Health status and outcome among Australia and Kenya

This paper compares the health status and outcomes of Australia and Kenya, highlighting the challenges and issues faced by both countries. The paper also discusses the key interventions and health services provided by the respective governments to address the challenges and issues. The ethnic/racial and socio-economic disparities are also discussed, along with steps to reduce the disparities.

Running head: HEALTH STATUS AND OUTCOME AMONG AUSTRALIA AND
KENYA
Health status and outcome among Australia and Kenya
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note:

1
HEALTH STATUS AND OUTCOME AMONG AUSTRALIA AND KENYA
Table of Contents
Introduction:...............................................................................................................................2
Health status of chosen countries:..............................................................................................2
Differences risk factors in and between countries:....................................................................3
Locational Disparity:..................................................................................................................5
Key interventions and health services by Australian and Kenyan government:........................5
Ethnic/Racial Disparity:.............................................................................................................6
Socioeconomic Disparity:..........................................................................................................7
Steps to reduce disparity:...........................................................................................................7
Conclusion:................................................................................................................................8
References:.................................................................................................................................9

2
HEALTH STATUS AND OUTCOME AMONG AUSTRALIA AND KENYA
Introduction:
This paper will attempt to compare the health status and outcome of two
demographics, Australia and Kenya. The primary aim of the paper is to explore and identify
the variables that affect the health status and outcome in different demographic settings, the
challenges and issues and recommendations to address the challenges and issues. The
commonwealth of Australia can be described as a Sovereign country encompassing the
mainland of the Australian continent (Aihw.gov.au 2018). The population of the Australian
mainland is 25 million and the nation is highly urbanized in accordance with the western
society which is the predominant population of the country. Although the Australia also is
native land to a large community of indigenous Australians who had been predominant
population of the Australian lands for about 60000 years before the British colonization of the
mainland in the late 18th centuries. The society of the aboriginals face a considerable
discrimination which is reflected in the disparities that are apparent in the health status and
outcomes of the population.
On the other hand, Republic of Kenya is an African country with its capital or largest
city being in Nairobi. The population of this country is approximately 48 million for 581309
km2 of mainland. The nation has a diverse geographical and topographical characteristics,
which affects the lifestyle of the inhabitants as well and is reflected in their health status or
outcome. This essay will compare and contrast the Health status/outcomes, risk factors, key
health services and interventions, locational disparities, and ethnic/racial disparities and/or
socioeconomic disparities in an attempt to recommend possible strategies to improve the
status (Aho.afro.who.int 2018).

3
HEALTH STATUS AND OUTCOME AMONG AUSTRALIA AND KENYA
Health status of chosen countries:
Considering the health status of the nation Australia, it has to be mentioned that
Australia is a high income country and the considerably better socio-economic condition of
the population is reflected in the good health status of citizens. It has to be mentioned in this
context that the nation has been ranked second on the United Nations Development
Programme’s Human Development Index. It has to be mentioned that the life expectancy for
the males in the Australia is third highest and for the females is seventh highest (Aihw.gov.au
2018). However, even with the overall good health status, there are considerable challenges,
the disparity experienced by the aboriginals is the most important aspect of challenge.
Smoking is the largest preventable cause of death for the nation leading to 7.8% of mortality.
Although, hypertension and obesity are also considerable co-morbid challenges facing the
public health sector of Australia. The nation spends around 10% of its total gross domestic
product, and the funding or expenditure of the nation is managed by the Medicare, the
universal health care scheme, making health care more accessible and affordable for
everyone (Aihw.gov.au 2018).
On the other hand, for Kenya the health care industry is dominated by privatized
sectors in contrast with the government funded and controlled health care system of
Australia. As discussed by Who.int (2018), the private health care industries and business are
the primary health acre providers for the entire nation, even for the impoverished groups of
the nation, who are the 20% of the total population of Kenya. The strengths of the private
health care system is the strong branding, focussed patient centred care and value addition
(Olack et al. 2015). There are different levels of care, community based, dispensaries,
specialty health centres, sub-county hospitals, and national referral hospitals. The diseases of
poverty dominate the health adversities of the nation which is linked to the economic
diversity and unequal wealth distribution of the nation. The most common diseases include

