Cancer diagnosis after emergency presentations in people with mental health and substance use conditions: a national cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer survival and mortality outcomes for people with mental health and substance use conditions (MHSUC) are worse than for people without MHSUC, which may be partly explained by poorer access to timely and appropriate healthcare, from screening and diagnosis through to treatment and follow-up. Access and quality of healthcare can be evaluated by comparing the proportion of people who receive a cancer diagnosis following an acute or emergency hospital admission (emergency presentation) across different population groups: those diagnosed with cancer following an emergency presentation have lower survival. METHODS: National mental health service use datasets (2002-2018) were linked to national cancer registry and hospitalisation data (2006-2018), to create a study population of people aged 15 years and older with one of four cancer diagnoses: lung, prostate, breast and colorectal. The exposure group included people with a history of mental health/addiction service contact within the five years before cancer diagnosis, with a subgroup of people with a diagnosis of bipolar disorder, schizophrenia or psychotic disorders. Marginal standardised rates were used to compare emergency presentations (hospital admission within 30 days of cancer diagnosis) in the exposure and comparison groups, adjusted for age, gender (for lung and colorectal cancers), ethnicity, area deprivation and stage at diagnosis. RESULTS: For all four cancers, the rates of emergency presentation in the fully adjusted models were significantly higher in people with a history of mental health/addiction service use than people without (lung cancer, RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.13, 1.24; prostate cancer RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.44, 1.93; breast cancer RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.14, 1.69; colorectal cancer 1.31, 95% CI 1.22, 1.39). Rates were substantially higher in those with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or psychotic disorders. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing pathways for earlier detection and diagnosis of cancers in people with MHSUC could reduce the rates of emergency presentation, with improved cancer survival outcomes. All health services, including cancer screening programmes, primary and secondary care, have a responsibility to ensure equitable access to healthcare for people with MHSUC.

Experiences of physical healthcare services in Maori and non-Maori with mental health and substance use conditions.

OBJECTIVES: Inequities in physical health outcomes exist for people with mental health and substance use conditions and for Indigenous populations (Maori in Aotearoa New Zealand). These inequities may be partly explained by poorer quality of physical healthcare services, including discrimination at systemic and individual levels. This study investigated the experiences of people with mental health and substance use conditions accessing physical healthcare and differences in service quality for non-Maori relative to Maori. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey of people with mental health and substance use conditions in New Zealand asked about four aspects of service quality in four healthcare settings: general practice, emergency department, hospital and pharmacy. The quality domains were: treated with respect; listened to; treated unfairly due to mental health and substance use conditions; mental health and substance use condition diagnoses distracting clinicians from physical healthcare (diagnostic and treatment overshadowing). RESULTS: Across the four health services, pharmacy was rated highest for all quality measures and emergency department lowest. Participants rated general practice services highly for being treated with respect and listened to but reported relatively high levels of overshadowing in general practice, emergency department and hospital services. Experiences of unfair treatment were more common in emergency department and hospital than general practice and pharmacy. Compared to Maori, non-Maori reported higher levels of being treated with respect and listened to in most services and were more likely to report 'never' experiencing unfair treatment and overshadowing for all health services. CONCLUSION: Interventions to address discrimination and poor-quality health services to people with mental health and substance use conditions should be tailored to the physical healthcare setting. More needs to be done to address institutional racism in systems that privilege non-Maori.

Dealing With Discrimination in Physical Health Care Services: Strategies of People With Mental Health and Substance Use Conditions.

Discrimination against people with mental health and substance use conditions (MHSUC) by health professionals contributes to the poor physical health outcomes this group experiences. We surveyed people with MHSUC in Aotearoa New Zealand to explore how they experienced and responded to discrimination from physical health services. Participants identified 6 strategies used to avoid or minimize the impact of discrimination. Avoidance strategies included not seeking help, not disclosing MHSUC diagnoses and changing or seeking out health professionals who did not behave in discriminatory ways. Minimizing strategies were being a "model patient," taking a support person to consultations or advocating for what they needed, even in the face of discrimination. Physical health services must focus on providing non-discriminatory care to reduce the need for compensatory strategies and improve care of physical illness for people with MHSUC.

