Joanne-Marie Cairns

A systematic review of the effectiveness of individual, community and societal level interventions at reducing socioeconomic inequalities in obesity amongst children

BackgroundTackling childhood obesity is one of the major contemporary public health policy challenges and vital in terms of addressing socioeconomic health inequalities.We aimed to systematically review studies of the effectiveness of interventions (individual, community and societal) operating via different approaches (targeted or universal) in reducing socio-economic inequalities in obesity-related outcomes amongst children.MethodsNine electronic databases were searched from start date to October 2012 along with website and grey literature searches. The review examined the best available international evidence from interventions that aimed to prevent obesity, treat obesity, or improve obesity-related behaviours (diet and/or physical activity) amongst children (aged 0-18 years) in any setting and country, so long as they provided relevant information and analysis on both socioeconomic status and obesity-related outcomes. Data extraction and quality appraisal were conducted using established mechanisms and narrative synthesis was conducted.ResultsWe located 23 studies that provided the ‘best available’ (strongest methodologically) international evidence. At the individual level (n = 4), there was indicative evidence that screen time reduction and mentoring health promotion interventions could be effective in reducing inequalities in obesity. For the community level interventions (n = 17), evidence was inconclusive - with some studies suggesting that school-based health promotion activities and community-based group-based programmes were effective in reducing obesity - others not. Societal level evaluations were few (n = 1). However, there was no evidence to suggest that any of these intervention types increase inequalities and several studies found that interventions could at least prevent the widening of inequalities in obesity. The majority of studies were from America and were of 6-12 year old children.ConclusionsThe review has found only limited evidence although some individual and community based interventions may be effective in reducing socio-economic inequalities in obesity-related outcomes amongst children but further research is required, particularly of more complex, societal level interventions and amongst adolescents.

A systematic review of the effectiveness of individual, community and societal level interventions at reducing socioeconomic inequalities in obesity amongst adults.

Background:Socioeconomic inequalities in obesity are well established in high-income countries. There is a lack of evidence of the types of intervention that are effective in reducing these inequalities among adults.Objectives:To systematically review studies of the effectiveness of individual, community and societal interventions in reducing socio-economic inequalities in obesity among adults.Methods:Nine electronic databases were searched from start date to October 2012 along with website and grey literature searches. The review examined the best available international evidence (both experimental and observational) of interventions at an individual, community and societal level that might reduce inequalities in obesity among adults (aged 18 years or over) in any setting and country. Studies were included if they reported a body fatness-related outcome and if they included a measure of socio-economic status. Data extraction and quality appraisal were conducted using established mechanisms and narrative synthesis was conducted.Results:The ‘best available’ international evidence was provided by 20 studies. At the individual level, there was evidence of the effectiveness of primary care delivered tailored weight loss programmes among deprived groups. Community based behavioural weight loss interventions and community diet clubs (including workplace ones) also had some evidence of effectiveness—at least in the short term. Societal level evaluations were few, low quality and inconclusive. Further, there was little evidence of long term effectiveness, and few studies of men or outside the USA. However, there was no evidence to suggest that interventions increase inequalities.Conclusions:The best available international evidence suggests that some individual and community-based interventions may be effective in reducing socio-economic inequalities in obesity among adults in the short term. Further research is required particularly of more complex, multi-faceted and societal-level interventions.

Weighing up the evidence: a systematic review of the effectiveness of workplace interventions to tackle socio-economic inequalities in obesity

BACKGROUND Addressing socio-economic inequalities in obesity is a public health priority and the workplace is seen as a potential health promotion site. However, there is a lack of evidence on what works. This article systematically reviews studies of the effects of workplace interventions on socio-economic inequalities in obesity. METHODS Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched for published or unpublished experimental and observational evaluation studies. Nine electronic databases were searched as well as websites and bibliographies. Included studies were data extracted, quality assessed and narratively synthesized. RESULTS Eighteen studies were included of which 14 examined behavioural interventions and 4 mixed or environmental ones. While most studies (n = 12) found no effects on inequalities in obesity--and a minority found increases (n = 3), there was also some evidence of potentially effective workplace interventions (n = 3) especially in terms of physical activity interventions targeted at lower occupational groups. CONCLUSION There is experimental evidence that workplace delivered physical activity interventions have the potential to reduce inequalities in obesity by targeting lower occupational groups. However, overall, the evidence base is small, largely from the USA, and of a low quality. More high-quality, experimental study designs are required.

