Partnership Status, Health, and Mortality: Selection or Protection?

Married individuals have better health and lower mortality than nonmarried people. Studies show that when cohabitants are distinguished from other nonmarried groups, health differences between partnered and nonpartnered individuals become even more pronounced. Some researchers have argued that partnered individuals have better health and lower mortality because a partnership offers protective effects (protection); others have posited that partnered people have better health and lower mortality because healthy persons are more likely to form a union and less likely to dissolve it (selection). This study contributes to this debate by investigating health and mortality by partnership status in England and Wales and analyzing the causes of mortality differences. We use combined data from the British Household Panel Survey and the UK Household Longitudinal Study and apply a simultaneous-equations hazard model to control for observed and unobserved selection into partnerships. We develop a novel approach to identify frailty based on self-rated health. Our analysis shows that partnered individuals have significantly lower mortality than nonpartnered people. We observe some selection into and out of unions on unobserved health characteristics, but the mortality differences by partnership status persist. The study offers strong support for the marital protection hypothesis and extends it to nonmarital partnerships.

Medical App Treatment of Non-Specific Low Back Pain in the 12-month Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial Rise-uP: Where Clinical Superiority Meets Cost Savings.

Purpose: Non-specific low back pain (NLBP) exerts a profound impact on global health and economics. In the era of Web 3.0, digital therapeutics offer the potential to improve NLBP management. The Rise-uP trial introduces a digitally anchored, general practitioner (GP)-focused back pain management approach with the Kaia back pain app as the key intervention. Here, we present the 12-months evaluation of the Rise-uP trial including clinical and economic outcomes, patient satisfaction and behavioral tracking analysis. Methods: The cluster-randomized controlled study (registration number: DRKS00015048) enrolled 1237 patients, with 930 receiving treatment according to the Rise-uP approach and 307 subjected to standard of care treatment. Assessments of pain, psychological state, functional capacity, and well-being (patient-reported outcome measures; PROMs) were collected at baseline, and at 3-, 6-, and 12-months follow-up intervals. Health insurance partners AOK, DAK, and BARMER provided individual healthcare cost data. An artificial intelligence (AI)-driven behavioral tracking analysis identified distinct app usage clusters that presented all with about the same clinical outcome. Patient satisfaction (patient-reported experience measures; PREMs) was captured at the end of the trial. Results: Intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis demonstrated that the Rise-uP group experienced significantly greater pain reduction at 12 months compared to the control group (IG: -46% vs CG: -24%; p < 0.001) with only the Rise-uP group achieving a pain reduction that was clinically meaningful. Improvements in all other PROMs were notably superior in patients of the Rise-uP group. The AI analysis of app usage discerned four usage clusters. Short- to long-term usage, all produced about the same level of pain reduction. Cost-effectiveness analysis indicated a substantial economic benefit for Rise-uP. Conclusion: The Rise-uP approach with a medical multimodal back pain app as the central element of digital treatment demonstrates both, clinical and economic superiority compared to standard of care in the management of NLBP.