Equity of colonoscopy provision and quality in Māori and New Zealand Europeans

Making Education Easy

Authors:

Donachie M et al.

September 21, 2021

Summary:

Māori are significantly less likely to receive colonoscopy than NZ Europeans, according to a retrospective comparative study conducted at Whanganui Hospital. The study analysed 2962 colonoscopies (385 from Māori; 2577 from NZ Europeans) between September 2016 and March 2020. The rate of colonoscopy provision in participants aged ≥40 years was 6.1% among Māori versus 9.1% among NZ Europeans (p < 0.0001). However, colonoscopy completion rates, colonoscope withdrawal times and polyp detection rates were similar between Māori and NZ Europeans. While the adenoma detection rate was significantly lower in Māori than NZ Europeans (32.7% vs 40.0%; p = 0.028), this was not observed when participants were stratified by 10-year age cohorts. The authors concluded that improving equity requires the addition of colonoscopy provision rates, across ethnic groups, to other key performance indicators.

Comment:

Great recommendations here to not only improve access to potentially life-saving investigation/treatment but to also ensure that equity (of care and its outcomes) for Māori is measured and reported.

Reference: ANZ J Surg. 2021;91(7-8):1575-1581.

Independent commentary by Dr. Matire Hardwood

Dr Matire Harwood (Ngapuhi) has worked in Hauora Māori, primary health and rehabilitation settings as clinician and researcher since graduating from Auckland Medical School in 1994. She also holds positions on a number of boards, committees and advisory groups including the Health Research Council. Matire lives in Auckland with her whānau including partner Haunui and two young children Te Rangiura and Waimarie.

Research Review publications are intended for New Zealand health professionals.

Disclaimer: This publication is not intended as a replacement for regular medical education but to assist in the process. The reviews are a summarised interpretation of the published study and reflect the opinion of the writer rather than those of the research group or scientific journal. It is suggested readers review the full trial data before forming a final conclusion on its merits.