Are health care inequalities unfair? A study on public attitudes in 23 countries

Background: In this article we focus on the following aims: (1) to analyze national and welfare state variations in the public perception of income-related health care inequalities, (2) to analyze associations of sociodemographic, socioeconomic, health-related, and health care factors with the perception of health care inequalities. Methods: Data were taken from the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP), an annually repeated cross-sectional survey based on nationally representative samples. 23 countries (N = 37,228) were included and assigned to six welfare states. Attitude towards income-related health care inequalities was assessed by asking: "Is it fair or unfair that people with higher incomes can afford better health care than people with lower incomes?" with response categories ranging from "very fair" (1) to "very unfair" (5). On the individual level, sociodemographic (gender, age), socioeconomic (income, education) health-related (self-rated health), and health care factors (health insurance coverage, financial barriers to health care) were introduced. Results: About two-thirds of the respondents in all countries think that it is unfair when people with higher incomes can afford better health care than people with lower incomes. Percentages vary between 42.8 in Taiwan and 84 in Slovenia. In terms of welfare states, this proportion is higher in Conservative, South European, and East European regimes than in East Asian, Liberal, and Social-Democratic regimes. Multilevel logistic regression analyses show that women, people affected by a low socioeconomic status, poor health, insufficient insurance coverage, and foregone care are more likely to perceive income-related health care inequalities as unfair. Conclusions: In most countries a majority of the population perceives income-related health care inequalities as unfair. Large differences between countries were observed. Welfare regime classification is important for explaining the variation across countries

Does socioeconomic status affect the association of social relationships and health? A moderator analysis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Social relations have repeatedly been found to be an important determinant of health. However, it is unclear whether the association between social relations and health is consistent throughout different status groups. It is likely that health effects of social relations vary in different status groups, as stated in the hypothesis of differential vulnerability. In this analysis we explore whether socioeconomic status (SES) moderates the association between social relations and health.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In the baseline examination of the Heinz Nixdorf Recall study, conducted in a dense populated Western German region (N = 4,814, response rate 56%), SES was measured by income and education. Social relations were classified by using both structural as well as functional measures. The Social Integration Index was used as a structural measure, whilst functional aspects were assessed by emotional and instrumental support. Health was indicated by self-rated health (1 item) and a short version of the CES-D scale measuring the frequency of depressive symptoms. Based on logistic regression models we calculated the relative excess risk due to interaction (RERI) which indicates existing moderator effects.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Our findings show highest odds ratios (ORs) for both poor self-rated health and more frequent depressive symptoms when respondents have a low SES as well as inappropriate social relations. For example, respondents with <it>low income and a low level of social integration </it>have an OR for a high depression score of 2.85 (95% CI 2.32-4.49), compared to an OR of 1.44 (95% CI 1.12-1.86) amongst those with a <it>low income but a high level of social integration </it>and an OR of 1.72 (95% CI 1.45-2.03) amongst respondents with <it>high income but a low level of social integration</it>. As reference group those reporting <it>high income and a high level of social integration </it>were used.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The analyses indicate that the association of social relations and subjective health differs across SES groups as we find moderating effects of SES. However, results are inconsistent as nearly all RERI scores are positive but do not reach a significant level. Also moderating effects vary between women and men and depending on the indicators of SES and social relations used. Thus, the hypothesis of differential vulnerability can only partially be supported. In terms of practical implications, psychosocial and health interventions aiming towards the enhancement of social relations should especially consider the situation of the socially deprived.</p

Associations of Migration, Socioeconomic Position and Social Relations With Depressive Symptoms – Analyses of the German National Cohort Baseline Data

Objectives: We analyze whether the prevalence of depressive symptoms differs among various migrant and non-migrant populations in Germany and to what extent these differences can be attributed to socioeconomic position (SEP) and social relations.Methods: The German National Cohort health study (NAKO) is a prospective multicenter cohort study (N = 204,878). Migration background (assessed based on citizenship and country of birth of both participant and parents) was used as independent variable, age, sex, Social Network Index, the availability of emotional support, SEP (relative income position and educational status) and employment status were introduced as covariates and depressive symptoms (PHQ-9) as dependent variable in logistic regression models.Results: Increased odds ratios of depressive symptoms were found in all migrant subgroups compared to non-migrants and varied regarding regions of origins. Elevated odds ratios decreased when SEP and social relations were included. Attenuations varied across migrant subgroups.Conclusion: The gap in depressive symptoms can partly be attributed to SEP and social relations, with variations between migrant subgroups. The integration paradox is likely to contribute to the explanation of the results. Future studies need to consider heterogeneity among migrant subgroups whenever possible

