Sociodemographic inequities associated with participation in leisure-time physical activity in sub-Saharan Africa: an individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) is an important contributor to total physical activity and the focus of many interventions promoting activity in high-income populations. Little is known about LTPA in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), and with expected declines in physical activity due to rapid urbanisation and lifestyle changes we aimed to assess the sociodemographic differences in the prevalence of LTPA in the adult populations of this region to identify potential barriers for equitable participation. METHODS: A two-step individual participant data meta-analysis was conducted using data collected in SSA through 10 population health surveys that included the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire. For each sociodemographic characteristic, the pooled adjusted prevalence and risk ratios (RRs) for participation in LTPA were calculated using the random effects method. Between-study heterogeneity was explored through meta-regression analyses and tests for interaction. RESULTS: Across the 10 populations (N = 26,022), 18.9% (95%CI: 14.3, 24.1; I2 = 99.0%) of adults (≥ 18 years) participated in LTPA. Men were more likely to participate in LTPA compared with women (RR for women: 0.43; 95%CI: 0.32, 0.60; P < 0.001; I2 = 97.5%), while age was inversely associated with participation. Higher levels of education were associated with increased LTPA participation (RR: 1.30; 95%CI: 1.09, 1.55; P = 0.004; I2 = 98.1%), with those living in rural areas or self-employed less likely to participate in LTPA. These associations remained after adjusting for time spent physically active at work or through active travel. CONCLUSIONS: In these populations, participation in LTPA was low, and strongly associated with sex, age, education, self-employment and urban residence. Identifying the potential barriers that reduce participation in these groups is necessary to enable equitable access to the health and social benefits associated with LTPA.

The state of hypertension care in 44 low-income and middle-income countries: a cross-sectional study of nationally representative individual-level data from 1·1 million adults.

BACKGROUND: Evidence from nationally representative studies in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) on where in the hypertension care continuum patients are lost to care is sparse. This information, however, is essential for effective targeting of interventions by health services and monitoring progress in improving hypertension care. We aimed to determine the cascade of hypertension care in 44 LMICs-and its variation between countries and population groups-by dividing the progression in the care process, from need of care to successful treatment, into discrete stages and measuring the losses at each stage. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we pooled individual-level population-based data from 44 LMICs. We first searched for nationally representative datasets from the WHO Stepwise Approach to Surveillance (STEPS) from 2005 or later. If a STEPS dataset was not available for a LMIC (or we could not gain access to it), we conducted a systematic search for survey datasets; the inclusion criteria in these searches were that the survey was done in 2005 or later, was nationally representative for at least three 10-year age groups older than 15 years, included measured blood pressure data, and contained data on at least two hypertension care cascade steps. Hypertension was defined as a systolic blood pressure of at least 140 mm Hg, diastolic blood pressure of at least 90 mm Hg, or reported use of medication for hypertension. Among those with hypertension, we calculated the proportion of individuals who had ever had their blood pressure measured; had been diagnosed with hypertension; had been treated for hypertension; and had achieved control of their hypertension. We weighted countries proportionally to their population size when determining this hypertension care cascade at the global and regional level. We disaggregated the hypertension care cascade by age, sex, education, household wealth quintile, body-mass index, smoking status, country, and region. We used linear regression to predict, separately for each cascade step, a country's performance based on gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, allowing us to identify countries whose performance fell outside of the 95% prediction interval. FINDINGS: Our pooled dataset included 1 100 507 participants, of whom 192 441 (17·5%) had hypertension. Among those with hypertension, 73·6% of participants (95% CI 72·9-74·3) had ever had their blood pressure measured, 39·2% of participants (38·2-40·3) had been diagnosed with hypertension, 29·9% of participants (28·6-31·3) received treatment, and 10·3% of participants (9·6-11·0) achieved control of their hypertension. Countries in Latin America and the Caribbean generally achieved the best performance relative to their predicted performance based on GDP per capita, whereas countries in sub-Saharan Africa performed worst. Bangladesh, Brazil, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Kyrgyzstan, and Peru performed significantly better on all care cascade steps than predicted based on GDP per capita. Being a woman, older, more educated, wealthier, and not being a current smoker were all positively associated with attaining each of the four steps of the care cascade. INTERPRETATION: Our study provides important evidence for the design and targeting of health policies and service interventions for hypertension in LMICs. We show at what steps and for whom there are gaps in the hypertension care process in each of the 44 countries in our study. We also identified countries in each world region that perform better than expected from their economic development, which can direct policy makers to important policy lessons. Given the high disease burden caused by hypertension in LMICs, nationally representative hypertension care cascades, as constructed in this study, are an important measure of progress towards achieving universal health coverage. FUNDING: Harvard McLennan Family Fund, Alexander von Humboldt Foundation.