The clinical profile of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults admitted to hospital with neurological injury is not well documented. Understanding these profiles may enable health professionals to provide more culturally responsive health care for this patient group. This study aimed to report the clinical profile of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults admitted to a regional Queensland hospital due to stroke or traumatic brain injury (TBI).

A 2-year retrospective medical record review of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults (≥18 years) admitted to a regional Queensland hospital with principal diagnoses of stroke or TBI.

There were 132 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adult stroke (51.5%) or TBI (48.5%) admissions. The mean ages were 56.7 years for stroke and 42.7 years for TBI. The majority of patients (83.3%) were of Aboriginal descent with others identifying as Torres Strait Islander only, or both Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander. Patients were from 26 diverse home locations across northern Australia, primarily Outer Regional or Remote/Very Remote geographical locations. All patients’ language backgrounds were documented as English only. Over 90% of stroke and 50% of TBI patients presented with medical co-morbidities.

Patients had diverse geographical locations and cultural backgrounds, with many likely impacted by dislocation from home and country, as well as potential delays in receiving treatment. Despite this diversity, English was documented in patients’ medical records as their only language. The majority of patients also presented with multiple medical co-morbidities. Health professionals should consider these factors to ensure patients receive optimum and culturally responsive health care.

In August 2007, Illinois passed legislation mandating methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) admission screening for intensive care unit patients. We assessed hospital staff perceptions of the implementation of this law.

Mixed-methods evaluation using structured focus groups and questionnaires.

Eight Chicago-area hospitals.

Three strata of staff (leadership, midlevel, and frontline) at each hospital.

All participants completed a questionnaire and participated in a focus group. Focus group transcripts were thematically coded and analyzed. The proportion of staff agreeing with statements about MRSA and the legislation was compared across staff types.

Overall, 126 hospital staff participated in 23 focus groups. Fifty-six percent of participants agreed that the legislation had a positive effect at their facility; frontline staff were more likely to agree than midlevel and leadership staff (P < .01). Perceived benefits of the legislation included increased awareness of MRSA among staff and better knowledge of the epidemiology of MRSA colonization. Perceived negative consequences included the psychosocial effect of screening and contact precautions on patients and increased use of resources. Most participants (59%) would choose to continue the activities associated with the legislation but advised facilities in states considering similar legislation to educate staff and patients about MRSA screening and to draft clear implementation plans.

Staff from Chicago-area hospitals perceived that mandatory MRSA screening legislation resulted in some benefits but highlighted implementation challenges. States considering similar initiatives might minimize these challenges by optimizing messaging to patients and healthcare staff, drafting implementation plans, and developing program evaluation strategies.