• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
2
How a universal health system reduces inequalities: lessons from England.全民健康系统如何减少不平等:来自英国的经验教训。
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2016 Jul;70(7):637-43. doi: 10.1136/jech-2015-206742. Epub 2016 Jan 19.
3
Are some areas more equal than others? Socioeconomic inequality in potentially avoidable emergency hospital admissions within English local authority areas.某些地区比其他地区更平等吗?英格兰地方当局辖区内潜在可避免的急诊住院中的社会经济不平等。
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2017 Apr;22(2):83-90. doi: 10.1177/1355819616679198. Epub 2016 Nov 15.
4
Unequal socioeconomic distribution of the primary care workforce: whole-population small area longitudinal study.基层医疗劳动力的社会经济分布不均:全人群小区域纵向研究。
BMJ Open. 2016 Jan 19;6(1):e008783. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008783.
5
Outcomes and inequalities in diabetes from 2004/2005 to 2011/2012: English longitudinal study.2004/2005年至2011/2012年糖尿病的结局与不平等:英国纵向研究
Br J Gen Pract. 2017 Jan;67(654):e1-e9. doi: 10.3399/bjgp16X688381. Epub 2016 Dec 5.
6
Modelling tool to support decision-making in the NHS Health Check programme: workshops, systematic review and co-production with users.用于支持国民保健制度健康检查计划决策的建模工具:研讨会、系统评价以及与用户的共同制作。
Health Technol Assess. 2021 May;25(35):1-234. doi: 10.3310/hta25350.
7
Health equity monitoring for healthcare quality assurance.卫生公平性监测与医疗质量保障。
Soc Sci Med. 2018 Feb;198:148-156. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.01.004. Epub 2018 Jan 6.
8
9
Impact of a social prescribing intervention in North East England on adults with type 2 diabetes: the SPRING_NE multimethod study.英格兰东北部社会处方干预对 2 型糖尿病成人的影响:SPRING_NE 多方法研究。
Public Health Res (Southampt). 2023 Mar;11(2):1-185. doi: 10.3310/AQXC8219.
10
Dying in hospital: socioeconomic inequality trends in England.在医院死亡:英格兰的社会经济不平等趋势
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2017 Jul;22(3):149-154. doi: 10.1177/1355819616686807. Epub 2017 Jan 11.

DOI:10.3310/hsdr04260
PMID:27656734
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Inequalities in health-care access and outcomes raise concerns about quality of care and justice, and the NHS has a statutory duty to consider reducing them.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to (1) develop indicators of socioeconomic inequality in health-care access and outcomes at different stages of the patient pathway; (2) develop methods for monitoring local NHS equity performance in tackling socioeconomic health-care inequalities; (3) track the evolution of socioeconomic health-care inequalities in the 2000s; and (4) develop ‘equity dashboards’ for communicating equity findings to decision-makers in a clear and concise format.

DESIGN

Longitudinal whole-population study at the small-area level.

SETTING

England from 2001/2 to 2011/12.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 32,482 small-area neighbourhoods (lower-layer super output areas) of approximately 1500 people.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Slope index of inequality gaps between the most and least deprived neighbourhoods in England, adjusted for need or risk, for (1) patients per family doctor, (2) primary care quality, (3) inpatient hospital waiting time, (4) emergency hospitalisation for chronic ambulatory care-sensitive conditions, (5) repeat emergency hospitalisation in the same year, (6) dying in hospital, (7) mortality amenable to health care and (8) overall mortality.

DATA SOURCES

Practice-level workforce data from the general practice census (indicator 1), practice-level Quality and Outcomes Framework data (indicator 2), inpatient hospital data from Hospital Episode Statistics (indicators 3–6) and mortality data from the Office for National Statistics (indicators 6–8).

RESULTS

Between 2004/5 and 2011/12, more deprived neighbourhoods gained larger absolute improvements on all indicators except waiting time, repeat hospitalisation and dying in hospital. In 2011/12, there was little measurable inequality in primary care supply and quality, but inequality was associated with 171,119 preventable hospitalisations and 41,123 deaths amenable to health care. In 2011/12, > 20% of Clinical Commissioning Groups performed statistically significantly better or worse than the England equity benchmark.

LIMITATIONS

General practitioner supply is a limited measure of primary care access, need in deprived neighbourhoods may be underestimated because of a lack of data on multimorbidity, and the quality and outcomes indicators capture only one aspect of primary care quality. Health-care outcomes are adjusted for age and sex but not for other risk factors that contribute to unequal health-care outcomes and may be outside the control of the NHS, so they overestimate the extent of inequality for which the NHS can reasonably be held responsible.

CONCLUSIONS

NHS actions can have a measurable impact on socioeconomic inequality in both health-care access and outcomes. Reducing inequality in health-care outcomes is more challenging than reducing inequality of access to health care. Local health-care equity monitoring against a national benchmark can be performed using any administrative geography comprising ≥ 100,000 people.

FUTURE WORK

Exploration of quality improvement lessons from local areas performing well and badly on health-care equity, improved methods including better measures of need and risk and measures of health-care inequality over the life-course, and monitoring of other dimensions of equity. These indicators can also be used to evaluate the health-care equity impacts of interventions and make international health-care equity comparisons.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

摘要