Health status, care dependency and oral care utilization among older adults: a register-based study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to examine oral care utilisation among older Danes and to describe the extent to which oral care use is associated with the co-existence of challenges relating to general health and care dependency. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study used registry data covering the entire population of older adults (≥65 years) in seven municipalities in Denmark (N = 178 787 individuals). Oral care services utilisation was computed from administrative data on oral care contacts up to and including 2019, including both private oral care and a municipal oral care programme (MOCP). Various registry data sources were used to compute risk factors to describe oral care utilisation across indicators of general health and care dependency. RESULTS: Indicators for poorer health were associated with larger proportions of individuals enrolled in the MOCPs and larger proportions of non-users of any type of oral care. Higher degrees of care dependency were associated with larger proportions of individuals enrolled in MOCPs and individuals with no use of any oral care services, with the exception of nursing home residents, who comprised a lower proportion of non-users than individuals receiving at-home care. Municipal oral care mainly enrolled older adults who were nursing home residents (60% of nursing home residents were enrolled). CONCLUSION: Our findings support existing evidence on the link between oral care utilisation and general health and frailty. While the municipal care programmes assisted in covering oral care for those with the highest level of care dependency, future preventive strategies for ensuring care continuity for older adults that are increasing in frailty may want to focus on the earlier stages of frailty and of general health deterioration.

A decade of socioeconomic inequality in type 2 diabetes area-level prevalence: an unshakeable status quo?

AIMS: It is well known that there is a socioeconomic gradient in the prevalence of many chronic diseases, including type 2 diabetes (T2DM). We present a simple assessment of the macro-level association between area socioeconomic disadvantage and the area-level prevalence of T2DM in Danish municipalities and the development in this relationship over the last decade. METHODS: We used readily available public data on the socioeconomic composition of municipalities and T2DM prevalence to illustrate this association and report the absolute and relative summary measures of socioeconomic inequality over the time period 2008-2018. RESULTS: The results show a persistent relationship between municipality socioeconomic disadvantage and T2DM prevalence across all analyses, with a modelled gap in T2DM prevalence between the most and least disadvantaged municipalities, the slope index of inequality, of 1.23 [0.97;1.49] in 2018. CONCLUSIONS: These results may be used to indicate areas with specific needs, to encourage systematic monitoring of socioeconomic gradients in health, and to provide a descriptive backdrop for a discussion of how to tackle these socioeconomic and geographic inequalities, which seem to persist even in the context of the comprehensive welfare systems in Scandinavia.

Equity of referrals to type 2 diabetes rehabilitation in a universal welfare state.

Objective: Despite aims of equal access to treatment and care in the Nordic countries, marked socioeconomic inequality in the development of type 2 diabetes (T2D) complications persists. The study purpose was to estimate the associations of individual socioeconomic position and deprivation at the general practitioner (GP) level with referrals to T2D rehabilitation.Research Design and Methods: In 2015-2018, 3390 people affiliated with 432 primary GPs living in the municipality of Copenhagen were identified through registry data as newly diagnosed with T2D. Of these, 656 (19%) individuals were referred to municipal rehabilitation services in 2015-2021. Individual socioeconomic position was measured by education, income, and employment. The Danish Deprivation Index (DADI) was used as a measure of GP-level deprivation. Results: Patients were more likely to be referred to municipal rehabilitation if they had low vs. high income (hazard ratio (HR) 2.87 [women], 1.64 [men]), were not employed vs. employed (HR 1.95 [women], 1.23 [men]) and were affiliated with GPs with a low vs. very high level of deprivation (HR 7.63 [women], 4.30 [men]). The results suggest that GPs practice proportionate universalism by allocating treatment to lower socioeconomic individuals in likely higher need of care. However, the overall HR for referrals was lower among GPs with more deprived patient populations, indicating unequal treatment of all citizens, which conflicts with the aims of general universal health care. Inequality in rehabilitation healthcare services must be further addressed and investigated to prevent exacerbating health disparities.

The role of self-efficacy, well-being capability and diabetes care assessment for emotional and diabetes management challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic: Findings from a follow-up study.

