Health workforce for oral health inequity: Opportunity for action.

Oral health is high on the global agenda following the adoption of the 2022 global strategy on oral health at the 75th World Health Assembly. Given the global burden of oral disease, workforce development to achieve universal health coverage [UHC] is crucial to respond to population needs within the non-communicable disease agenda. The aim of this paper is to present an overview of the oral health workforce [OHWF] globally in relation to key contextual factors. Data from the National Health Workforce Accounts and a survey of World Health Organization [WHO] member states were integrated for analysis, together with country-level data on population and income status. Data are presented using the WHO categorisation of global regions and income status categories established by the World Bank. Workforce densities for key OHWF categories were examined. Multiple regression was used to model workforce density and contextual influences. Challenges and possible solutions were examined by country income status. There are approximately 3.30 dentists per 10,000 population globally, and a combined OHWF [dentists, dental assistants/therapists and dental prosthetic technicians] of 5.31 per 10,000. Marked regional inequalities are evident, most notably between WHO European and African regions; yet both make greater use of skill mix than other regions. When adjusted by region, 'country income status' and 'population urbanization' are strong predictors of the workforce density of dentists and even more so for the combined OHWF. Maldistribution of the workforce [urban/rural] was considered a particular workforce challenge globally and especially for lower-income countries. Strengthening oral health policy was considered most important for the future. The global distribution of dentists, and the OHWF generally, is inequitable, with variable and limited use of skill mix. Creative workforce development is required to achieve the global oral health agenda and work towards equity using innovative models of care, supported by effective governance and integrated policies.

Inequities in COVID-19-Related Patient Outcomes by Socio-Demographic Characteristics: A Scoping Review.

Socio-demographic inequities in health treatment and outcomes are not new. However, the COVID-19 pandemic presented new opportunities to examine and address biases. This article describes a scoping review of 170 papers published prior to the onset of global vaccinations and treatment (December 2021). We report differentiated COVID-19-related patient outcomes for people with various socio-demographic characteristics, including the need for intubation and ventilation, intensive care unit admission, discharge to hospice care, and mortality. Using the PROGRESS-Plus framework, we determined that the most researched socio-demographic factor was race/ethnicity/culture/language. Members of minoritized racial and ethnic groups tended to have worse COVID-19-related patient outcomes; more research is needed about other categories of social disadvantage, given the scarcity of literature on these factors at the time of the review. It is only by researching and addressing the causes of social disadvantage that we can avoid such injustice in future public health crises.

Nonlinear associations between the ratio of family income to poverty and all-cause mortality among adults in NHANES study.

Socioeconomic status (SES) has been linked to mortality rates, with family income being a quantifiable marker of SES. However, the precise association between the family income-to-poverty ratio (PIR) and all-cause mortality in adults aged 40 and older remains unclear. A cross-sectional study was conducted using data from NHANES III, including 20,497 individuals. The PIR was used to assess financial status, and various demographic, lifestyle, and clinical factors were considered. Mortality data were collected from the NHANES III linked mortality file. The study revealed a non-linear association between PIR and all-cause mortality. The piecewise Cox proportional hazards regression model showed an inflection point at PIR 3.5. Below this threshold, the hazard ratio (HR) for all-cause mortality was 0.85 (95% CI 0.79-0.91), while above 3.5, the HR decreased to 0.66 (95% CI 0.57-0.76). Participants with lower income had a higher probability of all-cause mortality, with middle-income and high-income groups showing lower multivariate-adjusted HRs compared to the low-income group. This study provides evidence of a non-linear association between PIR and all-cause mortality in adults aged 40 and older, with an inflection point at PIR 3.5. These findings emphasize the importance of considering the non-linear relationship between family income and mortality when addressing socioeconomic health disparities.

