Daniel Tzu-Hsuan Chen1, Yi-Jen Wang1,2. 1. Public Health Policy Evaluation Unit, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London W6 8RP, UK. 2. Department of Family Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei 112, Taiwan.
Abstract
Background: Lower socioeconomic groups and disadvantaged populations across the world suffer disproportionately from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study aimed to examine the impact of health- and social-inequality-related factors on well-being in order to further distinguish each of their effects during the pandemic. Methods: A nationally-representative sample of 5077 UK respondents aged 18 years or older was recruited through an online survey panel during the COVID-19 pandemic. Their subjective well-being was measured using the 11-point Cantril Ladder of Life Scale. The impact of inequality-related health and social factors (pre-existing medical conditions, household size and occupation), as well as COVID-19-related risk factors (symptoms, confirmed infections, and social distancing behaviours) on well-being were analysed using multiple linear regression models. The associations between the COVID-19-related risk factors and well-being according to the respondents' household size and occupation were modelled in order to test the differences by their socioeconomic profile. Results: We identified inverted V-shaped associations between household size and subjective well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Compared to single-person households, respondents from households of two to four persons showed better well-being (β = 0.57; CI (0.44, 0.72)), whereas living in crowded households of five persons or more was associated with decreased well-being (β = -0.48; CI (-0.71, -0.25)). Furthermore, lower-skilled occupations (elementary occupations: β = -0.31; CI (-0.58, -0.03); logistics and transport services: β = -0.37; CI (-0.74, -0.01)) and chronic medical conditions (cardiometabolic or respiratory diseases: β = -0.25; CI (-0.41, -0.1); and mental health conditions: β = -1.12; CI (-1.28, -0.96)) were factors associated with reduced well-being during the pandemic. Interactions between a positive COVID-19 diagnosis, symptoms, and crowded households were identified (β = -0.95; CI (-1.76, -0.14) and β = -4.74; CI (-9.87, -1.61), respectively). Conclusions: In a national sample, the levels of general subjective well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns were disproportionately distributed across different groups within society. Preventive policies should explicitly focus on reaching lower socioeconomic groups; more emphasis should be placed on the coordination of multisectoral support in order to tackle existing health and social inequalities.
Background: Lower socioeconomic groups and disadvantaged populations across the world suffer disproportionately from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study aimed to examine the impact of health- and social-inequality-related factors on well-being in order to further distinguish each of their effects during the pandemic. Methods: A nationally-representative sample of 5077 UK respondents aged 18 years or older was recruited through an online survey panel during the COVID-19 pandemic. Their subjective well-being was measured using the 11-point Cantril Ladder of Life Scale. The impact of inequality-related health and social factors (pre-existing medical conditions, household size and occupation), as well as COVID-19-related risk factors (symptoms, confirmed infections, and social distancing behaviours) on well-being were analysed using multiple linear regression models. The associations between the COVID-19-related risk factors and well-being according to the respondents' household size and occupation were modelled in order to test the differences by their socioeconomic profile. Results: We identified inverted V-shaped associations between household size and subjective well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Compared to single-person households, respondents from households of two to four persons showed better well-being (β = 0.57; CI (0.44, 0.72)), whereas living in crowded households of five persons or more was associated with decreased well-being (β = -0.48; CI (-0.71, -0.25)). Furthermore, lower-skilled occupations (elementary occupations: β = -0.31; CI (-0.58, -0.03); logistics and transport services: β = -0.37; CI (-0.74, -0.01)) and chronic medical conditions (cardiometabolic or respiratory diseases: β = -0.25; CI (-0.41, -0.1); and mental health conditions: β = -1.12; CI (-1.28, -0.96)) were factors associated with reduced well-being during the pandemic. Interactions between a positive COVID-19 diagnosis, symptoms, and crowded households were identified (β = -0.95; CI (-1.76, -0.14) and β = -4.74; CI (-9.87, -1.61), respectively). Conclusions: In a national sample, the levels of general subjective well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns were disproportionately distributed across different groups within society. Preventive policies should explicitly focus on reaching lower socioeconomic groups; more emphasis should be placed on the coordination of multisectoral support in order to tackle existing health and social inequalities.
Entities:
Keywords:
COVID-19; health inequalities; pandemic; population health; social determinants; well-being
Authors: Hande Gencer; Regina Brunnett; Maria A Marchwacka; Petra Rattay; Tobias Staiger; Hürrem Tezcan-Güntekin; Kathleen Pöge Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-07-27 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Caroline Bell; Jonathan Williman; Ben Beaglehole; James Stanley; Matthew Jenkins; Philip Gendall; Charlene Rapsey; Susanna Every-Palmer Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-07-19 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Prince Yeboah; Dennis Bomansang Daliri; Ahmad Yaman Abdin; Emmanuel Appiah-Brempong; Werner Pitsch; Anto Berko Panyin; Emmanuel Bentil Asare Adusei; Afraa Razouk; Muhammad Jawad Nasim; Claus Jacob Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-12-07 Impact factor: 3.390