4
HEALTH STATUS AND OUTCOME AMONG AUSTRALIA AND KENYA
malaria, HIV/AIDS, pneumonia, diarrhoea and malnutrition, most of which also contributes
to alarming child mortality burden. The life expectancy for the females is 69.0 and for the
males is 64.7 (Aho.afro.who.int 2018).
Differences risk factors in and between countries:
The health risk factors can be defined as the attributes or characteristics that enhance
the likelihood of the individuals acquiring the health disorders or diseases (Damrongplasit,
Hsiao and Zhao 2018). For the Australian continents, the most notable risk factors that have
been identified includes high tobacco usage (9.1% contribution to burden), high body mass
index (7% contribution to burden), alcohol use (5.1% contribution to burden), physical
inactivity (5% contribution to burden), and high blood pressure (4.9% contribution to
burden). Along with that, as per the data reports, the joint effect all dietary risks are
accounted for around 7% of the disease burden. These risk factors are contributing to the
burden of the most notable diseases including endocrine disorders, cardiovascular diseases,
kidney and renal disorders, injuries, and cancer. However, Watanabe and Honda (2017), have
argued that lack of proper weight management and obesity dominate the health risks to the
burden of diseases in Australia. The lack of proper health promotional awareness, health
literacy, and differential socio-economic conditions of the population can be considered
contributor to the predominating risk factors (Aihw.gov.au 2018).
On the other hand, the health risk factors of Kenya is predominated by an alarming
behavioural risk factors including alcohol consumption, tobacco usage and substance abuse.
Along with that, increased blood glucose levels, hypertension, and smoking have been
attributed to be risk factors for non-communicable diseases for adults in Kenya
(Aho.afro.who.int 2018). However, for the youth and adolescents risky sexual behaviour and
lack of proper sexual health literacy is also a considerable issue for communicable disease
burden. In contrast, obesity rates are not as alarming for Kenya as it has been reported for

5
HEALTH STATUS AND OUTCOME AMONG AUSTRALIA AND KENYA
Australia. Lack of health literacy and awareness emerges as potential contributing factor for
the risks in this case as well bearing similarities with Australian demographics. In contrast the
malnutrition and lack of food security for the impoverished socio-economic gradient has been
argued to be notable health risks as well (Muraguri et al. 2015).
Locational Disparity:
The two countries Kenya and Australia present a stark contrast in terms of the total
population base. According to the recent statistical records, it has been revealed that the total
population of Kenya is approximately around 4.7 crores against the total population of
Australia estimated to be 2.46 crores (Zealand 2013). Further, on account of the rough
geographical terrain and the unpredictable climatic conditions, Kenya hosts a majority of the
health issues against Australia. The infancy death rate is significantly higher in Kenya than
in Australia. Also, the prevalence rate of infectious disease such as HIV/ AIDS have been
reported to be 61 times higher in Kenya than in Australia (Herbst et al. 2013). However it
should be crucially noted that the indigenous communities based at both the Nations in the
rural and remote areas do not have adequate access to health care facilities and witness a huge
gap in terms of life expectancy.
Key interventions and health services by Australian and Kenyan government:
Central objective for any country’s healthcare system is to lessen ill health, prevent
diseases and keep its population healthy for as long as possible. To that extension, Australia
has a very good healthcare system compared to other thirty five OECD (Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development) member countries owing to Australian
government’s health program and initiatives. Main pillar of the Australia’s healthcare system
is the Medicare program operated by Department of Human services in which Australian
government funds part of private health insurance premium for its citizen eligible for

6
HEALTH STATUS AND OUTCOME AMONG AUSTRALIA AND KENYA
Medicare. In the financial year 2013-2014, Australian government has spent 2.2 billion
Australian dollar for public health activities, promotion and prevention which is 1.4 percent
of their total health expenditure. Along with that, Australian government has taken a strict
stance for immunisation and vaccination (Australia’s health 2016 2016). From 1st January,
2016, Australian government introduced ‘No Jab, No Pay’ policy which will stop providing
childcare benefits to child without or incomplete immunisation. Apart from that, Australian
government has various health promotion activities to for public health. To name a few, these
are Cancer Screening campaign, the National Binge Drinking Campaign and My QuitBuddy
app to help quit smoking (Australia.gov.au, 2018).
In contrast, Kenya’s healthcare system is mostly funded by private organisation and
government also depends on the aid from other countries. Due to this reason, Kenya has a
very high percentage of under-five death and is part of forty two countries which are accounts
for 90 percent of whole world’s under five death. To prevent this, IMCI (Integrated
Management of Childhood Illnesses) were introduced by Kenyan government in
collaboration with WHO and UNICEF. Kenyan government also implemented KEPI (Kenya
Expanded Programme on Immunization) programme for improved immunisation and
nutrition in children (Gibson et al. 2016). Along with these, various other government’s aid
like USAID are working with Kenyan government, private sector and faith based
organisation to prevent and treat disease like HIV/AIDS, malaria and maternal death
(Usaid.gov 2018).
Ethnic/Racial Disparity:
Kenya as well as Australia have been identified to be multicultural countries that
comprise of a mosaic of population belonging to different cultures and ethnic background.
However, it should be critically noted here that in Kenya, Black Africans dominate the
population with a total of 80 % of the entire population base (Herbst et al. 2013). The major

