Health and well-being needs of Indigenous adolescents: a protocol for a scoping review of qualitative studies.

INTRODUCTION: Improving the health of Indigenous adolescents is central to addressing the health inequities faced by Indigenous peoples. To achieve this, it is critical to understand what is needed from the perspectives of Indigenous adolescents themselves. There have been many qualitative studies that capture the perspectives of Indigenous young people, but synthesis of these has been limited to date. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review seeks to understand the specific health needs and priorities of Indigenous adolescents aged 10-24 years captured via qualitative studies conducted across Australia, Aotearoa New Zealand, Canada, the USA, Greenland and Sami populations (Norway and Sweden). A team of Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers from these nations will systematically search PubMed (including the MEDLINE, PubMed Central and Bookshelf databases), CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, the Informit Indigenous and Health Collections, Google Scholar, Arctic Health, the Circumpolar Health Bibliographic Database, Native Health Database, iPortal and NZresearch.org, as well as specific websites and clearinghouses within each nation for qualitative studies. We will limit our search to articles published in any language during the preceding 5 years given that needs may have changed significantly over time. Two independent reviewers will identify relevant articles using a two-step process, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer and the wider research group. Data will then be extracted from included articles using a standardised form, with descriptive synthesis focussing on key needs and priorities. This scoping review will be conducted and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was not required for this review. Findings will be disseminated via a peer-reviewed journal article and will inform a broader international collaboration for Indigenous adolescent health to develop evidence-based actions and solutions.

Drivers of access to cardiovascular health care for rural Indigenous Peoples: a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Māori (the Indigenous Peoples of Aotearoa New Zealand) are disproportionately represented in cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevalence, morbidity and mortality rates, and are less likely to receive evidence-based CVD health care. Rural Māori experience additional barriers to treatment access, poorer health outcomes and a greater burden of CVD risk factors compared to Non-Māori and Māori living in urban areas. Importantly, these inequities are similarly experienced by Indigenous Peoples in other nations impacted by colonisation. Given the scarcity of available literature, a systematic scoping review was conducted on literature exploring barriers and facilitators in accessing CVD health care for rural Māori and other Indigenous Peoples in nations impacted by colonisation. METHODS: The review was underpinned by Kaupapa Māori Research methodology and was conducted utilising Arksey and O'Malley's (2005) methodological framework. A database search of MEDLINE (OVID), PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, CINAHL Plus, Australia/New Zealand Reference Centre and NZResearch.org was used to explore empirical research literature. A grey literature search was also conducted. Literature based in any healthcare setting providing care to adults for CVD was included. Rural or remote Indigenous Peoples from New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and the US were included. Literature was included if it addressed cardiovascular conditions and reported barriers and facilitators to healthcare access in any care setting. RESULTS: A total of 363 articles were identified from the database search. An additional 19 reports were identified in the grey literature search. Following screening, 16 articles were included from the database search and 5 articles from the grey literature search. The literature was summarised using the Te Tiriti o Waitangi (Treaty of Waitangi) Framework principles: tino rangatiratanga (self-determination), partnership, active protection, equity and options. Themes elucidated from the literature were described as key drivers of CVD healthcare access for rural Indigenous Peoples. Key driver themes included input from rural Indigenous Peoples on healthcare service design and delivery, adequate resourcing and support of indigenous and rural healthcare services, addressing systemic racism and historical trauma, providing culturally appropriate health care, rural Indigenous Peoples' access to family and wellbeing support, rural Indigenous Peoples' differential access to the wider social determinants of health, effective interservice linkages and communication, and equity-driven and congruent data systems. CONCLUSION: The findings are consistent with other literature exploring access to health care for rural Indigenous Peoples. This review offers a novel approach to summarising literature by situating the themes within the context of equity and rights for Indigenous Peoples. This review also highlighted the need for further research in this area to be conducted in the context of Aotearoa New Zealand.

Hauora Maori - Maori health: a right to equal outcomes in primary care.