It's not in my head: a qualitative analysis of experiences of discrimination in people with mental health and substance use conditions seeking physical healthcare.

Introduction: Clinician bias contributes to lower quality healthcare and poorer health outcomes in people with mental health and substance use conditions (MHSUC). Discrimination can lead to physical conditions being overlooked (diagnostic overshadowing) or substandard treatment being offered to people with MHSUC. This research aimed to utilise experiences of people with MHSUC to identify discrimination by clinicians, including the role of clinician's beliefs and assumptions in physical health service provision. Methods: We surveyed people with MHSUC who accessed physical healthcare services. Of 354 eligible participants, 253 responded to open-ended questions about experiences of those services. Thematic descriptive analysis of survey responses was completed using existing stigma frameworks and inductive coding. Results: One dominant theme from survey responses was that diagnostic overshadowing by clinicians was driven by clinician mistrust. Another theme was that clinicians assumed respondent's physical symptoms, including pain, were caused by MHSUC. This influenced decisions not to initiate investigations or treatment. Respondents perceived that clinicians focused on mental health over physical health, contributing to suboptimal care. Discussion: Discrimination based on MHSUC leads to poor quality care. Health systems and clinicians need to focus quality improvement processes on access to and delivery of equitable physical healthcare to people with MHSUC, address stereotypes about people with MHSUC and improve integration of mental and physical healthcare.

Do patients with mental health and substance use conditions experience discrimination and diagnostic overshadowing in primary care in Aotearoa New Zealand? Results from a national online survey.

Introduction Quality of health care contributes to poor physical health outcomes for people with mental health and substance use conditions (MHSUC). AIM This study investigated experiences of people with MHSUC who sought help for a physical health condition in primary healthcare services, examining quality of care attributes. Methods An online survey of adults currently or recently accessing services for MHSUC was fielded in 2022. Respondents were recruited nationally through mental health, addiction and lived experience networks and social media. The attributes of service quality assessed were relationships (respect and being listened to), discrimination due to MHSUC, and diagnostic overshadowing (MHSUC diagnosis distracted from physical health care). Results Respondents who had used primary care services were included (n = 335). The majority of respondents reported both being treated with respect (81%) and being listened to (79%) always or most of the time. A minority of respondents reported diagnostic overshadowing (20%) or discrimination due to MHSUC (10%). People with four or more diagnoses or a diagnosis of bipolar disorder or schizophrenia had significantly worse experiences across all quality measures. Those with a diagnosis of substance use disorders had worse experiences for diagnostic overshadowing. Maori had worse experiences for respect and diagnostic overshadowing. Conclusions Although many respondents reported good experiences in primary care, this was not the case for everyone. Quality of care was affected by type and number of diagnoses and the person's ethnicity. Interventions to reduce stigma and diagnostic overshadowing for people with MHSUC are needed in primary care services in New Zealand.

Driving quality improvement through better data: The story of New Zealand's radiation oncology collection.

Aotearoa/New Zealand is one of the first nations in the world to develop a comprehensive, high-quality collection of radiation therapy data (the Radiation Oncology Collection, ROC) that is able to report on treatment delivery by health region, patient demographics and service provider. This has been guided by radiation therapy leaders, who have been instrumental in overseeing the establishment of clear and robust data definitions, a centralised database and outputs delivered via an online tool. In this paper, we detail the development of the ROC, provide examples of variation in practice identified from the ROC and how these changed over time, then consider the ramifications of the ROC in the wider context of cancer care quality improvement. In addition to a review of relevant literature, primary data were sourced from the ROC on radiation therapy provided nationally in New Zealand between 2017 and 2020. The total intervention rate, number of fractions and doses are reported for select cancers by way of examples of national variation in practice. Results from the ROC have highlighted areas of treatment variation and have prompted increased uptake of hypofractionation for curative prostate and breast cancer treatment and for palliation of bone metastases. Future development of the ROC will increase its use for quality improvement and ultimately link to a real time cancer services database.

