A registry-based follow-up study, comparing the incidence of cardiovascular disease in native Danes and immigrants born in Turkey, Pakistan and the former Yugoslavia: do social inequalities play a role?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This study compared the incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) between native Danes and immigrants born in Turkey, Pakistan and the former Yugoslavia. Furthermore, we examined whether different indicators of socioeconomic status (SES), such as employment, income and housing conditions influenced potential differences.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In this registry-based follow-up study individuals were identified in a large database that included individuals from two major regions in Denmark, corresponding to about 60% of the Danish population. Incident cases of CVD and AMI included fatal and non-fatal events and were taken from registries. Using Cox regression models, we estimated incidence rates at 5-year follow-up.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Immigrant men and women from Turkey and Pakistan had an increased incidence of CVD, compared with native Danish men. In the case of AMI, a similar pattern was observed; however, differences were more pronounced. Pakistanis and Turks with a shorter duration of residence had a lower incidence, compared with those of a longer residence. Generally, no notable differences were observed between former Yugoslavians and native Danes. In men, differences in CVD and AMI were reduced after adjustment for SES, in particular, among Turks regarding CVD. In women, effects were particularly reduced among Yugoslavians in the case of CVD and in Turks in the case of CVD and AMI after adjustment for SES.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In conclusion, country of birth-related differences in the incidence of CVD and AMI were observed. At least some of the differences that we uncovered were results of a socioeconomic effect. Duration of residence also played a certain role. Future studies should collect and test different indicators of SES in studies of CVD among immigrants.</p

Relationship between social network, social support and health behaviour in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes: cross-sectional studies

Abstract Background Psychosocial and behavioural aspects of diabetes may differ according to diabetes type. This study compared people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes with respect to social relations (cohabitation status, contact with the social network and social support) and health behaviours (diet and physical activity). Furthermore, we examined whether potential differences in health behaviour between people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes were influenced by education level and social relations. Methods We conducted two cross-sectional surveys consisting of people with type 2 diabetes (N = 1081) and type 1 diabetes (N = 2419) from a specialist diabetes clinic. Gender-stratified stepwise multiple regression models assessed differences by diabetes type and other variables of interest. Results Significant associations were found between diabetes type and social network, social support and health behaviour. No differences were observed regarding cohabitation status. People with type 2 diabetes were less physically active, less likely to follow recommended diet (men), had fewer contacts with family and friends and were less certain of counting on help in case of severe illness than people with type 1 diabetes. No impact of education level, social network and social support were observed concerning differences in health behaviours by diabetes type; however, in women, the association between physical activity and diabetes type was not significant after adjustment for social relations and education level. Conclusions People with type 2 diabetes had less contact with the social network, less certainty about support in case of severe illness and fewer healthy behaviours than people with type 1 diabetes. It may be important to draw attention to differences in health behaviours and social relations between people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes in diabetes care, patient education and support initiatives