| Literature DB >> 23527054 |
Emily S Petherick1, Nicky A Cullum, Kate E Pickett.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There has been limited examination of the contribution of socio-economic factors to the development of leg ulcers, despite the social patterning of many underlying risk factors. No previous studies were found that examined social patterns in the quality of treatment received by patients with leg ulcers.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23527054 PMCID: PMC3602605 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0058948
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Baseline characteristics of the incident and prevalent cohort in the THIN database 2001 to 2006.
| Ulcer type | Incident venous leg ulcers | Prevalent venous leg ulcers |
| N | 14,568 | 16,500 |
| Female, N (%) | 9,158 (62.9) | 10,307 (62.5) |
| Mean age (SD), Median, range, in years | 73.7 (14.4) | 74.3 (14.2) |
| 77, 18–109 | 77, 18–109 | |
| Townsend deprivation quintile, N (%) | ||
| 1 (least deprived) | 2802 (19.2) | 3172 (19.2) |
| 2 | 2871 (19.7) | 3303 (20.0) |
| 3 | 3060 (21.0) | 3419 (20.7) |
| 4 | 2796 (19.2) | 3153 (19.1) |
| 5 (most deprived) | 2065 (14.2) | 2375 (14.4) |
| Missing | 974 (6.7) | 1078 (6.5) |
Results of negative binomial regression examining the relationship of deprivation quintile rank to venous leg ulcer burden.
| Incidence | Unadjusted Incidence Rate Ratio (95% CI) p-value | Adjusted Incidence Rate Ratio (95% CI) p-value |
| Townsend deprivation quintile | ||
| 1 (less deprived) | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | 1.06 (0.90, 1.24) 0.51 | 1.08 (1.02,1.14) <0.001 |
| 3 | 1.11 (0.94, 1.30) 0.21 | 1.24 (1.18, 1.31) <0.001 |
| 4 | 1.10 (0.93, 1.29) 0.25 | 1.30 (1.23,1.38) <0.001 |
| 5 (more deprived) | 1.15 (0.97, 1.36) 0.10 | 1.44 (1.36,1.53) <0.001 |
| p for linear trend | <0.001 | |
|
|
|
|
| Townsend deprivation quintile rank | ||
| 1 (less deprived) | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | 1.05 (0.89, 1.24) 0.55 | 1.10 (1.04, 1.17) <0.001 |
| 3 | 1.06 (0.90, 1.25) 0.47 | 1.25 (1.18, 1.32) <0.001 |
| 4 | 1.04 (0.89, 1.23) 0.61 | 1.31 (1.24, 1.39) <0.001 |
| 5 (more deprived) | 1.12 (0.95, 1.32) 0.20 | 1.48 (1.39, 1.57) <0.001 |
| p for linear trend | <0.001 |
Results adjusted for age, gender and study year.
Results of multilevel logistic regression analysis of Doppler aided ABPI measurement for patients diagnosed with venous leg ulceration.
| Individual level variables | Unadjusted Odds Ratio | Adjusted odds Ratio (95% CI) |
| Age (years) | ||
| 18–27 | 0.10 (0.01, 0.99) | 0.10 (0.01, 1.03) |
| 28–37 | 0.25 (0.07, 0.87) | 0.23 (0.06, 0.82) |
| 38–47 | 0.57 (0.25, 1.32) | 0.55 (0.24, 1.29) |
| 48–57 | 1.10 (0.62, 1.97) | 1.03 (0.57, 1.84) |
| 58–67 | 1.52 (0.95, 2.41) | 1.40 (0.88, 2.22) |
| 68–77 | 1 | 1 |
| 78–87 | 0.50 (0.34, 0.74) | 0.50 (0.34, 0.75) |
