| Literature DB >> 30594205 |
Daniel Barros de Castro1,2, Elvira Maria Godinho de Seixas Maciel2, Megumi Sadahiro1, Rosemary Costa Pinto1, Bernardino Cláudio de Albuquerque1, José Ueleres Braga3,4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Brazil is among the 30 countries with high-burden of tuberculosis worldwide, and Manaus is the capital with the highest tuberculosis incidence. The accelerated economic and population growth in Manaus in the last 30 years has strengthened the process of social stratification that may result in population groups that are less favored in terms of healthcare and are vulnerable to infection and illness due to tuberculosis. This study aimed to characterize inequalities associated with tuberculosis incidence in relation to the socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of the resident population of Manaus and to identify their determinants from 2007 to 2016.Entities:
Keywords: Brazil; Healthcare disparities; Socioeconomic level; Tuberculosis
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30594205 PMCID: PMC6310934 DOI: 10.1186/s12939-018-0900-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Equity Health ISSN: 1475-9276
Fig. 1Neighborhoods of Manaus
Fig. 2Equiplot of tuberculosis incidence in different population groups in Manaus, from 2001 to 2016. a gender; (b) ethnicity, and (c) HDI levels. Note: The points show the mean incidence rate in each population group. The horizontal lines connect the mean incidence of each group. The distance between the points represents the absolute inequality. The greater the line between the two groups, the greater the absolute inequality
Fig. 3Spatial distribution of the tuberculosis incidence inequality in the neighborhoods of Manaus, from 2007 to 2016
The relationship between the TB incidence inequality and the demographic and structural conditions of the Manaus neighborhoods
| Factor | Univariate analysisa | Multivariable analysisb | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crude coefficient | 95% Conf. interval | Adjusted coefficient | 95% Conf. interval | |||
| Gini prop. males | 1.818 | 0.001 | [0.798–2.839] | 1.836 | 0.001 | [0.953–2.718] |
| Gini prop. Indigenous | 0.718 | 0.011 | [0.170–1.266] | 0.601 | 0.011 | [0.143–1.060] |
| Gini illiteracy | 0.470 | 0.001 | [0.229–0.711] | |||
| Per capita income | 0.001 | 0.003 | [0.001–0.002] | |||
| Gini of income | 1.059 | 0.004 | [0.355–1.763] | 0.931 | 0.003 | [0.331–1.532] |
| Gini of water | 0.342 | 0.001 | [0.151–0.534] | |||
| Gini of bathroom per inhabitant | 1.401 | 0.001 | [0.805–1.998] | |||
| Prop. cases with laboratory confirmation | −0.010 | 0.008 | [−0.018−−0.002] | |||
| Prop. cases that performed DOTS | −0.002 | 0.217 | [−0.007–0.001] | |||
| Prop. abandonment of treatment | −0.003 | 0.656 | [−0.018–0.011] | |||
| Prop. Cure | −0.001 | 0.929 | [−0.009–0.008] | |||
Prop Proportion, Conf Confidence, DOTS directly observed treatment strategy
a Simple linear regression models; b Multiple linear negative binomial regression model