Deaths at home, area-based deprivation and the effect of the Covid-19 pandemic: An analysis of mortality data across four nations.

BACKGROUND: The number and proportion of home deaths in the UK increased during the Covid-19 pandemic. It is not known whether these changes were experienced disproportionately by people from different socioeconomic groups. AIM: To examine the association between home death and socioeconomic position during the Covid-19 pandemic, and how this changed between 2019 and 2020. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using population-based individual-level mortality data. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: All registered deaths in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. The proportion of home deaths between 28th March and 31st December 2020 was compared with the same period in 2019. We used Poisson regression models to evaluate the association between decedent's area-based level of deprivation and risk of home death, as well as the interaction between deprivation and year of death, for each nation separately. RESULTS: Between the 28th March and 31st December 2020, 409,718 deaths were recorded in England, 46,372 in Scotland, 26,410 in Wales and 13,404 in Northern Ireland. All four nations showed an increase in the adjusted proportion of home deaths between 2019 and 2020, ranging from 21 to 28%. This increase was lowest for people living in the most deprived areas in all nations, with evidence of a deprivation gradient in England. CONCLUSIONS: The Covid-19 pandemic exacerbated a previously described socioeconomic inequality in place of death in the UK. Further research to understand the reasons for this change and if this inequality has been sustained is needed.

Occupational social class differences in the impact of COVID-19 related employment disruptions on retirement planning amongst older workers in England

Purpose This paper aims to examine the impact of COVID-19 related employment disruption on individuals' retirement planning and whether these experiences differ by occupational social class. Design/methodology/approach To explore these issues, this study linked data from those who were employed in wave 9 of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) main study with wave 1 of the ELSA COVID-19 study (N = 1,797). Multinominal regression analyses were conducted to explore whether the interaction between employment disruption and occupational social class was associated with planning to retire earlier or later than previously planned. Findings The results show that stopping work because of COVID-19 is associated with planning to retire earlier. However, there were no statistically significant interactions between occupational social class and employment disruptions on whether respondents planned to retire earlier or later. Originality/value This paper's original contribution is in showing that the pandemic has had an impact on retirement decisions. Given the known negative effects of both involuntary early labour market exit, the findings suggest that the COVID-19 related employment disruptions are likely to exacerbate social inequalities in health, well-being in later life and, consequently, can help anticipate where there will be need for additional support in later life.

Continuing inequalities in COVID-19 mortality in England and Wales, and the changing importance of regional, over local, deprivation.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies have highlighted that where individuals live is far more important for risk of dying with COVID-19, than for dying of other causes. Deprivation is commonly proposed as explaining such differences. During the period of localised restrictions in late 2020, areas with higher restrictions tended to be more deprived. We explore how this impacted the relationship between deprivation and mortality and see whether local or regional deprivation matters more for inequalities in COVID-19 mortality. METHODS: We use publicly available population data on deaths due to COVID-19 and all-cause mortality between March 2020 and April 2021 to investigate the scale of spatial inequalities. We use a multiscale approach to simultaneously consider three spatial scales through which processes driving inequalities may act. We go on to explore whether deprivation explains such inequalities. RESULTS: Adjusting for population age structure and number of care homes, we find highest regional inequality in October 2020, with a COVID-19 mortality rate ratio of 5.86 (95% CI 3.31 to 19.00) for the median between-region comparison. We find spatial context is most important, and spatial inequalities higher, during periods of low mortality. Almost all unexplained spatial inequality in October 2020 is removed by adjusting for deprivation. During October 2020, one standard deviation increase in regional deprivation was associated with 20% higher local mortality (95% CI, 1.10 to 1.30). CONCLUSIONS: Spatial inequalities are greatest in periods of lowest overall mortality, implying that as mortality declines it does not do so equally. During the prolonged period of low restrictions and low mortality in summer 2020, spatial inequalities strongly increased. Contrary to previous months, we show that the strong spatial patterning during autumn 2020 is almost entirely explained by deprivation. As overall mortality declines, policymakers must be proactive in detecting areas where this is not happening, or risk worsening already strong health inequalities.

Inequalities in the distribution of COVID-19-related financial difficulties for Australian families with young children.

BACKGROUND: We examine (1) the frequency of financial difficulties in Australian families with young children (0-8 years) in the early and later phases of the pandemic; (2) the extent to which parents' pre-pandemic socio-economic disadvantage (SED) predicted financial difficulties; and (3) whether grandparent intergenerational SED further amplified this risk. METHOD: Data: Australian Temperament Project (ATP; established 1983, N = 2443) and ATP Generation 3 study (ATPG3; established 2012; N = 702), of which 74% (N = 553) completed a COVID-specific module in the early (May-September 2020) and/or later (October-December 2021) phases of the pandemic. OUTCOMES: Parent-reported loss of employment/reduced income, difficulty paying for essentials, and financial strain. EXPOSURES: Pre-pandemic parent and grandparent education and occupation. ANALYSIS: Logistic regressions, estimated via generalized estimating equations, were used to examine associations between the pre-pandemic SED of parents and grandparents and their interaction with financial difficulties, adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: At both pandemic time points, a third of parents reported adverse financial impacts (early: 34%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 30-38; later: 32%, 95% CI = 28-36). Each standard deviation increase in the parents' pre-pandemic SED was associated with a 36% increase in the odds of reporting multiple financial difficulties (odds ratio [OR] = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.04-1.78). There was little evidence of an interaction between the SED of parents and grandparents. CONCLUSIONS: Financial impacts related to the COVID-19 pandemic were common and, irrespective of grandparent SED, disproportionately borne by parents with higher pre-pandemic SED. Given the well-established relationship between disadvantage and child health and development, sustained and well-targeted government supports will be critical to minimizing adverse impacts in years to come.

