Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Front Public Health ; 10: 927658, 2022.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35910894

RESUMEN

Background: Area deprivation has been shown to be associated with various adverse health outcomes including communicable as well as non-communicable diseases. Our objective was to assess potential associations between area deprivation and COVID-19 standardized incidence and mortality ratios in Bavaria over a period of nearly 2 years. Bavaria is the federal state with the highest infection dynamics in Germany and demographically comparable to several other European countries. Methods: In this retrospective, observational ecological study, we estimated the strength of associations between area deprivation and standardized COVID-19 incidence and mortality ratios (SIR and SMR) in Bavaria, Germany. We used official SARS-CoV-2 reporting data aggregated in monthly periods between March 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021. Area deprivation was assessed using the quintiles of the 2015 version of the Bavarian Index of Multiple Deprivation (BIMD 2015) at district level, analyzing the overall index as well as its single domains. Results: Deprived districts showed higher SIR and SMR than less deprived districts. Aggregated over the whole period, the SIR increased by 1.04 (95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.01 to 1.07, p = 0.002), and the SMR by 1.11 (95% CI: 1.07 to 1.16, p < 0.001) per BIMD quintile. This represents a maximum difference of 41% between districts in the most and least deprived quintiles in the SIR and 110% in the SMR. Looking at individual months revealed clear linear association between the BIMD quintiles and the SIR and SMR in the first, second and last quarter of 2021. In the summers of 2020 and 2021, infection activity was low. Conclusions: In more deprived areas in Bavaria, Germany, higher incidence and mortality ratios were observed during the COVID-19 pandemic with particularly strong associations during infection waves 3 and 4 in 2020/2021. Only high infection levels reveal the effect of risk factors and socioeconomic inequalities. There may be confounding between the highly deprived areas and border regions in the north and east of Bavaria, making the relationship between area deprivation and infection burden more complex. Vaccination appeared to balance incidence and mortality rates between the most and least deprived districts. Vaccination makes an important contribution to health equality.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Teorema de Bayes , COVID-19/epidemiología , Alemania/epidemiología , Humanos , Incidencia , Pandemias , Áreas de Pobreza , Estudios Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2
2.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ; 16: 266, 2016 09 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27613387

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) occurs in 2-6 % of all pregnancies. We investigated whether area level deprivation is associated with a higher risk for GDM and whether GDM detection rates in deprived regions changed after the introduction of charge-free GDM screening in Germany in 2012. METHODS: We analyzed population-based data from Bavaria, Germany, comprising n = 587,621 deliveries in obstetric units between 2008 and 2014. Area level deprivation was assessed municipality-based using the Bavarian Index of Multiple Deprivation (BIMD), divided into quintiles and assigned to each mother based on her residential address. We estimated annual odds ratios (ORs) for GDM diagnosis by BIMD quintile with adjustment for maternal obesity, maternal age, migration background and single mother status. RESULTS: Women from the most deprived regions were less likely to be diagnosed with GDM before introduction of charge-free GDM screening (OR = 0.76 [95 % confidence interval: 0.66, 0.86] compared to least deprived areas), in 2008. In contrast, high area level deprivation was associated with significantly increased risk of GDM diagnosis in 2013 (OR [95 % confidence interval] = 1.15 [1.02, 1.29]). The OR was also elevated, although not significantly, in 2014 (OR [95 % confidence interval] = 1.05 [0.93, 1.18]). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of GDM seems to have been underreported in women from highly deprived areas before introduction of the charge-free GDM screening in Germany. In fact, women living in deprived regions seem to have an increased risk for GDM and may profit from access to charge-free GDM screening.


Asunto(s)
Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Diabetes Gestacional/diagnóstico , Tamizaje Masivo/economía , Pobreza/estadística & datos numéricos , Diagnóstico Prenatal/economía , Adulto , Estudios Transversales , Diabetes Gestacional/economía , Diabetes Gestacional/epidemiología , Femenino , Alemania/epidemiología , Humanos , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Oportunidad Relativa , Embarazo , Diagnóstico Prenatal/métodos , Prevalencia , Factores de Riesgo
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA