activity) http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4364.0.55.0042011-12?OpenDocument  Table 5.1

Adults living in Inner regional and Outer regional/Remote areas were about as likely as (or very slightly less likely than) those in Major cities to be sedentary in their leisure time, but appeared to be slightly less likely to be sedentary overall (ie their work involved a greater level of physical activity).

Table 12: Whether children aged 2-17 years met physical and screen-based activity recommendations, 2011-12

MC

IR

OR/Rem

Crude percentage

Met physical activity recommendation on all 7 days(a)(b)

27.5

34.3

34.2

Met screen-based activity recommendation on all 7 days(b)(c)

28.0

29.7

31.0

Met physical activity and screen-based recommendations on all 7 days (a)(b)(c)

9.7

10.9

14.2

Notes:
(a) The physical activity recommendation for children 2–4 years is 180 minutes or more per day, for children 5-17 years it is 60 minutes or more per day. See Physical activity recommendation in Glossary.
(b) In 7 days prior to interview.
(c) The screen-based recommendation for children 2–4 years is no more than 60 minutes per day, for children 5-17 years it is no more than 2 hours per day for entertainment purposes.

Source:
ABS 2011-12 Australian Health Survey (Physical activity) http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4364.0.55.0042011-12?OpenDocument  Table 14.3

Children in rural and regional Australia appeared more likely (34% vs 28%) to meet physical activity recommendations and slightly more likely (30%vs 28%) to meet screen-based activity recommendations than their Major cities counterparts.

 

Fruit and vegetable consumption

Table 13: Fruit and vegetable consumption, people 18+ years, by remoteness, 2014-15

MC

IR

OR/Remote

Crude Percentage

Inadequate fruit consumption(a)

50.0

50.6

51.2

Inadequate fruit consumption(b)

50.4

48.3

48.0

Inadequate vegetable consumption(a)

93.4

93.5

89.3

Inadequate vegetable consumption(b)

n.p.

n.p.

n.p.

Sources:
(a) ABS NHS (http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4364.0.55.0012014-15?OpenDocument Table 6.3)
(b) PHIDU (ABS NHS data) (http://phidu.torrens.edu.au/social-health-atlases/data#social-health-atlas-of-australia-remoteness-areas) sighted 18/7/2017

Note that adequacy of consumption is based on comparison with 2013 NHMRC guidelines.

Half of adult Australians eat insufficient fruit, with little clear difference between major cities and regional/rural areas.

Around 90% of adult Australians ate insufficient vegetables, with little clear difference between major cities and regional/rural areas.

Table 14: Fruit and vegetable consumption, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people 15+ years, 2012-13

MC

IR

OR

R

VR

Crude Percent

Inadequate daily fruit consumption (2013 NHMRC Guidelines)

59.0

60.6

56.9

54.9

49.1

Inadequate daily fruit consumption (2003 NHMRC Guidelines)

62.1

63.6

59.8

58.3

51.6

Inadequate daily vegetables consumption (2013 NHMRC Guidelines)

95.9

93.5

93.6

94.5

97.9

Inadequate daily vegetables consumption (2003 NHMRC Guidelines)

93.8

90.6

90.5

91.2

96.1

Source: http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4727.0.55.0012012-13?OpenDocument Table 2 (sighted 12/7/17)

Roughly 60% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians 15+ in Major cities and regional/rural areas have inadequate fruit intake, closer to 50% in remote areas (compared with around 50% of all Australians 18+ in major cities and regional/rural areas).

Roughly 95% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians 15+ in Major cities and regional/rural areas have inadequate vegetable intake, perhaps higher (98%) in Very remote areas (compared with around 90%-94% of all Australians 18+ in major cities and regional/rural areas).

 

 

Overweight and Obesity

Table 15: Overweight and Obesity, people 18+ years, by remoteness, 2014-15

MC

IR

OR/Remote

Crude Percentage

Persons, overweight/obese (a)

61.1

69.2

69.2

Age standardised percentage

Males overweight (b)

43.8

41.1

34.3

Males obese (b)

25.8

33.1

38.2

Females overweight (b)

28.9

28.3

30.1

Females obese (b)

25.0

32.4

33.7

People  overweight (b)

36.2

34.4

31.4

People obese (b)

25.4

32.6

35.8

Sources:
(a) ABS NHS (http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4364.0.55.0012014-15?OpenDocument Table 6.3)
(b) ABS NHS http://phidu.torrens.edu.au/social-health-atlases/data#social-health-atlas-of-australia-remoteness-areas

Adults in rural/regional areas are more likely to be overweight or obese than people in Major cities (69% vs 61%).

However, there were inter-regional BMI and gender differences:

  • Compared with those in Major cities, males in Inner regional and especially Outer-regional areas were less likely to be overweight (41% and 34%, vs 44%) but much more likely to be obese (33% and 38% vs 26%).
  • Compared with those in Major cities, females in Inner regional and Outer-regional areas were about as likely to be overweight (~29%) but much more likely to be obese (~33% vs 25%).

 

Table 16: Overweight and Obesity, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people 15+ years, 2012-13

MC

IR

OR

R

VR

Crude Percent

Overweight

27.5

28.8

30.1

32.5

26.4

Obese

37.9

41.3

36.2

33.1

32.3

Overweight/obese

65.4

70.1

66.2

65.6

58.8

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in rural/regional and Remote areas (29%-33%) were a little more likely to be overweight than those in Major cities (28%), with those in Very Remote areas (26%) least likely to be overweight.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Inner regional areas (41%) were more likely to be obese than those in Major cities (38%), but those in Outer regional (36%) and remote areas (~33%) were less likely to be obese.

Overall, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Inner Regional areas were most likely to be overweight/obese (70%), those in Major cities, Outer Regional and Remote areas were less likely to be overweight/obese (~66%), while those in Very Remote areas were the least likely to be overweight/obese (59%).

These figures compare with 61% – the prevalence of overweight/obesity for (predominantly non-Indigenous) people living in Major cities.

 

High blood pressure

Table 17: High blood pressure, people 18+, by Remoteness, 2014-15

MC

IR

OR/Remote

Percentage

Crude % (a)

21.9

27.1

24

Age standardised % (b)

22.7

24.6

22.1

Sources:

(a) ABS NHS (http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4364.0.55.0012014-15?OpenDocument Table 6.3)
(b) ABS NHS http://phidu.torrens.edu.au/social-health-atlases/data#social-health-atlas-of-australia-remoteness-areas

Age for age, people in rural/regional Australia appeared to be as likely, or very slightly more likely to have high blood pressure than their counterparts in Major cities (~23% vs ~24%). However, because people in rural/regional areas are older (on average), the prevalence of people with high blood pressure is higher (~26% vs 22%) than

Updated 31/07/2017
To view archived Risk Factors click here

NACCHO @FPDNAus Aboriginal Health @NDIS 2016 progress report survey The National #Disability Strategy

 ” By any measure Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disability are amongst some of the most disadvantaged Australians; often facing multiple barriers to meaningful participation within their own communities and the wider community.

