Search

Background: Health intervention implementation in Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ), as in many countries globally, usually varies by ethnicity. Māori (the Indigenous peoples of Aotearoa) and Pacific peoples are less likely to receive interventions than other ethnic groups, despite experiencing persistent health inequities. This study aimed to develop an equity-focused implementation framework, appropriate for the Aotearoa NZ context, to support the planning and delivery of equitable implementation pathways for health interventions, with the intention of achieving equitable outcomes for Māori, as well as people originating from the Pacific Islands. Methods: A scoping review of the literature to identify existing equity-focused implementation theories, models and frameworks was undertaken. One of these, the Equity-based framework for Implementation Research (EquIR), was selected for adaptation. The adaptation process was undertaken in collaboration with the project's Māori and consumer advisory groups and informed by the expertise of local health equity researchers and stakeholders, as well as the international implementation science literature. Results: The adapted framework's foundation is the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi (the written agreement between Māori rangatira (chiefs) and the British Crown), and its focus is whānau (extended family)-centred implementation that meets the health and wellbeing aspirations, priorities and needs of whānau. The implementation pathway comprises four main steps: implementation planning, pathway design, monitoring, and outcomes and evaluation, all with an equity focus. The pathway is underpinned by the core constructs of equitable implementation in Aotearoa NZ: collaborative design, anti-racism, Māori and priority population expertise, cultural safety and values-based. Additionally, the contextual factors impacting implementation, i.e. the social, economic, commercial and political determinants of health, are included. Conclusions: The framework presented in this study is the first equity-focused process-type implementation framework to be adapted for the Aotearoa NZ context. This framework is intended to support and facilitate equity-focused implementation research and health intervention implementation by mainstream health services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective  This study was aimed to determine mydriatic regimen(s) used in neonatal units in Aotearoa, New Zealand (NZ), and Australia and to estimate the frequency of adverse drug events following mydriatic administration in preterm neonates. Study Design  A cross-sectional survey was sent to neonatal nursing staff listed in the Australian and New Zealand Neonatal Network contact list. Participants were asked to state what mydriatic regimen they use, and to estimate the frequency of adverse drug events when eye drops were administered for retinopathy of prematurity eye examinations (ROPEE). Results  Thirteen different mydriatic regimens were identified; phenylephrine 2.5% and cyclopentolate 0.5% (1 standard drop of each) was the most commonly used regimen. Two of the regimens exceeded adult doses and five regimens included a mydriatic that is equivalent to an adult dose. Following mydriatic instillation, the three most common adverse effects were apnea, tachycardia, and periorbital pallor. Conclusion  Low-concentration single-microdrop regimens are currently in use and resulting in successful ROPEE, yet doses exceeding adult doses are in use throughout Aotearoa, NZ, and Australian units. We know from this dataset that neonates are experiencing unwanted and potentially preventable, adverse effects associated with mydriatics, and every effort should be made to minimize this risk. Key Points Thirteen different regimens are in use in Aotearoa, NZ, and Australia. Three regimens use doses in excess of adult doses. Phenylephrine 2.5% and cyclopentolate 0.5% (one standard drop of each) is the most common regimen [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To determine ifVery low dose mydriatic eye microdrop regimen sufficiently dilates the pupil (above 4.1 mm) compared with the currently used low dose mydriatic eye microdrop regimen.Cardiovascular, gastrointestinal and respiratory adverse effects occur following eye drop instillation.Methods: Seventeen premature infants were recruited into this prospective, randomised controlled pilot trial in January 2017 to November 2018. Data were collected from the single-centre Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Dunedin Hospital, New Zealand. The inclusion criteria were birth weight less than 1500 g or gestational age less than 31 weeks, or any premature infant requiring red reflex testing. Infants were randomised to receive either phenylephrine 1% or 0.5% and cyclopentolate 0.2% or 0.1%, 1 microdrop in both eyes. Efficacy outcome measures were pupil size at retinopathy of prematurity eye examination (ROPEE) and ophthalmologist rating of ease of screen.Results: All participants had sufficient pupillary dilation for a successful ROPEE. Ophthalmologists rated the ROPEE as easy for 90% of all examinations. Pupil dilation measurements at the time of examination, mean±SD, 4.8±0.2 (95% CI 4.5 to 5.2) mm for treatment A and 5±0.2 (95%CI 4.6 to 5.4) mm for treatment B (p=0.61). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups for safety data.Conclusions: Very low dose microdrop administration of phenylephrine and cyclopentolate appears to be effective at sufficiently dilating the neonatal pupil for ROPEEs. Low dose and very low dose microdrop mydriatic regimens may also reduce the risk of unwanted adverse effects associated with these medicines.Trial Registration Number: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (reference ACTRN12616001266459p). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]