Experiences of New Zealand public health messaging while in lockdown.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to greater societal divides based on alignment with vaccine mandates and social distancing requirements. This paper briefly lays out the experiences of individuals in Aotearoa New Zealand related to public health messaging. METHODS: Adults in Aotearoa New Zealand participated in a mixed-methods study involving a survey (n=1,010 analysed results) and then semi-structured interviews with a subset of surveyed participants (38 participants). Results were thematically analysed. RESULTS: Participants highlighted two key areas related to public health messaging, these related to message consistency and the impact of messaging on wellbeing. Conclusions and public health implications: As the COVID-19 pandemic continues and further disrupts health service delivery and normal societal functioning, forward planning is needed to deliver more targeted messaging.

Using national data to model the New Zealand radiation oncology workforce.

INTRODUCTION: Demand for radiation therapy is expected to increase over time. In Aotearoa/New Zealand, the radiation oncology workforce experiences high numbers of clinical hours but an intervention rate that is lower than in comparable countries, suggesting unmet treatment need. Accurate models on the supply and demand for radiation oncologists (ROs) are needed to ensure adequate staffing levels. METHODS: We developed a demand model that predicted the future number of ROs required, using national data from the Radiation Oncology Collection (ROC) and a survey of ROs. Radiation therapy intervention and retreatment rates (IR/RTRs), and benign and non-cancer conditions being treated, were derived from the ROC and applied to Census population projections. Survey data provided definitions of treatment by complexity, time spent in different activities and time available for work. Results were linked to radiation oncology workforce forecasts from a supply model developed by the Ministry of Health. RESULTS: The demand model showed that 85 ROs would be needed in 2031, if current IR/RTRs were maintained, an increase from 68 in 2021. The supply model predicted a decrease in ROs over time, leaving a significant shortfall. Model parameters could be modified to assess the impact of workforce or practice changes; more ROs would be needed if average working hours reduced or IR/RTRs increased. CONCLUSION: Workforce models based on robust data collections are an important tool for workforce planning. The RO demand model presented here combines detailed information on treatment and work activities to provide credible estimates that can be used to inform actions on training, recruitment and retention.

COVID-19 Pandemic Lockdown and Wellbeing: Experiences from Aotearoa New Zealand in 2020.

In 2020, in the first COVID-19 pandemic lockdown, Aotearoa New Zealand consistently maintained stringent public health measures including stay-at-home lockdowns and distancing responses. Considering the widespread disruption to social functioning caused by the pandemic, this paper aimed to explore environmental and social factors that influenced the wellbeing of individuals during the first lockdown in Aotearoa New Zealand. Our mixed-methods study involved a survey (n = 1010) and semi-structured interviews of a subset of surveyed individuals undertaken at the tail end of the first 2020 lockdown. Survey participants were recruited through social media-driven snowball sampling, less than 50% were aged under 45 years and 85% identified as female. Of those interviewed, 63% identified as female. Qualitative interview findings and open-ended survey results were analysed thematically. Participants described a variety of factors influencing wellbeing, largely related to the community and household; physical, behavioural, and lifestyle factors; access to health services; and social and economic foundations. While much of the focus of COVID-19 recovery was on reversing the economic and physical toll of the pandemic, our findings emphasise the need to empower individuals, families, and communities to mitigate the pandemic's negative implications on wellbeing.

Seeking Healthcare During Lockdown: Challenges, Opportunities and Lessons for the Future.

BACKGROUND: In Aotearoa/New Zealand, the first nation-wide coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdown occurred from March 23, 2020 to May 13, 2020, requiring most people to stay at home. Health services had to suddenly change how they delivered healthcare and some services were limited or postponed. This study investigated access to healthcare during this lockdown period, whether patients delayed seeking healthcare and reasons for these delays, focusing on the accessibility of primary care services. METHODS: Adults (aged 18 years or older) who had contact with primary care services were invited through social media and email lists to participate in an online survey (n = 1010) and 38 people were recruited for in-depth interviews. We thematically analysed qualitative data from the survey and interviews, reported alongside relevant descriptive survey results. RESULTS: More than half (55%) of survey respondents delayed seeking healthcare during lockdown. Factors at a national or health system-level that could influence delay were changing public service messages, an excessive focus on COVID-19 and urgent issues, and poor service integration. Influential factors at a primary care-level were communication and outreach, use of technology, gatekeeping, staff manner and the safety of the clinical practice environment. Factors that influenced patients' individual decisions to seek healthcare were the ability to self-manage and self-triage, consciousness of perceived pressure on health services and fear of infection. CONCLUSION: In future pandemic lockdowns or crises, appropriate access to primary care services can be improved by unambiguous national messages and better integration of services. Primary care practices should adopt rapid proactive outreach to patients, fostering a calm but safe clinical practice environment. More support for patients to self-manage and self-triage appropriately could benefit over-burdened health systems during lockdowns and as part of business as usual in less extraordinary times.

