Equity of travel to access surgery and radiation therapy for lung cancer in New Zealand.

PURPOSE: Centralisation of lung cancer treatment can improve outcomes, but may result in differential access to care for those who do not reside within treatment centres. METHODS: We used national-level cancer registration and health care access data and used Geographic Information Systems (GIS) methods to determine the distance and time to access first relevant surgery and first radiation therapy among all New Zealanders diagnosed with lung cancer (2007-2019; N = 27,869), and compared these outcomes between ethnic groups. We also explored the likelihood of being treated at a high-, medium-, or low-volume hospital. Analysis involved both descriptive and adjusted logistic regression modelling. RESULTS: We found that Maori tend to need to travel further (with longer travel times) to access both surgery (median travel distance: Maori 57 km, European 34 km) and radiation therapy (Maori 75 km, European 35 km) than Europeans. Maori have greater odds of living more than 200 km away from both surgery (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.83, 95% CI 1.49-2.25) and radiation therapy (aOR 1.41, 95% CI 1.25-1.60). CONCLUSIONS: Centralisation of care may often improve treatment outcomes, but it also makes accessing treatment even more difficult for populations who are more likely to live rurally and in deprivation, such as Maori.

Access to and Timeliness of Lung Cancer Surgery, Radiation Therapy, and Systemic Therapy in New Zealand: A Universal Health Care Context.

PURPOSE: Lung cancer is the biggest cancer killer of indigenous peoples worldwide, including Maori people in New Zealand. There is some evidence of disparities in access to lung cancer treatment between Maori and non-Maori patients, but an examination of the depth and breadth of these disparities is needed. Here, we use national-level data to examine disparities in access to surgery, radiation therapy and systemic therapy between Maori and European patients, as well as timing of treatment relative to diagnosis. METHODS: We included all lung cancer registrations across New Zealand from 2007 to 2019 (N = 27,869) and compared access with treatment and the timing of treatment using national-level inpatient, outpatient, and pharmaceutical records. RESULTS: Maori patients with lung cancer appeared less likely to access surgery than European patients (Maori, 14%; European, 20%; adjusted odds ratio [adj OR], 0.82 [95% CI, 0.73 to 0.92]), including curative surgery (Maori, 10%; European, 16%; adj OR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.84]). These differences were only partially explained by stage and comorbidity. There were no differences in access to radiation therapy or systemic therapy once adjusted for confounding by age. Although it appeared that there was a longer time from diagnosis to radiation therapy for Maori patients compared with European patients, this difference was small and requires further investigation. CONCLUSION: Our observation of differences in surgery rates between Maori and European patients with lung cancer who were not explained by stage of disease, tumor type, or comorbidity suggests that Maori patients who may be good candidates for surgery are missing out on this treatment to a greater extent than their European counterparts.

Emergency presentation prior to lung cancer diagnosis: A national-level examination of disparities and survival outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: A recent multinational investigation of emergency presentation within 30 days of cancer diagnosis, conducted within the International Cancer Benchmarking Programme (ICBP), observed that New Zealand had the highest rate of emergency presentation prior to lung cancer diagnosis compared to other similar countries. Here we use national-level health data to further investigate these trends, focussing on ethnic disparities in emergency presentation prior to lung cancer diagnosis. We have also compared survival outcomes between those who had an emergency presentation in the preceding 30 days to those who did not. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our study included all lung cancer registrations between 2007 and 2019 on the New Zealand Cancer Registry (N = 27,869), linked to national hospitalisation and primary healthcare data. We used descriptive (crude and age-standardised proportions) and logistic regression (crude and adjusted odds ratios) analyses to examine primary care access prior to cancer diagnosis, emergency hospitalisation up to and including 30 days prior to diagnosis, and one-year mortality post-diagnosis, both for the total population and between ethnicities. Regression models adjusted for age, sex, deprivation, rurality, comorbidity, tumour type and stage. RESULTS: We found stark disparities by ethnic group, with 62% of Pacific peoples and 54% of Maori having an emergency presentation within 30 days prior to diagnosis, compared to 47% of Europeans. These disparities remained after adjusting for multiple covariates including comorbidity and deprivation (adj. OR: Maori 1.21, 95% CI 1.13-1.30; Pacific 1.50, 95% CI 1.31-1.71). Emergency presentation was associated with substantially poorer survival outcomes across ethnic groups (e.g. 1-year mortality for Maori: no emergency presentation 50%, emergency presentation 79%; adj. OR 2.40, 95% CI 2.10-2.74). CONCLUSIONS: These observations reinforce the need for improvements in the early detection of lung cancer, particularly for Maori and Pacific populations, with a view to preventing diagnosis of these cancers in an emergency setting.

