4.6 Article

Inequalities in the use of secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease by socioeconomic status: evidence from the PURE observational study

期刊

LANCET GLOBAL HEALTH
卷 6, 期 3, 页码 E292-E301

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30031-7

关键词

-

资金

  1. Wellcome Trust [104349/Z/14/Z]
  2. UK Economic and Social Research Council under Secondary Data Analysis Initiative scheme [ES/L014696/1]
  3. Wellcome Trust
  4. ERC HRES [313590]
  5. Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia [600-RMI/LRGS 5/3]
  6. Marion Burke Chair of the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
  7. Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation/National Science Foundation under Programme for Research on Global Issues for Development [400640_160374]
  8. Population Health Research Institute
  9. Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  10. Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario
  11. AstraZeneca [Canada]
  12. Sanofi-Aventis [France]
  13. Sanofi-Aventis [Canada]
  14. Boehringer Ingelheim [Germany]
  15. Boehringer Ingelheim [Canada]
  16. Servier
  17. GlaxoSmithKline
  18. Novartis
  19. King Pharma
  20. Argentina: Fundacion ECLA
  21. Bangladesh: Independent University, Bangladesh
  22. Brazil: Unilever Health Institute, Brazil
  23. Canada: Public Health Agency of Canada
  24. Champlain Cardiovascular Disease Prevention Network
  25. Chile: Universidad de la Frontera
  26. China: National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases
  27. Colombia: Colciencias [6566-04-18062]
  28. Fundacion Oftalmologica de Santander
  29. India: Indian Council of Medical Research
  30. Malaysia: Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation of Malaysia [100-IRDC/BIOTEK 16/6/21, 07-05-IFN-BPH 010]
  31. Ministry of Higher Education of Malaysia [600-RMI/LRGS/5/3]
  32. Universiti Teknologi MARA
  33. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia [UKM-Hejim-Komuniti-15-2010]
  34. occupied Palestinian territory: the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)
  35. occupied Palestinian territory
  36. International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Canada
  37. Philippines: Philippine Council for Health Research AMP
  38. Development (PCHRD)
  39. Poland: Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education [290/W-PURE/2008/0]
  40. Wroclaw Medical University
  41. Saudi Arabia: Saudi Heart Association
  42. King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia [RG-1436-013]
  43. South Africa: The North-West University
  44. SANPAD (SA and Netherlands Programme for Alternative Development)
  45. National Research Foundation
  46. Medical Research Council of South Africa
  47. South Africa Department of Science and Technology
  48. South African Sugar Association
  49. Faculty of Community and Health Sciences (UWC)
  50. Sweden: AFA Insurance
  51. Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research
  52. King Gustaf V's and Queen Victoria's Freemasons Foundation
  53. Swedish Heart and Lung Foundation
  54. Swedish Research Council
  55. Swedish State
  56. Vastra Gotaland Region (FOUU)
  57. Turkey: Metabolic Syndrome Society
  58. AstraZeneca (Turkey)
  59. Sanofi-Aventis (Turkey)
  60. United Arab Emirates: Sheikh Hamdan Bin Rashid Al Maktoum Award For Medical Sciences
  61. Dubai Health Authority, Dubai, United Arab Emirates
  62. Mitra and Associates
  63. ESRC [ES/L014696/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  64. Economic and Social Research Council [ES/L014696/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background There is little evidence on the use of secondary prevention medicines for cardiovascular disease by socioeconomic groups in countries at different levels of economic development. Methods We assessed use of antiplatelet, cholesterol, and blood-pressure-lowering drugs in 8492 individuals with self-reported cardiovascular disease from 21 countries enrolled in the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study. Defining one or more drugs as a minimal level of secondary prevention, wealth-related inequality was measured using the Wagstaff concentration index, scaled from -1 (pro-poor) to 1 (pro-rich), standardised by age and sex. Correlations between inequalities and national health-related indicators were estimated. Findings The proportion of patients with cardiovascular disease on three medications ranged from 0% in South Africa (95% CI 0-1.7), Tanzania (0-3.6), and Zimbabwe (0-5.1), to 49.3% in Canada (44.4-54.3). Proportions receiving at least one drug varied from 2.0% (95% CI 0.5-6.9) in Tanzania to 91.4% (86.6-94.6) in Sweden. There was significant (p<0.05) pro-rich inequality in Saudi Arabia, China, Colombia, India, Pakistan, and Zimbabwe. Pro-poor distributions were observed in Sweden, Brazil, Chile, Poland, and the occupied Palestinian territory. The strongest predictors of inequality were public expenditure on health and overall use of secondary prevention medicines. Interpretation Use of medication for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease is alarmingly low. In many countries with the lowest use, pro-rich inequality is greatest. Policies associated with an equal or pro-poor distribution include free medications and community health programmes to support adherence to medications. Copyright (c) The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据