ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The focus of most epidemiological studies has been mortality or clinical events, with less information on activity limitations related to basic daily functions and their consequences. Standardised data from multiple countries at different economic levels in different regions of the world on activity limitations and their associations with clinical outcomes are sparse. We aimed to quantify the prevalence of activity limitations and use of assistive devices and the association of limitations with adverse outcomes in 25 countries grouped by different economic levels. METHODS: In this analysis, we obtained data from individuals in 25 high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries from the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiological (PURE) study (175 660 participants). In the PURE study, individuals aged 35-70 years who intended to continue living in their current home for a further 4 years were invited to complete a questionnaire on activity limitations. Participant follow-up was planned once every 3 years either by telephone or in person. The activity limitation screen consisted of questions on self-reported difficulty with walking, grasping, bending, seeing close, seeing far, speaking, hearing, and use of assistive devices (gait, vision, and hearing aids). We estimated crude prevalence of self-reported activity limitations and use of assistive devices, and prevalence standardised by age and sex. We used logistic regression to additionally adjust prevalence for education and socioeconomic factors and to estimate the probability of activity limitations and assistive devices by age, sex, and country income. We used Cox frailty models to evaluate the association between each activity limitation with mortality and clinical events (cardiovascular disease, heart failure, pneumonia, falls, and cancer). The PURE study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03225586. FINDINGS: Between Jan 12, 2001, and May 6, 2019, 175 584 individuals completed at least one question on the activity limitation questionnaire (mean age 50·6 years [SD 9·8]; 103 625 [59%] women). Of the individuals who completed all questions, mean follow-up was 10·7 years (SD 4·4). The most common self-reported activity limitations were difficulty with bending (23 921 [13·6%] of 175 515 participants), seeing close (22 532 [13·4%] of 167 801 participants), and walking (22 805 [13·0%] of 175 554 participants); prevalence of limitations was higher with older age and among women. The prevalence of all limitations standardised by age and sex, with the exception of hearing, was highest in low-income countries and middle-income countries, and this remained consistent after adjustment for socioeconomic factors. The use of gait, visual, and hearing aids was lowest in low-income countries and middle-income countries, particularly among women. The prevalence of seeing close limitation was four times higher (6257 [16·5%] of 37 926 participants vs 717 [4·0%] of 18 039 participants) and the prevalence of seeing far limitation was five times higher (4003 [10·6%] of 37 923 participants vs 391 [2·2%] of 18 038 participants) in low-income countries than in high-income countries, but the prevalence of glasses use in low-income countries was half that in high-income countries. Walking limitation was most strongly associated with mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 1·32 [95% CI 1·25-1·39]) and most consistently associated with other clinical events, with other notable associations observed between seeing far limitation and mortality, grasping limitation and cardiovascular disease, bending limitation and falls, and between speaking limitation and stroke. INTERPRETATION: The global prevalence of activity limitations is substantially higher in women than men and in low-income countries and middle-income countries compared with high-income countries, coupled with a much lower use of gait, visual, and hearing aids. Strategies are needed to prevent and mitigate activity limitations globally, with particular emphasis on low-income countries and women. FUNDING: Funding sources are listed at the end of the Article.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has caused profound socio-economic changes worldwide. However, internationally comparative data regarding the financial impact on individuals is sparse. Therefore, we conducted a survey of the financial impact of the pandemic on individuals, using an international cohort that has been well-characterized prior to the pandemic. METHODS: Between August 2020 and September 2021, we surveyed 24,506 community-dwelling participants from the Prospective Urban-Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study across high (HIC), upper middle (UMIC)-and lower middle (LMIC)-income countries. We collected information regarding the impact of the pandemic on their self-reported personal finances and sources of income. FINDINGS: Overall, 32.4% of participants had suffered an adverse financial impact, defined as job loss, inability to meet financial obligations or essential needs, or using savings to meet financial obligations. 8.4% of participants had lost a job (temporarily or permanently); 14.6% of participants were unable to meet financial obligations or essential needs at the time of the survey and 16.3% were using their savings to meet financial obligations. Participants with a post-secondary education were least likely to be adversely impacted (19.6%), compared with 33.4% of those with secondary education and 33.5% of those with pre-secondary education. Similarly, those in the highest wealth tertile were least likely to be financially impacted (26.7%), compared with 32.5% in the middle tertile and 30.4% in the bottom tertile participants. Compared with HICs, financial impact was greater in UMIC [odds ratio of 2.09 (1.88-2.33)] and greatest in LMIC [odds ratio of 16.88 (14.69-19.39)]. HIC participants with the lowest educational attainment suffered less financial impact (15.1% of participants affected) than those with the highest education in UMIC (22.0% of participants affected). Similarly, participants with the lowest education in UMIC experienced less financial impact (28.3%) than those with the highest education in LMIC (45.9%). A similar gradient was seen across country income categories when compared by pre-pandemic wealth status. INTERPRETATION: The financial impact of the pandemic differs more between HIC, UMIC, and LMIC than between socio-economic categories within a country income level. The most disadvantaged socio-economic subgroups in HIC had a lower financial impact from the pandemic than the most advantaged subgroup in UMIC, with a similar disparity seen between UMIC and LMIC. Continued high levels of infection will exacerbate financial inequity between countries and hinder progress towards the sustainable development goals, emphasising the importance of effective measures to control COVID-19 and, especially, ensuring high vaccine coverage in all countries. FUNDING: Funding for this study was provided by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the International Development Research Centre.