Article

Socioeconomic inequalities in mortality from conditions amenable to medical interventions: do they reflect inequalities in access or quality of health care?

Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
BMC Public Health (Impact Factor: 2.32). 05/2012; 12:346. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-346
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Previous studies have reported large socioeconomic inequalities in mortality from conditions amenable to medical intervention, but it is unclear whether these can be attributed to inequalities in access or quality of health care, or to confounding influences such as inequalities in background risk of diseases. We therefore studied whether inequalities in mortality from conditions amenable to medical intervention vary between countries in patterns which differ from those observed for other (non-amenable) causes of death. More specifically, we hypothesized that, as compared to non-amenable causes, inequalities in mortality from amenable causes are more strongly associated with inequalities in health care use and less strongly with inequalities in common risk factors for disease such as smoking.
Cause-specific mortality data for people aged 30-74 years were obtained for 14 countries, and were analysed by calculating age-standardized mortality rates and relative risks comparing a lower with a higher educational group. Survey data on health care use and behavioural risk factors for people aged 30-74 years were obtained for 12 countries, and were analysed by calculating age-and sex-adjusted odds ratios comparing a low with a higher educational group. Patterns of association were explored by calculating correlation coefficients.
In most countries and for most amenable causes of death substantial inequalities in mortality were observed, but inequalities in mortality from amenable causes did not vary between countries in patterns that are different from those seen for inequalities in non-amenable mortality. As compared to non-amenable causes, inequalities in mortality from amenable causes are not more strongly associated with inequalities in health care use. Inequalities in mortality from amenable causes are also not less strongly associated with common risk factors such as smoking.
We did not find evidence that inequalities in mortality from amenable conditions are related to inequalities in access or quality of health care. Further research is needed to find the causes of socio-economic inequalities in mortality from amenable conditions, and caution should be exercised in interpreting these inequalities as indicating health care deficiencies.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Johan Mackenbach, Jul 06, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
231 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: There is a renewed interest in health system indicators. In 1976 a measure of quality of healthcare, amenable mortality, was introduced by Rutstein. This indicator is based on the concept that deaths from certain causes should not occur in the presence of timely and effective healthcare. In the project "Amenable mortality in the European Union: toward better indicators for the effectiveness of health systems" (AMIEHS), we introduce a new approach to the selection of indicators of amenable mortality. METHODS: Based on predefined selection criteria and a broad review of the literature on the effectiveness of medical interventions, a first set of potential indicators of amenable mortality (causes of death) was selected. The timing of the introduction of medical innovations was established through reviews and questionnaires sent to national experts from seven participating European countries. The preselected indicators were then validated by a trend analysis that identified associations between the timing of innovations and cause-specific mortality trends and by a Delphi-procedure. RESULTS: After a short review of previous lists of amenable mortality indicators and a detailed description of the innovative procedure in the AMIEHS project we present a list of 14 causes of death that passed our selection criteria. We illustrate our empirical validation of these indicators using the examples of peptic ulcer and renal failure. CONCLUSIONS: The innovation developed in the AMIEHS study is a rigorous new approach to the concept of amenable mortality that includes empirical validation. Only validated indicators can be successfully used to assess the quality of healthcare systems in international comparisons.
    Gaceta Sanitaria 11/2012; 27(3). DOI:10.1016/j.gaceta.2012.08.004 · 1.25 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Black–white mortality disparities remain sizable in the United States. In this study, we use the concept of avoidable/amenable mortality to estimate cause-of-death contributions to the difference in life expectancy between whites and blacks by gender in the United States in 1980, 1993, and 2007. We begin with a review of the concept of “avoidable mortality” and results of prior studies using this cause-of-death classification. We then present the results of our empirical analyses. We classified causes of death as amenable to medical care, sensitive to public health policies and health behaviors, ischemic heart disease, suicide, HIV/AIDS, and all other causes combined. We used vital statistics data on deaths and Census Bureau population estimates and standard demographic decomposition techniques. In 2007, causes of death amenable to medical care continued to account for close to 2 years of the racial difference in life expectancy among men (2.08) and women (1.85). Causes amenable to public health interventions made a larger contribution to the racial difference in life expectancy among men (1.17 years) than women (0.08 years). The contribution of HIV/AIDS substantially widened the racial difference among both men (1.08 years) and women (0.42 years) in 1993, but its contribution declined over time. Despite progress observed over the time period studied, a substantial portion of black–white disparities in mortality could be reduced given more equitable access to medical care and health interventions.
    Population Research and Policy Review 02/2014; 33(1). DOI:10.1007/s11113-013-9309-2 · 0.76 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Health and inequalities in health among inhabitants of European cities are of major importance for European public health and there is great interest in how different health care systems in Europe perform in the reduction of health inequalities. However, evidence on the spatial distribution of cause-specific mortality across neighbourhoods of European cities is scarce. This study presents maps of avoidable mortality in European cities and analyses differences in avoidable mortality between neighbourhoods with different levels of deprivation. We determined the level of mortality from 14 avoidable causes of death for each neighbourhood of 15 large cities in different European regions. To address the problems associated with Standardised Mortality Ratios for small areas we smooth them using the Bayesian model proposed by Besag, York and Mollie. Ecological regression analysis was used to assess the association between social deprivation and mortality. Mortality from avoidable causes of death is higher in deprived neighbourhoods and mortality rate ratios between areas with different levels of deprivation differ between gender and cities. In most cases rate ratios are lower among women. While Eastern and Southern European cities show higher levels of avoidable mortality, the association of mortality with social deprivation tends to be higher in Northern and lower in Southern Europe. There are marked differences in the level of avoidable mortality between neighbourhoods of European cities and the level of avoidable mortality is associated with social deprivation. There is no systematic difference in the magnitude of this association between European cities or regions. Spatial patterns of avoidable mortality across small city areas can point to possible local problems and specific strategies to reduce health inequality which is important for the development of urban areas and the well-being of their inhabitants.
    International Journal of Health Geographics 03/2014; 13(1):8. DOI:10.1186/1476-072X-13-8 · 2.62 Impact Factor