Search

Chronic pain is common in older people. However, little is known about how pain is experienced in residents of retirement villages ('villages'), and how pain intensity and associations are experienced in relation to characteristics of residents and village living. We thus aimed to examine pain levels, prevalence and associated factors in village residents. The current paper is a cross‐sectional analysis of baseline data from the 'Older People in Retirement Villages' study in Auckland, New Zealand. Between July 2016 and August 2018, 578 village residents were interviewed face‐to‐face by gerontology nurse specialists, using interRAI Community Health Assessment (CHA) and customised survey. We used a validated pain scale and multivariable logistic regression analyses adjusted for pre‐specified confounders. Residents' median age was 82 years; 420 (73%) were female; 270 (47%) exhibited/reported daily pain, and in 11% this was severe. After controlling for confounders, daily pain was positively associated with self‐reported arthritis (OR = 3.88, 95% CI = 2.57–5.87), poor/fair self‐reported health (OR = 3.19, 95% CI = 1.29–7.93), having no health clinic on‐site (OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.10–2.83), and minimal fatigue (diminished energy but completes normal day‐to‐day activities) (OR = 1.77, 95% CI = 1.11–2.81). Similar associations were observed for levels of pain. We conclude that levels of pain and prevalence of daily pain are high in village residents. Self‐reported arthritis, self‐reported poor/fair health, no health clinic on‐site and minimal fatigue are all independently associated with a higher risk of daily pain and with levels of pain. This study suggests potential opportunities for villages to better provide on‐site support to decrease prevalence and severity of pain for their residents, and thus potentially increase wellbeing and quality‐of‐life, though as we cannot prove causality, more research is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the perceived quality of life, unmet needs and psychological distress in patients with head and neck cancer in a rural setting in New Zealand. Method: Patients presenting with head and neck cancer in Northland, New Zealand, were asked to complete questionnaires on quality of life, unmet needs, and anxiety or depression together with a free-text option. Results: About one quarter of respondents (27 per cent) scored high in the anxiety and depression scale, with corresponding diminished quality of life scores and increased needs. Over half of respondents (54 per cent) found it challenging to travel for treatment. Financial difficulties were encountered more frequently with indigenous patients. Rurality alone does not lead to significant differences in quality of life or needs. Conclusion: After treatment for head and neck cancer, it is important to monitor and manage patients' psychological distress and ease of access to health services to improve quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Little is known about experiences and barriers for trans and non‐binary (TGNB) people eligible for cervical screening in Aotearoa New Zealand. Aims: To identify uptake, barriers and reasons for delaying cervical cancer screening among TGNB people in Aotearoa. Materials and Methods: The 2018 Counting Ourselves data on TGNB people assigned female at birth aged 20–69 years who had ever had sex, were analysed to report on experiences of those who were eligible for cervical screening (n = 318). Participants answered questions about whether they had taken part in cervical screening and reasons behind any delays in receiving the test. Results: Trans men were more likely than non‐binary participants to report that they did not require cervical screening or were unsure if they needed it. For those who had delayed cervical screening, 30% did so due to feeling worried about how they would be treated as a trans or non‐binary person and 35% due to another reason. Other reasons for delay related to general and gender‐related discomfort, previous traumatic experiences, anxiety or fear of the test and pain. Material barriers to access included cost and lack of information. Conclusions: The current cervical screening program in Aotearoa does not consider the needs of TGNB people, leading to delayed and reduced uptake of cervical screening. Health providers require education on the reasons TGNB people delay or avoid cervical screening in order to provide appropriate information and affirmative healthcare environments. The human papillomavirus self‐swab may address some of the existing barriers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]