Acceptability of teledentistry use among residents and staff in aged residential care facilities in the Otago region of New Zealand.

OBJECTIVES: To assess ARC residents' and staff perceptions of the benefits of, and comfort with, teledentistry use in ARC facilities in the Otago region of NZ, and identify end-user-level factors associated with its use. BACKGROUND: Difficulty in accessing oral healthcare services is a key barrier to aged residential care (ARC) residents' oral health and well-being. Teledentistry offers a possible solution, yet studies on its acceptability in ARCs are sparse, especially in New Zealand (NZ). This study assessed ARC residents' and staff perceptions of the benefits of, and comfort with, teledentistry use in ARC facilities in the Otago region of NZ and identified end-user-level factors associated with its use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Rest home-level residents and care staff in ARC facilities in the Otago region of NZ were surveyed to assess their awareness of teledentistry, perceptions of benefit and comfort using teledentistry, and end-user-level factors associated with the feasibility of using it in ARCs. RESULTS: One hundred residents and 77 care staff from 14 facilities participated. Three-quarters of resident participants thought that teledentistry was beneficial. Three in five resident participants were comfortable receiving remote dental consultations and care advice through teledentistry. Acceptability, as measured by perceived benefits and comfort, was lower among older participants. Staff participants were receptive to teledentistry use for residents and were comfortable facilitating remote dental consultations and care through teledentistry. No staff participants disagreed with the potential benefits of teledentistry for ARC residents. CONCLUSION: Teledentistry would likely be acceptable to residents and staff in ARC facilities in NZ, contributing to residents' improved access to oral health care and improved oral health and well-being.

Impact of removing prescription co-payments on the use of costly health services: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether exempting people (with high health needs and living in areas of high deprivation) from a $5 prescription charge reduces hospital use. DESIGN: Two-group parallel prospective randomised controlled trial. SETTING: People living in the community in various regions of New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS: One thousand sixty one people who lived in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation, and either took medicines for diabetes, took antipsychotic medicines, or had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Of the 1053 who completed the study, just under half (49%) were Maori. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were individually randomized (1-1 ratio) to either be exempted from the standard $5 charge per prescription item for one year (2019-2020) (n = 591) or usual care (n = 469). Those in the intervention group did not pay the standard NZ$5 charge, and pharmacies billed the study for these. Participants continued to pay any other costs for prescription medicines. Those in the control group continued to pay all prescription charges for the year although they may have received one-off assistance from other agencies. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was length of stay (hospital bed-days). Secondary outcomes presented in this paper included: all-cause hospitalisations, hospitalisations for diabetes/mental health problems/COPD, deaths, and emergency department visits. RESULTS: The trial was under-powered because the recruitment target was not met. There was no statistically significant reduction in the primary outcome, hospital bed-days (IRR = 0.68, CI: 0.54 to 1.05). Participants in the intervention group were significantly less likely to be hospitalised during the study year than those in the control group (OR = 0.70, CI: 0.54 to 0.90). There were statistically significant reductions in the number of hospital admissions for mental health problems (IRR = 0.39, CI: 0.17 to 0.92), the number of admissions for COPD (IRR = 0.37, CI: 0.16 to 0.85), and length of stay for COPD (IRR 0.20, CI: 0.07 to 0.60). Apart from all-cause mortality and diabetes length of stay, all measures were better for the intervention group than the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Eliminating a small co-payment appears to have had a substantial effect on patients' risk of being hospitalised. Given the small amount of revenue gathered from the charges, and the comparative large costs of hospitalisations, the results suggest that these charges are likely to increase the overall cost of healthcare, as well as exacerbate ethnic inequalities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12618001486213 registered on 04/09/2018.

Factors associated with self-reported health among New Zealand military veterans: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with better or poorer self-reported health status in New Zealand military Veterans. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS: The participants of interest were the 3874 currently serving Veterans who had been deployed to a conflict zone, but all Veterans were eligible to participate. STUDY VARIABLES: The EQ-5D-5L, asking about problems across five dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain or discomfort and anxiety or depression), with five levels of severity (eg, no, slight, moderate, severe or extreme problems), also containing a Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS) to self-assess health state, scaled from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) imagined health.Hypothetical relationships with better health were positive social support, sleep and psychological flexibility; with poorer health, post-traumatic stress, exposure to psychological trauma, distress and hazardous drinking. RESULTS: The EQ5-D-5L was completed by 1767 Veterans, 1009 serving, a response rate of 26% from that group, 1767 completing the EQ5-D, 1458 who had deployed, 288 who had not and the 21 who did not provide deployment data. Of these, 247 were not used in the analysis due to missing values in one or more variables, leaving 1520 for analysis.A significantly higher proportion of Veterans reported 'any problems' rather than 'no problems' with four EQ-5D dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities and pain or discomfort, but no difference in anxiety or depression. Age, length of service, deployment, psychological flexibility and better sleep quality were associated with higher EQ-VAS scores; distress with lower EQ-VAS scores. CONCLUSION: In this sample of New Zealand Veterans, psychological flexibility and good sleep are associated with better self-rated health, and distress and poor sleep with diminished health. These factors might be used as sentinel health indicators in assessing Veteran health status, and cognitive-behavioural therapy encompassing these domains may be useful in improving the health of New Zealand Veterans.

A validated predictive model for risk of nodal metastasis in node negative oral squamous cell carcinoma of the buccal mucosa and tongue.

