Inequalities in the use of secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease by socioeconomic status: evidence from the PURE observational study.

Adrianna Murphy ORCID logo; Benjamin Palafox ORCID logo; OwenO'Donnell; DavidStuckler; Pablo Perel ORCID logo; Khalid FAlHabib; AlvaroAvezum; XiulinBai; JephatChifamba; Clara KChow; +30 more... Daniel JCorsi; Gilles RDagenais; Antonio LDans; RafaelDiaz; Ayse NErbakan; NoorhassimIsmail; RomainaIqbal; RoyaKelishadi; RashaKhatib; FernandoLanas; Scott ALear; WeiLi; JiaLiu; PatricioLopez-Jaramillo; ViswanathanMohan; NahedMonsef; Prem KMony; ThandiPuoane; SumathyRangarajan; AnnikaRosengren; Aletta ESchutte; MarizSintaha; Koon KTeo; AndreasWielgosz; KarenYeates; LuYin; KhalidYusoff; KatarzynaZatońska; SalimYusuf; Martin McKee ORCID logo; (2018) Inequalities in the use of secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease by socioeconomic status: evidence from the PURE observational study. The Lancet Global health, 6 (3). e292-e301. ISSN 2214-109X DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30031-7
Copy

BACKGROUND: There is little evidence on the use of secondary prevention medicines for cardiovascular disease by socioeconomic groups in countries at different levels of economic development. METHODS: We assessed use of antiplatelet, cholesterol, and blood-pressure-lowering drugs in 8492 individuals with self-reported cardiovascular disease from 21 countries enrolled in the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study. Defining one or more drugs as a minimal level of secondary prevention, wealth-related inequality was measured using the Wagstaff concentration index, scaled from -1 (pro-poor) to 1 (pro-rich), standardised by age and sex. Correlations between inequalities and national health-related indicators were estimated. FINDINGS: The proportion of patients with cardiovascular disease on three medications ranged from 0% in South Africa (95% CI 0-1·7), Tanzania (0-3·6), and Zimbabwe (0-5·1), to 49·3% in Canada (44·4-54·3). Proportions receiving at least one drug varied from 2·0% (95% CI 0·5-6·9) in Tanzania to 91·4% (86·6-94·6) in Sweden. There was significant (p<0·05) pro-rich inequality in Saudi Arabia, China, Colombia, India, Pakistan, and Zimbabwe. Pro-poor distributions were observed in Sweden, Brazil, Chile, Poland, and the occupied Palestinian territory. The strongest predictors of inequality were public expenditure on health and overall use of secondary prevention medicines. INTERPRETATION: Use of medication for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease is alarmingly low. In many countries with the lowest use, pro-rich inequality is greatest. Policies associated with an equal or pro-poor distribution include free medications and community health programmes to support adherence to medications. FUNDING: Full funding sources listed at the end of the paper (see Acknowledgments).



picture_as_pdf
Inequalities in the use of secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease by socioeconomic status.pdf
subject
Published Version
Available under Creative Commons: 3.0

View Download

Explore Further

Read more research from the creator(s):

Find work associated with the faculties and division(s):

Find work associated with the research centre(s):

Find work from this publication:

Find other related resources: