Introduction: Indigenous youth and young adults endure some of the highest rates of physical and mental health problems in the United States compared to their non-Indigenous counterparts. Colonization, oppression, and discrimination play a substantial role in these inequitable disease rates. However, culture (e.g., identity, participation, and connection) relates to the prevention of and recovery from illness in Indigenous populations. The Remember the Removal program aims to teach Indigenous youth and young adults tribally specific culture, history, and language to put them on a trajectory to become informed and culturally connected community leaders. We examined the program’s effects on health. Method: Thirty Remember the Removal program participants, mainly young adults, completed surveys four times: before the program’s start, at the end of the training period, at the program’s end, and at a six-month follow-up. Various indicators of physical, mental, spiritual, and cultural health and well-being were measured at each time period. Paired t-tests were completed to compare baseline scores to each subsequent time interval. Results: At program completion, and as indicated with an asterisk at the six month follow-up, participants had statistically significantly improved diet and exercise measures (e.g., reduced sugary, salty, and fatty foods, reduced soda consumption, increased fruit consumption, and improved self-efficacy for exercise), improved mental health indicators (e.g., reduced stress, anxiety, depression*, anger*, post-traumatic stress disorder, and microaggressions*, and improved positive mental health) and improved social and cultural connection (e.g., social support, Cherokee identity*, Cherokee values). Discussion: This is one of the first quantitative studies to demonstrate the profound effects that cultural learning and connection have on the health and well-being of Indigenous people and practices. It also demonstrates the specificity and effectiveness of a program created by and for tribal citizens. Future programs with Indigenous populations should work to center cultural connection and ensure that programs are created and directed by tribal community members.

Purpose: Indigenous patients experience challenges while accessing and utilizing healthcare services that relate to worsened health experiences. Bias towards Indigenous patients is prevalent in healthcare settings and leads to poor health outcomes. The purpose of this study was to learn about the healthcare experiences, both positive and negative, of Indigenous patients and solicit subsequent recommendations to improve care delivered to this population. Methods: This study sampled Indigenous patients (n = 20) from an Indigenous-serving health clinic to discuss participants’ health experiences and elicit recommendations for improved care. Four focus groups were conducted, and template analysis was employed to analyze the data. Results: A total of 15 themes were developed under the category of an effective health encounter. Highlighted themes include healthcare that is free of stigma, quality care, respecting trauma experiences, expanded integrated care and the patient–provider relationship. Based on participant recommendations, a checklist was created for healthcare professionals to improve care delivery to Indigenous patients. Results indicated that bias in healthcare settings may masquerade as poor clinical care but is really founded in biased beliefs and healthcare delivery. Alternatively, when patients received good quality care, their healthcare outcomes improved. Further, effective healthcare incorporates culture, family, tribe, and community and addresses these aspects of health in both clinical and systemic settings. Conclusions: With some of the largest proportions of health disparities and bias experiences in the US, it is critical that healthcare delivered to Indigenous patients incorporate culturally safe care to regain dignity and improve health outcomes for this population.

Background: The quality of healthcare experiences for Indigenous communities is worse when compared to non-Indigenous patients. Bias and discrimination within healthcare systems relate to worsened care and worsened health outcomes for Indigenous patients. The purpose of this study was to learn about the experiences of Indigenous people within healthcare settings, as well as their viewpoints for improving healthcare delivery to this population. Methods: Indigenous research methods were employed in this study as clinic administrators and staff, elders, and Indigenous researchers collaborated on the study purpose, design, and analysis. Twenty Indigenous patients participated in one of four focus groups regarding their experiences with healthcare systems. Results: Seven main themes emerged, highlighting participants’ experiences during health encounters, in relation to healthcare systems, and Indigenous health beliefs. Participants discussed challenges and barriers in each area and offered recommendations for care delivery to this population. Conclusions: Participants in this study highlighted that biased care results in poor quality of healthcare delivery and that there are actionable steps that providers and systems of healthcare can take to reduce bias within healthcare systems. The provision of culturally congruent care is imperative in improving the health and well-being of Indigenous communities.

Improving human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination rates is a public health priority and a crucial cancer prevention goal. We designed a survey to estimate HPV vaccination coverage and understand factors associated with HPV vaccination among American Indian adolescents aged 9 to 17 years in Cherokee Nation, United States. The final survey contains 37 questions across 10 content areas, including HPV vaccination awareness, initiation, reasons, recommendations, and beliefs. This process paper provides an overview of the survey development. We focus on the collaborative process of a tribal–academic partnership and discuss methodological decisions regarding survey sampling, measures, testing, and administration.

Cancer-related financial hardship is an increasingly recognized concern for patients, families, and caregivers. Many Native American (NA) patients are at increased risk for cancer-related financial hardship due to high prevalence of low income, medical comorbidity, and lack of private health insurance. However, financial hardship screening (FHS) implementation for NA patients with cancer has not been reported. The objective of this study is to explore facilitators and barriers to FHS implementation for NA patients. We conducted key informant interviews with NA patients with cancer and with clinical staff at an academic cancer center. Included patients had a confirmed diagnosis of cancer and were referred to the cancer center through the Indian Health Service, Tribal health program, or Urban Indian health program. Interviews included questions regarding current financial hardship, experiences in discussing financial hardship with the cancer care and primary care teams, and acceptability of completing a financial hardship screening tool at the cancer center. Clinical staff included physicians, advanced practice providers, and social workers. Interviews focused on confidence, comfort, and experience in discussing financial hardship with patients. Recorded interviews were transcribed and thematically analyzed using MAXQDA® software. We interviewed seven patients and four clinical staff. Themes from the interviews included: 1) existing resources and support services; 2) challenges, gaps in services, and barriers to care; 3) nuances of NA cancer care; and 4) opportunities for improved care and resources. Patients identified financial challenges to receiving cancer care including transportation, lodging, food insecurity, and utility expenses. Patients were willing to complete a FHS tool, but indicated this tool should be short and not intrusive of the patient’s financial information. Clinical staff described discomfort in discussing financial hardship with patients, primarily due to a lack of training and knowledge about resources to support patients. Having designated staff familiar with I/T/U systems was helpful, but perspectives differed regarding who should administer FHS. We identified facilitators and barriers to implementing FHS for NA patients with cancer at both the patient and clinician levels. Findings suggest clear organizational structures and processes are needed for financial hardship to be addressed effectively.