The prevalence of disability amongst Aboriginal and Torres Islander people is significantly higher than of the general population. Until recently, the prevalence of disability in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities has only been anecdotally reported. However, a report by the Commonwealth Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision made the following conclusions:

The proportion of the indigenous population 15 years and over, reporting a disability or long-term health condition was 37 per cent (102 900 people). The proportions were similar in remote and non-remote areas. This measure of disability does not specifically include people with a psychological disability. [note 1]

The high prevalence of disability, approximately twice that of the non-indigenous population, occurs in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities for a range of social reasons “

SEE First Peoples Disability Network Australia (FPDN) Intro and Ten-point plan for the implementation of the NDIS in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Communities VIEW HERE or Below

Read over 15 NACCHO NDIS Articles published

 See Background 1 below

The DSS need to improve under the National Disability Strategy.

We want to hear your thoughts about disability policy in Australia!

Are you a person with disability, a family member, a carer, or are you just interested in the rights of people with disability?

Tell us what you think about the lives of people with disability in Australia. This may include questions about things like health care, employment and access to the local community for people with disability.

Answer this survey and tell us how things have improved in the last two years. This feedback will help us understand what areas need to improve under the National Disability Strategy.

The National Disability Strategy

The National Disability Strategy 2010-2020 (the Strategy) helps us to create better policies, programs and communities so people with disability are able to lead happy and fulfilling lives.

The Strategy identifies six areas that people with disability are concerned about.  They are:

  1. Taking part in the in the community
  2. Your rights to fair treatment
  3. Work and money
  4. Personal and community support
  5. Learning and Skills
  6. Health and Wellbeing

What will my feedback be used for?

Your feedback will help inform the 2016 Progress Report.  Reporting is an important part of the Strategy.  Every two years we develop a progress report that looks at the achievements of the Strategy.  An important part of the report is finding out what people with disability, their families and carers think.  We also work with other government agencies and state and territory governments to collect feedback and data to help inform the 2016 Progress Report.

How can I access the survey?

The survey can be completed online via the 2016 Progress Report Stakeholder Survey page.

If you would like a hard copy of the survey to complete, please email nationaldisabilityst@dss.gov.au or ring (02) 6146 2507.

Please note: Requests for a hard copy of the survey must be made by 4 August 2017.

Completed hard copy surveys can be mailed to:

National Disability Policy Team
The Department of Social Services
Reply Paid
GPO Box 9820
Canberra ACT 2601

When will the survey open/close?

The survey will be open from Monday 17 July 2017 and will close on Monday 21 August 20

Background 1 of 2

What is the NDIS?

Will the NDIS mean more or less support?

Is the NDIS diagnosis based or needs based?

Am I eligible for the NDIS?

Where is the NDIS available now?

What supports does the NDIS cover?

How does the NDIS process work?

I have an NDIS plan. What’s next?

When will the NDIS be here for all Australians?

Where can we get more help

Full details below or download Help Guide Here :

NDIS your Questions answered Download

NACCHO Aboriginal Health #disability and @NDIS : Your Top 10 Questions answered about the National Disability Insurance Scheme

BACKGROUND from FPDN

Ten-point plan for the implementation of the NDIS in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Communities

Introduction

We are First Peoples Disability Network Australia (FPDN) – a national organisation of and for Australia’s First Peoples with disability, their families and communities. Our organisation is governed by First Peoples with lived experience of disability

By any measure Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disability are amongst some of the most disadvantaged Australians; often facing multiple barriers to meaningful participation within their own communities and the wider community.

The prevalence of disability amongst Aboriginal and Torres Islander people is significantly higher than of the general population. Until recently, the prevalence of disability in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities has only been anecdotally reported. However, a report by the Commonwealth Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision made the following conclusions:

The proportion of the indigenous population 15 years and over, reporting a disability or long-term health condition was 37 per cent (102 900 people). The proportions were similar in remote and non-remote areas. This measure of disability does not specifically include people with a psychological disability. [note 1]

The high prevalence of disability, approximately twice that of the non-indigenous population, occurs in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities for a range of social reasons, including poor health care, poor nutrition, exposure to violence and psychological trauma (e.g. arising from removal from family and community) and substance abuse, as well as the breakdown of traditional community structures in some areas. Aboriginal people with disability are significantly over-represented on a population group basis among homeless people, in the criminal and juvenile justice systems[note 2], and in the care and protection system (both as parents and children).[note 3]

The advent of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) presents an opportunity for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disabilities to engage – many for the first time – with the disability service system in a substantive way. Currently, most Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disabilities remain at the periphery of the disability service system. This continues to occur for a range of reasons some of which are well established. However, one factor that remains little understood is the reluctance of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disabilities to identify as people with disability. This preference to not identify presents a fundamental barrier for the successful implementation of the NDIS. The First Peoples Disability Network (Australia) (FPDN) argues that it has a central role in addressing not only this fundamental barrier but also in facilitating the roll out of the NDIS more broadly into Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.

FPDN argues passionately that for positive change to happen in the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disability, the change must be driven by community itself. It cannot be imposed, implied, intervened or developed with well-meaning intention from an external service system that the vast majority of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disabilities have little or no experience of in the first place.

Throughout many communities across the country, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disability are supported and accepted as members of their communities. However, many communities lack the resources to adequately support people with disability. Furthermore, the service system tends to operate from a ‘doing for’ as opposed to ‘doing with’ approach, which only further disenfranchises communities because they simply do not feel that they can self-direct their future. The NDIS does have the potential to address some of these concerns by giving Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disability the opportunity to self-direct their funding, for instance. The challenge in this area will be that many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disability have had little or no experience in self-managing funds.

It must be remembered that in many ways the social movement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disability is starting from an absolute baseline position. This is reflected, for example, by the fact that few Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disability have an understanding of the language of the disability service system. It is the view of FPDN that the application of the NDIS in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities will need to have a different look and approach to what is advocated for with regard the rest of the Australian population. It may be that the application of the NDIS in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities takes a longer process. But the FPDN argues that it is critical to get it right as it is the experience of many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people that they are usually the first to be blamed when new programs are not taken up by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

FPDN has developed a 10-point plan for the implementation of the NDIS in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disabilities. The development of this 10 point plan is based upon extensive consultation as well as drawing upon the decade long experience of the FPDN in advocating for the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders people with disabilities.

The plan was launched in May 2013 at Parliament House, Canberra.