Equity of travel required to access first definitive surgery for liver or stomach cancer in New Zealand.

In New Zealand, there are known disparities between the Indigenous Maori and the majority non-Indigenous European populations in access to cancer treatment, with resulting disparities in cancer survival. There is international evidence of ethnic disparities in the distance travelled to access cancer treatment; and as such, the aim of this paper was to examine the distance and time travelled to access surgical care between Maori and European liver and stomach cancer patients. We used national-level data and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analysis to describe the distance travelled by patients to receive their first primary surgery for liver or stomach cancer, as well as the estimated time to travel this distance by road, and the surgical volume of hospitals performing these procedures. All cases of liver (ICD-10-AM 3rd edition code: C22) and stomach (C16) cancer that occurred in New Zealand (2007-2019) were drawn from the New Zealand Cancer Registry (liver cancer: 866 Maori, 2,460 European; stomach cancer: 953 Maori, 3,192 European), and linked to national inpatient hospitalisation records to examine access to surgery. We found that Maori on average travel 120km for liver cancer surgery, compared to around 60km for Europeans, while a substantial minority of both Maori and European liver cancer patients must travel more than 200km for their first primary liver surgery, and this situation appears worse for Maori (36% vs 29%; adj. OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.09-2.01). No such disparities were observed for stomach cancer. This contrast between cancers is likely driven by the centralisation of liver cancer surgery relative to stomach cancer. In order to support Maori to access liver cancer care, we recommend that additional support is provided to Maori patients (including prospective financial support), and that efforts are made to remotely provide those clinical services that can be decentralised.

Selecting Health Need Indicators for Spatial Equity Analysis in the New Zealand Primary Care Context.

PURPOSE: To examine potential indicators of health need for primary care in spatial equity research, and evidence of the Inverse Care Law in the Waikato region of New Zealand. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of 7 health need indicators (ambulatory sensitive hospitalizations; cancer rate; mortality rate; New Zealand index of multiple deprivation-health domain; age; New Zealand index of deprivation; smoking rate) that were identified through a systematic review was carried out. Values of indicators were mapped and analyzed using geographic information systems (GIS). Spearman's correlations were calculated between indicators, and clusters of high need were identified through spatial autocorrelation. The impact of incorporating indicator-based weightings into an accessibility model was tested using analysis of variance and Spearman's correlations. General practice service spatial equity was assessed by comparing clusters of high access versus need, and quantified through the Gini coefficient. FINDINGS: Ambulatory sensitive hospitalization (ASH) rates were significantly correlated with all indicators. Health needs were significantly clustered, but incorporating indicator weightings into the spatial accessibility analysis did not impact accessibility scores. A misalignment of access and need, and a Gini coefficient of 0.281 suggest that services are not equitably distributed. CONCLUSION: ASH rates seem a robust indicator of health need. However, data access issues may restrict their use. Area-level socioeconomic deprivation measures incorporate some social determinants of health, and they have potential for wider use. High need clusters vary spatially according to the indicator used. GIS techniques can identify "hot-spots" of need, but these can be masked in accessibility models.

Improving spatial data in health geographics: a practical approach for testing data to measure children's physical activity and food environments using Google Street View.

BACKGROUND: Geographic information systems (GIS) are often used to examine the association between both physical activity and nutrition environments, and children's health. It is often assumed that geospatial datasets are accurate and complete. Furthermore, GIS datasets regularly lack metadata on the temporal specificity. Data is usually provided 'as is', and therefore may be unsuitable for retrospective or longitudinal studies of health outcomes. In this paper we outline a practical approach to both fill gaps in geospatial datasets, and to test their temporal validity. This approach is applied to both district council and open-source datasets in the Taranaki region of Aotearoa New Zealand. METHODS: We used the 'streetview' python script to download historic Google Street View (GSV) images taken between 2012 and 2016 across specific locations in the Taranaki region. Images were reviewed and relevant features were incorporated into GIS datasets. RESULTS: A total of 5166 coordinates with environmental features missing from council datasets were identified. The temporal validity of 402 (49%) environmental features was able to be confirmed from council dataset considered to be 'complete'. A total of 664 (55%) food outlets were identified and temporally validated. CONCLUSIONS: Our research indicates that geospatial datasets are not always complete or temporally valid. We have outlined an approach to test the sensitivity and specificity of GIS datasets using GSV images. A substantial number of features were identified, highlighting the limitations of many GIS datasets.