Changes in Racial and Ethnic Inequities in Pregnancy-Associated Death in the United States During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Objectives. To examine changes in cause-specific pregnancy-associated deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic by race and ethnicity and assess changes in racial and ethnic inequities in pregnancy-associated deaths. Methods. We used US vital statistics mortality data from 2018 to 2021 to identify pregnancy-associated deaths among females aged 15 to 44 years. We calculated crude pregnancy-associated death rates (deaths per 100 000 live births) by year, cause, and race/ethnicity, percent change in death rate, and the inequity (difference) in rate for each racial or ethnic group compared with non-Hispanic White people. Results. The pregnancy-associated death rate for obstetric, drug-related, homicide, and other causes of death increased during 2020, and obstetric deaths continued to increase in 2021. Overall estimates mask 2021 increases in drug-related deaths among Hispanic, non-Hispanic American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN), and non-Hispanic Asian people; increases in homicide among most racial and ethnic groups; and increases in suicide among Hispanic, non-Hispanic AI/AN, and non-Hispanic Asian people. Conclusions. We found disproportionate increases in pregnancy-associated deaths from nonobstetric causes among minoritized racial and ethnic groups during the COVID-19 pandemic. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(7):733-742. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307651).

Understanding and Addressing Widening Racial Inequalities in Drug Overdose.

The fourth wave of the United States overdose crisis-driven by the polysubstance use of fentanyl with stimulants and other synthetic substances-has driven sharply escalating racial/ethnic inequalities in drug overdose death rates. Here the authors present a detailed portrait of the latest overdose trends and synthesize the literature to describe where, how, and why these inequalities are worsening. By 2022 overdose deaths among Native and Black Americans rose to 1.8 and 1.4 times the rate seen among White Americans, respectively. This reflects that Black and Native Americans have been disproportionately affected by fentanyl and the combination of fentanyl and stimulants at the national level and in virtually every state. The highest overdose deaths rates are currently seen among Black Americans 55-64 years of age as well as younger cohorts of Native Americans 25-44 years of age. In 2022-the latest year of data available-deaths among White Americans decreased relative to 2021, whereas rates among all other groups assessed continued to rise. Moving forward, Fundamental Cause Theory shows us a relevant universal truth of implementation science: in socially unequal societies, new technologies typically end up favoring more privileged groups first, thereby widening inequalities unless underlying social inequalities are addressed. Therefore, interventions designed to reduce addiction and overdose death rates that are not explicitly designed to also improve racial/ethnic inequalities will often unintentionally end up worsening them. Well-funded community-based programs, with Black and Native leadership, providing harm reduction resources, naloxone, and medications for opioid use disorder in the context of comprehensive, culturally appropriate healthcare and other services, represent the highest priority interventions to decrease inequalities.

Action against inequalities: a synthesis of social justice & equity, diversity, inclusion frameworks.

Inequalities in health have long been recognized as interconnected with social, economic, and various other inequalities. The application of social justice and equity, diversity, inclusion (EDI) frameworks may help expand interdisciplinary perspectives in addressing inequalities. This review study conducted an environmental scan for existing syntheses of theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) relevant to the social justice and EDI. Results from Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, CINAHL, PsychINFO, and MEDLINE retrieved an existing implementation science framework intently centered upon health inequalities, and draws from a synthesis of postcolonial theory, reflexivity, intersectionality, structural violence, and governance theory. Given this high degree of relevance to the objective of this review, the framework was selected as a basis for expanded synthesis. Subsequent processes sought to identify social justice TMFs which could be integrated into the base framework selected, as well as to refine scope of the study. Based upon considerations of level of evidence and non-tokenistic integration, the following social justice and EDI TMFs were identified: John Rawls' theory of justice; Amartya Sen's Capabilities Approach; Iris Marion Young's theories of justice; Paulo Freire's critical consciousness; and critical race theory (CRT). The focus of the synthesis performed was scoped towards minimizing potential harms arising from actions intending to reduce inequalities. EDI considerations were not collated into a singular construct, but rather extended as a separate component assessing inequitable distribution of risks and benefits given population heterogeneity. Reflexive analysis amended the framework with two key decisions: first, the integration of environmental justice into a single construct, which helps to inform Rawls' and Sen's TMFs; second, a temporal element of sequential-analysis was employed over a unified output. The result of synthesis consists of a three-component framework which: (1) presents sixteen constructs drawn from selected TMFs, to consider various harms or potential reinforcement of existing inequalities; (2) aims to de-invisibilize marginalized groups who are noted to experience inequitable outcomes, and acknowledges the presence of individuals belonging to multiple groups; and (3) synthesizes seven considerations related to equitable dissemination and evaluation as drawn from TMFs, separated for sequential analysis after assessment of harms.

Examining Health Inequities in A1C Control over Time across Individual, Geospatial, and Geopolitical Factors among Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: Analyses of a Sample from One Commercial Insurer in a Southern State.

