Establishment of a sentinel surveillance network for sexually transmissible infections and blood borne viruses in Aboriginal primary care services across Australia: the ATLAS project

Abstract

Background: Sexually transmissible infection (STI) and blood-borne virus (BBV) diagnoses data are a core component of the Australian National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS). However, the NNDSS data alone is not enough to understand STI and BBV burden among priority population groups, like Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, because it lacks testing, treatment and management data. Here, we describe the processes involved in establishing a STI and BBV sentinel surveillance network representative of Aboriginal Community-Controlled Health Services (ACCHS)-known as the ATLAS network-to augment the NNDSS and to help us understand the burden of disease due to STI and BBV among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Methods: Researchers invited participation from ACCHS in urban, regional and remote areas clustered in five clinical hubs across four Australian jurisdictions. Participation agreements were developed for each clinical hub and individual ACCHS. Deidentified electronic medical record (EMR) data relating to STI and BBV testing, treatment and management are collected passively from each ACCHS via the GRHANITE tm data extraction tool. These data are analysed centrally to inform 12 performance measures which are included in regular surveillance reports generated for each ACCHS and clinical hub.

Representation of marginalised populations in digital surveillance for notifiable conditions in Australia: a systematic review

“…For example, the ATLAS indigenous primary care surveillance network aims to monitor the STi and BBv burden in Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander populations across Australia. 54 This network is partnered with the Aboriginal Community-Controlled Health Organisation sector and was designed to address the disparity in testing, treatment, and management of sexually transmissible infections and blood borne viruses, but as yet only a methods article has been published. 55 There are a number of other marginalised groups who are also important to consider in infectious disease surveillance.…”

Interrogating the intentions for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health: a narrative review of research outputs since the introduction of Closing the Gap

“…Conducting analytical research, particularly across multiple states and territories or nationally, is a complex and costly endeavour. Further, although Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health research ethics processes ensure culturally safe and appropriate research practice, 26 conducting multisite ethics processes has been reported to affect timelines in trials 27 . Despite experimental research being classified as the gold standard, recent reviews have identified knowledge and methodological gaps in documenting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health research impact 18 .…”

“…Further, although Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health research ethics processes ensure culturally safe and appropriate research practice, 26 conducting multisite ethics processes has been reported to affect timelines in trials. 27 Despite experimental research being classified as the gold standard, recent reviews have identified knowledge and methodological gaps in documenting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health research impact. 18 Furthermore, leading Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander academics are calling for a reimagining of health systems and research through a health justice framework 28 to influence major changes to research priorities, including the research methods most highly valued.…”

The search for evidence in Indigenous health intervention research: Shifting the debate

“…28 This collaborative, mutually-beneficial model for Indigenous data collection has been replicated in studies such as the ATLAS project and its application to other Indigenous health contexts merits further consideration. 29 5. Finally, we need to move beyond traditional systematic reviews in Indigenous health research, in favour of approaches that are more inclusive of diverse and culturally appropriate forms of evidence.…”

“…A key feature of the TTANGO project was a commitment to community engagement and ensuring that the research provided tangible benefits to participating services 28 . This collaborative, mutually‐beneficial model for Indigenous data collection has been replicated in studies such as the ATLAS project and its application to other Indigenous health contexts merits further consideration 29 …”