Temporal dynamics of socioeconomic inequalities in depressive and anxiety symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review.

Background: The existence of socioeconomic inequalities in the prevalence of symptoms of depression and anxiety is widely acknowledged, and individuals from lower socioeconomic backgrounds tend to exhibit higher rates of symptoms. However, the direction in which the COVID-19 pandemic has influenced these disparities remains uncertain. We therefore aimed to systematically outline the available evidence on the temporal dynamics of socioeconomic inequalities in symptoms related to depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic across high-income countries. Methods: A scoping review was conducted by searching the databases Embase, Scopus and PsycINFO. According to pre-defined eligibility criteria, two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts as well as full texts of the compiled records. Data from the included studies were extracted using a standardised data-extraction form and analysed numerically and narratively. The scoping review followed the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Results: A total of 49 studies comprising 149 analyses of socioeconomic indicators in relation to symptoms of depression and anxiety were included. Despite heterogeneous study designs and results, there was a tendency of increasing (40.9%; n = 61) or persistent (38.2%; n = 57) inequality trends to the detriment of those in socially more disadvantaged positions. Increasing inequalities were most pronounced when income was used as a socioeconomic indicator. Groups with lower socioeconomic status appeared most vulnerable in the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Throughout the pandemic, dynamics were diverse, with persistent trends most frequently reported. Conclusion: Overall, to the detriment of those with lower socioeconomic status, mental-health inequalities persisted or increased in most analyses. Continually monitoring socioeconomic inequalities over time is crucial, since this makes it possible to adapt prevention and intervention strategies to specific pandemic phases. Interventions targeting job security, income security and educational attainment could reduce mental-health inequalities. The results can contribute to preparedness plans for future pandemics and crises.

Socioeconomic inequalities in pandemic-induced psychosocial stress in different life domains among the working-age population.

BACKGROUND: Psychosocial stress is considered a risk factor for physical and mental ill-health. Evidence on socioeconomic inequalities with regard to the psychosocial consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany is still limited. We aimed to investigate how pandemic-induced psychosocial stress (PIPS) in different life domains differed between socioeconomic groups. METHODS: Data came from the German Corona-Monitoring nationwide study - wave 2 (RKI-SOEP-2, November 2021-February 2022). PIPS was assessed using 4-point Likert scales with reference to the following life domains: family, partnership, own financial situation, psychological well-being, leisure activity, social life and work/school situation. Responses were dichotomised into "not stressed/slightly stressed/rather stressed" (0) versus "highly stressed" (1). The sample was restricted to the working-age population in Germany (age = 18-67 years, n = 8,402). Prevalence estimates of high PIPS were calculated by sex, age, education and income. Adjusted prevalence ratios (PRs) were estimated using Poisson regression to investigate the association between education/income and PIPS; high education and income were the reference groups. RESULTS: The highest stress levels were reported in the domains social life and leisure activity. Women and younger participants reported high stress levels more frequently. The highest inequalities were found regarding people's own financial situation, and PIPS was higher in low vs. high income groups (PR 5.54, 95% CI 3.61-8.52). Inequalities were also found regarding partnerships with higher PIPS in low vs. high education groups (PR 1.68, 95% CI 1.13-2.49) - and psychological well-being with higher PIPS in low vs. high income groups (PR 1.52, 95% CI 1.14-2.04). CONCLUSION: Socioeconomic inequalities in PIPS were found for different life domains. Generally, psychosocial support and preventive interventions to help people cope with stress in a pandemic context should be target-group-specific, addressing the particular needs and circumstances of certain socioeconomic groups.

[Socioeconomic deprivation and premature mortality in Germany, 1998-2021 : An ecological study with what-if scenarios of inequality reduction]. / Sozioökonomische Deprivation und vorzeitige Sterblichkeit in Deutschland 1998­2021 : Eine ökologische Studie mit What-if-Szenarien der Ungleichheitsreduktion.