| 88–97 | 0.11 (0.06, 0.23) | 0.11 (0.06, 0.23) |
| 98+ | 0.09 (0.01, 0.94) | 0.10 (0.01, 1.01) |
| Gender | ||
| Male | 1 | 1 |
| Female | 0.81 (0.72–0.90) | 0.75 (0.55, 1.02) |
| Index of multiple deprivation quintile | ||
| 1 (low deprivation) | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | 0.81 (0.51–1.28) | 0.88 (0.56, 1.38) |
| 3 | 0.72 (0.45–1.15) | 0.80 (0.51, 1.26) |
| 4 | 0.82 (0.50–1.33) | 0.88 (0.55, 1.40) |
| 5 (high deprivation) | 0.41 (0.23–0.75) | 0.43 (0.24, 0.78) |
| Year of diagnosis | ||
| 2001 | 1 | 1 |
| 2002 | 1.83 (1.02, 3.26) | 1.62 (0.92, 2.83) |
| 2003 | 2.56 (1.43, 4.54) | 2.73 (1.55, 4.80) |
| 2004 | 3.31 (1.83, 5.98) | 3.45 (1.92, 6.18) |
| 2005 | 5.50 (2.96, 10.23) | 4.50 (2.67, 8.98) |
| 2006 | 5.00 (2.70, 9.27) | 4.61 (2.42, 8.45) |
|
| ||
| Mean practice list size | ||
| 0–4999 | 0.02 (0.01, 0.27) | 0.02 (0.01, 0.28) |
| 5000–9999 | 0.27 (0.08, 0.94) | 0.24 (0.07, 0.81) |
| 10000 | 0.32 (0.11, 0.95) | 0.31 (0.10, 0.90) |
| 15000 | 0.31 (0.10, 1.03) | 0.33 (0.10, 1.06) |
| 20000 | 1 | 1 |
| 25000 | 1.24 (0.34, 4.47) | 1.20 (0.34, 4.19) |
| 30000 | 7.58 (1.19, 48.50) | 6.56 (1.08, 39.92) |
| 35000 | 8.57 (1.30, 56.68) | 8.70 (1.37, 55.14) |
Results of multilevel logistic regression analysis of compression bandaging provision for patients diagnosed with venous leg ulceration.
| Individual level variables | Unadjusted Odds Ratio | Adjusted odds Ratio (95% CI) |
| Age (years) | ||
| 18–27 | 0.32 (0.09, 1.18) | 0.34 (0.09, 0.34) |
| 28–37 | 0.62 (0.30, 1,27) | 0.68 (0.33, 1.41) |
| 38–47 | 0.40 (0.23, 0.72) | 0.44 (0.25, 0.78) |
| 48–57 | 0.51 (0.34, 0.78) | 0.58 (0.38, 0.87) |
| 58–67 | 0.95 (0.71, 1.28) | 0.96 (0.72, 1.30) |
| 68–77 | 1 | 1 |
| 78–87 | 1.40 (1.10, 1.79) | 1.39 (1.09, 1.78) |
| 88–97 | 1.12 (0.83, 1.51) | 1.10 (0.81, 1.49) |
| 98+ | 1.30 (0.41, 4.11) | 1.27 (0.40, 4.06) |
| Gender | ||
| Male | 1 | 1 |
| Female | 1.34 (1.10, 1.62) | 1.20 (0.99, 1.46) |
| Deprivation quintile | ||
| 1 (low deprivation) | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | 1.19 (0.90, 1.56) | 1.16 (0.87, 1.53) |
| 3 | 1.07 (0.82, 1.14) | 1.07 (0.81, 1.43) |
| 4 | 1.12 (0.84, 1.49) | 1.11 (0.84, 1.49) |
| 5 (high deprivation) | 1.11 (0.80, 1.53) | 1.18 (0.85, 1.65) |
| Year of diagnosis | ||
| 2001 | 1 | 1 |
| 2002 | 0.87 (0.63, 1.18) | 0.88 (0.64, 1.21) |
| 2003 | 0.70 (0.51, 0.97) | 0.71 (0.51, 0.98) |
| 2004 | 0.93 (0.68, 1.27) | 0.92 (0.67, 1.26) |
| 2005 | 1.22 (0.89, 1.66) | 1.18 (0.86. 1.62) |
| 2006 | 1.24 (0.91, 1.71) | 1.20 (0.87, 1.66) |
|
| ||
| Mean practice list size | ||
| 0–4999 | 0.66 (0.16, 2.75) | 0.69 (0.16, 2.97) |
| 5000–9999 | 0.94 (0.41, 2.15) | 0.93 (0.40, 2.17) |
| 10000 | 1.06 (0.50, 2.24) | 1.08 (0.50, 2.33) |
| 15000 | 1.16 (0.51, 2.62) | 1.17 (0.51, 2.70) |
| 20000 | 1 | 1 |
| 25000 | 1.39 (0.56, 3.43) | 1.38 (0.55, 3.48) |
| 30000 | 0.38 (0.09, 1.54) | 0.37 (0.09, 1.53) |
| 35000 | 0.59 (0.14, 2.41) | 0.60 (0.14, 2,54) |