Ten-point plan

  • Recognise that the starting point is the vast majority of Aboriginal people with disability do not self-identify as people with disability. This occurs for a range of reasons including the fact that in traditional languages there are no comparable words for disability. Also, many Aboriginal people with disability are reluctant to take on the label of disability; particularly when they already experience discrimination based on their Aboriginality. In many ways disability is a new conversation in many communities. In these instances the NDIS is starting from a baseline position. As a consequence change in this area is likely to happen on a different timeline to that of the mainstream NDIS.
  • Awareness raising via a concerted outreach approach informing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disability, their families and communities about their rights and entitlements, and informing Aboriginal and Torres Strait communities about the NDIS itself and how to work this new system effectively. There is no better way to raise awareness then by direct face-to-face consultation. Brochures and pamphlets will not be appropriate as this is a new conversation in many communities.
  • Establish the NDIS Expert Working Group on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People with disability and the NDIS. In recognition of the fact that there is a stand-alone building block for the NDIS focused upon Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disability, FPDN views it not only as critical but logical that a specific Expert Working Group be established to focus on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disability. The new working group would operate in the same way the four current working groups do, that is it would be chaired by two members of the National People with Disability and Carers Council. To ensure its effectiveness but also critically to influence prominent Aboriginal leaders as well as the disability sector, members would be drawn from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in community leadership positions, as well as involving prominent disability leaders. The FPDN believes such an approach is warranted not only because of the degree of unmet need that is well established but also because this has the potential to be a very practical and meaningful partnership between government, the non-government sector, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.
  • Build the capacity of the non-Indigenous disability service system to meet the needs of Aboriginal people with disability in a culturally appropriate way. Legislate an additional standard into the Disability Services Act focused upon culturally appropriate service delivery and require disability services to demonstrate their cultural competencies.
  • Conduct research on the prevalence of disability and a range other relevant matters. Critically, this work must be undertaken in partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disability to ensure a culturally appropriate methodology. There remains very little reference material about disability in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. This needs to be rectified to ensure that we are getting a true picture of the lived experience of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disability.
  • Recognise that  a workforce already exists in many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities that does important work, often informally. This work needs to valued and recognised, with the potential for employment opportunities in some communities.
  • Recognise that it’s not always about services. Many communities just need more resources so that they can continue to meet the needs of their own people with disabilities. There may be perfectly appropriate ways of supporting people already in place, however what is often lacking is access to current technologies or appropriate technical aids or sufficient training for family and community members to provide the optimum level of support.
  • Recruitment of more Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people into the disability service sector.
  • Build the capacity of the social movement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders with disability by supporting existing networks and building new ones in addition to fostering Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders with disability. These networks play a critical role in breaking down stigma that may exist in some communities but are also the conduits for change, and will be integral to the successful implementation of the NDIS in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.
  • Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ‘Launch’ sites focused upon remote, very remote, regional and urban settings. It is critical that this major reform be done right. Therefore it is appropriate to effectively trial its implementation. To this end, FPDN can readily identify key communities that would be appropriate as trial sites.

NACCHO Aboriginal Health and Smoking : Download Tackling Indigenous Smoking Program prelim. evaluation report

 ” The overall goal of the national Tackling Indigenous Smoking (TIS) program is to improve the health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people through local population specific efforts to reduce harm from tobacco.

The purpose of this preliminary report is to provide a mid-term evaluation of progress to date in implementing the first year of the three year (2015-2018) TIS program.

The TIS programme with a budget of $116.8 million over 3 years ($35.3 million in 2015-16; $37.5 million in 2016-17 and $44 million in 2017-18) was announced by the Government, on 29 May 2015.”

Download 133 page PDF report Here :

NACCHO Download Dept Health Tackling Indigenous Smoking Evaluation June 2017

The report found the program is operating effectively, using proven approaches to change smoking behaviours, and delivering evidence-based local tobacco health promotion activities. I am pleased the report recommends it continues,

Smoking is the most preventable cause of disease and early death among Aboriginal people and accounts for almost one-quarter of the difference in average health outcomes between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians.

“The program provides grants in 37 urban, rural, regional and remote areas to assist local communities to develop localised anti-smoking campaigns

Minister Ken Wyatt

Read over 100 plus NACCHO articles published in past 5 years

This mid-term evaluation looks at progress to date of the TIS program, particularly in terms of regional grants delivering localised Indigenous tobacco interventions.

Source of intro

See list all 35 Recipients below

It does not look at long-term impact in relation to a reduction of smoking rates at a national level.

Findings focus on (see in full below 1-9)

  • the shift to TIS
  • community engagement and partnerships
  • localised health promotion
  • access to quit support
  • contribution to evidence base
  • National Best Practice Unit and TIS portal
  • governance and communications.

A number of key recommendations emerging from the evaluation are included in the report.(see Below Part 2)

Findings

1. Shift to TIS

Since the implementation of the TIS program, all grant recipients are primarily focused on planning for, and/or delivering, targeted and tailored activities that directly address reduction of smoking prevalence within communities.

For some grant recipients, broader health promotion activities without a clear link to tobacco reduction have dropped off significantly as a result of the shift to TIS, whilst for others the integration of healthy lifestyle and tobacco control strategies has been successful. There are varying degrees of clarity among grant recipients about the extent to which there is flexibility to tap into healthy lifestyle activities under the new guidelines.

2.Community engagement and partnerships

Community engagement and involvement in the design and planning of localised TIS programs is a key priority for grant recipients, and a key indicator of successful TIS activities.

While challenges were identified in terms of handling competing priorities in community, adhering to cultural protocols, and the change in focus of the TIS program and uncertainty about ongoing funding, in the main, grant recipients have demonstrated substantial progress in involving community in design and planning and garnering support for TIS activities.

This is evidenced by the popularity of community events hosted/attended by the TIS team and the proactivity of local community and Elders in advocating for tobacco control.

The success of the TIS program and the capacity for grant recipients to operate as a multi-level population health program in their region is highly dependent upon the quality and reach of partnerships between grant recipients and other agencies/organisations.

Whilst challenges to regional collaborations were reported, overall there has been a noticeable increase in the reporting of grant recipient collaboration and partnerships, representing an important shift to both a wider regional focus and wider community approach to tobacco reduction.

3.Localised health promotion

At the local level, a range of multi-component health promotion activities around tobacco control are being undertaken by grant recipients, in collaboration with external stakeholders. Local partnerships are crucial to the successful implementation of localised health promotion activities through facilitating access to priority populations, supporting capacity-building and enabling a broader population reach to achieve awareness and understanding of the health impacts of smoking and quitting pathways. viii

Increased levels of community support and ownership for local solutions to tackling Indigenous smoking are being seen across the TIS sites.

4.Community education

Community education, is being undertaken by all grant recipients. This manifests in a range of ways, including health promotion activities at community/sporting events, drama shows and comedy and social marketing.

The involvement of local champions and Elders in local education and awareness raising events and activities is recognised as central to tobacco control messages resonating with target audiences.

