Cargando…

Primary care and health inequality: Difference-in-difference study comparing England and Ontario

BACKGROUND: It is not known whether equity-oriented primary care investment that seeks to scale up the delivery of effective care in disadvantaged communities can reduce health inequality within high-income settings that have pre-existing universal primary care systems. We provide some non-randomise...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cookson, Richard, Mondor, Luke, Asaria, Miqdad, Kringos, Dionne S., Klazinga, Niek S., Wodchis, Walter P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5705159/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29182652
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0188560
_version_ 1783282012595945472
author Cookson, Richard
Mondor, Luke
Asaria, Miqdad
Kringos, Dionne S.
Klazinga, Niek S.
Wodchis, Walter P.
author_facet Cookson, Richard
Mondor, Luke
Asaria, Miqdad
Kringos, Dionne S.
Klazinga, Niek S.
Wodchis, Walter P.
author_sort Cookson, Richard
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: It is not known whether equity-oriented primary care investment that seeks to scale up the delivery of effective care in disadvantaged communities can reduce health inequality within high-income settings that have pre-existing universal primary care systems. We provide some non-randomised controlled evidence by comparing health inequality trends between two similar jurisdictions–one of which implemented equity-oriented primary care investment in the mid-to-late 2000s as part of a cross-government strategy for reducing health inequality (England), and one which invested in primary care without any explicit equity objective (Ontario, Canada). METHODS: We analysed whole-population data on 32,482 neighbourhoods (with mean population size of approximately 1,500 people) in England, and 18,961 neighbourhoods (with mean population size of approximately 700 people) in Ontario. We examined trends in mortality amenable to healthcare by decile groups of neighbourhood deprivation within each jurisdiction. We used linear models to estimate absolute and relative gaps in amenable mortality between most and least deprived groups, considering the gradient between these extremes, and evaluated difference-in-difference comparisons between the two jurisdictions. RESULTS: Inequality trends were comparable in both jurisdictions from 2004–6 but diverged from 2007–11. Compared with Ontario, the absolute gap in amenable mortality in England fell between 2004–6 and 2007–11 by 19.8 per 100,000 population (95% CI: 4.8 to 34.9); and the relative gap in amenable mortality fell by 10 percentage points (95% CI: 1 to 19). The biggest divergence occurred in the most deprived decile group of neighbourhoods. DISCUSSION: In comparison to Ontario, England succeeded in reducing absolute socioeconomic gaps in mortality amenable to healthcare from 2007 to 2011, and preventing them from growing in relative terms. Equity-oriented primary care reform in England in the mid-to-late 2000s may have helped to reduce socioeconomic inequality in health, though other explanations for this divergence are possible and further research is needed on the specific causal mechanisms.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5705159
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57051592017-12-08 Primary care and health inequality: Difference-in-difference study comparing England and Ontario Cookson, Richard Mondor, Luke Asaria, Miqdad Kringos, Dionne S. Klazinga, Niek S. Wodchis, Walter P. PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: It is not known whether equity-oriented primary care investment that seeks to scale up the delivery of effective care in disadvantaged communities can reduce health inequality within high-income settings that have pre-existing universal primary care systems. We provide some non-randomised controlled evidence by comparing health inequality trends between two similar jurisdictions–one of which implemented equity-oriented primary care investment in the mid-to-late 2000s as part of a cross-government strategy for reducing health inequality (England), and one which invested in primary care without any explicit equity objective (Ontario, Canada). METHODS: We analysed whole-population data on 32,482 neighbourhoods (with mean population size of approximately 1,500 people) in England, and 18,961 neighbourhoods (with mean population size of approximately 700 people) in Ontario. We examined trends in mortality amenable to healthcare by decile groups of neighbourhood deprivation within each jurisdiction. We used linear models to estimate absolute and relative gaps in amenable mortality between most and least deprived groups, considering the gradient between these extremes, and evaluated difference-in-difference comparisons between the two jurisdictions. RESULTS: Inequality trends were comparable in both jurisdictions from 2004–6 but diverged from 2007–11. Compared with Ontario, the absolute gap in amenable mortality in England fell between 2004–6 and 2007–11 by 19.8 per 100,000 population (95% CI: 4.8 to 34.9); and the relative gap in amenable mortality fell by 10 percentage points (95% CI: 1 to 19). The biggest divergence occurred in the most deprived decile group of neighbourhoods. DISCUSSION: In comparison to Ontario, England succeeded in reducing absolute socioeconomic gaps in mortality amenable to healthcare from 2007 to 2011, and preventing them from growing in relative terms. Equity-oriented primary care reform in England in the mid-to-late 2000s may have helped to reduce socioeconomic inequality in health, though other explanations for this divergence are possible and further research is needed on the specific causal mechanisms. Public Library of Science 2017-11-28 /pmc/articles/PMC5705159/ /pubmed/29182652 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0188560 Text en © 2017 Cookson et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Cookson, Richard
Mondor, Luke
Asaria, Miqdad
Kringos, Dionne S.
Klazinga, Niek S.
Wodchis, Walter P.
Primary care and health inequality: Difference-in-difference study comparing England and Ontario
title Primary care and health inequality: Difference-in-difference study comparing England and Ontario
title_full Primary care and health inequality: Difference-in-difference study comparing England and Ontario
title_fullStr Primary care and health inequality: Difference-in-difference study comparing England and Ontario
title_full_unstemmed Primary care and health inequality: Difference-in-difference study comparing England and Ontario
title_short Primary care and health inequality: Difference-in-difference study comparing England and Ontario
title_sort primary care and health inequality: difference-in-difference study comparing england and ontario
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5705159/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29182652
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0188560
work_keys_str_mv AT cooksonrichard primarycareandhealthinequalitydifferenceindifferencestudycomparingenglandandontario
AT mondorluke primarycareandhealthinequalitydifferenceindifferencestudycomparingenglandandontario
AT asariamiqdad primarycareandhealthinequalitydifferenceindifferencestudycomparingenglandandontario
AT kringosdionnes primarycareandhealthinequalitydifferenceindifferencestudycomparingenglandandontario
AT klazinganieks primarycareandhealthinequalitydifferenceindifferencestudycomparingenglandandontario
AT wodchiswalterp primarycareandhealthinequalitydifferenceindifferencestudycomparingenglandandontario