Search

A child's disability, long-term illness, or mental ill-health is known to affect siblings' health, social life, school engagement, and quality of life. This article addresses a research gap by its focus on young sibling carers and the impact of providing care to a sibling. A cross-national survey study was conducted in 2018–2019 (Italy, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK) to examine the incidence of adolescent sibling carers, the extent of care they provide, and their self-reported health, well-being, and school situation. The survey was completed by 7146 adolescents, aged 15–17, and 1444 of them provided care to family members with health-related conditions. Out of these, 286 were identified as Sibling Carers and 668 as Parent Carers, while 181 had both sibling(s) and parent(s) with health-related conditions, and thus were identified as Sibling–Parent Carers. Sibling Carers and Sibling–Parent Carers carried out higher levels of caring activities compared to Parent Carers. They reported both positive aspects of caring, such as increased maturity, and negative aspects, such as mental ill-health, impact on schooling and a lack of support. To reduce the negative aspects of a sibling carer role, it is important to recognise them and to implement early preventive measures and formal support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective This paper examines how negative experiences with the health-care system create a lack of confidence in receiving medical care in seven countries: Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Methods The empirical analysis is based on data from the Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey 2007, with nationally representative samples of adults aged 18 and over. For the analysis of the experience of cost barriers and confidence in receiving medical care, we conducted pairwise comparisons of group percentages as well as country-wise multivariate logistic regression models. Results Individuals who have experienced cost barriers show a significantly lower level of confidence in receiving safe and quality medical care than those who have not. This effect is most pronounced in the United States, where people who have foregone necessary treatment because of costs are four times as likely to lack confidence as individuals without the experience of cost barriers (adjusted odds ratio 4.00). In New Zealand, Germany, and Canada, individuals with the experience of cost barriers are twice as likely to report low confidence compared with those without this experience (adjusted odds ratios of 1.95, 2.19 and 2.24, respectively). In the Netherlands and UK, cost barriers are only a marginal phenomenon. Conclusions The fact that the experience of financial barriers considerably lowers confidence indicates that financial incentives, such as private co-payments, have a negative effect on overall public support and therefore on the legitimacy of health-care systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health equity is a multidimensional concept that has been internationally considered as an essential element for health system development. However, our understanding about the root causes of health equity is limited. In this study, we investigated the historical roots and seminal works of research on health equity. Methods: Health equity-related publications were identified and downloaded from the Web of Science database (n = 67,739, up to 31 October 2018). Their cited references (n = 2,521,782) were analyzed through Reference Publication Year Spectroscopy (RPYS), which detected the historical roots and important works on health equity and quantified their impact in terms of referencing frequency. Results: A total of 17 pronounced peaks and 31 seminal works were identified. The first publication on health equity appeared in 1966. But the first cited reference can be traced back to 1801. Most seminal works were conducted by researchers from the US (19, 61.3%), the UK (7, 22.6%) and the Netherlands (3, 9.7%). Research on health equity experienced three important historical stages: origins (1800–1965), formative (1966–1991) and development and expansion (1991–2018). The ideology of health equity was endorsed by the international society through the World Health Organization (1946) declaration based on the foundational works of Chadwick (1842), Engels (1945), Durkheim (1897) and Du Bois (1899). The concept of health equity originated from the disciplines of public health, sociology and political economics and has been a major research area of social epidemiology since the early nineteenth century. Studies on health equity evolved from evidence gathering to the identification of cost-effective policies and governmental interventions. Conclusion: The development of research on health equity is shaped by multiple disciplines, which has contributed to the emergence of a new stream of social epidemiology and political epidemiology. Past studies must be interpreted in light of their historical contexts. Further studies are needed to explore the causal pathways between the social determinants of health and health inequalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite significant investments to support primary care internationally, income-based inequities in access to quality health care are present in many high-income countries. This study aims to determine whether low- and middle-income groups are more likely to report poor quality of primary care (PC) than high-income groups cross-nationally. Methods: The 2011 Commonwealth Fund Telephone Survey of Sicker Adults is a cross-sectional study across eleven countries. Respondents were recruited from randomly selected households. We used data from surveys conducted in Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. We identified all questions relating to primary care performance, and categorized these into five dimensions: 1) access to care, 