Treatment selection and medication adherence for stable angina: The role of area-based health literacy

Disparity issues in coronary artery surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Coronary artery disease is the third leading cause of mortality worldwide. Coronary artery surgery is an important treatment option. Certain groups such as people of color, those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and women tend to have lower rates of receiving the surgery they need ( Fig. 1 ).

RECENT FINDINGS

Still there are disparities in treatment options for coronary artery disease among different groups, due to geographic location, economical situation, institutional tradition and sex.

SUMMARY

Through continued research, awareness and utilization of innovative technologies, we can improve access and equity in healthcare for all patients, including patients in need of coronary surgery.

Health Inequities in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Literature: A Scoping Review

Although life saving, health inequities exist regarding access and patient outcomes in Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), especially among marginalized groups. This scoping review's goal is to outline existing literature and highlight gaps for future research. Researchers followed guidance from the Joanna Briggs Institute and PRISMA extension for scoping reviews. We conducted a search to identify articles published between 2016 and 2022 regarding CABG and inequity groups, defined by the National Institutes of Health. Fifty-seven articles were included in our final sample. Race/Ethnicity was examined in 39 incidences, Sex or Gender 29 times, Income 17 instances, Geography 10 instances, and Education Level 3 instances. Occupation Status 2 instances, and LGBTQ+ 0 times. Important disparities exist regarding CABG access and outcomes, especially involving members of the LGBTQ+, Native American, and Black communities. Further research is needed to address health disparities and their root causes for focused action and improved health of minoritized groups.

Area-based inequalities and distribution of healthcare resources for managing diabetes in South Korea: a cross-sectional multilevel analysis

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to identify area-based socioeconomic inequalities in diabetes management and to examine whether the distribution of healthcare resources could explain area-based inequalities in diabetes management.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional multilevel analysis from national survey data.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Data were derived from the 2018 Korean Community Health Survey. Study subjects included 23 760 participants aged 30 years or older with diabetes diagnosed by a doctor.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The dependent variables were self-reported good glycaemic control, haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) testing, recognition of the term HbA1c, and diabetic complications testing. Area Deprivation Index was used as an area-based measure of socioeconomic position. Factors related to regional healthcare resources-the coefficient of variation (CV) value of clinics and the number of physicians per 1000-were considered as potential mediating variables in explaining the association between diabetes management and area deprivation. A multilevel logistic regression analysis was used.

RESULTS

Compared with the least deprived quintile, the likelihoods of not taking HbA1c tests, not recognising the term HbA1c, and not taking diabetic complication tests in the most deprived quintile were approximately 1.5 times (95% CI 1.25 to 1.80), 2.6 times (95% CI 1.97 to 3.45) and two times (95% CI 1.67 to 2.48) higher, respectively. In the most deprived quintile, CV value of clinics was the highest and the number of doctors was the lowest. Regional healthcare resource factors explained inequalities in managing diabetes by 14%-18%, especially in the most deprived quintile.

CONCLUSIONS

The results in this study suggest that socioeconomic inequalities in diabetes management may be explained by regional healthcare resource disparities. Policy interventions for a more even distribution of healthcare resources would likely reduce the magnitude of regional socioeconomic inequalities in diabetes management.