Thomson H, Petticrew M, Morrison D
Medical Research Council Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, Glasgow G12 8RZ.
BMJ. 2001 Jul 28;323(7306):187-90. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7306.187.
To review the evidence on the effects of interventions to improve housing on health.
Systematic review of experimental and non-experimental housing intervention studies that measured quantitative health outcomes.
Studies dating from 1887, in any language or format, identified from clinical, social science, and grey literature databases, personal collections, expert consultation, and reference lists.
Socioeconomic change and health, illness, and social measures.
18 completed primary intervention studies were identified. 11 studies were prospective, of which six had control groups. Three of the seven retrospective studies used a control group. The interventions included rehousing, refurbishment, and energy efficiency measures. Many studies showed health gains after the intervention, but the small study populations and lack of controlling for confounders limit the generalisability of these findings.
The lack of evidence linking housing and health may be attributable to pragmatic difficulties with housing studies as well as the political climate in the United Kingdom. A holistic approach is needed that recognises the multifactorial and complex nature of poor housing and deprivation. Large scale studies that investigate the wider social context of housing interventions are required.
回顾关于改善住房干预措施对健康影响的证据。
对测量定量健康结果的实验性和非实验性住房干预研究进行系统综述。
从临床、社会科学和灰色文献数据库、个人收藏、专家咨询及参考文献列表中识别出的1887年以来的任何语言或格式的研究。
社会经济变化以及健康、疾病和社会指标。
确定了18项已完成的主要干预研究。11项研究为前瞻性研究,其中6项有对照组。7项回顾性研究中有3项使用了对照组。干预措施包括重新安置、翻新和能源效率措施。许多研究显示干预后健康状况有所改善,但研究人群规模小且未对混杂因素进行控制,限制了这些研究结果的普遍性。
缺乏将住房与健康联系起来的证据可能归因于住房研究的实际困难以及英国的政治气候。需要一种整体方法,认识到住房条件差和贫困的多因素及复杂性。需要开展大规模研究,调查住房干预措施更广泛的社会背景。