E-prescribing and access to prescription medicines during lockdown: experience of patients in Aotearoa/New Zealand.

BACKGROUND: Health services internationally have been compelled to change their methods of service delivery in response to the global COVID-19 pandemic, to mitigate the spread of infection amongst health professionals and patients. In Aotearoa/New Zealand, widespread electronic delivery of prescriptions (e-prescribing) was enabled. The aim of the research was to explore patients' experiences of how lockdown, changes to prescribing and the interface between general practices and community pharmacy affected access to prescription medications. METHOD: The research employed a mixed-method approach. This included an online survey (n = 1,010) and in-depth interviews with a subset of survey respondents (n = 38) during the first COVID-19 lockdown (March-May 2020). Respondents were recruited through a snowballing approach, starting with social media and email list contacts of the research team. In keeping with the approach, descriptive statistics of survey data and thematic analysis of qualitative interview and open-ended questions in survey data were combined. RESULTS: For most respondents who received a prescription during lockdown, this was sent directly to the pharmacy. Most people picked up their medication from the pharmacy; home delivery of medication was rare (4%). Survey and interview respondents wanted e-prescribing to continue post-lockdown and described where things worked well and where they encountered delays in the process of acquiring prescription medication. CONCLUSIONS: E-prescribing has the potential to improve access to prescription medication and is convenient for patients. The increase in e-prescribing during lockdown highlighted how the system could be improved, through better feedback about errors, more consistency across practices and pharmacies, more proactive communication with patients, and equitable prescribing costs.

Telehealth consultations in general practice during a pandemic lockdown: survey and interviews on patient experiences and preferences.

BACKGROUND: During the first COVID-19 pandemic 'lockdown' in Aotearoa/New Zealand (March-May 2020, in which strict 'stay at home' measures were introduced), general practices were advised to use telephone and video consultations (telehealth) wherever possible instead of the usual in-person visits. This was a sudden change for most practices and patients. This research aimed to explore how patients accessed general practice during lockdown and evaluate their experiences with telehealth, to inform how telehealth could be most effectively used in the future. METHODS: Using a mixed-method approach, we undertook an online survey and in-depth interviews with adults (> 18 years) who had contact with practices during lockdown, recruited through social media and email lists. We present descriptive statistics from the survey data (n = 1010) and qualitative analysis of interview data (n = 38) and open-ended survey questions, using a framework of access to health care, from the patient's perspective. RESULTS: In general, patients reported high satisfaction with telehealth in general practice during lockdown. Telehealth was convenient and allowed patients to safely access health care without having to weigh-up the fear of COVID-19 infection against the need to be seen. Telehealth worked best for routine and familiar health issues and when rapport was established between patients and clinicians. This was easier with a pre-existing clinical relationship, but not impossible without one. Telehealth was less suitable when a physical examination was needed, when the diagnosis was unknown or for patients who had a strong preference to be seen in-person. CONCLUSIONS: Even in this disruptive lockdown period, that prompted an unexpected and rapid implementation of telehealth services in general practices, most patients had positive experiences with telehealth. In the future, patients want the choice of consultation type to match their needs, circumstances, and preferences. Technological issues and funding barriers may need to be addressed, and clear communication for both patients and clinicians is needed about key aspects of telehealth (e.g. cost, appropriateness, privacy). Maintaining telehealth as an option post-lockdown has the potential to increase timely and safe access to primary health care for many patients.

Reflections on conducting research with healthcare users in a pandemic lockdown.

The COVID-19 lockdown period created both challenges and opportunities to undertake research. Research was facilitated by flexibility from funders and team members, support from networks and stakeholders and the willingness of individuals to participate. We could learn from the experience of lockdown research by improving institutional support for research processes and dissemination, investing in a nationwide online panel for public good research and ensuring that a planned database of health research can collect and monitor research proposals in times of rapid change and uncertainty.