Literature DB >> 16670412

Disease and disadvantage in the United States and in England.

James Banks1, Michael Marmot, Zoe Oldfield, James P Smith.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: The United States spends considerably more money on health care than the United Kingdom, but whether that translates to better health outcomes is unknown.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the relative heath status of older individuals in England and the United States, especially how their health status varies by important indicators of socioeconomic position. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We analyzed representative samples of residents aged 55 to 64 years from both countries using 2002 data from the US Health and Retirement Survey (n = 4386) and the English Longitudinal Study of Aging (n = 3681), which were designed to have directly comparable measures of health, income, and education. This analysis is supplemented by samples of those aged 40 to 70 years from the 1999-2002 waves of National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (n = 2097) and the 2003 wave of the Health Survey for England (n = 5526). These surveys contain extensive and comparable biological disease markers on respondents, which are used to determine whether differential propensities to report illness can explain these health differences. To ensure that health differences are not solely due to health issues in the black or Latino populations in the United States, the analysis is limited to non-Hispanic whites in both countries. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Self-reported prevalence rates of several chronic diseases related to diabetes and heart disease, adjusted for age and health behavior risk factors, were compared between the 2 countries and across education and income classes within each country.
RESULTS: The US population in late middle age is less healthy than the equivalent British population for diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, myocardial infarction, stroke, lung disease, and cancer. Within each country, there exists a pronounced negative socioeconomic status (SES) gradient with self-reported disease so that health disparities are largest at the bottom of the education or income variants of the SES hierarchy. This conclusion is generally robust to control for a standard set of behavioral risk factors, including smoking, overweight, obesity, and alcohol drinking, which explain very little of these health differences. These differences between countries or across SES groups within each country are not due to biases in self-reported disease because biological markers of disease exhibit exactly the same patterns. To illustrate, among those aged 55 to 64 years, diabetes prevalence is twice as high in the United States and only one fifth of this difference can be explained by a common set of risk factors. Similarly, among middle-aged adults, mean levels of C-reactive protein are 20% higher in the United States compared with England and mean high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels are 14% lower. These differences are not solely driven by the bottom of the SES distribution. In many diseases, the top of the SES distribution is less healthy in the United States as well.
CONCLUSION: Based on self-reported illnesses and biological markers of disease, US residents are much less healthy than their English counterparts and these differences exist at all points of the SES distribution.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16670412     DOI: 10.1001/jama.295.17.2037

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  229 in total

1.  Purpose in life and use of preventive health care services.

Authors:  Eric S Kim; Victor J Strecher; Carol D Ryff
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-11-03       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Where the United States falls down and how we might stand up.

Authors:  Robert L Phillips
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2011 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.166

3.  Measurement equivalence in ADL and IADL difficulty across international surveys of aging: findings from the HRS, SHARE, and ELSA.

Authors:  Kitty S Chan; Judith D Kasper; Jason Brandt; Liliana E Pezzin
Journal:  J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci       Date:  2011-12-12       Impact factor: 4.077

4.  Purpose in life and reduced risk of myocardial infarction among older U.S. adults with coronary heart disease: a two-year follow-up.

Authors:  Eric S Kim; Jennifer K Sun; Nansook Park; Laura D Kubzansky; Christopher Peterson
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2012-02-23

5.  Massachusetts health reform and disparities in coverage, access and health status.

Authors:  Jane Zhu; Phyllis Brawarsky; Stuart Lipsitz; Haiden Huskamp; Jennifer S Haas
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2010-08-21       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  Early life exposures and the occurrence and timing of heart disease among the older adult Puerto Rican population.

Authors:  Mry McEnry; Alberto Palloni
Journal:  Demography       Date:  2010-02

7.  Protecting and enhancing health: community engagement, collaborations, and incentives for prevention.

Authors:  Eduardo J Simoes; Ciro V Sumaya
Journal:  J Prim Prev       Date:  2010-04

8.  Analyzing national health reform strategies with a dynamic simulation model.

Authors:  Bobby Milstein; Jack Homer; Gary Hirsch
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2010-03-18       Impact factor: 9.308

9.  National Institute on Aging at middle age--its past, present, and future.

Authors:  Catherine L Nagy; Marie A Bernard; Richard J Hodes
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2012-05-30       Impact factor: 5.562

10.  Trends in Educational Attainment by Race/Ethnicity, Nativity, and Sex in the United States, 1989-2005.

Authors:  Bethany G Everett; Richard G Rogers; Robert A Hummer; Patrick M Krueger
Journal:  Ethn Racial Stud       Date:  2011-01-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.