Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 9, 2025

Using Visual and Narrative Methods to Achieve Fair Process in Clinical Care
Published on: February 16, 2011
Formative process evaluation of a guideline-driven process for improving the cultural responsiveness of alcohol and
Sara Farnbach1, Julaine Allan2, Raechel Wallace3
1National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre UNSW, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.
Background:
To improve Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people's access to, and experience of, healthcare services, including Alcohol and other Drug (AoD) treatment services, principles and frameworks have been developed to optimise cultural responsiveness. Implementing those principles in practice, however, can be difficult to achieve. This study has five aims: i) to describe a five-step process developed to operationalise improvements in culturally responsive practice in AoD services; ii) to evaluate the fidelity of implementation for this five-step process; iii) to identify barriers and enablers to implementation; iv) to assess the feasibility and acceptability of this approach; and v) to describe iterative adaptation of implementation processes based on participant feedback.
Methods:
Participating services were 15 non-Aboriginal AoD services in New South Wales, Australia. Implementation records were used to assess the implementation fidelity of the project. Structured interviews with chief executive officers or senior management were conducted, and interview data were thematically analysed to identify project acceptability, and the key enablers of, and barriers to, project implementation. Quantitative descriptive analyses were performed on the post-implementation workshop survey data, and responses to the free text questions were thematically analysed.
Results:
A high level of implementation fidelity was achieved. Key enablers to improving culturally responsive practice were the timing of the introduction of the five-step process, the active interest of staff across a range of seniority and the availability of resources and staff time to identify and implement activities. Key barriers included addressing the unique needs of a range of treatment sub-groups, difficulty adapting activities to different service delivery models, limited time to implement change in this evaluation (three months) and the varied skill level across staff. The project was rated as being highly acceptable and relevant to service CEOs/managers and direct service staff, with planned changes perceived to be achievable and important. Based on CEO/management feedback after the project was implemented at the initial services, several improvements to processes were made.
Conclusion:
The operationalisation of the five-step process developed to improve cultural responsiveness was feasible and acceptable and may be readily applicable to improving the cultural responsiveness of a wide variety of health and human services.
More Related Videos
08:05A Prediction Error-driven Retrieval Procedure for Destabilizing and Rewriting Maladaptive Reward Memories in Hazardous Drinkers
Published on: January 5, 2018
10:39Qualitative and Quantitative Validation of Tools with Rating Scales Aimed at Assessing the Quality of University Service-Learning
Published on: August 29, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Community Based Intervention
Foundations of Community Mental Health Programs
Central to the success of community-based interventions is the...
Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care...
Nursing Process for Patient and Caregiver Teaching III: Evaluation and Documentation
Nurses can use several methods to evaluate patient outcomes. For example, oral questions can assess cognitive learning,...
Factors Affecting Drug Response: Overview
Group Therapy
Therapeutic Drug Monitoring: Affecting Factors