It has also been recognised that targeting priority groups, such as young people and pregnant women, requires the adaptation of messages so that they resonate with those groups.

Grant recipients are partnering with key local organisations (e.g. schools, other AMS etc.) to overcome some of the challenges around access to these priority groups.

Many grant recipients have established or showed progress in establishing social marketing campaigns to supplement other health promotion activities. Campaigns are developed largely through a strength-based approach, with ‘local faces and local places’ taking precedence. Grant recipients have acknowledged the challenges in measuring the impact of social marketing campaigns although some are demonstrating a commitment to collecting data on awareness, and influences on motivations and attempts to quit.

5.Smoke-free environments

An area that has been recognised by grant recipients as requiring attention is the promotion and establishment of smoke-free environments, particularly in rural and remote locations. Modelling smoke-free environments within the grant recipients’ own workplace is one way in which this issue is being addressed, with some evidence of success.

Challenges to the implementation of smoke-free workplaces include getting support from senior leaders or Board members who smoke, and organisations where tobacco control is not the main priority. Monitoring the compliance of smoke-free environments presented an additional challenge to grant recipients. Some external organisations have requested support to become smoke-free, and successful examples of smoke-free environments including smoke-free community events are evident.

Shifting attitudes around second-hand smoke (e.g. smoking indoors and in cars) and some evidence of behaviour change were reported by grant recipients and community members.

6.Access to quit support

TIS funded organisations are encouraged to take a systems approach to activity planning. The TIS program is part of a larger preventive health care system, all connected in different ways such as through referral pathways, and client appointments.

A key component of the TIS program is therefore enhancement of referral pathways and promoting access to quit support. Grant recipients have developed a range of opportunities for community members to achieve smoking cessation, with referral pathways having been established in two key areas: clinic-based referrals within their organisation and referrals made during localised TIS health promotion activities.

For some, successful referral pathways are dependent upon grant recipients partnering with external organisations.

Improving access to culturally appropriate support to quit has been a key focus of the grant recipients over the past 12 months.

Quitline enhancements are a component of the TIS program and data suggests that referrals to Quitline are higher in urban and some rural areas. Continuing to build strong partnerships between grant recipients and Quitline will be key to increasing referrals from local TIS programs into Quitline where appropriate.

Another key focus for grant recipients has been in increasing the skills of TIS workers and other professionals in contact with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to provide smoking cessation education and brief interventions. Quits kills training, and other smoking cessation education programs, have been accessed to support this goal.

7.Contributions to evidence base

The shift to delivering activities based in evidence and focusing more on outcomes than outputs has been welcomed by grant recipients, in the main, and has provided greater direction for activities and a goal to work towards.

A range of activities were undertaken by grant recipients to develop or strengthen their evidence base and work towards measurable outcomes. Collecting data remained challenging for some remote grant recipients operating in contexts with low literacy levels and where English is not the first language. Health service grant recipients wanting to collect population level data was also challenging when services are operating on different databases within a region and where there was an unwillingness to share data.

Overall, grant recipients expressed a willingness to focus on outcomes, and the confidence and capability to obtain data, although interpreting and reporting on data was presented as a challenge.

8.National Best Practice Unit and TIS portal

Advice and guidance around monitoring, measuring and further improving local TIS programs is provided to grant recipients through the NBPU TIS. Grant recipients have indicated that they value the support and advice provided through the NBPU TIS and this has aided in building their confidence and capacity to undertake monitoring and evaluation activities.

Some grant recipients reported that an additional level of support from NBPU TIS was needed. Resistance to change is common in any business when new processes are set in place. NBPU TIS therefore expected, and has witnessed, some resistance to this change. However, it continues to engage with grant recipients and support significant processes of change, not just reporting and compliance.

Another component of the work of the NBPU TIS is the development and ongoing maintenance and improvement of the Tackling Indigenous Smoking Resource and Information Centre (TISRIC) and its home, the TIS Portal (hosted by Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet).

Information and resources to support grant recipients in planning, monitoring, and evaluating activities, as well as information on workforce development is provided through the TIS Portal.

In addition, the Portal hosts an online forum (TIS Yarning Place) that enables grant recipients from across the country to share information and ask questions. Evaluation findings suggest that, whilst grant recipients are utilising the TIS Portal, some grant recipients have identified opportunities to enhance the useability of the TIS Portal.

9.Governance and communications

Various components of support are provided to grant recipients by the department and the NBPU TIS regarding the new focus and priorities and expectations of the TIS program.

To ensure consistent program messaging, and to enhance performance reporting, a range of initiatives were undertaken in the latter half of 2016 to clarify the roles and responsibilities of the various ‘players’ in the national TIS program.

The loss of experienced staff due to funding uncertainty has represented a significant challenge for several grant recipients in their planning and implementing activities.

Particularly in remote areas, recruitment has been an issue for many grant recipients due to the mix of skills demanded of TIS staff. Grant recipients report continued issues attracting and retaining staff with only short term contracts under the new TIS program.

Despite these concerns, indications are that providing grant recipients are given sufficient time and support to execute their Action Plans, they are on track for achieving stated tobacco reduction outcomes. The key risk to this is workforce stability, which would be mitigated by timely advice about the outcome of ongoing funding arrangements.

A number of key recommendations have emerged out of the evaluation findings:

Overall recommendations

1. Department: The TIS program in its current form should be continued, with a move away from short-term funding cycles.

2. Department: Provide immediate advice about the funding of TIS from June 2017 to end of current funding cycle.

Shift to TIS

3. Department: Provide clarity around what is allowable in relation to healthy lifestyle activities within the current iteration of the TIS program  Community engagement and partnerships

4. Grant recipients: Continue to broker partnerships and leverage relationships.

5. NBPU TIS: Continue to build capability of grant recipients to broker partnerships and leverage relationships through the distribution and promotion of relevant resources.

Community education and awareness

6. Grant recipients: Continue to identify and prioritise key groups, especially pregnant women.

7. Grant recipients: Ensure evidence-based best practice community education models (including monitoring and evaluation approaches) are sought and adopted where appropriate.

8. NBPU TIS: Ensure the evidence-based best practice community education models (including monitoring and evaluation approaches) are available, particularly for priority target groups such as pregnant women and activities around social marketing.

Smoke-free environments

9. Grant recipients: Continue to explore implementing smoke-free workplaces and enhance support for smoke-free public spaces.

10. National Coordinator: Lead a dialogue between regional leaders, including CEOs, Board members of TIS and non-TIS funded organisations around establishing smoke-free environments.

Access to quitting support

11. Grant recipients: Continue to strengthen partnerships with Quitline and other quit support structures where appropriate.  Contribution to larger evidence base

12. Grant recipients: Build on routine and existing data sources to reduce data collection burden.

National support

13. Grant recipients: Continue to seek feedback from NBPU TIS regarding M&E activities where required.

14. NBPU TIS: Continue to respond to feedback from GRs around M&E needs and TIS portal content and use ability.

15. Department: Articulate the role of the National coordinator  in the context that the program has evolved and as such his role has evolved. Governance and communication

16. Department: Provide greater clarification of TIS funding parameters, especially in terms of incorporation of healthy lifestyle activities and one-on-one smoking cessation support.

