September 2016 – AQuAS Blog

Equality, fairness, reality: social inequalities in child health

29 Sep

– Your post code is more important than your genetic code when it comes to children’s health (Anonymous).
– It takes the whole tribe to raise the children (African proverb).

Currently, there is a wealth of accumulated information to show that life experience and living conditions during prenatal and early life are extremely influential factors when it comes to the health and social participation of the future adult. The World Health Organization (WHO) Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH) has proposed eliminating the health gap within a generation noting that inequalities during the early growth and development of children are one of the main contributing factors in creating and perpetuating inequalities in health in adulthood. According to the CSDH, the academic level of a family, education in the school-going years and academic performance all play a crucial role, in addition to exposure to a situation of family economic vulnerability.

The UNICEF Innocenti Report Card 13 shows that among developed countries, Spain rates very poorly in relation to the state’s capacity to reduce the socioeconomic inequality gap since the beginning of the Great Recession.

Children are the most vulnerable population risk group and the worst affected by the current economic crisis: in Catalonia it is estimated that one in three children live at risk of poverty, according to data from the Statistical Institute of Catalonia (IEC) for 2015. The IEC data reflects the serious impact of unemployment, household employment insecurity and the impact of the historical public investment deficit in child protection policies (or lack thereof) on the lives of children. In Spain, the number of families who turn to non-governmental organizations in search for assistance to cover their basic needs has tripled since 2007.

The short-term effects of the economic crisis on children’s health depends on the degree of exposure to material deprivation, family living conditions and access to basic minimum services as well as the family’s economic capacity to meet the children’s needs. As a result of the crisis, the already existing social gradients in health have increased. Thus, the inequality in life expectancy at birth of a child between the more and less prosperous districts of Barcelona has grown to 8 years’ difference (thereby reinforcing the claim that post code is more important in children’s health that genetic code). The evidence shows generally poorer health and worse mental health in children of at-risk families who require assistance to maintain their homes or have been evicted, according to a study carried out by the SOPHIE project and Caritas of people at-risk of eviction or who have been evicted. Evidence also shows an increase in obesity and overweight children in the general population of Catalonia but this increase cannot be attributed solely to the economic crisis as it had been detected before the onset of the recession. However, obesity is linked to important social gradients and these have increased in recent years. The perception of quality of life related to health has deteriorated for children of families with primary level studies in comparison with those with third-level education between 2006 and 2012. Studies have also detected an impact on perinatal health with decreased fertility and increased maternity age, above all for the first child, an increase in abortions among women aged 15-24, and an increase in low birthweight among young women in Spain.

The policies implemented to deal with the situation however have not resolved the problem, but instead they are helping to increase the gap. Investment in public policies targeting children in Spain is the lowest in the European Union. Local scientific societies such as the Catalan Paediatric Society (SCP), state bodies such as Spanish Society of Public Health and Administration (SESPAS) and international organisations like the International Society of Social Paediatrics (ISSOP), NGOs such as UNICEF and other organizations are calling on governments to ensure that vulnerable children are not subject to further disadvantages due to cutback policies. These bodies propose the following measures: suspend evictions of families with children / ensure basic measures against energy poverty and housing for all families; promote quality employment for young people and parents; maintain and finance school canteens throughout the year; ensure a guaranteed minimum income for families with fewer resources; and reduce regional disparities prioritizing disadvantaged districts and municipalities.

Early enrolment has shown a positive impact on cognitive development, academic level and future possibilities for social insertion of the general population and which has a particularly positive effect on the members of society who are not as well educated and have fewer resources. The proposals regarding education are summarized in ensuring children’s access to education; universal access to educational material and activities and early detection and intervention in cases of children with disadvantages.

As far as health policy is concerned, the objectives include fostering healthy nutrition and eating habits, promoting breastfeeding, extending programs and policies that have shown greater effectiveness, ensuring the rights of children with and without disabilities and complying with The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, and guaranteeing universal access to effective health services for the entire population and the repeal of Royal Decree Law 16/2012 regarding exclusion from healthcare.

