To inform the WHO Global report on psoriasis, a new comprehensive worldwide systematic review of the epidemiology of psoriasis was undertaken. The aim of this study was to systematically review the worldwide literature regarding the epidemiology of psoriasis, including prevalence and incidence, in adults and in children. A search of 15 electronic medical databases was performed. Using a rigorous systematic protocol, eligible articles were analysed. No language, regional or temporal restrictions were applied. A total of 76 study observations met all eligibility criteria and were included in the systematic review. The estimates of the prevalence of psoriasis in adults ranged from 0.51% to 11.43%, and in children from 0% to 1.37%. Psoriasis is a common disease, occurring more frequently with advancing age. Limited data on the epidemiology of psoriasis are available. The available prevalence data come from only 20 countries, meaning there are huge geographic gaps in knowledge, especially from low- and middle-income settings.

Background: Eliminating indigenous and ethnic health inequities requires addressing the determinants of health inequities which includes institutionalised racism, and ensuring a health care system that delivers appropriate and equitable care. There is growing recognition of the importance of cultural competency and cultural safety at both individual health practitioner and organisational levels to achieve equitable health care. Some jurisdictions have included cultural competency in health professional licensing legislation, health professional accreditation standards, and pre-service and in-service training programmes. However, there are mixed definitions and understandings of cultural competency and cultural safety, and how best to achieve them. Methods: A literature review of 59 international articles on the definitions of cultural competency and cultural safety was undertaken. Findings were contextualised to the cultural competency legislation, statements and initiatives present within Aotearoa New Zealand, a national Symposium on Cultural Competence and Māori Health, convened by the Medical Council of New Zealand and Te Ohu Rata o Aotearoa-Māori Medical Practitioners Association (Te ORA) and consultation with Māori medical practitioners via Te ORA. Results: Health practitioners, healthcare organisations and health systems need to be engaged in working towards cultural safety and critical consciousness. To do this, they must be prepared to critique the 'taken for granted' power structures and be prepared to challenge their own culture and cultural systems rather than prioritise becoming 'competent' in the cultures of others. The objective of cultural safety activities also needs to be clearly linked to achieving health equity. Healthcare organisations and authorities need to be held accountable for providing culturally safe care, as defined by patients and their communities, and as measured through progress towards achieving health equity. Conclusions: A move to cultural safety rather than cultural competency is recommended. We propose a definition for cultural safety that we believe to be more fit for purpose in achieving health equity, and clarify the essential principles and practical steps to operationalise this approach in healthcare organisations and workforce development. The unintended consequences of a narrow or limited understanding of cultural competency are discussed, along with recommendations for how a broader conceptualisation of these terms is important.

Palliative care for noncommunicable disease patients must be strengthened in a majority of countries. These data provide a baseline for trend measurement of official country-level and global palliative care development. A repeat assessment is taking place in the first half of 2017.

The Asia Pacific region is home to more than 60% of the world's population. Life expectancy at birth differs between countries by as much as 27 years. This article suggests that asymmetric economic growth, unplanned urbanization, marked environmental change, unequal improvements in daily living conditions, and the unequal distribution and access to quality health care have contributed to health inequities in the Asia Pacific region. Contextually specific evidence and action are needed. This requires ongoing monitoring of health inequities and systematic evaluation of societal changes and their impact on health inequities. It requires better understanding of how to translate theoretical and empirical demonstrations of the social and environmental impact on health inequities into evidence-informed policies and programs, in diverse geopolitical, socioeconomic, and sociocultural contexts across the Asia Pacific region and the range of associated complex policy processes. A spotlight is needed on health inequities and their causes else the status quo will persist.

No abstract