The Tackling Indigenous Smoking (TIS) regional tobacco control grants aim to improve the wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people through population health activities to reduce tobacco use. It is an initiative of the Australian Government Department of Health (DoH).

At the end of 2015, a number of organisations were notified of their success in gaining a TIS grant for culturally appropriate tobacco cessation programs. The grants were awarded to a variety of service providers across the nation.

The 35 organisations that have commenced their programs are:

With the program funding provided until 2018, the successful organisations will work towards the intended outcomes of the TIS programme, including:

  • encouraging community involvement in and support for local tobacco control activities
  • increasing community understanding of the dangers of smoking and chewing tobacco
  • improving knowledge, skills and a better understanding of the health impacts of smoking.

Aboriginal Health Please support the @MaiWiruSCF #Sugar Challenge Palyaringkunytjaku – Towards Wellbeing

“ The rates of obesity and insulin resistance syndrome in our communities are now so high that the majority of the adult population over 35 will be affected.

This provides a situation in which we are not aiming to target a subset or at risk group of the population with a nutrition strategy but our whole population is both at risk and suffering disease.”

Professor Paul Torzillo, Medical Director of Nganampa Health Council said in Fighting for “Good Food” (Mai Wiru), submitted by Lorenzo Piemonte, International Diabetes Foundation (2015)

 ” Congratulations, Mai Wiru. They are excited to be taking 10 influential Anangu senior women on a nutrition education retreat so they can experience first hand how a healthy diet feels, and can consequently extend lives in the APY Lands – to do this though, they need your help

Friends,please share this and support it. I met so many wonderful people when I spent two day in the APY Lands last week – they deserve our help.”

Indigenous Health Minister Ken Wyatt

Amata was an alcohol-free community, but some years earlier its population of just under 400 people had been consuming 40,000 litres of soft drink annually.

The thing that I say in community meetings all the time is that, the reason we’re doing this is so that the young children now do not end up going down the same track of diabetes, kidney failure, dialysis machines and early death, which is the track that many, many people out here are on now,”

Mai Wiru, meaning good health, and managed by long-time community consultant John Tregenza.

See Previous NACCHO Post Aboriginal Health and Sugar TV Doco: APY community and the Mai Wiru Sugar Challenge Foundation

Palyaringkunytjaku – Towards Wellbeing is the brain child of Inawantji (Ina) Scales, a young Pitjantjatjara woman from the APY Lands.

Ina has seen too many family and friends, too many Anangu (people from the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Lands) die from diet related illnesses.

Watch video

Ina wants to give Anangu the same opportunity Hope For Health has given Yolngu in the top end

See fundraising website

In 2016 Ina met with Damon Gameau, the founding director of the Mai Wiru Sugar Challenge Foundation.

She told him of her sadness from watching so many people become ill and pass away, she also told of her personal experience from visiting Living Valley Springs and the happiness she felt at now understanding the solutions.

Ina asked Damon for his help, and the Foundation’s help, to share her experiences with other people on the APY Lands.

Here we are today, raising funds to send 10 senior and influential women to an intensive health and nutrition retreat where they will learn and be able to personally experience firsthand, the benefits of healthy eating and living.

By providing a culturally appropriate setting with language interpretation, we will free participants to focus, distraction free, on learning the extensive information that will be provided.

These strong community leaders will then be able to return to community to share their experiences and become healthy living champions.

This is a 2 week trip with an interpreter and staff member to support the women through their learning and experiences, and further to be able to support the women on their return to community.

This will also ensure longer lasting results and help participants maximise their learnings and minimise any stumbling blocks they come across.

Our aim is to have an intensive and immediate impact for these women, enabling them to experience the benefits of healthy eating and living, and to expand their understanding of the impacts of foods on their bodies, to understand the how and why foods have such influence over us.

In their roles in community they can then spread the word about their positive experience and help others make healthier choices.

The participants are being selected based on their location and their capacity to influence on their return.

As a result, these women will become healthy living champions, sharing their knowledge and experience in their regions.

We can’t do it without you.

Help Ina make a good impact on the health of her people, of the Anangu nation.

  • The rate of kidney failure in Aboriginal communities is 15 x the rest of Australia; Type 2 diabetes is 3 x the national average.
  • For too long now high Aboriginal death rates have been attributed to alcohol consumption. The communities and region of the APY lands have now been alcohol free for 40 years yet average life span on the lands is just 55; 20 years lower than the rest of Australia. This is because of poor diet.
  • Professor Paul Torzillo, Medical Director of Nganampa Health Council said in Fighting for “Good Food” (Mai Wiru), submitted by Lorenzo Piemonte, International Diabetes Foundation (2015) “The rates of obesity and insulin resistance syndrome in our communities are now so high that the majority of the adult population over 35 will be affected. This provides a situation in which we are not aiming to target a subset or at risk group of the population with a nutrition strategy but our whole population is both at risk and suffering disease.”
  • Dr Amanda Lee et al in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, Nutrition in remote Aboriginal communities: Lessons from Mai Wiru and the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Lands, (2015), state that more than 75% of Indigenous deaths result from potentially avoidable causes. This includes type 2 diabetes, a preventable, non-communicable chronic disease. About 70% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults, and 38% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children were considered overweight or obese in 2015, with an additional 8% of children who are underweight, another major contributor to the avoidable deaths.
  • Communities on the APY Lands have a long history of being proactive, for example, communities took back management of their stores to ensure food security (the availability and affordability of healthy food and essential items on a daily basis through their local store).
  • There are programs in place that address nutrition and health, but the scale of the problem necessitates a spot fire approach and they are struggling to extend and achieve the progressive results needed to combat chronic health and nutrition issues in the Aboriginal population.
  • The success of service delivery in remote communities depends on the level of community involvement and buy-in. By providing an intensive experience with ongoing support community members will be empowered to create and manage change in their communities.

To make this program fly we need your wonderful support to get there!

We know you’re all very busy people and this is why we appreciate your help more than you can know! Here is a list of 10 things that you could do to help us make Ina’s dream of Palyaringkunytjaku – Towards Wellbeing a reality.