BACKGROUND: For more than a century, Maori have experienced poorer health than non-Maori. In 2019 an independent Tribunal found the Government had breached Te Tiriti o Waitangi by "failing to design and administer the current primary health care system to actively address persistent Maori health inequities". Many Maori (44%) have unmet needs for primary care. Seven models of primary care were identified by the funders and the research team, including Maori-owned practices. We hypothesised patient health outcomes for Maori would differ between models of care. METHODS: Cross-sectional primary care data were analysed at 30 September 2018. National datasets were linked to general practices at patient level, to measure associations between practice characteristics and patient health outcomes. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: polypharmacy (≥ 55 years), HbA1c testing, child immunisations, ambulatory sensitive hospitalisations (0-14, 45-64 years) and emergency department attendances. Regressions include only Maori patients, across all models of care. RESULTS: A total of 660,752 Maori patients were enrolled in 924 practices with 124,854 in 65 Maori-owned practices. Maori practices had: no significant association with HbA1c testing, ambulatory sensitive hospitalisations or ED attendances, and a significant association with lower polypharmacy (3.7% points) and lower childhood immunisations (13.4% points). Maori practices had higher rates of cervical smear and cardiovascular risk assessment, lower rates of HbA1c tests, and more nurse (46%) and doctor (8%) time (FTE) with patients. The average Maori practice had 52% Maori patients compared to 12% across all practices. Maori practices enrolled a higher percentage of children and young people, five times more patients in high deprivation areas, and patients with more multimorbidity. More Maori patients lived rurally (21.5% vs 15%), with a greater distance to the nearest ED. Maori patients were more likely to be dispensed antibiotics or tramadol. CONCLUSIONS: Maori practices are an expression of autonomy in the face of enduring health system failure. Apart from lower immunisation rates, health outcomes were not different from other models of care, despite patients having higher health risk profiles. Across all models, primary care need was unmet for many Maori, despite increased clinical input. Funding must support under-resourced Maori practices and ensure accountability for the health outcomes of Maori patients in all models of general practice.

Widening ethnic inequities in heart failure incidence in New Zealand.

OBJECTIVE: Ethnic inequities in heart failure (HF) have been documented in several countries. This study describes New Zealand (NZ) trends in incident HF hospitalisation by ethnicity between 2006 and 2018. METHODS: Incident HF hospitalisations in ≥20-year-old subjects were identified through International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision-coded national hospitalisation records. Incidence was calculated for different ethnic, sex and age groups and were age standardised. Trends were estimated with joinpoint regression. RESULTS: Of 116 113 incident HF hospitalisations, 12.8% were Maori, 5.7% Pacific people, 3.0% Asians and 78.6% Europeans/others. 64% of Maori and Pacific patients were aged <70 years, compared with 37% of Asian and 19% of European/others. In 2018, incidence rate ratios compared with European/others were 6.0 (95% CI 4.9 to 7.3), 7.5 (95% CI 6.0 to 9.4) and 0.5 (95% CI 0.3 to 0.8) for Maori, Pacific people and Asians aged 20-49 years; 3.7 (95% CI 3.4 to 4.0), 3.6 (95% CI 3.2 to 4.1) and 0.5 (95% CI 0.4 to 0.6) for Maori, Pacific people and Asians aged 50-69 years; and 1.5 (95% CI 1.4 to 1.6), 1.5 (95% CI 1.3 to 1.7) and 0.5 (95% CI 0.5 to 0.6) for Maori, Pacific people and Asians aged ≥70 years. Between 2006 and 2018, ethnicity-specific rates diverged in ≥70-year-old subjects due to a decline in European/others (annual percentage change (APC) -2.0%, 95% CI -2.5% to -1.6%) and Asians (APC -3.3%, 95% CI -4.4% to -2.1%), but rates remained unchanged for Maori and Pacific people. In contrast, regardless of ethnicity, rates either increased or remained unchanged in <70-year-old subjects. CONCLUSION: Ethnic inequities in incident HF hospitalisation have widened in NZ over the past 13 years. Urgent action is required to address the predisposing factors that lead to development of HF in Maori and Pacific people.

Primary eye health services for older adults as a component of universal health coverage: a scoping review of evidence from high income countries.

