Background Rheumatic fever is an autoimmune condition that occurs in response to an untreated Group A Streptococcus throat or skin infection. Recurrent episodes of rheumatic fever can cause permanent damage to heart valves, heart failure and even death. Māori and Pacific people in Aotearoa New Zealand experience some of the highest rates globally, with Pacific children 80 times more likely to be hospitalised for rheumatic fever and Māori children 36 times more likely than non-Māori, non-Pacific children. Community members from the Pacific People’s Health Advisory Group, research officers from the Pacific Practice-Based Research Network and University of Auckland researchers identified key health priorities within the South Auckland community that needed to be addressed, one of which was rheumatic fever. The study outlined in this protocol aims to co-design, implement, and evaluate a novel intervention to reduce rheumatic fever rates for Pacific communities in South Auckland. Methods This participatory mixed-methods study utilises the Fa’afaletui method and follows a three-phase approach. Phase 1 comprises a quantitative analysis of the rheumatic fever burden within Auckland and across New Zealand over the last five years, including sub-analyses by ethnicity. Phase 2 will include co-design workshops with Pacific community members, families affected by rheumatic fever, health professionals, and other stakeholders in order to develop a novel intervention to reduce rheumatic fever in South Auckland. Phase 3 comprises the implementation and evaluation of the intervention. Discussion This study aims to reduce the inequitable rheumatic fever burden faced by Pacific communities in South Auckland via a community-based participatory research approach. The final intervention may guide approaches in other settings or regions that also experience high rates of rheumatic fever. Additionally, Māori have the second-highest incidence rates of rheumatic fever of all ethnic groups, thus community-led approaches ‘by Māori for Māori’ are also necessary. Trial registration The Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry has approved the proposed study: ACTRN12622000565741 and ACTRN12622000572763.

Background Gout is a painful chronic disease which disrupts work and family life and can lead to chronic joint damage. Pacific people in Aotearoa/New Zealand experience significant inequities, with over three times the gout prevalence of the non-Pacific non-Māori populations. Pacific people receive less regular urate-lowering drugs to prevent gout flare-ups, and have nine times the hospitalisation from gout compared with non-Pacific non-Māori people. Rates for Indigenous Māori lie between Pacific and non-Pacific non-Māori. A long-established Collective comprising community members from the Pacific People’s Health Advisory Group, clinical staff from the Pacific Practice-Based Research Network, and University of Auckland researchers have identified that improving Pacific urate-lowering therapy use as the research question of prime importance for improved health outcomes of Pacific people in South Auckland. Building on the existing knowledge, this study aims to develop, implement and evaluate a novel innovative intervention to improve the uptake of urate-lowering therapy by Pacific patients with gout. Methods Three-phase mixed methods co-design study using the Fa’afaletui research framework following the STROBE statement. Phase1 is observational times series of prevalence of patients with gout, proportion with urate blood-level monitoring and use of urate-lowering medication over past 5 years. In Phase 2 the Collective will workshop new interventions to address previous uptake barriers, using culturally-appropriate Talanga communications with results synthesised in line with Kakala principles. The designed intervention will be implemented and process and outcome evaluations conducted. Finally, an implementation framework will be produced to facilitate further roll-out. Discussion The study aims to enhance health and reduce inequities for Pacific people, contribute to creation of Pacific health knowledge and translation of research findings into Pacific health gains. Potential longer-term impact is a gout-management pathway for use throughout Aotearoa/New Zealand. Māori have similar issues with high gout prevalence and low urate-lowering therapy use hence the intervention is likely to translate to Māori healthcare. The project will contribute to Pacific research capacity and capability-building as well as general upskilling of community and practice members involved in the co-design processes. Trial registration The Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry is in process, request number 38206, 1-09-2021.

Introduction.Gout in Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ) remains an equity issue. The prevalence in Pacific and Māori people is one of the highest internationally. Although Pacific and Māori experience earlier onset and higher burden of gout, which can severely impact their quality of life, their management of it is often sub-optimal. Aim. To conduct a scoping review of the NZ literature for interventions to improve the uptake/management of allopurinol for gout and their evaluation. Methods. Databases Medline, Scopus, Embase, and CINAHL Plus and the grey literature were searched systematically to identify all NZ intervention studies aiming to improve allopurinol uptake for gout treatment. Interventions included: if they were delivered in NZ, aimed to improve allopurinol uptake, and were provided in English. A narrative approach was used to extract and synthesise data. Results. Eighteen peer-reviewed and grey literature publications met the search criteria. Interventions clustered into three domains: multifaceted or multipractitioner; gout app; and online booklets or fact sheets. Serum urate levels improved in multi-faceted or multi-practitioner interventions only, whereas the gout app only improved patients' awareness and understanding of gout and medications. Online fact sheets and booklets need more active utilisation from health professionals to improve gout health literacy. Discussion. Most gout interventions in NZ use multifaceted or multi-practitioner approaches. Although most interventions successfully controlled serum urate levels and improved equitable access for gout patients to urate-lowering therapy, these interventions did not sustain retention, completion, and engagement for certain population groups, particularly Pacific and Māori, who experience a higher burden of gout.

Introduction. Rheumatic fever is a preventable illness caused by untreated Group A Streptococcus (GAS) infection. Despite reductions in most high-income countries, rheumatic fever rates remain a concern in Aotearoa New Zealand. Pacific and Māori people are inequitably affected, with risk of initial hospitalisation due to rheumatic fever 12-and 24-fold more likely, respectively, compared to non-Māori and non-Pacific people. Aim. This scoping review aims to explore the range of interventions and initiatives in New Zealand seeking to prevent GAS and rheumatic fever, with a particular focus on Pacific and Māori. Methods. Databases Scopus, Medline, EMBASE and CINAHL, along with grey literature sources, were searched to broadly identify interventions in New Zealand. Data were screened for eligibility and the final articles were charted into a stocktake table. Results. Fifty-eight studies were included, reporting 57 interventions. These targeted school-based throat swabbing, awareness and education, housing, secondary prophylaxis, improving primary care guidelines and diagnosis of sore throats and skin infections. Some interventions reported short-term outcomes of improvements in awareness, a reduction in rheumatic fever risk and fewer hospitalisations. Evaluation outcomes were, however, lacking for many initiatives. Pacific and Māori people primarily served only in an advisory or delivery capacity, rather than as partners in co-design or leadership from the beginning. Discussion. Although positive outcomes were reported for some interventions identified in this review, rheumatic fever rates have not shown any long-term reduction over time. Co-designing interventions with affected communities could ensure that strategies are better targeted and do not contribute to further stigma.