  1. Share our emails – when you receive our emails – share them with your friends and networks.
  2. Share our Social Media posts – Follow us on Facebook and invite your friends to do the same.
  3. Talk to your friends, family, colleagues – tell them what we are doing and how they can support us.
  4. Give us a call. We are looking for more support and are ready to answer calls. We can talk in more detail about the project and who knows where a conversation may lead. Email info@maiwirufoundation.org
  5. Hold a fundraising event. Be creative – a donation box at your work for a month, hold a concert, a dinner party with tickets, a raffle, a physical challenge among your friends, a percentage of your office mates salaries for a month. Design your own style of fundraising.
  6. Create your own campaign under this ‘Palyaringkunytjaku’ umbrella – simply click the button at the bottom of the screen that says ‘Fundraisers – Create Your Own’. You can select one of the impact levels and let your friends and family know what the funds raise will enable. You might like to do ‘6 Spoons in June (and July)’ for the length of this campaign and ask for sponsorship, as an incentive
  7. Keep a close eye on our campaign-we need to hit the target, so if we get close and time is short consider donating again to get us over the top
  8. Have you got something special to give? Relevant health products or services? Donate towards our perks or retreat or help with distributing perks to donors.
  9. Send a message through your networks. Do you have a voice in your community? Do you have a big social media following? Perhaps a lot of professional networks? One or two emails during the campaign from you could result in thousands of dollars towards our very important work. We have email templates for you to use and technical support available if you require. Email: info@maiwirufoundation.org
  10. Did we mention sharing our social media, emails and talking to people you know about what we are doing? When people hear and understand your passion, they can be inspired to jump on board.

All donations are tax deductible.

What happens if we get more or less than $63,500?

By hitting $63,500 we can make Ina’s dream a reality and take 10 participants from the APY Lands on this program, means Palyaringkunytjaku can go ahead as Ina hoped.

There are always many people from the APY Lands who would benefit from this experience,, therefore the amount we raise will directly impact on the number of people Ina and the Mai Wiru Foundation are able to support.

The Mai Wiru Sugar Challenge Foundation is an indigenous community-led initiative, implementing nutrition programs in central Australia’s remote APY Lands. After two years of consultation, and multiple visits from nutritionists to indigenous communities, the team are working on three key projects: opening healthy living cafes, funding permanent nutritionists on the ground, and intensive nutrition workshops.

Melbourne filmmaker Damon Gameau embarked on a unique experiment to document the effects of a high sugar diet on a healthy body, consuming only foods that are commonly perceived, or promoted to be ‘healthy’. Damon’s now acclaimed documentary The Sugar Film raises awareness of the hazards of any diet containing too much sugar. In making the film Damon included a segment about an innovative health program initiated by Indigenous communities in the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara(APY) Lands, where stores were stocking healthy foods and nutritionists were advising customers on the best food choices. Damon determined to give back to the APY communities who featured in That Sugar Film by supporting them in their mission to take control of their own nutrition and improve the health status of Aboriginal families on the APY Lands.

Damon founded the Mai Wiru (Good Food) Sugar Challenge Foundation, a not-for-profit enterprise working with APY communities in an indigenous-led initiative to improve their health.

The health challenges of Aboriginal people are well documented, with current research identifying a 10 year gap between the life expectancy of indigenous and non-indigenous males and indigenous and non-indigenous females. The report published by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare : Indigenous Health (2014) found that ‘The largest gap in death rates between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians was in circulatory disease deaths (22% of the gap) followed by endocrine, metabolic and nutritional disorders (particularly diabetes) (14% of the gap)’.

You can start your own campaign to raise money for Palyaringkunytjaku – with a goal for one of the impact levels below:

  • For the flights – 1 participant (12 in total) = $767
  • For the 2 week health workshop – per participant (10 participants) = $5,990
  • Meals during transit per person – 4 days (12 people) = $300
  • Vehicle expenses – hire, mileage, fuel, maintenance. Pickup and return to community – 3 vehicles for all participants = $11,169
  • Accommodation Alice Springs – per person 2 nights (each direction) twin share = $150

What happens if we get more or less than $63,500?

By hitting $63,500 we can make Ina’s dream a reality and take 10 participants from the APY Lands on this program, it means Palyaringkunytjaku can go ahead as Ina hoped. There are always many people from the APY Lands who would benefit from this experience, therefore the amount we raise will directly impact on the number of people Ina and the Mai Wiru Foundation are able to support

If you would prefer to make a donation by bank transfer/direct deposit, please see our bank account details below. Please advise by email – info@maiwirufoundation.org – when donation is made so we can issue a tax receipt. Thank you.

Account Name: Mai Wiru Sugar Challenge Foundation
Bank: Suncorp
BSB: 484 799
Acct No: 507433042
Description: Please enter your email address

NACCHO Aboriginal Health and #Stroke : New Report : Regional and rural health divide : #stroke treatment a cruel lottery

 ” Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander are between two and three times as likely to have a stroke than non-Indigenous Australians which is why increasing stroke awareness is crucial.

Too many Australians couldn’t spot a stroke if it was happening right in front of them. We know that in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities this awareness is even lower. We want all Australians, regardless of where they live or what community they’re from, to learn the signs of stroke.”

Stroke Foundation and Apunipima ACCHO Cape York Project

“It can happen to anyone — stroke doesn’t discriminate against colour, it doesn’t discriminate against age “

Photo above Seith Fourmile, Indigenous stroke survivor campaigns for culture to aid in stroke recovery

Regional and rural communities are bearing the brunt of Australia’s stroke burden, according to an updated Stroke Foundation report released today.

Download the Report here : NSF1586_Postcode2017_web

Read over 60 plus NACCHO stroke Articles HERE

“No Postcode Untouched: Stroke in Australia 2017”, found 12 of the country’s top 20 hotspots for stroke incidence were located in regional Australia and people living in country areas were 19 percent more likely to suffer a stroke than those living in metropolitan areas.

Stroke Foundation Chief Executive Officer Sharon McGowan said due to limited access to best practice treatment, regional Australians were also more likely to die or be left with a significant disability as a result a stroke.

“In 2017, Australians will suffer more than 56,000 strokes and many of these will be experienced by people living in regional Australia,’’ Ms McGowan said.

“Advancements in stroke treatment and care mean stroke is no longer a death sentence for many, however patient outcomes vary widely across the country depending on where people live.

“Stroke can be treated and it can be beaten. It is a tragedy that only a small percentage of Australian stroke patients are getting access to the latest treatments and ongoing specialist care that we know saves lives.”

See Video from the Project

Stroke Foundation Clinical Council Chair Associate Processor Bruce Campbell said Australian clinicians were leading the way internationally in advancements in acute stroke treatment, such as endovascular clot retrieval. However, the health system was not designed to support and deliver these innovations in treatment and care nationally.

“It is not fair that our health system forces patients into this cruel lottery,’’ A/Professor Campbell said.

“There are pockets of the country where targeted investment and coordination of services is resulting in improved outcomes for stroke patients.

“Consistent lack of stroke-specific funding and poor resourcing is costing us lives and money. For the most part, doctors and nurses are doing what they can in a system that is fragmented, under-resourced and overwhelmed.”