INTRODUCTION: Type 2 diabetes impacts millions and poor maintenance of diabetes can lead to preventable complications, which is why achieving and maintaining target A1C levels is critical. Thus, we aimed to examine inequities in A1C over time, place, and individual characteristics, given known inequities across these indicators and the need to provide continued surveillance. METHODS: Secondary de-identified data from medical claims from a single payer in Texas was merged with population health data. Generalized Estimating Equations were utilized to assess multiple years of data examining the likelihood of having non-target (>7% and ≥7%, two slightly different cut points based on different sources) and separately uncontrolled (>9%) A1C. Adults in Texas, with a Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) flag and with A1C reported in first quarter of the year using data from 2016 and 2019 were included in analyses. RESULTS: Approximately 50% had A1Cs within target ranges (<7% and ≤7%), with 50% considered having non-target (>7% and ≥7%) A1Cs; with 83% within the controlled ranges (≤9%) as compared to approximately 17% having uncontrolled (>9%) A1Cs. The likelihood of non-target A1C was higher among those individuals residing in rural (vs urban) areas (P < .0001); similar for the likelihood of reporting uncontrolled A1C, where those in rural areas were more likely to report uncontrolled A1C (P < .0001). In adjusted analysis, ACA enrollees in 2016 were approx. 5% more likely (OR = 1.049, 95% CI = 1.002-1.099) to have non-target A1C (≥7%) compared to 2019; in contrast non-ACA enrollees were approx. 4% more likely to have non-target A1C (≥7%) in 2019 compared to 2016 (OR = 1.039, 95% CI = 1.001-1.079). In adjusted analysis, ACA enrollees in 2016 were 9% more likely (OR = 1.093, 95% CI = 1.025-1.164) to have uncontrolled A1C compared to 2019; whereas there was no significant change among non-ACA enrollees. CONCLUSIONS: This study can inform health care interactions in diabetes care settings and help health policy makers explore strategies to reduce health inequities among patients with diabetes. Key partners should consider interventions to aid those enrolled in ACA plans, those in rural and border areas, and who may have coexisting health inequities.

Verso società in salute e fiscalmente resilienti: trovare un terreno comune tra i settori della sanità pubblica e della finanza e le banche centrali

Questo è il principale documento di base per l’iniziativa europea Finding Common Ground dell’OMS, che mira a sviluppare nuovi strumenti di modellazione ad uso delle banche centrali e dei ministeri delle finanze per modellare le politiche fiscali ed economiche al fine di migliorare l’equità e il benessere della salute, mostrando al contempo i co-benefici della salute e dell’equità in salute per la stabilità di bilancio e il benessere economico. Le priorità condivise sono state individuate nella salute mentale e nell’inclusione dei giovani, nell’invecchiamento, nello sviluppo squilibrato e nella parità di genere. Il documento dimostra il crescente interesse e le iniziativedelle banche centrali, della finanza, della sanità e della salute pubblica su questioni politiche comuni, inquadrando le opportunità di azione tra questi settori. Inoltre, definisce i ruoli chiave e le modalità di lavoro all’interno di questi settori per consentire il dialogo futuro.

Addressing health inequalities in times of austerity: implementation of a place-based approach in multitiered local government.

AIMS: This article focuses on how local authorities in England are tackling wider determinants of health and inequalities in their population's outcomes while budgets for public services are diminishing. METHODS: It reports the experience from one case study engaged in rolling out a devolved, place- and asset-based strategy over multiple tiers of local government. Relating these findings to relevant social theory, we draw out aspects of context and mechanisms of change. We offer plausible hypotheses for the experiences observed, which supports transferability and implementation of place-based strategies in other local authority areas struggling with similar challenges. RESULTS: Findings highlight the importance of high-level and political buy-in, as well as the role of the COVID-19 pandemic as a potential catalyst to rollout. Creating the foundations for a new, place-based working was important for achieving coherence among partners around what local government was trying to achieve. These included investment in infrastructure, both relational and tangible inputs such as organisational and human resources, to establish the conditions for systemic change towards early intervention and prevention. CONCLUSION: This study identified clear foundations for place-based action, plus enablers and barriers to significant transformation of practice towards asset-based approaches between local authorities, partners and the public.

Will Generative AI Tools Improve Access to Reliable Health Information?

