Examining the impact of different social class mechanisms on health inequalities: A cross-sectional analysis of an all-age UK household panel study.

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic inequalities are well established across health, morbidity and mortality measures. Social class theory describes how social groups relate, interact and accrue advantages/disadvantages relative to one another, with different theorists emphasising different dimensions. In the context of health inequalities, different social class measures are used interchangeably to rank population groups in terms of health rather than directly exploring the role of social class in creating inequalities. We aim to better understand how four distinct social class mechanisms explain differences in a range of self-reported and biological health outcomes. METHODS: We use data from the UK Household Longitudinal Study, a representative population survey of UK adults, to identify measures pertaining to Early years, Bourdieusian, Marxist, and Weberian social class mechanisms. Using logistic and least-squares regression we consider the relative extent to which these mechanisms explain differences in health (Self-reported health, SF12 Physical (PCS) and Mental (MCS) Component Scores, General Health Questionnaire; N = 21,446) and allostatic load, a biomarker-based measure of cumulative stress (N = 5003). RESULTS: Respondents with higher social position according to all social class measures had better self-rated, physical and mental health, and lower allostatic load. Associations with Marxist social class were among the strongest (e.g. Relative Index of Inequality for very good/excellent self-rated health comparing highest versus lowest Marxist social class: 4.96 (4.45, 5.52), with the Weberian measure also strongly associated with self-rated (4.35 (3.90, 4.85)) and physical health (Slope Index of Inequality for SF12-PCS: 7.94 (7.39, 8.48)). Health outcome associations with Bourdieusian and Marxist measures were generally stronger for women and older respondents, and physical health associations with all measures were stronger among those aged 50+ years. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of social class on health is multi-faceted. Policies to reduce health inequalities should focus more on unequal capital ownership, economic democracy and educational inequalities, reflecting Marxist and Weberian mechanisms.

Scottish Keep Well health check programme: an interrupted time series analysis.

BACKGROUND: Effective interventions are available to reduce cardiovascular risk. Recently, health check programmes have been implemented to target those at high risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), but there is much debate whether these are likely to be effective at population level. This paper evaluates the impact of wave 1 of Keep Well, a Scottish health check programme, on cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: Interrupted time series analyses were employed, comparing trends in outcomes in participating and non-participating practices before and after the introduction of health checks. Health outcomes are defined as CVD mortality, incident hospitalisations and prescribing of cardiovascular drugs. RESULTS: After accounting for secular trends and seasonal variation, coronary heart disease mortality and hospitalisations changed by 0.4% (95% CI -5.2% to 6.3%) and -1.1% (-3.4% to 1.3%) in Keep Well practices and by -0.3% (-2.7% to 2.2%) and -0.1% (-1.8% to 1.7%) in non-Keep Well practices, respectively, following the intervention. Adjusted changes in prescribing in Keep Well and non-Keep Well practices were 0.4% (-10.4% to 12.5%) and -1.5% (-9.4% to 7.2%) for statins; -2.5% (-12.3% to 8.4%) and -1.6% (-7.1% to 4.3%) for antihypertensive drugs; and -0.9% (-6.5% to 5.0%) and -2.4% (-10.1% to 6.0%) for antiplatelet drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Any impact of the Keep Well health check intervention on CVD outcomes and prescribing in Scotland was very small. Findings do not support the use of the screening approach used by current health check programmes to address CVD. We used an interrupted time series method, but evaluation methods based on randomisation are feasible and preferable and would have allowed more reliable conclusions. These should be considered more often by policymakers at an early stage in programme design when there is uncertainty regarding programme effectiveness.