In pursuit of Universal Health Coverage (UHC) for eye health, countries must strengthen services for older adults, who experience the highest prevalence of eye conditions. This scoping review narratively summarised (i) primary eye health services for older adults in eleven high-income countries/territories (from government websites), and (ii) the evidence that eye health services reduced vision impairment and/or provided UHC (access, quality, equity, or financial protection) (from a systematic literature search). We identified 76 services, commonly comprehensive eye examinations ± refractive error correction. Of 102 included publications reporting UHC outcomes, there was no evidence to support vision screening in the absence of follow-up care. Included studies tended to report the UHC dimensions of access (n=70), equity (n=47), and/or quality (n=39), and rarely reported financial protection (n=5). Insufficient access for population subgroups was common; several examples of horizontal and vertical integration of eye health services within the health system were described. Funding: This work was funded by Blind Low Vision New Zealand for Eye Health Aotearoa.

Reasons for Ethnic Disparities in the Prehospital Care Pathway Following an Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Event: Protocol of a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Substantial inequities in cardiovascular disease occur between and within countries, driving much of the current burden of global health inequities. Despite well-established treatment protocols and clinical interventions, the extent to which the prehospital care pathway for people who have experienced an out-of-hospital cardiac event (OHCE) varies by ethnicity and race is inconsistently documented. Timely access to care in this context is important for good outcomes. Therefore, identifying any barriers and enablers that influence timely prehospital care can inform equity-focused interventions. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to answer the question: Among adults who experience an OHCE, to what extent and why might the care pathways in the community and outcomes differ for minoritized ethnic populations compared to nonminoritized populations? In addition, we will investigate the barriers and enablers that could influence variations in the access to care for minoritized ethnic populations. METHODS: This review will use Kaupapa Maori theory to underpin the process and analysis, thus prioritizing Indigenous knowledge and experiences. A comprehensive search of the CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE (OVID), PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library databases will be done using Medical Subject Headings terms themed to the 3 domains of context, health condition, and setting. All identified articles will be managed using an Endnote library. To be included in the research, papers must be published in English; have adult study populations; have an acute, nontraumatic cardiac condition as the primary health condition of interest; and be in the prehospital setting. Studies must also include comparisons by ethnicity or race to be eligible. Those studies considered suitable for inclusion will be critically appraised by multiple authors using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and CONSIDER (Consolidated Criteria for Strengthening the Reporting of Health Research Involving Indigenous Peoples) framework. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Graphic Appraisal Tool for Epidemiology. Disagreements on inclusion or exclusion will be settled by a discussion with all reviewers. Data extraction will be done independently by 2 authors and collated in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. The outcomes of interest will include (1) symptom recognition, (2) patient decision-making, (3) health care professional decision-making, (4) the provision of cardiopulmonary resuscitation, (5) access to automated external defibrillator, and (6) witnessed status. Data will be extracted and categorized under key domains. A narrative review of these domains will be conducted using Indigenous data sovereignty approaches as a guide. Findings will be reported according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 guidelines. RESULTS: Our research is in progress. We anticipate the systematic review will be completed and submitted for publication in October 2023. CONCLUSIONS: The review findings will inform researchers and health care professionals on the experience of minoritized populations when accessing the OHCE care pathway. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022279082; https://tinyurl.com/bdf6s4h2. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/40557.

Improving social justice in observational studies: protocol for the development of a global and Indigenous STROBE-equity reporting guideline.

