Unveiling the gaps: Hypertension control beyond the cascade of care framework.

This study examines hypertension control beyond the cascade of care framework, which assesses awareness, treatment, and control sequentially. The analysis included 52 434 hypertensive adults (blood pressure (BP) ≥140/90 mm Hg and/or treatment in the past 6 months), aged 25-69, from the French population-based CONSTANCES cohort from 2012 to 2021. The authors assessed the typical "awareness, treatment, and control" scenario and characterized other possible control patterns. The authors found that 13% achieved control. This percentage rose to 19% when considering individuals who were not aware but treated and controlled. This alternative control scenario was associated with female sex, younger age, higher education, Northern-African origin, and reporting prior cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Sub-Saharan African origin, diabetes and overweight/obesity were associated with the typical control scenario. This study highlights that applying a typical sequential cascade of care approach may lead to the exclusion of some specific groups of participants who do not fit into the defined categories.

Social inequalities in medical appointment cancellations and reschedulings at the onset of the COVID-19 epidemic in France.

Inconsistent results are found regarding social inequalities related to healthcare appointment cancellations during the COVID-19 crisis. Whether rescheduling was associated with social status is unknown. By studying both cancellations and rescheduling, we comprehensively describe which social groups were affected by care disruption. First follow-up of a random population-based cohort was used, including 95 118 people aged 18 or older at baseline and who live in France. Poisson and multinomial regressions were used to study social factors associated with experiencing both medical appointment cancellation by health professionals during the first COVID-19 lockdown, and rescheduling within six months. Among all individuals (including those without scheduled appointment), 21.1% reported cancellations initiated by healthcare professionals. Women, the richest, and those with a chronic disease were the most affected by these cancellations. Although 78.1% who had their appointment cancelled obtained a new appointment within six months, 6.6% failed to reschedule and 15.2% did not want to reschedule. While the oldest were more likely to reschedule, regardless of their health status, the poorest and those with multiple chronic diseases were less likely to do so. Difficulties in rescheduling revealed certain social groups were ultimately more penalized by the restriction of access to care during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Given that the poorest people, a social group that is in poorer health condition compared to other groups, were the most affected, our results raise questions about the ability of the healthcare system to reduce social health inequalities during a major health crisis.

Use of health care services among people with Covid-19 symptoms in the first pandemic peak in France.

In France, the first pandemic peak fell disproportionately on the most disadvantaged, as they were overrepresented in contaminations and in developing severe forms of the virus. At that time, and especially during lockdown, the French healthcare system was severely disrupted and limited. The issue of social differences in the use of healthcare by people experiencing symptoms of Covid-19 arose. Based on a random sample of 135,000 persons, we selected respondents who reported Covid-19-like symptoms (cough, fever, dyspnea, anosmia and/or ageusia) during the first lockdown (n = 12,422). The aim of this study was to determine if the use of health care services was likely to contribute to widen Covid-19 social inequalities. Use of health care services was classified in three categories: (1) no consultation, (2) out-of-hospital consultation(s) and (3) in-hospital consultation(s). We estimated odds ratio of utilization of health care using multinomial regressions, adjusted on social factors (age, gender, class, ethno-racial status, social class, standard of living and education), contextual variables, health variables, and symptoms characteristics. Altogether, 37.8% of the individuals consulted a doctor for their symptoms; 32.1% outside hospital and 5.7% in hospital. Use of health care services was strongly associated with social position2: the most disadvantaged social groups and racially minoritized immigrants were more likely to use health care, particularly for in-hospital consultation(s). The highest utilization of health care were found among older adults (OR 9.51, 95%CI 5.02-18.0 compared to the youngest age group), the racially minoritized first-generation immigrants (OR 1.61, 95%CI 1.09-2.36 compared to the mainstream population), the poorest (OR 1.31, 95%CI 1.00-1.72) and the least educated (OR 2.20, 95%CI 1.44-3.38). To conclude, we found that the use of health care services counteracted the potential impact of social inequalities in exposure and infection to the Covid-19.

When Lack of Trust in the Government and in Scientists Reinforces Social Inequalities in Vaccination Against COVID-19.