This study aimed to investigate the potential protective role of baseline resources and capabilities for experiencing challenges to emotional well-being and perceived access to and quality of diabetes care during the COVID-19 pandemic in a Danish type 2 diabetes population (N = 1608). We investigated how differences in self-efficacy, well-being capability, socioeconomic status, health status, and perceptions of diabetes care measured before the COVID-19 pandemic were related to experiences of well-being and diabetes management challenges during the pandemic. The study is based on a survey conducted shortly before the pandemic (autumn 2019) and a follow-up survey during the pandemic (autumn 2020), which included questions about impacts of the pandemic. We used this longitudinal data to quantitatively investigate in regression analyses how self-reported baseline indicators of chronic care access and quality (PACIC), self-efficacy (GSE), health (EQ VAS), and well-being capability (ICECAP-A), and registry-based socioeconomic indicators were associated with the probability of reporting negative impacts on emotional wellbeing and diabetes management. Results showed that respondents with higher baseline general self-efficacy and higher well-being capability scores, who more often considered care well-organised and were in better health before the pandemic, were less likely to report pandemic-related negative impacts on emotional well-being. Considering diabetes care well organised before the pandemic was associated with a lower probability of adverse impacts on diabetes care. The results thus broadly confirmed that several indicators of higher levels of baseline resources and capabilities were associated with a lower probability of reporting negative impacts of the pandemic. However, some variation in predictors was observed for general well-being outcomes, compared to diabetes-care specific challenges, and findings on socioeconomic status as indicated by education were mixed.

Conceptualising equity in the impact evaluation of chronic disease management programmes: a capabilities approach.

Chronic diseases are highly important for the future level and distribution of health and well-being in western societies. Consequently, it seems pertinent to assess not only efficiency of chronic care but also its impact on health equity. However, operationalisation of health equity has proven a challenging task. Challenges include identifying a relevant and measurable evaluative space. Various schools of thought in health economics have identified different outcomes of interest for equity assessment, with capabilities as a proposed alternative to more conventional economic conceptualisations. The aim of this paper is to contribute to the conceptualisation of health equity evaluation in the context of chronic disease management. We do this by firstly introducing an equity enquiry framework incorporating the capabilities approach. Secondly, we demonstrate the application and relevance of this framework through a content analysis of equity-related principles and aims in national chronic disease management guidelines and the national diabetes action plan in Denmark. Finally, we discuss how conceptualisations of equity focused on capabilities may be used in evaluation by scoping relevant operationalisations. A promising way forward in the context of chronic care evaluation may emerge from a combination of concepts of capabilities developed in economics, health sciences and psychology.

Exploring equity in accessing diabetes management treatment: A healthcare gap analysis.

Healthcare inequities are often investigated empirically as associations between socio-economic characteristics and differences between observed healthcare utilisation and estimates of needs-based utilisation. However, the concept of 'need' is tricky to operationalise and utilisation may be contingent on inequities arising at an earlier stage. In this study, we apply a unique combination of register and survey data collected in 2019 to assess equity in opportunities to access treatment for patients with recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes. In the study of this population (N = 1864) we escape the challenge of estimating needs by arguing that need can be approximated from treatment guidelines within a nationwide framework of disease management programmes. Furthermore, instead of observed utilisation we use patient reports on whether they have been offered treatment as a measure of opportunities to access multiple components of care, that is, we focus on possible inequalities arising prior to possible utilisation inequalities. 'Healthcare gaps' are computed as the discrepancy between an index of guideline recommended treatments and patients' perceived offers of treatments, thus providing a novel take on the 'healthcare deprivation profiles' approach to the study of healthcare inequalities. Using this method, we explore and document inequalities along multiple dimensions of familiar socio-economic factors (income, education, occupation) as well as self-reported barriers to access. We also provide supporting evidence that healthcare gaps, as measured in our study, are associated with poorer quality of care, and that those who experience large gaps are more likely to be disadvantaged in terms of self-reported difficulties in relation to key self-care aspects. We conclude that even in a health system with comprehensive universal coverage, healthcare inequity can arise already at the stage of offering access to preventive treatment. The results warrant further research into the causes, consequences and remedies of such inequities.