BACKGROUND: Addressing persistent and pervasive health inequities is a global moral imperative, which has been highlighted and magnified by the societal and health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Observational studies can aid our understanding of the impact of health and structural oppression based on the intersection of gender, race, ethnicity, age and other factors, as they frequently collect this data. However, the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guideline, does not provide guidance related to reporting of health equity. The goal of this project is to develop a STROBE-Equity reporting guideline extension. METHODS: We assembled a diverse team across multiple domains, including gender, age, ethnicity, Indigenous background, disciplines, geographies, lived experience of health inequity and decision-making organizations. Using an inclusive, integrated knowledge translation approach, we will implement a five-phase plan which will include: (1) assessing the reporting of health equity in published observational studies, (2) seeking wide international feedback on items to improve reporting of health equity, (3) establishing consensus amongst knowledge users and researchers, (4) evaluating in partnership with Indigenous contributors the relevance to Indigenous peoples who have globally experienced the oppressive legacy of colonization, and (5) widely disseminating and seeking endorsement from relevant knowledge users. We will seek input from external collaborators using social media, mailing lists and other communication channels. DISCUSSION: Achieving global imperatives such as the Sustainable Development Goals (e.g., SDG 10 Reduced inequalities, SDG 3 Good health and wellbeing) requires advancing health equity in research. The implementation of the STROBE-Equity guidelines will enable a better awareness and understanding of health inequities through better reporting. We will broadly disseminate the reporting guideline with tools to enable adoption and use by journal editors, authors, and funding agencies, using diverse strategies tailored to specific audiences.

Comparison of Stroke Care Costs in Urban and Nonurban Hospitals and Its Association With Outcomes in New Zealand: A Nationwide Economic Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Although geographical differences in treatment and outcomes after stroke have been described, we lack evidence on differences in the costs of treatment between urban and nonurban regions. Additionally, it is unclear whether greater costs in one setting are justified given the outcomes achieved. We aimed to compare costs and quality-adjusted life years in people with stroke admitted to urban and nonurban hospitals in New Zealand. METHODS: Observational study of patients with stroke admitted to the 28 New Zealand acute stroke hospitals (10 in urban areas) recruited between May and October 2018. Data were collected up to 12 months poststroke including treatments in hospital, inpatient rehabilitation, other health service utilization, aged residential care, productivity, and health-related quality of life. Costs in New Zealand dollars were estimated from a societal perspective and assigned to the initial hospital that patients presented to. Unit prices for 2018 were obtained from government and hospital sources. Multivariable regression analyses were conducted when assessing differences between groups. RESULTS: Of 1510 patients (median age 78 years, 48% female), 607 presented to nonurban and 903 to urban hospitals. Mean hospital costs were greater in urban than nonurban hospitals ($13 191 versus $11 635, P=0.002), as were total costs to 12 months ($22 381 versus $17 217, P<0.001) and quality-adjusted life years to 12 months (0.54 versus 0.46, P<0.001). Differences in costs and quality-adjusted life years remained between groups after adjustment. Depending on the covariates included, costs per additional quality-adjusted life year in the urban hospitals compared to the nonurban hospitals ranged from $65 038 (unadjusted) to $136 125 (covariates: age, sex, prestroke disability, stroke type, severity, and ethnicity). CONCLUSIONS: Better outcomes following initial presentation to urban hospitals were associated with greater costs compared to nonurban hospitals. These findings may inform greater targeted expenditure in some nonurban hospitals to improve access to treatment and optimize outcomes.

Geographic access to eye health services in Aotearoa New Zealand: which communities are being left behind?

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Efforts to provide accessible eye care must consider the extent to which travel-distance may be a barrier for some communities. BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the distribution of - and geographic access to - eye health services in Aotearoa New Zealand. We further sought to identify communities who might benefit from provision of eye health services that were more geographically accessible. METHODS: We obtained addresses of optometry and ophthalmology clinics from regulatory bodies and augmented this with online searches. Address locators were created using a Land Information dataset and geocoded using ArcGIS 10.6. A national population was derived using Statistics New Zealand's Integrated Data Infrastructure. We generated population-weighted centroids of each of New Zealand's 50,938 meshblocks and calculated the travel distance along the road network between each clinic and population (meshblock centroid). The proportion of the population living >50 km from each clinic type was calculated; as was the median, inter-quartile range and maximum distance across area-level deprivation quintiles in each district. RESULTS: A national population of 4.88 million was identified, as were addresses for 344 optometry, 46 public ophthalmology and 90 private ophthalmology clinics. Nationally and within each district, travel distance to optometry was shorter than to either type of ophthalmology clinic. The region of Northland - with a high proportion of the population Maori and in the highest quintile of area-level deprivation - had the furthest average distance to travel to optometry and public ophthalmology, while the West Coast region on the South Island had the farthest to travel to private ophthalmology. Several communities were identified where longer distances intersected with higher area-level deprivation. CONCLUSION: Most New Zealanders live within 10 km of eye health services. However, to achieve equitable eye health, strategies are required that make affordable eye health services accessible to communities for whom large travel distances intersect with high deprivation.

What are the gaps in cardiovascular risk assessment and management in primary care for Maori and Pacific people in Aotearoa New Zealand? Protocol for a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: In New Zealand, significant inequities exist between Maori and Pacific peoples compared with non-Maori, non-Pacific peoples in cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors, hospitalisations and management rates. This review will quantify and qualify already-reported gaps in CVD risk assessment and management in primary care for Maori and Pacific peoples compared with non-Maori/non-Pacific peoples in New Zealand. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic search of the following electronic databases and websites from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2021: MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL Plus, NZresearch.org, National Library Catalogue (Te Puna), Index New Zealand (INNZ), Australia/New Zealand Reference Centre. In addition, we will search relevant websites such as the Ministry of Health and research organisations. Data sources will include published peer reviewed articles, reports and theses employing qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods.Two reviewers will independently screen the titles and abstracts of the citations and grade each as eligible, not eligible or might be eligible. Two reviewers will read each full report, with one medically qualified reviewer reading all reports and two other reviewers reading half each. The final list of included citations will be compiled from the results of the full report reading and agreed on by three reviewers. Data abstracted will include authors, title, year, study characteristics and participant characteristics. Data analysis and interpretation will involve critical inquiry and a strength-based approach that is inclusive of Maori and Pacific values. This means that critical appraisal includes an assessment of quality from an Indigenous perspective. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required. The findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and shared with stakeholders. This review contributes to a larger project which creates a Quality-Improvement Equity Roadmap to reduce barriers to Maori and Pacific peoples accessing evidence-based CVD care.

Maori Experiences and Beliefs about Antibiotics and Antimicrobial Resistance for Acute Upper Respiratory Tract Symptoms: A Qualitative Study.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a threat to public health. Addressing unnecessary antibiotic use provides an opportunity to reduce antibiotic consumption and to slow AMR. Understanding people's beliefs is important for informing antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) initiatives. Within New Zealand, health inequities exist between Maori and non-Maori; however, no research has examined Maori beliefs about antibiotics and AMR. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences related to antibiotic use of Maori in New Zealand. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 30 Maori adults recruited from primary care to explore the experiences, perceptions and beliefs that Maori have about antibiotics, and about AMR. Overall, 30 Maori adults (23% male; age range from 20 to 77 years) participated. Three themes emerged: systemic-, social-, and individual-related factors. From these themes, seven subthemes explained the factors that influenced antibiotic use and their perceptions of AMR in Maori: general practitioner (GP) times and ratios, effect of colonisation, lack of knowledge and information, access and poverty barriers, relationship with health professionals, illness perceptions, treatment beliefs and Whaakaro (thoughts), and beliefs pertaining to natural (rongoa) and Western medicine. Participants identified potential solutions to improve antibiotic use such as cultural support and involving Te Ao Maori; recognising these can inform future AMS initiatives.

Reducing healthcare inequities for Maori using Telehealth during COVID-19.

AIM: Maori experience barriers to accessing timely, quality healthcare. The March 2020 COVID-19 lockdown in New Zealand required provision of Telehealth consultation options in primary care. Telehealth consultations have the potential to improve access to healthcare for Maori, and thereby reduce health inequities. Conversely, Telehealth may present additional barriers that contribute to inequities overall. This scoping project investigated Maori experiences of Telehealth consultations during the March 2020 COVID-19 lockdown. METHOD: Semi-structured key informant interviews were completed with five Maori health professionals, six Maori Telehealth patients, and six Maori in-clinic patients, about their healthcare consultation experiences during COVID-19 lockdown. Participants were asked about what worked, what did not work, and for suggestions to improve future Telehealth provision to Maori whanau. Kaupapa Maori methodology underpinned thematic analysis of the interviews. RESULTS: Key findings are presented in three overarching themes: benefits (safety, cost, time, options); challenges (health literacy, access to Information Technology (IT), supply and demand, limited physical assessment); and suggested improvements (systems fit for purpose, supporting IT and health literacy, Telehealth as a routine option, rapport building, and cross system efficiency and information sharing). CONCLUSION: Telehealth is a viable long-term option that can support Maori whanau access to healthcare.

