Glasgow Western Infirmary, Glasgow, UK.
Public Health. 2012 May;126(5):378-85. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2012.01.018. Epub 2012 Apr 4.
The extent to which the higher level of mortality seen in Glasgow compared with other UK cities is solely attributable to socio-economic deprivation has been the focus of much discussion recently. Some authors have suggested that poorer health in the city may be influenced by issues related to its history of religious sectarianism. In order to investigate this further, this study compared deprivation and mortality between Glasgow and Belfast, a similar post-industrial city, but one with a considerably more pronounced sectarian divide.
To compare the deprivation and mortality profiles of the two cities; to assess the extent to which any differences in mortality can be explained by differences in area-based measures of deprivation; and to examine whether these analyses shed any light on the 'sectarianism' hypothesis for Glasgow's excess mortality relative to elsewhere in the UK.
Replicating the methodology of a recent study comparing deprivation and mortality in Glasgow, Liverpool and Manchester, rates of 'income deprivation' for 2005 were calculated for every small area across the two cities (average population size: 1810 in Belfast; 1650 in Glasgow). Standardized mortality ratios were calculated for the period 2003-2007 for Glasgow relative to Belfast, standardizing for age, gender and income deprivation decile.
While total levels of deprivation were slightly higher in Glasgow than in Belfast (24.8% of Glasgow's population were income deprived in 2005 compared with 22.4% in Belfast), Belfast was more unequal in terms of its distribution of deprivation across the city. After standardizing for age, sex and deprivation, all-cause mortality in Glasgow was 27% higher for deaths under 65 years of age and 18% higher for deaths at all ages. Higher all-cause mortality in Glasgow was shown in the majority of sub-analyses (i.e. for most age groups, both sexes and across the majority of deprivation deciles). Analyses of particular causes of death showed significantly higher mortality in Glasgow relative to Belfast for all conditions examined except 'external causes'. Notably higher mortality was evident for drug-related poisonings and alcohol-related causes among men in both cities. With a small number of exceptions, the results were very similar to those shown for Glasgow in comparison with Liverpool and Manchester.
Area-based deprivation did not explain the higher mortality in Glasgow in comparison with Belfast. Belfast has a more profound history of sectarianism, and similar climatic conditions, to Glasgow. If these factors were to be important in explaining the high mortality in Glasgow, the question arises as to why they have not produced similar effects in Belfast.
最近,人们对格拉斯哥与其他英国城市相比死亡率较高的原因展开了激烈讨论。有人认为,城市中较差的健康状况可能受到与宗教宗派主义历史相关的问题影响。为了进一步研究这个问题,本研究比较了格拉斯哥和贝尔法斯特(一个类似的后工业化城市,但宗派分歧更为明显)的贫困程度和死亡率。
比较这两个城市的贫困和死亡率情况;评估基于地区的贫困程度差异在多大程度上可以解释死亡率的差异;并考察这些分析是否能说明格拉斯哥相对于英国其他地区死亡率过高的“宗派主义”假说。
复制最近一项比较格拉斯哥、利物浦和曼彻斯特贫困和死亡率的研究方法,计算了这两个城市的每个小区域(平均人口规模:贝尔法斯特 1810 人;格拉斯哥 1650 人)2005 年的“收入贫困”率。对 2003-2007 年格拉斯哥相对于贝尔法斯特的标准化死亡率进行了计算,标准化了年龄、性别和收入贫困十分位数。
尽管格拉斯哥的贫困总水平略高于贝尔法斯特(2005 年,格拉斯哥有 24.8%的人口收入贫困,而贝尔法斯特为 22.4%),但贝尔法斯特的贫困分布在城市内更为不平等。在标准化年龄、性别和贫困程度后,格拉斯哥 65 岁以下人群的全因死亡率高出 27%,所有年龄段的死亡率高出 18%。格拉斯哥的大多数亚组分析都显示出全因死亡率较高(即大多数年龄组、男女两性和大多数贫困十分位数)。对特定死因的分析表明,除“外部原因”外,格拉斯哥的所有疾病死亡率均高于贝尔法斯特。在两个城市中,男性的药物相关中毒和酒精相关原因的死亡率明显更高。除了少数例外,这些结果与格拉斯哥与利物浦和曼彻斯特的比较结果非常相似。
基于地区的贫困程度并不能解释格拉斯哥相对于贝尔法斯特的高死亡率。贝尔法斯特与格拉斯哥有着更为深刻的宗派主义历史和相似的气候条件。如果这些因素对解释格拉斯哥的高死亡率很重要,那么就会产生一个问题,即为什么它们在贝尔法斯特没有产生类似的影响。