Infant exposure to environmental tobacco smoke: a prevalence study in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To determine: the prevalence of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke among infants aged 0-12 months in two child health care settings; the accuracy of parent report indicators of exposure; and the factors associated with exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. METHOD: Samples of consecutive parents of infants 12 months of age or younger who attended Hunter Region public child health and immunisation clinics were approached to complete a questionnaire and to allow a urine sample to be obtained from their infant during December and January 1998/99. Infant urine samples were analysed for cotinine and information obtained regarding the smoking status of household members, infant exposure to environmental tobacco smoke during the previous three days, and parent and infant characteristics and demographics. RESULTS: 85 (47%) [95% CI 40-54] infants in the combined sample had detectable levels of cotinine. Sensitivity of reported infant exposure of 86% was achieved through the combined measure of parent report of exposure and smoking status of households. The odds of exposure for infants of smoking parents were 14 times that of infants of nonsmokers [CI 5.26-50.0]. CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of the infants in this study had detectable levels of cotinine in their urine. Future interventions targeting infant exposure to environmental tobacco smoke should incorporate quit smoking strategies for both parents and other household members, as well as strategies for changing the pattern of smoking behaviour around infants. IMPLICATIONS: These findings suggest that existing community education strategies and passive smoking public policies are failing to protect this vulnerable population group.

Duration of general practice consultations: association with patient occupational and educational status.

Past studies have demonstrated that the majority of health care visits are made to general practitioners, and that socio-economically disadvantaged individuals are significantly more likely to use such services. Relatively little is known, however, about the quality of general practice care provided to patients of different socio-economic status. The specific aims of the study were to determine whether an association existed between consultation duration and patient educational and occupational status, and if an association was evident, to determine the extent of association after taking into account a range of identified confounding variables and the effect of a clustered sample design. Consecutive consultations from a randomly selected sample of general practitioners were audiotaped and their durations measured electronically. Patient education and occupational status were obtained by questionnaire. Information concerning a range of additional patient, practitioner and consultation variables was also assessed in order to identify possible confounders of the association between consultation duration and patient occupational and educational status. No association was evident between consultation duration and level of patient educational qualification. Independent of identified confounding variables and the effect of a clustered sample design, general practitioners spent less time with those patients employed in unskilled occupations. Unskilled patients received 2.1 min or 21% less time per consultation than patients in professional occupations. The odds of patients in unskilled occupations receiving a long consultation (> 10 min) were 26% less than the odds of patients in professional occupations. The finding of an occupational status differential in the duration of general practice consultations suggests that socio-economically disadvantaged patients may not be receiving the health care they require. Further research is required to confirm these findings and to identify whether similar differentials are evident in more specific elements of general practice care.

Practitioner provision of preventive care in general practice consultations: association with patient educational and occupational status.

Socio-economically disadvantaged individuals experience significantly greater mortality and morbidity relative to advantaged individuals. General practitioners have been suggested to occupy a position which has the capacity to ameliorate the health consequences of socio-economic disadvantage. Community studies of preventive care status suggest, however, that socio-economically disadvantaged individuals are less likely to receive appropriate preventive care. Using a convenience sample of 22 general practitioners, 579 consultations were audiotaped to determine whether practitioner provision of preventive care was associated with the educational and occupational status of patients. Practitioner provision of preventive care was assessed in terms of: the proportion of consultations in which discussion of at least one preventive care topic occurred; the number of preventive care topics discussed; and the proportion of consultations in which each of six specific preventive care topic were discussed. Practitioners were significantly less likely to discuss at least one preventive care topic with patients of high occupational status. No significant differences were observed between patient groups in the number of preventive care topics, discussed, and in the likelihood of receiving preventive care discussion concerning each of six preventive topics. However, a consistent trend of practitioners being less likely to discuss preventive care topics with patients of high educational or occupational status was evident for all outcome variables. The pattern of results suggests that previously reported findings of socio-economically disadvantaged individuals having a poorer preventive care status may not be attributable to differentials in practitioner's provision of preventive care. Greater attention should therefore be given to identifying and resolving barriers other than practitioner-based barriers to preventive care provision if these differentials in preventive care status are to be reduced.

Prevalence and frequency of health service use: associations with occupational prestige and educational attainment.

The accessibility of health care services has been suggested to be one factor with the potential to ameliorate the health effects of socioeconomic disadvantage. From a randomly selected sample of households in the Lower Hunter Valley region, 2623 adults were surveyed in 1987-88 to identify their reported use of medical, allied and alternative health services during the previous four weeks. There was a higher prevalence of use of the 'usual' general practitioner and medical services among educationally disadvantaged respondents only. No significant differences were evident between educational or between occupational groups in the prevalence of use of either alternative services or health services generally. Fewer occupationally disadvantaged respondents reported using allied health services. There was no difference in the number of health services used. Disadvantaged respondents were more likely to use medical services exclusively. Only educationally disadvantaged service users reported using any health, medical or general practitioner services more frequently than expected. In contrast, only occupationally disadvantaged service users reported using allied health services (and allied health services other than dentists) more frequently. The lack of consistent differentials in use across health services in favour of disadvantaged respondents suggests that a number of health care services may not be responding to the greater need for health care among disadvantaged members of the community.