7
HEALTH STATUS AND OUTCOME AMONG AUSTRALIA AND KENYA
religion followed by the Kenyan inhabitants is Islam. The remaining 10.9% of the population
base has been identified to be white and 9.10% have been identified to be Asians (Zealand
2013). The common languages spoken in Africa include Zulu, Xhosa and Afrikaans. On the
contrary, the indigenous population base of Australia is referred to as the Torres Strait
Islander Aboriginal community members that comprise 18.4% of the complete population
base (Andersen et al. 2016). The remaining proportion of the population forms the White
population and the dominant religion has been reported to be Christianity. The indigenous
population group is restricted to the rural and remote areas of the two Nations and present a
high prevalence of chronic illness concerns such as Diabetes, Obesity, Hepatitis B and HIV
infection (Herbst et al. 2013). The lack of awareness and reduced availability of a culturally
safe intervention strategy has been reported to be the major barriers in restricting the access
to health care facilities.
Socioeconomic Disparity:
The annual Gross development rate of Australia have been reported to be $43,000 US
against $ 18,000 in Kenya (Zealand 2013). The literacy rate of Australia has been reported to
be 99% against only 85.1% in that of Kenya (Zealand 2013). Most importantly, statistical
figures reveal the unemployment rate in Australia to be roughly around only 5.8% against
<40% in Kenya (Vuluku et al. 2013). This clearly states that a huge gap in terms of income
group prevails among the citizens of both the countries. A lower income group and a higher
rate of unemployment clearly reflects the lack of access to quality health care services among
the people living in Kenya (Bastawrous and Armstrong 2013). Also, a lower annual GDP
reflects the lack of progress in terms of incorporating advanced medical services and
infrastructure to facilitate better health care facilities for the benefit of the people.

8
HEALTH STATUS AND OUTCOME AMONG AUSTRALIA AND KENYA
Steps to reduce disparity:
From the above discussion it can be deduced that Kenya is lagging behind in terms of
introduction of improved infrastructure so as to facilitate better health care services to the
citizens. However, it should also be noted here that ethnic disparity seems to be a major issue
in both the countries to make health care facilities readily accessible to the indigenous
population base. In order to mitigate the problem, it is important to rapidly spread awareness
regarding the poor health status and also include measures to improvise the existing
infrastructure of the health care organizations across Kenya (Giles-Corti et al. 2016). This
would require strategic planning and funding from the international governing bodies so as to
mitigate the seriousness of the health care issues.
Conclusion:
Health is one of the most integral resources of a society; and along with that it can
also be considered an imperative part of the social capital. However, the health status of a
population is directly or indirectly dependant on different variables. These variables have
both biological, demographic, and socio-ecological links. On a concluding note, the health
disparities among the both of the countries bear certain similarities along with notable
differences as well. Whereas the health behaviour and health literacy has emerged as
considerable contributors to the existing health issues and disparities, for Kenya, the socio-
economic factors and poverty predominate the risks or the health adversities and disparities.
This paper has highlighted the key differences in the risk factors and locational, ethnic or
racial and socioeconomic disparities pertaining in both of the countries in comparison. It can
be hoped that the recommendation strategies that have been provided in relation of the
challenges emerged for both countries can help in addressing the key challenges effectively
and sustainably.

