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.

The Horne and Ostberg Morningness/Eveningness Questionnaire (MEQ) is widely used to differentiate between morning and evening types, but there is very little epidemiological evidence about the distribution of MEQ chronotypes in the general population. The purpose of the present study was to simultaneously investigate the influence of demographic, socioeconomic, and work factors on the distribution of morningness/eveningness. A New Zealand version of the MEQ was mailed to 5000 New Zealand adults, ages 30 to 49 years, who were randomly selected from the electoral rolls (55.7% response rate). A total of 2526 questionnaires were included in the analyses. According to the Horne and Ostberg classification, 49.8% of the total population was classified as morning type compared to 5.6% having an evening-type preference. However, using new cutoffs for middle-aged working adults described by Taillard et al. (2004), 24.7% of the population was morning type and 26.4% was evening type. After controlling for ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic deprivation, participants ages 30 to 34 years were more likely to be definitely evening type (odds ratio [OR] = 1.59, p < 0.05) and less likely to be morning type (moderately morning type, OR = 0.59, p < 0.01, or definitely morning type, OR = 0.59, p < 0.05) compared to those ages 45 to 49 years. Work schedules were also important predictors of chronotype, with night workers more likely to be definitely evening type (OR = 1.49, p = 0.05) and the unemployed less likely to be moderately morning type (OR = 0.64, p < 0.05) compared to other workers. Evening types were 2.5 times more likely to report that their general health was only poor or fair compared to morning types (p < 0.01). This study confirms that the original criteria of Horne and Ostberg (1976) are not useful for classifying chronotypes in a middle-aged population. The authors conclude that morningness/eveningness preference is largely independent of ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic position, indicating that it is a stable characteristic that may be better explained by endogenous factors.

No abstract

Socioeconomic factors and ethnicity are significant independent predictors of reported insomnia symptoms. This finding has important implications for the provision of treatment services to those most in need.

The aim was to estimate the prevalence of, and identify independent risk factors for, Advanced (ASPD) and Delayed Sleep Phase Disorder (DSPD) among Māori (indigenous New Zealanders) and non-Māori adults using a self-report questionnaire. The Munich Chronotype Questionnaire was mailed to a stratified sample of 9100 adults (5100 Māori and 4000 non-Māori) aged 20-59 years randomly selected from the electoral rolls (54% response rate). Different definitions for ASPD and DSPD were developed using combinations of symptoms including self-reported bed and rising times, current chronotype, and a desire to change sleep schedule. Logistic regression models were used to model the likelihood of reporting ASPD or DSPD separately after adjusting for ethnicity (Māori versus non-Māori), sex (males versus females), age (in decades), socio-economic deprivation (NZDep2006 deciles) and employment status (unemployed, night work versus employed with no night work). The prevalence of ASPD ranged from 0.25% to 7.13% whereas the prevalence of DSPD was 1.51 to 8.90% depending on the definition used. The prevalence of ASPD was higher among men and increased with age. The prevalence of DSPD was higher among those living in more deprived areas and decreased with age. After controlling for ethnicity, gender, age, socio-economic deprivation and employment status, people with ASPD were more likely to report excessive daytime sleepiness, whereas those with DSPD were more likely to report poor or fair self-rated health. Reporting ASPD and DSPD were associated with self-reported night work. In this large sleep timing survey, we found no differences in the prevalence of self-identified ASPD and DSPD between Maori and non-Maori. This has implications for the development and provision of sleep health services and strategies for managing the significant impact of work patterns on sleep.

No abstract

Factors contributing to sleep timing and sleep restriction in daily life include chronotype and less flexibility in times available for sleep on scheduled days versus free days. There is some evidence that these two factors interact, with morning types and evening types reporting similar sleep need, but evening types being more likely to accumulate a sleep debt during the week and to have greater sleep extension on weekend nights. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the independent contributions of circadian phase and weekend-to-weekday variability to sleep timing in daily life. The study included 14 morning types and 14 evening types recruited from a community-based sample of New Zealand adults (mean age 41.1 ± 4.7 years). On days 1-15, the participants followed their usual routines in their own homes and daily sleep start, midpoint and end times were determined by actigraphy and sleep diaries. Days 16-17 involved a 17 h modified constant routine protocol in the laboratory (17:00 to 10:00, <20 lux) with half-hourly saliva samples assayed for melatonin. Mixed model ANCOVAs for repeated measures were used to investigate the independent relationships between sleep start and end times (separate models) and age (30-39 years versus 40-49 years), circadian phase [time of the dim light melatonin onset (DLMO)] and weekday/weekend schedules (Sunday-Thursday nights versus Friday-Saturday nights). As expected on weekdays, evening types had later sleep start times (mean = 23:47 versus 22:37, p < .0001) and end times (mean = 07:14 versus 05:56, p < .0001) than morning types. Similarly on weekend days, evening types had later sleep start times (mean = 00:14 versus 23:07, p = .0032) and end times (mean = 08:56 versus 07:04, p < .0001) than morning types. Evening types also had later DLMO (22:06 versus 20:46, p = .0002) than morning types (mean difference = 80.4 min, SE = 18.6 min). The ANCOVA models found that later sleep start times were associated with later DLMO (p = .0172) and weekend-to-weekday sleep timing variability (p < .0001), after controlling for age, while later sleep end times were associated with later DLMO (p = .0038), younger age (p = .0190) and weekend days (p < .0001). Sleep end times showed stronger association with DLMO (for every 30 min delay in DLMO, estimated mean sleep end time occurred 14.0 min later versus 10.19 min later for sleep start times). Sleep end times also showed greater delays on weekends versus weekdays (estimated mean delay for sleep end time = 84 min, for sleep start time = 28 min). Comparing morning types and evening types, the estimated contributions of the DLMO to the mean observed differences in sleep timing were on weekdays, 39% for sleep start times and 49% for sleep end times; and on weekends, 41% for sleep start times and 34% of sleep end times. We conclude that differences in sleep timing between morning types and evening types were much greater than would be predicted on the basis of the independent contribution of the difference in DLMO on both weekdays and weekend da...

No abstract