This Medical News article is an interview with JAMA Editor in Chief Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo and Virologist Davey Smith, head of the Division of Infectious Diseases and Global Public Health at the University of California, San Diego.

Can the household clean energy transition ameliorate health inequality? Evidence from China.

China is actively encouraging households to replace traditional solid fuels with clean energy. Based on the Chinese Families Panel Survey (CFPS) data, this paper uses propensity scores matching with the difference-in-differences model to examine the impact of clean energy in the household sector on residents' health status, and whether such an energy transition promotes health equity by favoring relatively disadvantaged social groups. The results show that: (1) The use of cleaner cooking fuels can significantly improve residents' health status; (2) The older adult and women have higher health returns from the clean energy transition, demonstrating that, from the perspective of age and gender, the energy transition contributes to the promotion of health equity; (3) The clean energy transition has a lower or insignificant health impact on residents who cannot easily obtain clean energy or replace non-clean energy at an affordable price. Most of these individuals live in low-income, energy-poor, or rural households. Thus, the energy transition exacerbates health inequalities. This paper suggests that to reduce the cost of using clean energy and help address key issues in health inequality, Chinese government efforts should focus on improving the affordability, accessibility, and reliability of clean energy.

Ending "domestic helicopter research".

"Helicopter research" refers to a practice where researchers from wealthier countries conduct studies in lower-income countries with little involvement of local researchers or community members. This practice also occurs domestically. In this Commentary, we outline strategies to curb domestic helicopter research and to foster equity-centered collaborations.

Understanding responsibility for health inequalities in children's hospitals in England: a qualitative study with hospital staff.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to understand how staff in children's hospitals view their responsibility to reduce health inequalities for the children and young people who access their services. DESIGN: We conducted an exploratory qualitative study. SETTING: The study took place at nine children's hospitals in England. PARTICIPANTS: 217 members of staff contributed via interviews and focus groups conducted January-June 2023. Staff were represented at all levels of the organisations, and all staff who volunteered to contribute were included in the study. ANALYSIS: Data were analysed using Rapid Research Evaluation and Appraisal (RREAL) methodology for rapid assessment procedures (RAP). RESULTS: All of the children's hospitals were taking some action to reduce health inequalities. Two key themes were identified. First, it was clear that reducing health inequalities was seen as something that was of vital import and should be part of staff's day-to-day activity, framed as 'everyone's business.' Many staff felt that there was an obligation to intervene to ensure that children and young people receiving hospital treatment were not further disadvantaged by, for example, food poverty. Second, however, the deeply entrenched and intersectional nature of health inequalities sometimes meant that these inequalities were complex to tackle, with no clear impetus to specific actions, and could be framed as 'no-one's responsibility'. Within a complex health and social care system, there were many potential actors who could take responsibility for reducing health inequalities, and staff often questioned whether it was the role of a children's hospital to lead these initiatives. CONCLUSIONS: Broadly speaking, senior leaders were clear about their organisational role in reducing health inequalities where they impacted on access and quality of care, but there was some uncertainty about the perceived boundaries of responsibility. This led to fragility in the sustainability of activity, and a lack of joined-up intervention. Most hospitals were forging ahead with activity, considering that it was more important to work to overcome health inequalities rather than debate whose job it was.

Epidemiological approaches to multivariable models of health inequity: A study of race, rurality, and occupation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: Methods for assessing the structural mechanisms of health inequity are not well established. This study applies a phased approach to modeling racial, occupational, and rural disparities on the county level. METHODS: Rural counties with disparately high rates of COVID-19 incidence or mortality were randomly paired with in-state control counties with the same rural-urban continuum code. Analysis was restricted to the first six months of the pandemic to represent the baseline structural reserves for each county and reduce biases related to the disruption of these reserves over time. Conditional logistic regression was applied in two phases-first, to examine the demographic distribution of disparities and then, to examine the relationships between these disparities and county-level social and structural reserves. RESULTS: In over 200 rural county pairs (205 for incidence, 209 for mortality), disparities were associated with structural variables representing economic factors, healthcare infrastructure, and local industry. Modeling results were sensitive to assumptions about the relationships between race and other social and structural variables measured at the county level, particularly in models intended to reflect effect modification or mediation. CONCLUSIONS: Multivariable modeling of health disparities should reflect the social and structural mechanisms of inequity and anticipate interventions that can advance equity.

