| Literature DB >> 26605512 |
Kristina M Talbert-Slagle1, Maureen E Canavan, Erika M Rogan, Leslie A Curry, Elizabeth H Bradley.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Despite considerable advances in the prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS, the burden of new infections of HIV and AIDS varies substantially across the country. Previous studies have demonstrated associations between increased healthcare spending and better HIV/AIDS outcomes; however, less is known about the association between spending on social services and public health spending and HIV/AIDS outcomes. We sought to examine the association between state-level spending on social services and public health and HIV/AIDS case rates and AIDS deaths across the United States.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26605512 PMCID: PMC4732004 DOI: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000000978
Source DB: PubMed Journal: AIDS ISSN: 0269-9370 Impact factor: 4.177
Means and standard deviations of annual HIV/AIDS outcomes and median annual state-level spending, 2000–2009.
| Annual outcome (per 100 000 population) | Mean (SD) |
| HIV case rate | 10.94 (9.40) |
| AIDS case rate | 8.07 (6.77) |
| AIDS death rate | 4.37 (3.70) |
| Spending variable | Median |
| (SS+PH)/person in poverty | $54.98 (19.08) |
Fig. 1U.S. maps of HIV/AIDS case rates and combined social service and public health spending per person in poverty, 2009.
Associations between social services + public health spending per person in poverty and HIV/AIDS outcomes across 50 U.S. states, 2000–2009.
| One year lag in spending ( | Five year lag in spending ( | |||||||
| Model 1 | Model 1A | Model 2 | Model 2A | |||||
| Estimate | Estimate | Estimate | Estimate | |||||
| HIV case rate | −0.529 | 0.002 | −0.468 | <0.001 | −0.491 | 0.005 | −0.247 | 0.013 |
| AIDS case rate | −0.287 | 0.002 | −0.138 | 0.006 | −0.252 | 0.006 | −0.123 | 0.050 |
| AIDS death rate | −0.188 | 0.002 | −0.081 | 0.028 | −0.166 | 0.007 | −0.061 | 0.027 |
aModel adjusted for the log of state-level GDP per capita, regional and fixed effects, Medicaid spending as a percentage of state GDP, and state-level serial autocorrelation.
bModel fully adjusted for the log of state-level GDP per capita, regional and fixed effects, Medicaid spending as a percentage of state GDP, and state-level serial autocorrelation as well as significant covariates in best fit model: percentage of the population aged 65 years and older, percentage white, percentage female, percentage of population living in urban area, unemployment rate, percentage of children living in single-parent household, hospital beds and primary care providers per 100 000 population.
cAll outcomes are per 100 000 population.