The priorities for future clinical trials and large cohort studies addressing health and healthcare for mothers and babies in Aotearoa New Zealand.

AIMS: To identify priorities for clinical trials and large cohort studies addressing maternal and perinatal health and healthcare in Aotearoa New Zealand. METHODS: An Aotearoa New Zealand specific Research Prioritisation Framework was developed. Knowledge gaps were collected from an Audience Group via online questionnaires, video call interviews, and by systematic review. These were formulated into research questions. An Advisory Group reviewed questions suited to a clinical trial or large cohort study. A Ranking Group weighted the ranking criteria and ranked the research questions. RESULTS: A total of 305 online questionnaires, 62 interviews and 62 published prioritisation projects generated 3,347 knowledge gaps. After content analysis, 358 unanswered research questions were ranked. Rating criteria weightings were: effect on equity 26.1%; potential to reduce disease burden 20.5%; effectiveness 20.0%; deliverability 17.9%; and answerability 16.0%. All of the top 20 prioritised research questions directly related to Maori and/or Pacific health and predominantly involved research into healthcare systems and workforce rather than disease conditions. CONCLUSIONS: This project has identified the most important questions for future clinical trials and large cohort studies addressing maternal and perinatal health and healthcare in Aotearoa New Zealand. The Framework and methodology can be adapted for use across all areas of health.

Geographic Disparities in Stroke Outcomes and Service Access: A Prospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: International evidence shows that patients treated at non-urban hospitals experience poorer access to key stroke interventions. Evidence whether this results in poorer outcomes is conflicting and generally based on administrative or voluntary registry data. The aim of this study was to use prospective high-quality comprehensive nationwide patient level data to investigate the association between hospital geography and stroke patient outcomes and access to best practice stroke care in New Zealand. METHODS: This is a prospective, multi-centre, nationally representative observational study involving all 28 New Zealand acute stroke hospitals (18 non-urban), and affiliated rehabilitation and community services. Consecutive adults admitted to the hospital with acute stroke between 1 May and 31 October 2018 were captured. Outcomes included functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale (mRS) shift analysis), functional independence (mRS scores 0-2), quality of life (EQ5D-3L), stroke/vascular events, and death at 3, 6, and 12 months and proportion accessing thrombolysis, thrombectomy, stroke units, key investigations, secondary prevention, and inpatient/community rehabilitation. Results were adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, stroke severity/type, co-morbidities, baseline function, and differences in baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Overall, 2,379 patients were eligible (mean (standard deviation) age 75 (13.7); 51.2% male; 1,430 urban; 949 non-urban). Patients treated at non-urban hospitals were more likely to score in a higher mRS category (greater disability) at three (aOR=1.28, 1.07-1.53), six (aOR=1.33, 1.07-1.65) and twelve months (aOR=1.31, 1.06-1.62) and were more likely to have died (aOR=1.57, 1.17-2.12) or experienced recurrent stroke and vascular events at 12 months (aOR=1.94, 1.14-3.29 and aOR=1.65, 1.09-2.52). Fewer non-urban patients received recommended stroke interventions including endovascular thrombectomy (aOR=0.25, 95% confidence interval 0.13-0.49), acute stroke unit care (aOR=0.60, 0.49-0.73), antiplatelet prescriptions (aOR=0.72, 0.58-0.88), ≥60 minutes daily physical therapy (aOR=0.55, 0.40-0.77) and community rehabilitation (aOR=0.69, 0.56-0.84). DISCUSSION: Patients managed at non-urban hospitals experience poorer stroke outcomes and reduced access to key stroke interventions across the entire care continuum. Efforts to improve access to high quality stroke care in non-urban hospitals should be a priority.