Area-level socioeconomic disadvantage and suicidal behaviour in Europe: A systematic review.

The relationship between adverse individual socio-economic circumstances and suicidal behaviour is well established. However, the impact of adverse collective circumstances - such as the socio-economic context where people live - is less well understood. This systematic review explores the extent to which area-level socioeconomic disadvantage is associated with inequalities in suicidal behaviour and self-harm in Europe. We performed a systematic review (in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, EconLit and Social Sciences Citation Index) from 2005 to 2015. Observational studies were included if they were based in Europe and had a primary suicidal behaviour and self-harm outcome, compared at least two areas, included an area-level measure of socio-economic disadvantage and were published in the English language. The review followed The Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for quality appraisal. We identified 27 studies (30 papers) from 14 different European countries. There was a significant association (in 25/27 studies, all of which were rated as of medium or high quality) between socioeconomic disadvantage and suicidal behaviour (and self-harm), particularly for men, and this was a consistent finding across a variety of European countries. Socio-economic disadvantage was found to have an independent effect in several studies whilst others found evidence of mediating contextual and compositional factors. There is strong evidence of an association between suicidal behaviours (and self-harm) and area-level socio-economic disadvantage in Europe, particularly for men. Suicide prevention strategies should take this into account.

The Pain Divide: a cross-sectional analysis of chronic pain prevalence, pain intensity and opioid utilisation in England

Objectives Our central research question was, in England, are geographical inequalities in opioid use driven by health need (pain)? To answer this question, our study examined: (1) if there are regional inequalities in rates of chronic pain prevalence, pain intensity and opioid utilisation in England; (2) if opioid use and chronic pain are associated after adjusting for individual-level and area-level confounders. Design Cross-sectional study design using data from the Health Survey for England 2011. Setting England. Primary and secondary outcome measures Chronic pain prevalence, pain intensity and opioid utilisation. Participants Participant data relating to chronic pain prevalence, pain intensity and opioid usage data were obtained at local authority level from the Health Survey for England 2011; in total, 5711 respondents were included in our analysis. Methods Regional and local authority data were mapped, and a generalised linear model was then used to explore the relationships between the data. The model was adjusted to account for area-level and individual-level variables. Results There were geographical variations in chronic pain prevalence, pain intensity and opioid utilisation across the English regions—with evidence of a ‘pain divide’ between the North and the South, whereby people in the North of England more likely to have ‘severely limiting’ or ‘moderately limiting’ chronic pain. The intensity of chronic pain was significantly and positively associated with the use of opioid analgesics. Conclusions There are geographical differences in chronic pain prevalence, pain intensity and opioid utilisation across England—with evidence of a ‘pain divide’. Given the public health concerns associated with the long-term use of opioid analgesics—and their questionable activity in the management of chronic pain—more guidance is needed to support prescribers in the management of chronic pain, so the initiation of opioids can be avoided.

This divided land: An examination of regional inequalities in exposure to brownfield land and the association with morbidity and mortality in England.

This paper is the first empirical examination of the association between brownfield land and spatial inequalities in health. Linear mixed modelling of ward-level data suggests that there is higher exposure and susceptibility to brownfield land in the Northern compared to the Southern regions (with the exception of London); that brownfield exposure has an association with regional inequalities in mortality and morbidity within regions (particularly in the North West); that brownfield has an association with inequalities between regions (particularly between the North West and the South East); but that brownfield land only makes a small independent contribution to the North-South health divide in England. However, brownfield land could be a potentially important and previously overlooked independent environmental determinant of spatial inequalities in health in England.