It is essential that all professionals responsible for the care of children and families become aware of and take an active role in reducing social inequalities in health and education if the goal is to ensure future generations of adults with equal opportunities to healthcare.

Post written by Luis Rajmil (@LuisRajmil).

Perspectives on Preventing Overdiagnosis

15 Sep

We continue drawing inspiration from the Preventing Overdiagnosis Congress (in Twitter: #PODC2016), which is due to take place this coming week. There are many issues in play that we must take into consideration and we will try to demonstrate just some of those here. Joan MV Pons in this post reflects on the public health measures implemented over the past centuries which have had a role in the history of overcoming poverty and increasing life expectancy after reading the book by Nobel Prize winning Economist Angus Deaton.

Without detracting from developments made over time, in this post Andreu Segura comments on the futility of medicine and of procedures with unrealistic expectations regarding the benefits. Segura mentions the report “To err is human” and the estimation made by Barbara Starfield concerning mortality caused by adverse side effects of medicine. At the same time, the author mentions the very specific case of prescribing preventive measures and how these have evolved over the years.

It is not a straightforward task, but thanks to this post by Cari Almazan, it is easy to understand exactly what is being referred to when we talk about overdiagnosis. Almazan takes us on a journey from the origins of the concept itself through to some current examples and discusses the challenges we face in the future in this area, which begins with a good communications strategy.

No es fácil pero gracias a este post de Cari Almazan resulta fácil entender qué significa y qué no significa sobrediagnóstico. Almazan propone un recorrido por los orígenes de este concepto pasando por algunos ejemplos actuales y planteando algunos retos de futuro en este ámbito, empezando por una buena estrategia de comunicación.

The concept of overdiagnosis is equivalent to diagnosing a disease that does not present symptoms throughout a person’s life and, meanwhile, the treatment and monitoring the patient is subject to in order to treat the disease can be more harmful and fail to produce any benefits.

The interest of working along the lines of diagnosing less can be seen on an individual and population-wide level. On an individual level, overdiagnosis is associated with the negative effects of unnecessary labels, such as the effects of radiation and false positives and false negatives as a result of unnecessary diagnostic tests and therapies (surgery or medication). On a population-wide level we are talking about the opportunity cost derived from wasting resources that might have been allocated to preventing and treating diseases.

That said, we can ask ourselves what the primary care professionals think. In this regard we find some interesting pointers in this post by Johanna Caro where we can see the principal results of a survey of GPs and paediatricians post by Johanna Caro Mendivelso where we can see the principal results of a survey of GPs and paediatricians. One of the most striking results of the survey is the fact that around 80% of physicians surveyed find themselves in the position of making a decision whether to request an unnecessary test or prescribe unnecessary treatment at least once the week.

The interest in the impact that this issue can have is growing significantly. For this reason, Preventig Overdiagnosis will be a brainstorming session which will enable us to design strategies and make decisions to address the fallout from overdiagnosis and overtreatment. We think that this new topic for debate is increasingly present in both our professional and personal lives.

johanna-caro-cari-almazan — Johanna Caro Mendivelso and Cari Almazan, members of the Essencial Project team, participating in the Preventing Overdiagnosis.

Broadening perspectives in health service assessment

8 Sep

What lies behind a significant volume of hospital readmissions? What makes a service present a good healthcare praxis? What obstacles are there when changing to a healthcare model such as in major out-patient surgery which encourages patients to go home on the same day as their operation? Do managers and nursing staff have the same opinion about what efficiency is in an operating theatre? What is the perception of professionals of the possible benefits of people-centred attention?

Do we all see a dragon?

Drac

Reality is complex and therefore approaches are needed which facilitate the interpretation and understanding of that reality. With qualitative research, places can be reached otherwise unattainable when using other methodological aproximations. When answering questions like those we asked ourselves previously, a truly qualitative approach is required. We need to make the approach using an adequate and credible technique to validate the process of all those involved and to ensure precision in results as is done in quantitative research but not forgetting that we need to be critical and independent in the analysis made.