Guidance relevant to the reporting of health equity in observational research: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Health inequities are defined as unfair and avoidable differences in health between groups within a population. Most health research is conducted through observational studies, which are able to offer real-world insights about etiology, healthcare policy/programme effectiveness and the impacts of socioeconomic factors. However, most published reports of observational studies do not address how their findings relate to health equity. Our team seeks to develop equity-relevant reporting guidance as an extension of the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement. This scoping review will inform the development of candidate items for the STROBE-Equity extension. We will operationalise equity-seeking populations using the PROGRESS-Plus framework of sociodemographic factors. As part of a parallel stream of the STROBE-Equity project, the relevance of candidate guideline items to Indigenous research will be led by Indigenous coinvestigators on the team. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute method for conducting scoping reviews. We will evaluate the extent to which the identified guidance supports or refutes our preliminary candidate items for reporting equity in observational studies. These candidate items were developed based on items from equity-reporting guidelines for randomised trials and systematic reviews, developed by members of this team. We will consult with our knowledge users, patients/public partners and Indigenous research steering committee to invite suggestions for relevant guidance documents and interpretation of findings. If the identified guidance suggests the need for additional candidate items, they will be developed through inductive thematic analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: We will follow a principled approach that promotes ethical codevelopment with our community partners, based on principles of cultural safety, authentic partnerships, addressing colonial structures in knowledge production and the shared ownership, interpretation, and dissemination of research. All products of this research will be published as open access.

Economic analysis of the 'Take Charge' intervention for people following stroke: Results from a randomised trial.

OBJECTIVE: To undertake an economic analysis of the Take Charge intervention as part of the Taking Charge after Stroke (TaCAS) study. DESIGN: An open, parallel-group, randomised trial comparing active and control interventions with blinded outcome assessment. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (n = 400) discharged to community, non-institutional living following acute stroke. INTERVENTIONS: The Take Charge intervention, a strengths based, self-directed rehabilitation intervention, in two doses (one or two sessions), and a control intervention (no Take Charge sessions). MEASURES: The cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) saved for the period between randomisation (always post hospital discharge) and 12 months following acute stroke. QALYs were calculated from the EuroQol-5D-5L. Costs of stroke-related and non-health care were obtained by questionnaire, hospital records and the New Zealand Ministry of Health. RESULTS: One-year post hospital discharge cost of care was mean (95% CI) $US4706 (3758-6014) for the Take Charge intervention group and $6118 (4350-8005) for control, mean (95% CI) difference $ -1412 (-3553 to +729). Health utility scores were mean (95% CI) 0.75 (0.73-0.77) for Take Charge and 0.71 (0.67-0.75) for control, mean (95% CI) difference 0.04 (0.0-0.08). Cost per QALY gained for the Take Charge intervention was $US -35,296 (=£ -25,524, € -30,019). Sensitivity analyses confirm Take Charge is cost-effective, even at a very low willingness-to-pay threshold. With a threshold of $US5000 per QALY, the probability that Take Charge is cost-effective is 99%. CONCLUSION: Take Charge is cost-effective and probably cost saving.

The inequity of access to health: a case study of patients with gout in one general practice.

AIM: Gout is a health equity issue for Maori and Pacific peoples because disparities in quality of care exist. This study aims to describe domains of access that may contribute to the optimisation of gout care and, therefore, address health inequity. METHODS: The practice management system at one general practice in Auckland was used to identify enrolled patients with gout, using disease codes and medication lists. Barriers to access for the cohort were investigated using staff knowledge and the practice management system. The general practice is uniquely situated within an urban marae (traditional meeting house) complex serving a predominantly Maori community. This enables a focus on domains of access other than cultural safety. RESULTS: Of 3,095 people enrolled at the practice, 268 were identified as having gout. Of these, 94% had at least one other long-term health condition. The majority of people with gout enrolled at the practice have employment roles incongruent with the clinic's opening hours. CONCLUSIONS: Social circumstances, such as employment and availability of transport, should be actively discussed with all patients and recorded in the practice management system. Reorientation of health services, including hours of access, is evidentially required to ensure optimal management of gout and possibly other health conditions.

Interventions to promote access to eyecare for non-dominant ethnic groups in high-income countries: a scoping review.

