Explaining income-related inequalities in cardiovascular risk factors in Tunisian adults during the last decade: comparison of sensitivity analysis of logistic regression and Wagstaff decomposition analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is important to quantify inequality, explain the contribution of underlying social determinants and to provide evidence to guide health policy. The aim of the study is to explain the income-related inequalities in cardiovascular risk factors in the last decade among Tunisian adults aged between 35 and 70 years old. METHODS: We performed the analysis by applying two approaches and compared the results provided by the two methods. The methods were global sensitivity analysis (GSA) using logistic regression models and the Wagstaff decomposition analysis. RESULTS: Results provided by the two methods found a higher risk of cardiovascular diseases and diabetes in those with high socio-economic status in 2005. Similar results were observed in 2016. In 2016, the GSA showed that education level occupied the first place on the explanatory list of factors explaining 36.1% of the adult social inequality in high cardiovascular risk, followed by the area of residence (26.2%) and income (15.1%). Based on the Wagstaff decomposition analysis, the area of residence occupied the first place and explained 40.3% followed by income and education level explaining 19.2 and 14.0% respectively. Thus, both methods found similar factors explaining inequalities (income, educational level and regional conditions) but with different rankings of importance. CONCLUSIONS: The present study showed substantial income-related inequalities in cardiovascular risk factors and diabetes in Tunisia and provided explanations for this. Results based on two different methods similarly showed that structural disparities on income, educational level and regional conditions should be addressed in order to reduce inequalities.

Stress ulcer, gastritis, and gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in critically ill pediatric patients: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and evaluate the quality of evidence supporting prophylactic use of treatments for stress ulcers and upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Stress ulcers, erosions of the stomach and duodenum, and upper gastrointestinal bleeding are well-known complications of critical illness in children admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit. DATA SOURCES: Studies were identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PUBMED; LILACS; Scirus. We also scanned bibliographies of relevant studies. STUDY SELECTION: This systematic review of randomized controlled trials assessed the effects of drugs for stress-related ulcers, gastritis, and upper gastrointestinal bleeding in critically ill children admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently extracted the relevant data. Most randomized controlled trials were judged as having unclear risk of bias. When pooling two randomized controlled trials, treatment was significantly more effective in preventing upper gastrointestinal bleeding (macroscopic or important bleeding) compared with no treatment (two studies = 300 participants; relative risk, 0.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.91; I = 12%). Meta-analysis of two studies found no significant difference in death rates among groups (two randomized controlled trials = 132 participants; relative risk, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-2.79; I = 4%). The rate of pneumonia was not significantly different when comparing treatment and no treatment in one study. When comparing ranitidine with no treatment, significant differences were found in the proportion of mechanically ventilated children with normal gastric mucosal endoscopic findings by histologic specimens (one randomized controlled trial = 48 participants; relative risk, 3.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.34-9.29). No significant differences were found when comparing different drugs (omeprazole, ranitidine, sucralfate, famotidine, amalgate), doses, or regimens for main outcomes (deaths, endoscopic findings of erosion or ulcers, upper gastrointestinal bleeding, or pneumonia). CONCLUSIONS: Although pooled data of two studies suggested that critically ill pediatric patients may benefit from receiving prophylactic treatment to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding, we found that high-quality evidence to guide clinical practice is still limited.