2) coordination 3) patient-centered care, and 4) technical quality of care. We used logistic regression with low and middle-income as the comparison groups and high-income as the referent. Results: Fourteen thousand two hundred sixty-two respondents provided income data. Countries varied considerably in their extent of income disparity. Overall, 24.7% were categorized as low- and 13.9% as high-income. The odds of reporting poor access to care were higher for low- and middle-income than high-income respondents in Canada, New Zealand and the US. Similar results were found for Sweden and Norway on coordination; the opposite trend favoring the low- and middle-income groups was found in New Zealand, United Kingdom, and the United States. The odds of reporting poor patient-centered care were higher for low-income than high-income respondents in the Netherlands, Norway, and the US; in Australia, this was true for low- and middle-income respondents. On technical quality of care, the odds of reporting poor care were higher for the low- and middle-income comparisons in Canada and Norway; in Germany, the odds were higher for low-income respondents only. The odds of reporting poor technical quality of care were higher for high-income than low-income respondents in the Netherlands. Conclusion: Inequities in quality PC for low and middle income groups exist on at least one dimension in all countries, including some that in theory provide universal access. More research is needed to fully understand equity in the PC sector. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Psychosocial factors shape the health of older adults through complex inter-relating pathways. Besides socioeconomic factors, time use activities may explain gender inequality in self-reported health. This study investigated the role of work-related and social time use activities as determinants of health in old age. Specifically, we analysed whether the impact of stress in terms of time pressure on health mediated the relationship between work-related time use activities (i.e. housework and paid work) on self-reported health. Methods: We applied structural equation models and a maximum-likelihood function to estimate the direct and indirect effects of psychosocial factors on health using pooled data from the Multinational Time Use Study on 11,168 men and 14,295 women aged 65+ from Italy, Spain, UK, France and the Netherlands. Results: The fit indices for the conceptual model indicated an acceptable fit for both men and women. The results showed that socioeconomic status (SES), demographic factors, stress and work-related time use activities after retirement had a significant direct influence on self-reported health among the elderly, but the magnitude of the effects varied by gender. Social activities had a positive impact on self-reported health but had no significant impact on stress among older men and women. The indirect standardized effects of work-related activities on self-reported health was statistically significant for housework (β = − 0.006; P < 0.001 among men and β = − 0.008; P < 0.001 among women) and paid work (β = 0.012; P < 0.01 among men and β = 0.000; P > 0.05 among women), which implied that the paths from paid work and housework on self-reported health via stress (mediator) was very weak because their indirect effects were close to zero. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that although stress in terms of time pressure has a direct negative effect on health, it does not indirectly influence the positive effects of work-related time use activities on self-reported health among elderly men and women. The results support the time availability hypothesis that the elderly may not have the same time pressure as younger adults after retirement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Disparities in access to primary care (PC) have been demonstrated within and between health systems. However, few studies have assessed the factors associated with multiple barriers to access occurring along the care-seeking process in different healthcare systems. Methods: In this secondary analysis of the 2016 Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey of Adults, access was represented through participant responses to questions relating to access barriers either before or after reaching the PC practice in 11 countries (Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Norway, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and United States). The number of respondents in each country ranged from 1000 to 7000 and the response rates ranged from 11% to 47%. We used multivariable logistic regression models within each of eleven countries to identify disparities in response to the access barriers by age, sex, immigrant status, income and the presence of chronic conditions. Results: Overall, one in five adults (21%) experienced multiple barriers before reaching PC practices. After reaching care, an average of 16% of adults had two or more barriers. There was a sixfold difference between nations in the experience of these barriers to access. Vulnerable groups experiencing multiple barriers were relatively consistent across countries. People with lower income were more likely to experience multiple barriers, particularly before reaching primary care practices. Respondents with mental health problems and those born outside the country displayed substantial vulnerability in terms of barriers after reaching care. Conclusion: A greater understanding of the multiple barriers to access to PC across the stages of the care-seeking process may help to inform planning and performance monitoring of disparities in access. Variation across countries may reveal organisational and system drivers of access, and inform efforts to improve access to PC for vulnerable groups. The cumulative nature of these barriers remains to be assessed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]