No Postcode Untouched: Stroke in Australia 2017 report and website uses data compiled and analysed by Deloitte Access Economics to reveal how big the stroke challenge is in each Australian federal electorate.

This data includes estimates of the number of strokes, survivors and the death rate, as well as those living with key stroke risk factors. It is an update of a Stroke Foundation report released in 2014.

The report shows the cities and towns where stroke is having its biggest impact and pinpoints future hotspots where there is an increased need for support.

Ms McGowan said stroke is a leading cause of death and disability in Australia, having a huge impact on the community and the economy. Media release

“Currently, there is one stroke in Australia every nine minutes, by 2050 – without action – this number is set to increase to one stroke every four minutes,’’ she said.

“Stroke doesn’t discriminate, it impacts people of all ages and while more people are surviving stroke, its impact on survivors and their families is far reaching.

“It doesn’t have to be this way. Federal and state governments have the opportunity to invest in proven measures to change the state of stroke in this country.”

In the wake of the report Stroke Foundation is calling for a funded national action plan to address the prevention and treatment of stroke, and support for stroke survivors living in the community.

Key elements include: A national action campaign to ensure every Australian household has someone who knows

Key elements include:

  •  A national action campaign to ensure every Australian household has someone who knows FAST – the signs of stroke and to call 000. Stroke is a time critical medical condition. Time saved in getting people to hospital and treatments = brain saved.

  •  Nationally coordinated telemedicine network – breaking down the barriers to acute stroke treatment.
  •  Ensuring all stroke patients have access to stroke unit care, and spend enough time on the stroke unit accessing the services and supports they need to live well after stroke.

The No Postcode Untouched:Stroke in Australia 2017 report was funded by an unrestricted educational grant from Boehringer Ingelheim.

Aboriginal Health and #prevention : New report : @Prevention1stAU health : How much does Australia spend and is it enough?

 ” The verdict is in: Prevention is better than cure when it comes to tackling Australia’s chronic disease burden, but is Australia pulling its weight when it comes to tackling the nation’s greatest public health challenge?

A new economic report looking at what Australia invests in preventive health has found Australia ranks poorly on the world stage and has determined that governments must spend more wisely to contain the burgeoning healthcare budget.

Treating chronic disease costs the Australian community an estimated $27 billion annually, accounting for more than a third of our national health budget.

Yet Australia currently spends just over $2 billion on preventive health each year, or around $89 per person.

One in two Australians suffer from chronic disease, which is responsible for 83 per cent of all premature deaths in Australia, and accounts for 66 per cent of the burden of disease.”

The report, Preventive health: How much does Australia spend and is it enough? was co-funded by the Heart Foundation, Kidney Australia, Alzheimer’s Australia, the Australia Health Promotion Association and the Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education.

Download the report HERE

Preventive-health-How-much-does-Australia-spend-and-is-it-enough_FINAL

Produced by La Trobe University’s Department of Public Health, the report examines trends in preventive health spending, comparing Australia’s spending on preventive health, as well as the funding models used, against selected Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries.

The report also explores the question: ‘how much should Australia be spending on preventive health?’

Treating chronic disease costs the Australian community an estimated $27 billion annually, accounting for more than a third of our national health budget.

Yet Australia currently spends just over $2 billion on preventive health each year, or around $89 per person. At just 1.34 per cent of Australian healthcare expenditure, the amount is considerably less than OECD countries Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom, with Australia ranked 16th out of 31 OECD countries by per capita expenditure.

Michael Thorn, Chief Executive of the Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education (FARE), a founding member organisation of the Prevention 1st campaign, says that when looking at Australia’s spend on prevention, it should be remembered that one third of all chronic diseases are preventable and can be traced to four lifestyle risk factors: alcohol and tobacco use, physical inactivity and poor nutrition.

“We know that by positively addressing and influencing lifestyle factors such as physical activity, diet, tobacco and   alcohol consumption, we will significantly reduce the level of heart disease, stroke, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, lung disease and type 2 diabetes; conditions that are preventable, all too common, and placing great pressure on Australian families and on Australia’s healthcare systems,” Mr Thorn said.

Report co-author, Professor Alan Shiell says we should not simply conclude that Australia should spend more on preventive health simply because we spend less than equivalent nations, and instead argues that Australia could and should spend more on preventive health measures based on the evidence of the cost effectiveness of preventive health intervention.

“The key to determining the appropriate prevention spend is to compare the added value of an increase in spending on preventive health against the opportunity cost of doing so.

“If the value of the increased spending on preventive health is greater than the opportunity cost, then there is a strong case to do so,” Professor Shiell said.

Professor Shiell says there is clear evidence that many existing preventive health initiatives are cost-effective.

“Studies suggest Australia’s health could be improved and spending potentially even reduced if government was to act on existing policy recommendations and increase spending on activities already considered cost-effective.

“We also suspect that the choice of funding mechanism, or how money is allocated to whom for prevention – is an important factor for the overall efficiency of health prevention expenditure,” Professor Shiell said.

The report highlights England’s efforts in evaluating and monitoring the cost effectiveness and success of its public health interventions and Mr Thorn believes Australia would do well to follow their lead.

“In the United Kingdom we have a conservative government no less, showing tremendous leadership to tackle chronic disease, with bold policy measures like the recently introduced sugar tax and broad-based physical activity programs, all of which are underpinned by robust institutional structures,” Mr Thorn said.

The report will be launched at a Forum at Parliament House in Canberra today, where public health experts, including the World Health Organization’s Dr Alessandro Demaio will explain how they would invest in preventive health if given $100 million to spend.

 

 

 

NACCHO Aboriginal Health #CarersGateway : Free online resources to support #Aboriginal #carers

It’s rewarding work, but without help Dolly finds herself emotionally and physically drained. Dolly reached out and found that she could get services to help her.

Like Dolly, millions of people in Australia care for others who need help with their everyday lives.

A carer may be someone who looks after their husband or wife, partner, grandparent, uncle, aunty, cousin, child, grandchild or any other family member, a neighbour, a friend or someone in their community who needs help.

Everyone’s situation is different. Some carers look after someone who is an older person or who is unwell or has difficulties getting around. Some carers may look after someone who has a disability, a mental illness or dementia, a chronic condition or a long-term illness or drug and alcohol problems.

Many people looking after someone else don’t think of themselves as carers. They just see caring as what they do to help their families or friends or people in their communities.

Carers need help too – someone they can talk to and find out about services that can help. Carer Gateway is a free, Australian Government funded service that provides information for carers and helps people get in touch with their local services. People can ring up and have a private chat or go online and find out about support in their area, free financial and legal help and what to do in emergencies.  They can also get tips on how to look after themselves so they don’t get burnt out while caring for someone else.

Carer Gateway has short videos about real-life carers in the community – showing how they cope and deal with problems – and how they make the most of the time they spend caring for someone in need.

