Socioeconomic disparities in asthma health care utilization, exacerbations, and mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies investigating the effect of socioeconomic status (SES) on asthma health care outcomes have been heterogeneous in the populations studied and methodologies used. OBJECTIVE: We sought to systematically synthesize evidence investigating the impact of SES on asthma health care utilization, exacerbations, and mortality. METHODS: We searched Embase, Medline, and Web of Science for studies reporting differences in primary care attendance, exacerbations, emergency department attendance, hospitalization, ventilation/intubation, readmission, and asthma mortality by SES. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale, and meta-analyses were conducted using random-effects models. We conducted several prespecified subgroup analyses, including by health care system (insurance based vs universal government funded) and time period (before vs after 2010). RESULTS: A total of 61 studies, comprising 1,145,704 patients, were included. Lower SES was consistently associated with increased secondary health care utilization including emergency department attendance (odds ratio [OR], 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.40-1.84), hospitalization (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.34-1.99), and readmission (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.19-1.44). Substantial associations were also found between SES and ventilation/intubation (OR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.13-2.73), although there was no association with primary care attendances (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.51-1.24). We found evidence of borderline significance for increased exacerbations (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.98-1.42) and mortality (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.92-1.37) among more deprived groups. There was no convincing evidence that disparities were associated with country-level health care funding models or that disparities have narrowed over time. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a lower SES have substantially increased secondary care health care utilization. We found evidence suggestive of increased exacerbations and mortality risk, although CIs were wide. These disparities have been consistently reported worldwide, including within countries offering universally funded health care systems. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: CRD42020173544.

Benefits of specialist severe asthma management: demographic and geographic disparities.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of specialist assessment and management have yet to be evaluated within the biologic era of UK severe asthma treatment, and potential disparities have not been considered. METHODS: In an uncontrolled before-and-after study, we compared asthma symptoms (Asthma Control Questionnaire-6 (ACQ-6)), exacerbations, unscheduled secondary care use, lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)) and oral corticosteroid (OCS) dose after 1 year. We compared outcomes by sex, age (18-34, 35-49, 50-64 and ≥65 years), ethnicity (Caucasian versus non-Caucasian) and hospital site after adjusting for demographics and variation in biologic therapy use. RESULTS: 1140 patients were followed-up for 1370 person-years from 12 specialist centres. At annual review, ACQ-6 score was reduced by a median (interquartile range (IQR)) of 0.7 (0.0-1.5), exacerbations by 75% (33-100%) and unscheduled secondary care by 100% (67-100%). FEV1 increased by a median (IQR) of 20 (-200-340) mL, while OCS dose decreased for 67% of patients. Clinically meaningful improvements occurred across almost all patients, including those not receiving biologic therapy. There was little evidence of differences across demographic groups, although those aged ≥65 years demonstrated larger reductions in exacerbations (69% versus 52%; p<0.001) and unscheduled care use (77% versus 50%; p<0.001) compared with patients aged 18-34 years. There were >2-fold differences between the best and worst performing centres across all study outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Specialist assessment and management is associated with substantially improved patient outcomes, which are broadly consistent across demographic groups and are not restricted to those receiving biologic therapy. Significant variation exists between hospitals, which requires further investigation.

Ethnic variation in asthma healthcare utilisation and exacerbation: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Patients from ethnic minority groups (EMGs) frequently report poorer asthma outcomes; however, a broad synthesis summarising ethnic disparities is yet to be undertaken. What is the magnitude of ethnic disparities in asthma healthcare utilisation, exacerbations and mortality? Methods: MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science databases were searched for studies reporting ethnic variation in asthma healthcare outcomes (primary care attendance, exacerbation, emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalisation, hospital readmission, ventilation/intubation and mortality) between White patients and those from EMGs. Estimates were displayed using forest plots and random-effects models were used to calculate pooled estimates. We conducted subgroup analyses to explore heterogeneity, including by specific ethnicity (Black, Hispanic, Asian and other). Results: 65 studies, comprising 699 882 patients, were included. Most studies (92.3%) were conducted in the United States of America (USA). Patients from EMGs had evidence suggestive of lower levels of primary care attendance (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.48-1.09), but substantially higher ED visits (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.53-1.98), hospitalisations (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.48-1.79) and ventilation/intubation (OR 2.67, 95% CI 1.65-4.31) when compared to White patients. In addition, we found evidence suggestive of increased hospital readmissions (OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.90-1.57) and exacerbation rates (OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.94-1.28) among EMGs. No eligible studies explored disparities in mortality. ED visits were much higher among Black and Hispanic patients, while Asian and other ethnicities had similar rates to White patients. Conclusions: EMGs had higher secondary care utilisation and exacerbations. Despite the global importance of this issue, the majority of studies were performed in the USA. Further research into the causes of these disparities, including whether these vary by specific ethnicity, is required to aid the design of effective interventions.