BACKGROUND: Lymph node metastasis in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is influenced by clinical and histopathological variables. The aim of this study was to develop a simple model to predict nodal metastasis of OSCC in clinically negative necks (cN0). METHODS: Data from patients who underwent surgery for treatment of OSCC of the tongue or buccal mucosa with neck dissection were used for model development and validation. RESULTS: Nodal metastasis was significantly associated with gender, age, tumor size, site, pattern of invasion and depth of invasion on univariate analysis. All the five variables except age were retained at the variable selection step of the model development and were used in the final model because it was not significant at 0.10 significance level after adjusting for other variables. Regression coefficients of the model were used to estimate risks of nodal metastases for each combination of clinicopathological characteristics. A 10-fold cross-validation was used to assess the model. The average of the resultant 10 AUCs (along with its 95% confidence interval estimated using bootstrap) was used as the overall validated measure of the model. A risk chart was produced using probability of nodal metastasis predicted by the model for each combination of five characteristics. The model's ability to identify patients with nodal metastases as assessed by the area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.752. CONCLUSION: The model based on established clinicopathological variables has been internally validated on a large cohort of patients and offers practicability for use in OSCCs of the tongue and buccal mucosa.

Impact of removing prescription charges on health outcomes: protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Prescription charges prevent many people from accessing the medicines they need to maintain or improve their health. In New Zealand, where most people pay $5 per prescription item, Maori and Pacific peoples, those living in most deprived areas and those with chronic health conditions are the most likely to report that cost prevents them from accessing medicines. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This randomised controlled trial (RCT) will evaluate the effect of removing prescription charges on health outcomes and healthcare utilisation patterns of people with low income and high health needs. We will enrol 2000 participants: half will be allocated to the intervention group and we will pay for their prescription charges for 12 months. The other half will receive usual care. The primary outcome will be hospital bed-days. Secondary outcomes will be: all-cause and diabetes/mental health-specific hospitalisations, prescription medicines dispensed (number and type), deaths, emergency department visits and quality of life as measured by the 5-level EQ-5D version. Costs associated with these outcomes will be compared in an economic substudy. A qualitative substudy will also help understand the impact of free prescriptions on participant well-being using in-depth interviews. DISCUSSION: Being unable to afford prescription medicines is only one of many factors that influence adherence to medicines, but removing prescription charges is relatively simple and in New Zealand would be cheap compared with other policy changes. This RCT will help identify the extent of the impact of a simple intervention to improve access to medicines on health outcomes and health service utilisation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Central Health and Disability Ethics Committee (NZ) in July 2019 (19/CEN/33). Findings will be reported in peer-reviewed publications, as well as in professional newsletters, mainstream media and through public meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12618001486213p.

Epidemiology of healthcare harm in New Zealand general practice: a retrospective records review study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the epidemiology of healthcare harm observable in general practice records. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort records review study. SETTING: 72 general practice clinics were randomly selected from all 988 New Zealand clinics stratified by rurality and size; 44 clinics consented to participate. PARTICIPANTS: 9076 patient records were randomly selected from participating clinics. INTERVENTION: Eight general practitioners examined patient records (2011-2013) to identify harms, harm severity and preventability. Analyses were weighted to account for the stratified sampling design and generalise findings to all New Zealand patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Healthcare harm, severity and preventability. RESULTS: Reviewers identified 2972 harms affecting 1505 patients aged 0-102 years. Most patients (82.0%, weighted) experienced no harm. The estimated incidence of harm was 123 per 1000 patient-years. Most harms (2160; 72.7%, 72.4% weighted) were minor, 661 (22.2%, 22.8% weighted) were moderate, and 135 (4.5%, 4.4% weighted) severe. Eleven patients died, five following a preventable harm. Of the non-fatal harms, 2411 (81.6%, 79.4% weighted) were considered not preventable. Increasing age and number of consultations were associated with increased odds of harm. Compared with patients aged ≤49 years, patients aged 50-69 had an OR of 1.77 (95% CI 1.61 to 1.94), ≥70 years OR 3.23 (95% CI 2.37 to 4.41). Compared with patients with ≤3 consultations, patients with 4-12 consultations had an OR of 7.14 (95% CI 5.21 to 9.79); ≥13 consultations OR 30.06 (95% CI 21.70 to 41.63). CONCLUSIONS: Strategic balancing of healthcare risks and benefits may improve patient safety but will not necessarily eliminate harms, which often arise from standard care. Reducing harms considered 'not preventable' remains a laudable challenge.

Prevalence and predictors of psychological distress following injury: findings from a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Research examining psychological distress in people who have experienced an injury has focused on those with serious injuries or specific injury types, and has not involved long-term follow up. The aims of this investigation were to describe the prevalence of, and factors contributing to, psychological distress in a cohort of people with a broad range of injuries. METHODS: The Prospective Outcomes of Injury Study (POIS) is a longitudinal cohort study of 2856 injured New Zealanders recruited from a national insurance entitlement claims register between 2007 and 2009. Participants were interviewed approximately 3, 12, and 24 months after their injury. The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6) was used to measure psychological distress at each interview. RESULTS: 25% of participants reported clinically relevant distress (K6 ≥ 8) 3 months post-injury, 15% reported distress at 12 months, and 16% reported distress at 24 months. Being 45 years or older, Maori or Pacific ethnicity, experiencing pre-injury mental health conditions, having inadequate pre-injury income, reporting poor pre-injury health or trouble accessing healthcare, having a severe injury or an injury resulting from assault, and reporting clinically relevant distress 3 months post-injury were independently associated with an increased risk of distress 12 months post-injury. The majority of these associations were also evident with respect to distress 24 months post-injury. CONCLUSIONS: Distress is common after injury among people with a broad range of injury types and severities. Screening for distress early after injury is important to identify individuals in need of targeted support.