BACKGROUND: Earlier mortality in socioeconomically disadvantaged population groups represents an extreme manifestation of health inequity. This study examines the extent, time trends, and mitigation potentials of area-level socioeconomic inequalities in premature mortality in Germany. METHODS: Nationwide data from official cause-of-death statistics were linked at the district level with official population data and the German Index of Socioeconomic Deprivation (GISD). Age-standardized mortality rates before the age of 75 were calculated stratified by sex and deprivation quintile. A what-if analysis with counterfactual scenarios was applied to calculate how much lower premature mortality would be overall if socioeconomic mortality inequalities were reduced. RESULTS: Men and women in the highest deprivation quintile had a 43% and 33% higher risk of premature death, respectively, than those in the lowest deprivation quintile of the same age. Higher mortality rates with increasing deprivation were found for cardiovascular and cancer mortality, but also for other causes of death. Socioeconomic mortality inequalities had started to increase before the COVID-19 pandemic and further exacerbated in the first years of the pandemic. If all regions had the same mortality rate as those in the lowest deprivation quintile, premature mortality would be 13% lower overall. DISCUSSION: The widening gap in premature mortality between deprived and affluent regions emphasizes that creating equivalent living conditions across Germany is also an important field of action for reducing health inequity.

Education and pandemic SARS-CoV-2 infections in the German working population - the mediating role of working from home.

OBJECTIVES: SARS-CoV-2 infections were unequally distributed during the pandemic, with those in disadvantaged socioeconomic positions being at higher risk. Little is known about the underlying mechanism of this association. This study assessed to what extent educational differences in SARS-CoV-2 infections were mediated by working from home. METHODS: We used data of the German working population derived from the seroepidemiological study "Corona Monitoring Nationwide - Wave 2 (RKI-SOEP-2)" (N=6826). Infections were assessed by seropositivity against SARS-CoV-2 antigens and self-reports of previous PCR-confirmed infections from the beginning of the pandemic until study participation (November 2021 - February 2022). The frequency of working from home was assessed between May 2021 and January 2022.We used the Karlson-Holm-Breen (KHB) method to decompose the effect of education on SARS-CoV-2 infections. RESULTS: Individuals with lower educational attainment had a higher risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection (adjusted prevalence ratio of low versus very high = 1.76, 95% confidence interval 1.08-2.88; P=0.023). Depending on the level of education, between 27% (high education) and 58% (low education) of the differences in infection were mediated by the frequency of working from home. CONCLUSIONS: Working from home could prevent SARS-CoV-2 infections and contribute to the explanation of socioeconomic inequalities in infection risks. Wherever possible, additional capacities to work remotely, particularly for occupations that require lower educational attainment, should be considered as an important measure of pandemic preparedness. Limitations of this study are the observational cross-sectional design and that the temporal order between infection and working from home remained unclear.

Social Inequalities in Long-Term Health Effects After COVID-19-A Scoping Review.

Objectives: We aimed to map and synthesize evidence about social inequalities in long-term health effects after COVID-19 (LTHE), often referred to as "long COVID" or "post-COVID-19 conditions." Methods: We conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed articles by searching the databases Embase and Scopus. According to predefined inclusion criteria, titles/abstracts and full texts were screened for eligibility. Additionally, reference lists of all included studies were hand-searched for eligible studies. This study followed the PRISMA guidelines for scoping reviews. Results: Nineteen articles were included. LTHE were analysed according to ethnicity, education, income, employment and deprivation indices. The studies varied significantly in their definitions of LTHE. Eighty-two analyses showed no statistically significant associations. At least 12 studies had a high risk of type II errors. Only studies associating deprivation indices and long COVID tended to show a higher prevalence of LTHE in deprived areas. Conclusion: Although some studies indicated social inequalities in LTHE, evidence was generally weak and inconclusive. Further studies with larger sample sizes specifically designed to detect social inequalities regarding LTHE are needed to inform future healthcare planning and public health policies.