Objective: To assess whether lack of trust in the government and scientists reinforces social and racial inequalities in vaccination practices. Design: A follow-up of the EpiCov random population-based cohort survey. Setting: In July 2021, in France. Participants: Eighty-thousand nine hundred and seventy-one participants aged 18 years and more. Main Outcome Measures: Adjusted odds ratios of COVID-19 vaccination status (received at least one dose/ intends to get vaccinated/ does not know whether to get vaccinated/refuses vaccination) were assessed using multinomial regressions to test associations with social and trust factors and to study how these two factors interacted with each other. Results: In all, 72.2% were vaccinated at the time of the survey. The population of unvaccinated people was younger, less educated, had lower incomes, and more often belonged to racially minoritized groups, as compared to vaccinated people. Lack of trust in the government and scientists to curb the spread of the epidemic were the factors most associated with refusing to be vaccinated: OR = 8.86 (7.13 to 11.00) for the government and OR = 9.07 (7.71 to 10.07) for scientists, compared to vaccinated people. Lack of trust was more prevalent among the poorest which consequently reinforced social inequalities in vaccination. The poorest 10% who did not trust the government reached an OR of 16.2 (11.9 to 22.0) for refusing to be vaccinated compared to the richest 10% who did. Conclusion: There is a need to develop depoliticised outreach programmes targeted at the most socially disadvantaged groups, and to design vaccination strategies conceived with people from different social and racial backgrounds to enable them to make fully informed choices.

Social Isolation Among Older Adults in the Time of COVID-19: A Gender Perspective.

We aimed to analyze inequalities in social isolation among older adults in a time of COVID-19 social restrictions, using a gender perspective. A random population-based survey, including 21,543 older adults (65+) was conducted during and post COVID-19 lockdown in France. Our main outcome was a three-dimension indicator of social isolation based on living conditions, i.e., living alone (i) and not having gone out in the past week (ii), completed by an indicator measuring Internet use i.e., never using the Internet (iii). Logistic regressions were used to identify factors associated with isolation for women and men. Women were more likely to live alone (aOR = 2.72 [2.53; 2.92]), not to have gone out in the past week (aOR = 1.53 [1.39; 1.68]), and not to use the Internet (aOR = 1.30 [1.20; 1.44]). In addition to gender effects, being older, at the bottom of the social hierarchy, and from an ethno-racial minority was also associated with social isolation. Preventive policies should take into account these inequalities when addressing the issue of social isolation among older women and men, so as to enable all social groups to maintain social contacts, and access health information.

The social specificities of hostility toward vaccination against Covid-19 in France.

Equal Access to the COVID-19 vaccine for all remains a major public health issue. The current study compared the prevalence of vaccination reluctance in general and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and social and health factors associated with intentions to receive the vaccine. A random socio-epidemiological population-based survey was conducted in France in November 2020, in which 85,855 adults participants were included in this study. We used logistic regressions to study being "not at all in favor" to vaccination in general, and being "certainly not" willing to get vaccinated against Covid-19. Our analysis highlighted a gendered reluctance toward vaccination in general but even more so regarding vaccination against COVID-19 (OR = 1.88 (95% CI: 1.79-1.97)). We also found that people at the bottom of the social hierarchy, in terms of level of education, financial resources, were more likely to refuse the COVID-19 vaccine (from OR = 1.22 (95% CI:1.10-1.35) for respondents without diploma to OR = 0.52 (95% CI:0.47-0.57) for High school +5 or more years level). People from the French overseas departments, immigrants and descendants of immigrants, were all more reluctant to the Covid-19 vaccine (first-generation Africa/Asia immigrants OR = 1.16 (95% CI:1.04-1.30)) versus OR = 2.19 (95% CI:1.96-2.43) for the majority population). Finally, our analysis showed that those who reported not trusting the government were more likely to be Covid-19 vaccine-reluctant (OR = 3.29 (95% CI: 3.13-3.45)). Specific campaigns should be thought beforehand to reach women and people at the bottom of the social hierarchy to avoid furthering social inequalities in terms of morbidity and mortality.