Health Patterns among Migrant and Non-Migrant Middle- and Older-Aged Individuals in Europe—Analyses Based on Share 2004–2017

Introduction: European populations are becoming older and more diverse. Little is known about the health differences between the migrant and non-migrant elderly in Europe. The aim of this paper was to analyse changes in the health patterns of middle- and older-aged migrant and non-migrant populations in Europe from 2004 to 2017, with a specific focus on differences in age and gender. We analysed changes in the health patterns of older migrants and non-migrants in European countries from 2004 to 2017. Method: Based on data from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (6 waves; 2004–2017; n = 233,117) we analysed three health indicators (physical functioning, depressive symptoms, and self-rated health). Logistic regression models for complex samples were calculated. Interaction terms (wave * migrant * gender * age) were used to analyse gender and age differences and the change over time. Results: Middle- and older-aged migrants in Europe showed significantly higher rates of depressive symptoms, lower self-rated health, and a higher proportion of limitations on general activities compared to non-migrants. However, different time trends were observed. An increasing health gap was identified in the physical functioning of older males. Narrowing health gaps over time were observed in women. Discussion: An increasing health gap in physical functioning in men is evidence of cumulative disadvantage. In women, evidence points towards the hypothesis of aging-as-leveler. These different results highlight the need for specific interventions focused on healthy ageing in elderly migrant men

Burdening and Protective Organisational Factors among International Volunteers in Greek Refugee Camps&mdash;A Qualitative Study

A majority of the workforce in the humanitarian aid consists of volunteers who partly suffer from health problems related to their voluntary service. To date, only a fraction of the current research focuses on this population. The aim of this qualitative explorative study was to identify burdening and protective organisational factors for health and well-being among humanitarian aid volunteers in a Greek refugee camp. To this end, interviews with 22 volunteers were held on site and afterwards analysed by using qualitative content analysis. We focused on international volunteers working in Greece that worked in the provision of food, material goods, emotional support and recreational opportunities. We identified burdening factors, as well as protective factors, in the areas of work procedures, team interactions, organisational support and living arrangements. Gender-specific disadvantages contribute to burdening factors, while joyful experiences are only addressed as protective factors. Additionally, gender-specific aspects in the experience of team interactions and support systems were identified. According to our findings, several possibilities for organisations to protect health and well-being of their volunteers exist. Organisations could adapt organisational structures to the needs of their volunteers and consider gender-specific factors

The mediating effect of social relationships on the association between socioeconomic status and subjective health – results from the Heinz Nixdorf Recall cohort study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Socioeconomic status (SES) is an important determinant of population health. Explanatory approaches on how SES determines health have so far included numerous factors, amongst them psychosocial factors such as social relationships. However, it is unclear whether social relationships can help explain socioeconomic differences in general subjective health. Do different aspects of social relationships contribute differently to the explanation? Based on a cohort study of middle and older aged residents (45 to 75 years) from the Ruhr Area in Germany our study tries to clarify the matter.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>For the analyses data from the population-based prospective Heinz Nixdorf Recall (HNR) Study is used. As indicators of SES education, equivalent household income and occupational status were employed. Social relations were assessed by including structural as well as functional aspects. Structural aspects were estimated by the Social Integration Index (SII) and functional aspects were measured by availability of emotional and instrumental support. Data on general subjective health status was available for both baseline examination (2000–2003) and a 5-year follow-up (2006–2008). The sample consists of 4,146 men and women. Four logistic regression models were calculated: in the first model we controlled for age and subjective health at baseline, while in models 2 and 3, either functional or structural aspects of social relationships were introduced separately. Model 4 then included all variables. As former studies indicated different health effects of SES and social relations in men and women, analyses were conducted with the overall sample as well as for each gender alone.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Prospective associations of SES and subjective health were reduced after introducing social relationships into the regression models. Percentage reductions between 2% and 30% were observed in the overall sample when all aspects of social relations were included. The percentage reductions were strongest in the lowest SES group. Gender specific analyses revealed mediating effects of social relationships in women and men. The magnitude of mediating effects varied depending on the indicators of SES and social relations.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Social relationships substantially contribute to the explanation of SES differences in subjective health. Interventions for improving social relations which especially focus on socially deprived groups are likely to help reducing socioeconomic disparities in health.</p