PURPOSE: People who are distinct from the dominant ethnic group within a country can experience a variety of barriers to accessing eyecare services. We conducted a scoping review to map published interventions aimed at improving access to eyecare for non-Indigenous, non-dominant ethnic groups residing in high-income countries. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Global Health for studies that described an intervention to promote access to eyecare for the target population. Two authors independently screened titles and abstracts followed by review of the full text of potentially relevant sources. For included studies, data extraction was carried out independently by two authors. Findings were summarised using a combination of descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. RESULTS: We screened 5220 titles/abstracts, of which 82 reports describing 67 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies were conducted in the USA (90%), attempted to improve access for Black (48%) or Latinx (28%) communities at-risk for diabetic retinopathy (42%) and glaucoma (18%). Only 30% included the target population in the design of the intervention; those that did tended to be larger, collaborative initiatives, which addressed both patient and provider components of access. Forty-eight studies (72%) evaluated whether an intervention changed an outcome measure. Among these, attendance at a follow-up eye examination after screening was the most common (n=20/48, 42%), and directly supporting patients to overcome barriers to attendance was reported as the most effective approach. Building relationships between patients and providers, running coordinated, longitudinal initiatives and supporting reduction of root causes for inequity (education and economic) were key themes highlighted for success. CONCLUSION: Although research evaluating interventions for non-dominant, non-Indigenous ethnic groups exist, key gaps remain. In particular, the paucity of relevant studies outside the USA needs to be addressed, and target communities need to be involved in the design and implementation of interventions more frequently.

Vision impairment and differential access to eye health services in Aotearoa New Zealand: protocol for a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: In Aotearoa New Zealand, Maori and Pacific people experience worse health outcomes compared with other New Zealanders. No population-based eye health survey has been conducted, and eye health services do not generate routine monitoring reports, so the extent of eye health inequality is unknown. This information is required to plan equitable eye health services. Here we outline the protocol for a scoping review to report the nature and extent of the evidence reporting vision impairment, and the use of eye health services by ethnicity in New Zealand. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: An information specialist will conduct searches on MEDLINE and Embase, with no limit on publication dates or language. We will search the grey literature via websites of relevant government and service provider agencies. Reference lists of included articles will be screened. Observational studies will be included if they report the prevalence of vision impairment, or any of the main causes (cataract, uncorrected refractive error, macular degeneration, glaucoma or diabetic retinopathy) or report the use of eye health services in New Zealand among people of any age. Two authors will independently review titles, abstracts and full-text articles, and complete data extraction. Overall findings will be summarised using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis, with an emphasis on disaggregation by ethnicity where this information is available. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has not been sought as our review will only include published and publicly accessible data. We will publish the review in an open access peer-reviewed journal. We anticipate the findings will be useful to organisations and providers in New Zealand responsible to plan and deliver eye care services, as well as stakeholders in other countries with differential access to eye care. REGISTRATION DETAILS: The protocol has been registered with Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/yw7xb).

Emergency COVID-19 funding to general practices in early 2020: lessons for future allocation to support equity.

AIM: To (1) describe the distribution of Ministry of Health (MOH) COVID-19 emergency funding to general practices in March and April 2020 and (2) consider whether further funding to general practices should be allocated differently to support equity for patients. METHODS: Emergency funding allocation criteria and funding amounts by general practice were obtained from the MOH. Practices were stratified according to their proportion of high-needs enrolled patients (Maori, Pacific or living in an area with the highest quintile of socioeconomic deprivation). Funding per practice was calculated for separate and total payments according to practice stratum of high-needs enrolled patients. RESULTS: The median combined March and April funding for general practices with 80% high-needs patients was 28% higher per practice ($36,674 vs $28,686) and 48% higher per patient ($10.50 vs $7.11) compared with the funding received by general practices with fewer than 20% high-needs patients. Although the March allocation did increase funding for high-needs patients, the April allocation did not. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency support funding for general practices was organised by the MOH at short notice and in exceptional circumstances. In the future, the MOH should apply pro-equity resource allocation in all emergencies, as with other circumstances.