PURPOSE: The objective of the study was to assess the influence of socioeconomic status (SES) on the care of patients with diabetes. METHODS: Quality indicators for patients who were taking medication for diabetes were established. Overall compliance with the quality indicators, as well as prevalence of diabetes by age, were obtained from a national database. Patients with national tax exemptions (used as a marker for low SES) were compared to those without. RESULTS: Of 4,110,852 citizens aged 18-74, 210,988 (5.1%) were receiving medication for diabetes. The prevalence of diabetes reached 19.9% in people aged 65-74. 495,392 citizens had an exemption, and they had a higher prevalence of diabetes that those who did not (15.4% vs. 3.7%). Patients with an exemption had a higher rate of having a yearly HbA1c done, a yearly LDL level done, a yearly eye exam, a yearly urinary protein exam, of being treated with insulin for an elevated HbA1c than those without an exemption. In patients with an exemption there was a lower percentage with an HbA1c less than 7%, a higher percentage with an HbA1c greater than 9%, and a lower percentage with an LDL less than 130. Multivariate analysis showed that exemption status was a predictor of better performance on process measures (LDL test done, OR-1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.06, HbA1c test done, OR 1.03, 95% CI- 1.01-1.05) and of worse outcomes (high LDL, OR 0.92, 95% CI, 0.90-0.95 and high HbA1c, OR, 0.85, 95% CI, 0.83-0.87). CONCLUSIONS: In a country with universal healthcare, patients from a lower SES had an increased prevalence of diabetes and had greater adherence to preventive healthcare measures However, they were less successful in meeting target treatment goals.
PURPOSE: The objective of the study was to assess the influence of socioeconomic status (SES) on the care of patients with diabetes. METHODS: Quality indicators for patients who were taking medication for diabetes were established. Overall compliance with the quality indicators, as well as prevalence of diabetes by age, were obtained from a national database. Patients with national tax exemptions (used as a marker for low SES) were compared to those without. RESULTS: Of 4,110,852 citizens aged 18-74, 210,988 (5.1%) were receiving medication for diabetes. The prevalence of diabetes reached 19.9% in people aged 65-74. 495,392 citizens had an exemption, and they had a higher prevalence of diabetes that those who did not (15.4% vs. 3.7%). Patients with an exemption had a higher rate of having a yearly HbA1c done, a yearly LDL level done, a yearly eye exam, a yearly urinary protein exam, of being treated with insulin for an elevated HbA1c than those without an exemption. In patients with an exemption there was a lower percentage with an HbA1c less than 7%, a higher percentage with an HbA1c greater than 9%, and a lower percentage with an LDL less than 130. Multivariate analysis showed that exemption status was a predictor of better performance on process measures (LDL test done, OR-1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.06, HbA1c test done, OR 1.03, 95% CI- 1.01-1.05) and of worse outcomes (high LDL, OR 0.92, 95% CI, 0.90-0.95 and high HbA1c, OR, 0.85, 95% CI, 0.83-0.87). CONCLUSIONS: In a country with universal healthcare, patients from a lower SES had an increased prevalence of diabetes and had greater adherence to preventive healthcare measures However, they were less successful in meeting target treatment goals.
Authors: Rebekah J Walker; Emma Garacci; Jennifer A Campbell; Melissa Harris; Elise Mosley-Johnson; Leonard E Egede Journal: J Appl Gerontol Date: 2020-03-13
Authors: Scott J Pilla; James R Dotimas; Nisa M Maruthur; Jeanne M Clark; Hsin-Chieh Yeh Journal: Diabetes Res Clin Pract Date: 2018-03-07 Impact factor: 5.602
Authors: Rachel Wilf-Miron; Ronit Peled; Einat Yaari; Orna Shem-Tov; Vainer Anna Weinner; Avi Porath; Ehud Kokia Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2010-11-25 Impact factor: 3.295