Social patterning of telephone health-advice for diarrhoea and vomiting: analysis of 24 million telehealth calls in England.

OBJECTIVES: Gastrointestinal (GI) infections are common and most people do not see a physician. There is conflicting evidence of the impact of socioeconomic status (SES) on risk of GI infections. We assessed the relationship between SES and GI calls to two National Health Service (NHS) telephone advice services in England. METHODS: Over 24 million calls to NHS Direct (2010-13) and NHS 111 (2013-15) were extracted from Public Health England (PHE) syndromic surveillance systems. The relationship between SES and GI calls was assessed using generalised linear models (GLM). RESULTS: Adjusting for rurality and age-sex interactions, in NHS Direct, children in disadvantaged areas were at lower risk of GI calls; in NHS 111 there was a higher risk of GI calls in disadvantaged areas for all ages (0-4 years RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.25-1.29; 5-9 years RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.36-1.51; 10-14 years RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.26-1.41; 15-19 years RR 1.59, 95% CI 1.52-1.67; 20-59 years RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.47-1.53, 60 years and over RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.09-1.14). CONCLUSIONS: Disadvantaged areas had higher risk of GI calls in NHS 111. This may relate to differences in exposure or vulnerability to GI infections, or propensity to call about GI infections.

Relationship between socioeconomic status and gastrointestinal infections in developed countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The association between socioeconomic status (SES) and health is well-documented; however limited evidence on the relationship between SES and gastrointestinal (GI) infections exists, with published studies producing conflicting results. This systematic review aimed to assess the association between SES and GI infection risk, and explore possible sources of heterogeneity in effect estimates reported in the literature. METHODS: MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science and grey literature were searched from 1980 to October 2015 for studies reporting an association between GI infections and SES in a representative population sample from a member-country of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Harvest plots and meta-regression were used to investigate potential sources of heterogeneity such as age; level of SES variable; GI infection measurement; and predominant mode of transmission. The protocol was registered on PROSPERO: CRD42015027231. RESULTS: In total, 6021 studies were identified; 102 met the inclusion criteria. Age was identified as the only statistically significant potential effect modifier of the association between SES and GI infection risk. For children, GI infection risk was higher for those of lower SES versus high (RR 1.51, 95% CI;1.26-1.83), but there was no association for adults (RR 0.79, 95% CI;0.58-1.06). In univariate analysis, the increased risk comparing low and high SES groups was significantly higher for pathogens spread by person-to-person transmission, but lower for environmental pathogens, as compared to foodborne pathogens. CONCLUSIONS: Disadvantaged children, but not adults, have greater risk of GI infection compared to their more advantaged counterparts. There was high heterogeneity and many studies were of low quality. More high quality studies are needed to investigate the association between SES and GI infection risk, and future research should stratify analyses by age and pathogen type. Gaining further insight into this relationship will help inform policies to reduce inequalities in GI illness in children.

Socioeconomic status and infectious intestinal disease in the community: a longitudinal study (IID2 study).

Background: Infectious intestinal diseases (IID) are common, affecting around 25% of people in UK each year at an estimated annual cost to the economy, individuals and the NHS of £1.5 billion. While there is evidence of higher IID hospital admissions in more disadvantaged groups, the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and risk of IID remains unclear. This study aims to investigate the relationship between SES and IID in a large community cohort. Methods: Longitudinal analysis of a prospective community cohort in the UK following 6836 participants of all ages was undertaken. Hazard ratios for IID by SES were estimated using Cox proportional hazard, adjusting for follow-up time and potential confounding factors. Results: In the fully adjusted analysis, hazard ratio of IID was significantly lower among routine/manual occupations compared with managerial/professional occupations (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.61-0.90). Conclusion: In this large community cohort, lower SES was associated with lower IID risk. This may be partially explained by the low response rate which varied by SES. However, it may be related to differences in exposure or recognition of IID symptoms by SES. Higher hospital admissions associated with lower SES observed in some studies could relate to more severe consequences, rather than increased infection risk.

Socioeconomic status is associated with symptom severity and sickness absence in people with infectious intestinal disease in the UK.

BACKGROUND: The burden of infectious intestinal disease (IID) in the UK is substantial. Negative consequences including sickness absence are common, but little is known about the social patterning of these outcomes, or the extent to which they relate to disease severity. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis using IID cases identified from a large population-based survey, to explore the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and symptom severity and sickness absence; and to assess the role of symptom severity on the relationship between SES and absence. Regression modelling was used to investigate these associations, whilst controlling for potential confounders such as age, sex and ethnicity. RESULTS: Among 1164 cases, those of lower SES versus high had twice the odds of experiencing severe symptoms (OR 2.2, 95%CI;1.66-2.87). Lower SES was associated with higher odds of sickness absence (OR 1.8, 95%CI;1.26-2.69), however this association was attenuated after adjusting for symptom severity (OR 1.4, 95%CI;0.92-2.07). CONCLUSIONS: In a large sample of IID cases, those of low SES versus high were more likely to report severe symptoms, and sickness absence; with greater severity largely explaining the higher absence. Public health interventions are needed to address the unequal consequences of IID identified.