At the international level, evidence supports the position that regardless of whether a country is industrialized or less developed, vulnerable populations living in poor social conditions are at disproportionate risk of injury. The Aboriginal population of Canada is one such vulnerable population. In addition to poor social conditions and marginalization related to historical injustices, this population is faced with the challenge of working with little or no descriptive injury data relevant to the community level. It has been and continues to be a significant barrier to the adoption and implementation of injury prevention strategies and programs. Recognizing that surveillance is an intrinsic component of public health practice, this study was undertaken to address a critical data gap facing Aboriginal communities. The objective of the study was to develop the conceptual design of an injury surveillance framework that would be culturally relevant, that is 'acceptable and owned by the target population', and would meet the specific requirements for injury data and data collection methods for the study population. The methodology was undertaken with focus groups at national and community levels, and relied on the use of strategic activities such as benchmarking, guided discussions, nominal group technique exercises and critical document reviews. The process of benchmarking served to identify that injury surveillance systems described in the literature, linking data to action, are not a predominant reality. The locus of control is often removed from the population of interest and resides primarily with experts under the jurisdiction and control of designated authorities. In order for the surveillance system to have cultural relevance, the focus group identified that the locus of control must be defined by the population of interest at the community level, and that the system must be germane and flexible to consider the local environment. The Aboriginal framework proposed places the locus of control with the community, in partnership with its data sources. Surveillance activities remain largely distinct from communities of interest, leading us to consider whether structural changes can serve to promote a link between data and action. Traditional or standard surveillance systems, by virtue of their structure, promote a disassociation between information and community action. Data management under the complete jurisdiction of sources external to a community appears to obstruct potential linkages between information and action.

Background: In 2009, Alberta Health Services (AHS) became Canada's first and largest fully integrated healthcare system, involving the amalgamation of nine regional health authorities and three provincial services. Within AHS, communities of practice (CoPs) meet regularly to learn from one another and to find ways to improve service quality. This qualitative study examined CoPs as an applied practice of a learning organisation along with their potential influence in a healthcare system by exploring the perspectives of CoP participants. Methods: A collective case study method was used to enable the examination of a cross-section of cases in the study organisation. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 31 participants representing 28 distinct CoPs. Using Senge's framework of a learning organisation, CoP influences associated with team learning and organisational change were explored. Results: CoPs in AHS were described as diverse in practice domains, focus, membership boundaries, attendance and sphere of influence. Using small-scale resource investments, CoPs provided members with opportunities for meaningful interactions, the capacity to build information pathways, and enhanced abilities to address needs at the point of care and service delivery. Overall, CoPs delivered a sophisticated array of engagement and knowledgesharing activities perceived as supportive of organisational change, systems thinking, and the team learning practice critical to a learning organisation. Conclusion: CoPs enable the diverse wealth of knowledge embedded in people, local conditions and special circumstances to flow from practice domain groups to programme and service areas, and into the larger system where it can effect organisational change. This research highlights the potential of CoPs to influence practice and broad-scale change more directly than previously understood or reported in the literature. As such, this study suggests that CoPs have the potential to influence and advance widespread systems change in Canadian healthcare.

BackgroundOver the past three decades, the capacity to develop and implement injury surveillance systems (ISS) has grown worldwide and is reflected by the diversity of data gathering environments in which ISS operate. The capacity to evaluate ISS, however, is less advanced and existing evaluation guidelines are ambiguous. Furthermore, the applied relevance of these guidelines to evaluate ISS operating in various settings is unclear. The aim of this paper was to examine how the World Health Organization (WHO) injury surveillance guidelines have been applied to evaluate systems operating in three different contexts.MethodsThe attributes of a good surveillance system as well as instructions for conducting evaluations, outlined in the WHO injury surveillance guidelines, were used to develop an analytical framework. Using this framework, a comparative analysis of the application of the guidelines was conducted using; the Aboriginal Community-Centered Injury Surveillance System (ACCISS) from Canada, the Shantou-Emergency Department Injury Surveillance Project (S-EDISP) from China, and the Yorkhill-Canadian Hospitals Injury Reporting and Prevention Program (Y-CHIRPP) imported from Canada and implemented in Scotland.ResultsThe WHO guidelines provide only a basic platform for evaluation. The guidelines over emphasize epidemiologic attributes and methods and under emphasize public health and injury prevention perspectives requiring adaptation for context-based relevance. Evaluation elements related to the dissemination and use of knowledge, acceptability, and the sustainability of ISS are notably inadequate. From a public health perspective, alternative reference points are required for re-conceptualizing evaluation paradigms. This paper offers an ISS evaluation template that considers how the WHO guidelines could be adapted and applied.ConclusionsFindings suggest that attributes of a good surveillance system, when used as evaluation metrics, cannot be weighted equally across ISS. In addition, the attribute of acceptability likely holds more relevance than previously recognized and should be viewed as a critical underpinning attribute of ISS. Context-oriented evaluations sensitive to distinct operational environments are more likely to address knowledge gaps related to; understanding links between the production of injury data and its use, and the effectiveness, impact, and sustainability of ISS. Current frameworks are predisposed to disassociating epidemiologic approaches from subjective factors and social processes.

Growing attention has been placed on injury as a major public health problem which has served to highlight the need for relevant injury data for preventive purposes at the community level. In the case of reserve-based Aboriginal communities in Canada, available injury data, from large datasets, often has little or no relevance at the community level. In addition, the availability of local data is complicated by unique health service and community infrastructures. As such, a prerequisite to establishing injury surveillance requires an understanding of Medical Service Patterns (MSPs) for injured patients intrinsic to a community's health service infrastructure. In determining patterns, cultural and environmental contexts are integral to methodological considerations as historically, Canada's Aboriginal population has been 'controlled' by others in the areas of health, education and social services. The objective of the study was to investigate MSPs in a Canadian Aboriginal community, specific to the management of injured patients, for the purpose of identifying data sites, sources, and collectors. The method relied on a four-step qualitative process designed explicitly for the study community, comprising: (1) semi-structured interviews with key informants; (2) a flow diagram process; (3) focus group discussions; and (4) a summary matrix diagram. This methodology was later replicated with three additional pilot communities. Three major MSPs were identified from nine original patterns generated through the initial data collection process. MSPs were found to be most directly impacted by severity of injury and the proximity of health service providers. Data collection practices were inconsistent, sporadic and poorly coordinated. Data was exclusive to respective data sources and off-reserve documentation was not reported back to the community. MSPs identified key data sites, sources, and collectors relevant to the study population. In conclusion, the four-step qualitative methodology employed in the study was found to be reliable and feasible in identifying community MSPs. Empirical findings confirm the need to investigate MSPs in communities considering surveillance activities, as intra-national differences may be considerable given social inequalities, geographic uniqueness and cultural factors. The use of sophisticated methodologies may detract rather than promote collaborative efforts.