The videos include Dolly’s story. Dolly is a mother and full-time carer for her two adult daughters, who both need support with their everyday needs.

“It’s pretty much 24/7 around the clock. Four years ago, I realised I was doing a care role and I was also a working mum so quite busy. I thought you know what, it’s time for me to step back and start looking after my own,” she said.

There are free online resources to support Aboriginal carers, including a guided relaxation audio recording and information brochures and posters for use by health and community groups  which can also be ordered from the Carer Gateway ordering form and a Carer Gateway Facebook page to keep up to date on services and supports for carers.

To find out more, Carer Gateway can be contacted on 1800 422 737, Monday to Friday between 8am and 6pm,

or by visiting carergateway.gov.au

You can join the Carer Gateway Facebook community by visiting https://www.facebook.com/carergateway/

 

 

 

Aboriginal Health : Second Atlas of Healthcare Variation highlights higher Aboriginal hospitalisation rates for all 18 clinical conditions

 

“The report, compiled by the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care, shows us that high hospitalisation rates often point to inadequate primary care in the community, leading to higher rates of potentially preventative hospitalization

The most disturbing example of this  has been the higher hospitalisation rates for all of the 18 clinical conditions surveyed experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, people living in areas of relative socioeconomic disadvantage and those living in remote areas.

 Chairman of Consumers Health Forum, Tony Lawson who is a member of the Atlas Advisory Group.

 “Additional priorities for investigation and action are hospitalisation rates for specific populations with chronic conditions and cardiovascular conditions, particularly:

  • Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians
  • People living in remote areas
  • People at most socioeconomic disadvantage.

Please note

  • Features of the second Atlas include: Analysis of data by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status

DOWNLOAD Key-findings-and-recommendations

Mr Martin Bowles Secretary Dept of Health  launches the Second Australian Atlas of Healthcare Variation

A new report showing dramatic differences in treatment rates around Australia signals a pressing need for reforms to ensure equitable access to appropriate health care for all Australians, the Consumers Health Forum, says.

“A seven-fold difference in hospitalisation for heart failure and a 15-fold difference for a serious chronic respiratory disease depending on place of residence, are among many findings of substantial variations in treatment rates in Australia revealed in the Second Australian Atlas of Healthcare Variation,” the chairman of Consumers Health Forum, Tony Lawson, said.

“While there are a variety of factors contributing to these differences,  the variation in health and treatment outcomes is, as the report states, an ‘alarm bell’ that should make us stop and investigate whether appropriate care is being delivered.

“These findings show that recommended care for chronic diseases is not always provided.  Even with the significant funding provided through Medicare to better coordinate primary care for people with chronic and complex conditions, fragmented health services contribute to suboptimal management, as the report states.

“We support the report’s recommendation for a stronger primary health system that would provide a clinical ‘home base’ for coordination of patient care and in which patients and carers are activated to develop their knowledge and confidence to manage their health with the aid of a healthcare team.

“The Atlas provides further robust reasons for federal, state and territory governments to act on the demonstrated need for a more effective primary health system that will ensure better and more cost effective care for all Australians.

“The Atlas also examined  variations in women’s health care, and its findings included a seven-fold difference in rates of hysterectomy and  21-fold  difference in rates of endometrial ablation.  The report states that rates of hysterectomy and caesarean sections in Australia are higher than reported rates in other developed nations.  These results highlight the need for continuing support and information on women’s health issues,” Mr Lawson said.

The Second Australian Atlas of Healthcare Variation (second Atlas) paints a picture of marked variation in the use of 18 clinical areas (hospitalisations, surgical procedures and complications) across Australia.

This Atlas, the second to be released by the Commission, illuminates variation by mapping use of health care according to where people live.  As well, this Atlas identifies specific achievable actions for exploration and quality improvement.

The second Atlas includes interventions not covered in the first Atlas, such as hospitalisations for chronic diseases and caesarean section in younger women. It also builds on the findings from the first Atlas – for example, examining hysterectomy and endometrial ablation separately, and examining rates of cataract surgery using a different dataset.

Priority areas for investigation and action arising from the second Atlas include use of:

  • Hysterectomy and endometrial ablation
  • Chronic conditions (COPD, diabetes complications)
  • Knee replacement.

Additional priorities for investigation and action are hospitalisation rates for specific populations with chronic conditions and cardiovascular conditions, particularly:

  • Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians
  • People living in remote areas
  • People at most socioeconomic disadvantage.

Healthcare Variation – what does it tell us

Some variation is expected and associated with need-related factors such as underlying differences in the health of specific populations, or personal preferences. However, the weight of evidence in Australia and internationally suggests that much of the variation documented in the Atlas is likely to be unwarranted. Understanding this variation is critical to improving the quality, value and appropriateness of health care.

View the second Atlas

The second Atlas, released in June 2017, examined four clinical themes: chronic disease and infection – potentially preventable hospitalisations, cardiovascular, women’s health and maternity, and surgical interventions.

Key findings and recommendations for action are available here.

View the maps and download the data using the interactive platform.

What does the Atlas measure?

The second Atlas shows rates of use of healthcare interventions (hospitalisations, surgical procedures and complications,) in geographical areas across Australia.  The rate is then age and sex standardised to allow comparisons between populations with different age and sex structures. All rates are based on the patient’s place of residence, not the location of the hospital or health service.

The second Atlas uses data from national databases to explore variation across different healthcare settings. These included the National Hospital Morbidity Database and the AIHW National Perinatal Data Collection.

Who has developed the second Atlas?

The Commission worked with the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) on the second Atlas.

The Commission consulted widely with the Australian government, state and territory governments, specialist medical colleges, clinicians and consumer representatives to develop the second Atlas.

Features of the second Atlas include:

  • Greater involvement of clinicians during all stages of development
  • Analysis of data by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status
  • Analysis of data by patient funding status (public or private).

Table of Contents

Chapter 1 Chronic disease and infection: potentially preventable hospitalisations

1.1 Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)
1.2 Heart failure
1.3 Cellulitis
1.4 Kidney and urinary tract infections
1.5 Diabetes complications

Chapter 2 Cardiovascular conditions

2.1 Acute myocardial infarction admissions
2.2 Atrial fibrillation

Chapter 3 Women’s health and maternity

3.1 Hysterectomy
3.2 Endometrial ablation
3.3 Cervical loop excision or cervical laser ablation
3.4 Caesarean section, ages 20 to 34 years
3.5 Third- and fourth-degree perineal tear

Chapter 4 Surgical interventions

4.1 Knee replacement
4.2 Lumbar spinal decompression
4.3 Lumbar spinal fusion
4.4 Laparoscopic cholecystectomy
4.5 Appendicectomy
4.6 Cataract surgery
Technical Supplement
About the Atlas
Glossary

Australian Atlas of Healthcare Variation data set specifications are available at http://meteor.aihw.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/674758