Scientific Advice Unit, European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), Stockholm, Sweden.
Euro Surveill. 2010 Jul 8;15(27):32-9. doi: 10.2807/ese.15.27.19611-en.
Systematic health inequalities exist in all European countries today. Individuals with lower socio-economic status suffer disproportionally from adverse health outcomes. While this is widely accepted for chronic diseases, a literature review covering the years 1999-2010 reveals that infectious diseases are also distributed unevenly throughout society, with vulnerable groups bearing a disproportionate burden. This burden is not restricted to a few 'signature infections of social determinants' such as tuberculosis or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infections, but also a wide array of other infectious diseases. Tremendous advances in public health over the last century have reduced the absolute magnitude of inequalities but relative differences remain. In order to explore the underlying reasons for such persistent inequalities in Europe, I examined interventions targeting social determinants of infectious diseases: interventions on social determinants tend to focus on chronic diseases rather than infectious diseases, and interventions for these mainly focus on HIV/AIDS or other sexually transmitted infections. Thus, there seems to be a need to intervene on inequalities in infectious diseases but ideally with a comprehensive public health approach. Three intervention strategies are discussed: population-at-risk, population, and vulnerable population approaches. Strengths and weaknesses of these options are illustrated.
如今,系统性健康不平等现象存在于所有欧洲国家。社会经济地位较低的个人不成比例地遭受不良健康结果的影响。虽然这在慢性疾病中是广泛接受的,但一项涵盖 1999 年至 2010 年的文献综述表明,传染病在社会中也分布不均,弱势群体承受着不成比例的负担。这种负担不仅限于少数“社会决定因素的标志性传染病”,如结核病或人类免疫缺陷病毒(HIV)感染,还包括广泛的其他传染病。上个世纪公共卫生的巨大进步已经减少了不平等的绝对程度,但相对差异仍然存在。为了探讨欧洲这种持续不平等现象的根本原因,我研究了针对传染病社会决定因素的干预措施:针对社会决定因素的干预措施往往侧重于慢性病而不是传染病,而针对这些疾病的干预措施主要侧重于艾滋病毒/艾滋病或其他性传播感染。因此,似乎需要对传染病不平等进行干预,但理想情况下需要采取全面的公共卫生方法。讨论了三种干预策略:风险人群、人群和弱势群体方法。说明了这些选择的优缺点。