9
HEALTH STATUS AND OUTCOME AMONG AUSTRALIA AND KENYA
References:
Aho.afro.who.int. 2018. African Health Observatory. [online] Available at:
http://www.aho.afro.who.int/profiles_information/index.php/Kenya:Analytical_summary_-
_Risk_factors_for_health [Accessed 27 Oct. 2018].
Aihw.gov.au 2018. Risk factors to health, Risk factors and disease burden - Australian
Institute of Health and Welfare. [online] Available at:
https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/biomedical-risk-factors/risk-factors-to-health/contents/risk-
factors-and-disease-burden [Accessed 27 Oct. 2018].
Anderson, I., Robson, B., Connolly, M., Al-Yaman, F., Bjertness, E., King, A., Tynan, M.,
Madden, R., Bang, A., Coimbra Jr, C.E. and Pesantes, M.A., 2016. Indigenous and tribal
peoples' health (The Lancet–Lowitja Institute Global Collaboration): a population study. The
Lancet, 388(10040), pp.131-157.
Australia.gov.au. 2018. Health promotion | australia.gov.au. [online] Available at:
https://www.australia.gov.au/information-and-services/health/health-promotion [Accessed 27
Oct. 2018].
Australia’s health 2016. 2016. [ebook] Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.
Available at: https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/8913d477-33cc-4edd-8246-ef4ed1a0851d/
ah16-6-1-prevention-health-promotion.pdf.aspx [Accessed 27 Oct. 2018].
Bastawrous, A. and Armstrong, M.J., 2013. Mobile health use in low-and high-income
countries: an overview of the peer-reviewed literature. Journal of the royal society of
medicine, 106(4), pp.130-142.
Damrongplasit, K., Hsiao, C. and Zhao, X., 2018. Health status and labour market outcome:
Empirical evidence from Australia. Pacific Economic Review.

10
HEALTH STATUS AND OUTCOME AMONG AUSTRALIA AND KENYA
Gibson, D.G., Kagucia, E.W., Ochieng, B., Hariharan, N., Obor, D., Moulton, L.H., Winch,
P.J., Levine, O.S., Odhiambo, F., O'Brien, K.L. and Feikin, D.R., 2016. The Mobile Solutions
for Immunization (M-SIMU) Trial: a protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial that
assesses the impact of mobile phone delivered reminders and travel subsidies to improve
childhood immunization coverage rates and timeliness in western Kenya. JMIR research
protocols, 5(2).
Giles-Corti, B., Vernez-Moudon, A., Reis, R., Turrell, G., Dannenberg, A.L., Badland, H.,
Foster, S., Lowe, M., Sallis, J.F., Stevenson, M. and Owen, N., 2016. City planning and
population health: a global challenge. The lancet, 388(10062), pp.2912-2924.
Muraguri, N., Tun, W., Okal, J., Broz, D., Raymond, H.F., Kellogg, T., Dadabhai, S.,
Musyoki, H., Sheehy, M., Kuria, D. and Kaiser, R., 2015. HIV and STI prevalence and risk
factors among male sex workers and other men who have sex with men in Nairobi,
Kenya. Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999), 68(1), p.91.
Olack, B., Wabwire-Mangen, F., Smeeth, L., Montgomery, J.M., Kiwanuka, N. and Breiman,
R.F., 2015. Risk factors of hypertension among adults aged 35–64 years living in an urban
slum Nairobi, Kenya. BMC public health, 15(1), p.1251.
Usaid.gov. 2018. Health, Population and Nutrition | Kenya | U.S. Agency for International
Development. [online] Available at: https://www.usaid.gov/kenya/global-health [Accessed 27
Oct. 2018].
Vuluku, G., Wambugu, A. and Moyi, E., 2013. Unemployment and underemployment in
Kenya: A gender gap analysis. Economics, 2(2), pp.7-16.
Watanabe, Y. and Honda, K., 2017. Community demographics, socio‐economic and health
status among older Australian residents of Japanese origin living in New South Wales,
Australia. Australasian journal on ageing, 36(3), pp.238-242.

11
HEALTH STATUS AND OUTCOME AMONG AUSTRALIA AND KENYA
Who.int 2018. Kenya- health status [online] Available at:
http://www.who.int/countries/ken/en/ [Accessed 27 Oct. 2018].
Who.int 2018. Kenya: WHO statistical profile. [online] Available at:
http://www.who.int/gho/countries/ken.pdf?ua=1 [Accessed 27 Oct. 2018].
Zaba, B., Calvert, C., Marston, M., Isingo, R., Nakiyingi-Miiro, J., Lutalo, T., Crampin, A.,
Robertson, L., Herbst, K., Newell, M.L. and Todd, J., 2013. Effect of HIV infection on
pregnancy-related mortality in sub-Saharan Africa: secondary analyses of pooled community-
based data from the network for Analysing Longitudinal Population-based HIV/AIDS data on
Africa (ALPHA). The Lancet, 381(9879), pp.1763-1771.
Zealand, S.N., 2013. Census QuickStats about culture and identity.pp.73-77