Health-related and socio-economic burden of the COVID-19 pandemic in Vienna.

Previous pandemics have rarely affected everyone equally and, so far, the COVID-19 pandemic is no exception. Emerging evidence has shown that incidence rate, hospitalisation rate, and mortality due to COVID-19 are higher among people in lower socio-economic position (SEP). In addition, first investigations indicate that not everyone is equally affected by this pandemic's collateral public health damage. Using a stratified random sample of 1,004 participants living in Vienna, a Central European city with approximately 1.9 million inhabitants, this study analysed the distribution of 10 adverse health-related and socio-economic outcomes attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic across socio-economic strata. To this end, we estimated differences in the incidence rate of these outcomes by SEP and each of its indicators using zero-inflated Poisson and logistic regression models, adjusted for age and gender. Data were collected during first lockdown measures between 27 April and 17 May 2020. Differences in the incidence rate between the two lowest and two highest SEP groups were clearly visible. Participants in the lowest SEP category had a 32.96% higher incidence rate (IRR = 1.333 [95% CI: 1.079-1.639]), and participants in the second lowest SEP category had a 44.69% higher incidence rate (IRR = 1.447 [95% CI: 1.190-1.760]) compared with participants in the highest SEP category. In sum, 6 out of 10 adverse COVID-19-related outcomes were, to a greater or lesser extent, disproportionately experienced by Viennese residents in lower SEP. Inequalities were most visible between income groups and for the outcomes job loss, worsening of the financial situation, and worse mental health. These results strengthen and extend the current evidence on the unequally distributed burden of the COVID-19 pandemic. In light of effect heterogeneity across SEP indicators, we encourage future investigators to pay increased attention to their operationalisation of SEP. Such awareness will help to correctly identify those in most urgent need of supportive polices.

Socio-economic position and local solidarity in times of crisis. The COVID-19 pandemic and the emergence of informal helping arrangements in Germany.

In this article we study the emergence of local solidarity in the wake of the COVID-19 crisis in Germany. The COVID-19 pandemic and ensuing lockdown measures have had far-reaching and quite diverse consequences for different social groups, and have increased the need for practical help, childcare, financial aid, but also emotional support to cope with the psychological consequences of social isolation. Hence, even individuals who are not traditionally receivers of informal help have suddenly become dependent on it. Existing research on volunteering, caregiving and donations has shown that the provision of help and volunteer work has a social gradient, and that social inequalities therein can partly be explained by reference to individuals' attitudes and social networks. Against this backdrop, we ask: (1) Has the COVID-19 pandemic sparked the emergence of a new local solidarity? (2) What types of help are provided, and to whom? (3) How does socio-economic position affect the provision of different forms of help during the COVID-19 crisis? (4) Which sociological mechanisms can explain these inequalities in helping? Using data from a topical online-survey based on a quota sample which was collected, during the heydays of the first lockdown in Germany, we find that one of two respondents engages in some sort of local solidarity. Depending on the recipient and the way of helping - up to half of these helping arrangements has newly emerged and does not build on already existing (pre-crisis) help-arrangements. Differences between income and educational groups can mostly be explained by attitudes and social networks. Embeddedness in formal networks is particularly important for extending help to previously unknown recipients in the community. This article contributes to the literature on the social origins of help and the initiation of social capital during crises in general, and the political discussion about solidarity in the COVID-19 pandemic in particular.

Predictors and Impact of Arts Engagement During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Analyses of Data From 19,384 Adults in the COVID-19 Social Study.

OBJECTIVES: The global COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 heavily affected the arts and creative industries due to the instigation of lockdown measures in the United Kingdom and closure of venues. However, it also provided new opportunities for arts and cultural engagement through virtual activities and streamed performances. Yet it remains unclear (i) who was likely to engage with the arts at home during lockdown, (ii) how this engagement differed from patterns of arts engagement prior to COVID-19, and (iii) whether home-based arts engagement was related to people's ability to cope with their emotions during lockdown. This study was therefore designed to address these questions. METHODS: We used data collected in late May from the United Kingdom COVID-19 Social Study run by University College London. Multivariate regressions were used for the analysis (N = 19,384). Identified factors included demographic factors, socio-economic position, psychosocial wellbeing and health conditions, adverse events/worries, and coping styles. RESULTS: Four types of home-based arts engagement were identified during the COVID-19 pandemic: digital arts and writing, musical activities, crafts, and reading for pleasure. Our results show that the strongest predictors of the engagement were age, education attainment, social support, and emotion-focused or supportive coping styles. In particular, younger adults (aged 18-29), non-keyworkers, people with greater social support, people who had lost work, those who were worried about catching the virus, and those with an emotion-focused, problem-focused or supportive coping style were more likely to have increased arts engagement during lockdown. Arts activities were used as approach and avoidance strategies to help cope with emotions, as well as to help improve self-development. CONCLUSION: Overall, our study suggests that while some people who engaged in the arts during the COVID-19 pandemic were those who typically engage under normal circumstances, the pandemic has also created new incentives and opportunities for others to engage virtually. Additionally, this study highlights the value of the arts as coping tools during stressful situations.