Dataset Information

A comparison of rural Australian First Nations and Non-First Nations survey responses to COVID-19 risks and impacts: implications for health communications.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

This study investigated differences between rural Australian First Nations and non-First Nations survey respondents' perceptions of COVID-19-related risks and analysed other variables that could predict an exacerbation of anxiety related to COVID-19 harms.

Methods

A cross-sectional online and paper survey of rural residents from the western regions of NSW, Australia, was conducted. Descriptive and multivariate statistical analyses were used to assess links between First Nations status and demographic measures including postcode, age, gender, education, rural or town/village location, proximity to medical services and living situation. The analysis included five items related to perceptions about COVID-19: perceived likelihood of contracting COVID-19 in the next 12 months, perceived harmfulness of the virus, how often people felt afraid, perception about respondents' ability to do something about the virus and perceived economic impacts of the pandemic.

Results

There were significant differences between First Nations (n=60) and non-First Nations (n= 639) respondents across all sociodemographic categories. The results reflect a significantly higher level of anxiety among the First Nations Australians in the sample: they felt afraid more often, felt it was highly likely they would catch the virus and if they did catch the virus perceived that it would be very harmful. Living with children under eighteen years of age and in small rural towns were key factors linked to feeling afraid of COVID-19 and First Nations status.

Conclusion

Health risk communication in pandemic response should include an equitable focus on rural areas, recognising that First Nations Australians are a significant proportion of the rural population with different risk factors and concerns than those of non-First Nations Australians. This principle of First Nations-led design is critical to all health policy and planning. The Australian Government should include rural areas in planning pandemic responses, recognising that First Nations populations are a significant proportion of the rural population creating syndemic conditions.

SUBMITTER: Allan J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9245509 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo examine public views on COVID-19 vaccination and consider the implications for communications and targeted support.DesignCross-sectional study.SettingOnline and telephone nationally representative survey in Great Britain, January to February 2021.Participants4978 adults. Survey response rate was 84%, among the 5931 panellists invited.Main outcome measuresSociodemographic characteristics (age, gender, ethnicity, education, financial status), COVID-19 status, vaccine acceptance, trust in COVID-19 vaccination information sources, perceptions of vaccination priority groups and perceptions of importance of second dose.ResultsCOVID-19 vaccine acceptance (83%) was associated with increasing age, higher level of education and having been invited for vaccination. Acceptance decreased with unconfirmed past COVID-19, greater financial hardship and non-white British ethnicity; black/black British participants had lowest acceptance. Overall, healthcare and scientific sources of information were most trusted. Compared with white British participants, other ethnicities had lower trust in healthcare and scientific sources. Those with lower educational attainment or financial hardship had lower trust in healthcare and scientific sources. Those with no qualifications had higher trust in media and family/friends. While trust was low overall in community or faith leaders, it was higher among those with Asian/Asian British and black/black British ethnicity compared with white British participants. Views of vaccine prioritisation were mostly consistent with UK official policy but there was support for prioritising additional groups. There was high support for having the second vaccine dose.ConclusionsTargeted engagement is needed to address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in non-white British ethnic groups, in younger adults, and among those with lower education, greater financial hardship and unconfirmed past infection. Healthcare professionals and scientific advisors should play a central role in communications and tailored messaging is needed for hesitant groups. Careful communication around vaccination prioritisation continues to be required.

Project description:BackgroundCanada's Aboriginal population faces significantly higher rates of stillbirth and neonatal and postnatal death than those seen in the general population. The objective of this study was to compare indicators of obstetric care quality and use of obstetric interventions between First Nations and non-First Nations mothers in British Columbia, Canada.MethodsWe linked obstetrical medical records with the First Nations Client File for all nulliparous women who delivered single infants in British Columbia from 1999 to 2011. Using logistic regression models, we examined differences in the proportion of women who received services aligned with best practice guidelines, as well as the overall use of obstetric interventions among First Nations mothers compared with the general population, controlling for geographic barriers (distance to hospital) and other relevant confounders.ResultsDuring the study period, 215,993 single births occurred in nulliparous women in British Columbia, 9152 of which were to members of our First Nations cohort. First Nations mothers were less likely to have early ultrasonography (adjusted risk difference = 10.2 fewer women per 100 deliveries [95% confidence interval {CI} -11.3 to -9.3]), to have at least 4 antenatal care visits (3.6 fewer women per 100 deliveries [95% CI -4.6 to -2.6]), and to undergo labour induction after prolonged (> 24 hours) prelabour rupture of membranes (-5.9 [95% CI -11.8 to 0.1]) or at post-dates gestation (-10.6 [95% CI -13.8 to -7.5]). Obstetric interventions including epidural, labour induction, instrumental delivery and cesarean delivery were used less often in First Nations mothers.InterpretationWe identified differences in the obstetric care received by First Nations mothers compared with the general population. Such differences warrant further investigation, given increases in perinatal mortality that are consistently shown and that may be a downstream consequence of differences in care.