Matthew C Stiefel1,2, Nancy P Gordon1,3, Folasade J Wilson-Anumudu1, Emily L Arsen1,4. 1. Care Management Institute, Oakland, CA. 2. Institute for Healthcare Improvement, Oakland, CA. 3. Kaiser Permanente Northern California Division of Research, Oakland. 4. Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Kaiser Permanente commissioned a health and well-being (HWB) survey of adult members and nonmembers in its 8 Regions. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of HWB indicators and evaluate differences in prevalence of excellent/very good (E/VG) health and thriving overall in life (thriving) by race/ethnicity, age group, sex, education, and financial situation. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey conducted by email and phone during Winter 2016-2017 with a racial/ethnic group-stratified quota sample. Participants (N = 26,304) provided sociodemographic characteristics and ratings for 6 HWB indicators. Using population-weighted data, we estimated the prevalence of HWB indicators and used logistic regression models to test for differences in E/VG health and thriving by sociodemographic factors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall health and overall life evaluation. RESULTS: Of adults, 52% were in E/VG health and 63% were thriving. Blacks were less likely to be in E/VG health than whites, Hispanics, and Asian/Pacific Islanders, but there was little racial/ethnic variation in those who were thriving. E/VG health and thriving varied significantly by level of education and financial situation. Across all racial/ethnic groups, large differences in percentages were observed in E/VG health and thriving between the lowest and highest levels of education and financial situation but little racial/ethnic variation within education and financial situation strata. CONCLUSION: Differences in health status and life evaluation are associated very strongly with financial situation and educational attainment, and these social determinants partially explain racial/ethnic disparities in HWB. The lack of strong correlation of health status and life evaluation suggests these are different domains of well-being.
CONTEXT: Kaiser Permanente commissioned a health and well-being (HWB) survey of adult members and nonmembers in its 8 Regions. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of HWB indicators and evaluate differences in prevalence of excellent/very good (E/VG) health and thriving overall in life (thriving) by race/ethnicity, age group, sex, education, and financial situation. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey conducted by email and phone during Winter 2016-2017 with a racial/ethnic group-stratified quota sample. Participants (N = 26,304) provided sociodemographic characteristics and ratings for 6 HWB indicators. Using population-weighted data, we estimated the prevalence of HWB indicators and used logistic regression models to test for differences in E/VG health and thriving by sociodemographic factors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall health and overall life evaluation. RESULTS: Of adults, 52% were in E/VG health and 63% were thriving. Blacks were less likely to be in E/VG health than whites, Hispanics, and Asian/Pacific Islanders, but there was little racial/ethnic variation in those who were thriving. E/VG health and thriving varied significantly by level of education and financial situation. Across all racial/ethnic groups, large differences in percentages were observed in E/VG health and thriving between the lowest and highest levels of education and financial situation but little racial/ethnic variation within education and financial situation strata. CONCLUSION: Differences in health status and life evaluation are associated very strongly with financial situation and educational attainment, and these social determinants partially explain racial/ethnic disparities in HWB. The lack of strong correlation of health status and life evaluation suggests these are different domains of well-being.
Authors: Lindsay E Sears; Sangeeta Agrawal; James A Sidney; Patricia H Castle; Elizabeth Y Rula; Carter R Coberley; Dan Witters; James E Pope; James K Harter Journal: Popul Health Manag Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 2.459
Authors: Paula A Braveman; Catherine Cubbin; Susan Egerter; David R Williams; Elsie Pamuk Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2010-02-10 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Joseph A Lewnard; Vincent X Liu; Michael L Jackson; Mark A Schmidt; Britta L Jewell; Jean P Flores; Chris Jentz; Graham R Northrup; Ayesha Mahmud; Arthur L Reingold; Maya Petersen; Nicholas P Jewell; Scott Young; Jim Bellows Journal: BMJ Date: 2020-05-22
Authors: Brita Roy; Judith R L M Wolf; Michelle D Carlson; Reinier Akkermans; Bradley Bart; Paul Batalden; Julie K Johnson; Hub Wollersheim; Gijs Hesselink Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-04-08 Impact factor: 3.240