TY - JOUR
T1 - Injuries and alcohol management plans in remote Indigenous communities
T2 - A twocommunity comparison
AU - West, Caryn
AU - Muller, Reinhold
AU - Clough, Alan R.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 BMJ Publishing Group. All rights reserved.
PY - 2018/5
Y1 - 2018/5
N2 - To curb high rates of alcohol-related violence and injury in Indigenous communities, alcohol management plans (AMPs) were implemented in 2002-2003 and tightened in 2008. This project compares injury presentations and alcohol involvement from two Indigenous Cape York communities, one that entered full prohibition and one that did not. Aclinical file audit was performed for the period 2006-2011, capturing changes in alcohol availability. Medical files were searched for injury presentation documenting type of injury, cause of injury (including alcohol), date of injury and outcomes of all presenting injuries for the time period 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2011, capturing the major changes of the 2008 AMP restrictions. Findings indicated injury presentation rates were higher in both communities before prohibition than afterwards andreduction was more pronounced in community 2 (prohibition). Ongoing research is imperative, as this area is characterised by a near-absence of evidence.
AB - To curb high rates of alcohol-related violence and injury in Indigenous communities, alcohol management plans (AMPs) were implemented in 2002-2003 and tightened in 2008. This project compares injury presentations and alcohol involvement from two Indigenous Cape York communities, one that entered full prohibition and one that did not. Aclinical file audit was performed for the period 2006-2011, capturing changes in alcohol availability. Medical files were searched for injury presentation documenting type of injury, cause of injury (including alcohol), date of injury and outcomes of all presenting injuries for the time period 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2011, capturing the major changes of the 2008 AMP restrictions. Findings indicated injury presentation rates were higher in both communities before prohibition than afterwards andreduction was more pronounced in community 2 (prohibition). Ongoing research is imperative, as this area is characterised by a near-absence of evidence.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053550282&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053550282&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/injuryprev-2016-042151
DO - 10.1136/injuryprev-2016-042151
M3 - Article
C2 - 28835444
AN - SCOPUS:85053550282
SN - 1353-8047
VL - 24
SP - 236
EP - 239
JO - Injury Prevention
JF - Injury Prevention
IS - 3
ER -