Health inequalities in childhood diseases: temporal trends in the inter-crisis period.

BACKGROUND: Since 2008, children in Catalonia (Spain) have suffered a period of great economic deprivation. This situation has generated broad-ranging health inequalities in a variety of diseases. It is not known how these inequalities have changed over time. The aim of the present study is to determine trends in inequalities over this period in ten relevant diseases in children according to sex and age. METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional population-based study of all children under 15 years old resident in Catalonia during the 2014-2021 period (over 1.2 million children/year) and of their diagnoses registered by the Catalan Health System. Health inequalities were estimated by calculating the relative index of inequality and time trends using logistic regression models. Interaction terms were added to test for the effects of sex on time trends. RESULTS: Increasing significant temporal trends in inequalities were shown for both sexes in almost all the diseases or adverse events studied (asthma, injuries, poisoning, congenital anomalies, overweight and obesity), in mood disorders in boys, and in adverse birth outcomes in girls. Adjustment and anxiety and mood disorders in girls showed a decreasing temporal trend in inequalities. More than half of the diseases and adverse events studied experienced significant annual increases in inequality. Poisoning stood out with an average annual increase of 8.65% [4.30, 13.00], p ≤ 0.001 in boys and 8.64% [5.76, 11.52], p ≤ 0.001) in girls, followed by obesity with increases of 5.52% [4.15, 6.90], p = < 0.001 in boys and 4.89% [4.26, 5.51], p ≤ 0.001) in girls. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that inequalities persist and have increased since 2014. Policy makers should turn their attention to how interventions to reduce Health inequalities are designed, and who benefits from them.

Perspective: Nutrition Health Disparities Framework: A Model to Advance Health Equity.

Disparities in nutrition, such as poor diet quality and inadequate nutrient intake, arise from multiple factors and are related to adverse health outcomes such as obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and some cancers. The aim of the current perspective is to present a nutrition-centric socioecological framework that delineates determinants and factors that contribute to diet and nutrition-related disparities among disadvantaged populations. The Nutrition Health Disparities Framework (NHDF) describes the domains (biological, behavioral, physical/built environment, sociocultural environment, and healthcare system) that influence nutrition-related health disparities through the lens of each level of influence (that is, individual, interpersonal, community, and societal). On the basis of the scientific literature, the authors engaged in consensus decision making in selecting nutrition-related determinants of health within each domain and socioecological level when creating the NHDF. The framework identifies how neighborhood food availability and access (individual/built environment) intersect with cultural norms and practices (interpersonal/sociocultural environment) to influence dietary behaviors, exposures, and risk of diet-related diseases. In addition, the NHDF shows how factors such as genetic predisposition (individual/biology), family dietary practices (interpersonal/behavioral), and food marketing policies (societal) may impact the consumption of unhealthy foods and beverages and increase chronic disease risk. Family and peer norms (interpersonal/behavior) related to breastfeeding and early childhood nutrition interact with resource-poor environments such as lack of access to preventive healthcare settings (societal/healthcare system) and low usage of federal nutrition programs (societal/behavioral), which may increase risk of poor nutrition during childhood and food insecurity. The NHDF describes the synergistic interrelationships among factors at different levels of the socioecological model that influence nutrition-related outcomes and exacerbate health disparities. The framework is a useful resource for nutrition researchers, practitioners, food industry leaders, and policymakers interested in improving diet-related health outcomes and promoting health equity in diverse populations.

Editorial: Equity, diversity and inclusion in child and adolescent mental health - equality of opportunities should be every child's right and every society's obligation.

Socio-ecological factors are major determinants of poor mental health across the life span. These factors can lead to health inequalities, which refer to differences in the health of individuals or groups (Kirkbride et al., 2024). Health inequity "is a specific type of health inequality that denotes an unjust, avoidable, systematic and unnecessary difference in health" (Arcaya, Arcaya, & Subramanian, 2015). Among several intersecting social adversities, inequity is one of the most pervasive contributors to poor mental health across all regions (Venkatapuram & Marmot, 2023). Structural inequity creates institutional power structures that marginalise large sections of the population and concentrate resources in the hands of a small minority (Shim, Kho, & Murray-García, 2018). The world is now more prosperous than it has ever been, yet the world is witnessing more within country inequality with the vast majority of the world's resources in the hands of a small minority of individuals or regions (United Nations, 2020).