We will briefly outline the evolution of the qualitative approaches in the context of the assessment of health services. A reflection on the usefulness of qualitative techniques in the assessment of health services or medical technologies is not a new one and you can find a series on this subject in the British Medical Journal of 1995 and in the Health Technology Assessment report of 1998.

bmj-1995-eng

Health assessment agencies have given great importance to questions about the scientific evidence available when talking about the efficiency and safety of treatments and biomedical interventions of a clinical nature. Randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews are considered to be the reference standards for causal atributions of the benefits of an intervention for the improvement in the health status of patients.

Society has evolved and the needs of the system adapt to this. We formulate new questions related to the preferences and expectations of users facing treatment and how different professionals contribute to providing better results in patient health care. One must bear in mind that when assessing the benefits and results of attention given, many factors come into play.

In this context, the paradigm of evidence based medicine and the supposed superiority of quantitative approaches and of some study designs above others, have created obstacles in the application of qualitative research. In this sense, the letter to the editors of the British Medical Journal signed by more than 70 researchers of reference for giving their support to qualitative research is clear proof of this remaining obstacle.

bmj-2016-eng

Questioning the efficacy of a medical drug cannot be answered using a qualitative approach but we can broaden the scope of questions that we pose ourselves.

For example, we can consider asking ourselves questions, among others, about the preferences of patients, the perception of the benefits of a medical drug, the expectations or opinion of professionals that prescribe it or the possible reasons for a low adherence of the medical drug.

Another scenario could be that of a patient with osteoarthritis who has undergone a knee replacement (arthroplasty) and who is being attended by several professionals such as the primary care doctor, the traumatologist surgeon, the anaesthetist, the nurse, the physiotherapist and other professionals if the patient has other comorbidities. That patient has certain preferences and expectations which need to be understood and then give the health care to cover those needs, which can go beyond the mere surgical procedure.

With qualitative research we develop a discourse, texts, opinions and perceptions of people, communities, with images, perspectives, ideologies and complexities. We must guarantee rigour and that the photograph and interpretation of reality that we make remain valid and coherent for the research group and the populaton or group of people that we are assessing.

The application of qualitative techniques has been on the rise using interviews, semi-structured questionnaires, field notes, focus or discussion groups to gather the opinion of different groups of professionals and users.

From my point of view, there are three examples which can be of great use to know the approach and the process in carrying out an assessment of services with a qualitative approach:

Avoiding the classic metrics means being able to measure in an alternative or complementary way by combining different approaches be they qualitative or quantitative. I find the introduction to qualitative research we find in René Brown’s TED talk the power of vulnerability. This qualitative researcher recommends we measure that which is apparently unmeasurable and go more in depth into the complex phenomenon of vulnerabilty.

We broaden perspectives by understanding the reality from within, by bearing in mind the multiple existing points of view to improve that which is disfunctional or by identifying better practices to spread them. We can measure what we want to measure. It will be necessary to adapt the approach to the context and audiences and to continue progressing to show with rigour and practice the usefulness of qualitative approaches.

We continue learning. This time, it has been at the Congrés Iberoamericà de Recerca Qualitativa en Salut (in Twitter #IICS2016) held in Barcelona, 5-7 September. The Agència de Qualitat i Avaluació Sanitàries de Catalunya (AQuAS) and the Agència de Salut Pública de Catalunya (ASPCAT) shared the stand to explain their experiences.

2016 Congreso Iberoamericano de Investigación Cualitativa en Salud — Santi Gómez Santos (AQuAS/ASPCAT), Dolors Rodríguez Arjona (ASPCAT), Mireia Espallargues (AQuAS), Vicky Serra-Sutton (AQuAS)

Post written by Vicky Serra-Sutton (@vserrasutton), sociologist PhD in AQuAS.