Zoekresultaten

Predicting Functional Decline in community-living older people with low socioeconomic status

Maintaining independence is the most important goal of the majority of older people. The onset of disability in activities of daily living is one of the greatest threats to the ability of older people to live independently. Older people with a low socioeconomic status (SES) are at high risk of functional decline. It is unclear what predicts functional decline in older people with a low SES. The aim of this study was to determine predictors of 12-month functional decline in community-living older people with low SES in the Netherlands. Functional decline was defined as the inability to perform (instrumental) activities of daily living. A prognostic multicentre study was conducted, using data from The Dutch Older Persons and Informal Caregivers Survey Minimum DataSet. A multivariable logistic regression model was fitted, using a stepwise backward selection process. Performance of the model was expressed by discrimination, calibration and accuracy. A total of 4.370 participants were included. The mean age of the participants was 80 years and 58.9% were female. Functional decline was present in 1486 participants (34.0%). Ten predictors were independently associated with the outcome. Dementia was the strongest predictor (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.04–3.23). Other predictors were age, education, poor health, quality of life rate, arthrosis/arthritis, hearing problems, anxiety/panic disorder, pain and less social activities. The final model showed an acceptable discrimination (C-statistic 0.69, 95% CI 0.67–0.70), calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow p-value 0.33) and accuracy (Brier score 0.20). Further research is needed to examine how functional decline can be ameliorated in this population.

Exploring experiences with stressors and coping resources among Dutch socioeconomic groups during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 crisis impacts populations globally. This impact seems to differ for groups with low- and high-socioeconomic status (SES). We conducted a qualitative study in the Netherlands using a salutogenic perspective to examine experiences with stressors and coping resources during the pandemic among both SES groups to gain insight on how to promote the health and well-being of these groups. We conducted 10 focus group discussions and 20 interviews to explore the experiences, including resources and stressors, of respondents from low- (N = 37) and high-SES (N = 38) groups (25-55 years, Dutch speaking). We analyzed the findings at individual, community, and national levels. The results show that coping depends on government-imposed measures and the way individuals handle these measures; restriction to the home context with positive and negative consequences for work and leisure; psychological negative consequences and resourcefulness; and social effects related to unity (e.g. social cohesion or support) and division (including polarization). Respondents with lower SES expressed more problems with COVID-19 measures and experienced more social impact in their neighborhood than those with higher SES. Where low-SES groups especially mentioned the effects of staying at home on family life, high-SES groups mentioned effects on work life. At last, psychological consequences seem to differ somewhat across SES groups. Recommendations include consistent government-imposed measures and government communication, support for home schooling children, and strengthening the social fabric of neighborhoods.

Perceptions of employees with a low and medium level of education towards workplace health promotion programmes: a mixed-methods study

Background Understanding the perceptions of lower socioeconomic groups towards workplace health promotion is important because they are underrepresented in workplace health promotion activities and generally engage in unhealthier lifestyle behaviour than high SEP groups. This study aims to explore interest in workplace health promotion programmes (WHPPs) among employees with a low and medium level of education regarding participation and desired programme characteristics (i.e. the employer’s role, the source, the channel, the involvement of the social environment and conditions of participation). Methods A mixed-methods design was used, consisting of a questionnaire study (n = 475) and a sequential focus group study (n = 27) to enrich the questionnaire’s results. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to analyse the associations between subgroups (i.e. demographics, weight status) and interest in a WHPP. The focus group data were analysed deductively through thematic analysis, using MAXQDA 2018 for qualitative data analysis. Results The questionnaire study showed that 36.8% of respondents were interested in an employer-provided WHPP, while 45.1% expressed no interest. Regarding subgroup differences, respondents with a low level of education were less likely to express interest in a WHPP than those with a medium level of education (OR = .54, 95%, CI = .35–.85). No significant differences were found concerning gender, age and weight status. The overall themes discussed in the focus groups were similar to the questionnaires (i.e. the employer’s role, the source, the channel, the involvement of the social environment and conditions of participation). The qualitative data showed that participants’ perceptions were often related to their jobs and working conditions. Conclusions Employees with a medium level of education were more inclined to be interested in a WHPP than those with a low level of education. Focus groups suggested preferences varied depending on job type and related tasks. Recommendations are to allow WHPP design to adapt to this variation and facilitate flexible participation. Future research investigating employers’ perceptions of WHPPs is needed to enable a mutual understanding of an effective programme design, possibly contributing to sustainable WHPP implementation.

Digital health interventions to improve eating behaviour of people with a lower socioeconomic position: a scoping review of behaviour change techniques

Specific approaches are needed to reach and support people with a lower socioeconomic position (SEP) to achieve healthier eating behaviours. There is a growing body of evidence suggesting that digital health tools exhibit potential to address these needs because of its specific features that enable application of various behaviour change techniques (BCTs). The aim of this scoping review is to identify the BCTs that are used in diet-related digital interventions targeted at people with a low SEP, and which of these BCTs coincide with improved eating behaviour. The systematic search was performed in 3 databases, using terms related to e/m-health, diet quality and socioeconomic position. A total of 17 full text papers were included. The average number of BCTs per intervention was 6.9 (ranged 3–15). BCTs from the cluster ‘Goals and planning’ were applied most often (25x), followed by the clusters ‘Shaping knowledge’ (18x) and ‘Natural consequences’ (18x). Other frequently applied BCT clusters were ‘Feedback and monitoring’ (15x) and ‘Comparison of behaviour’ (13x). Whereas some BCTs were frequently applied, such as goal setting, others were rarely used, such as social support. Most studies (n = 13) observed a positive effect of the intervention on eating behaviour (e.g. having breakfast) in the low SEP group, but this was not clearly associated with the number or type of applied BCTs. In conclusion, more intervention studies focused on people with a low SEP are needed to draw firm conclusions as to which BCTs are effective in improving their diet quality. Also, further research should investigate combinations of BCTs, the intervention design and context, and the use of multicomponent approaches. We encourage intervention developers and researchers to describe interventions more thoroughly, following the systematics of a behaviour change taxonomy, and to select BCTs knowingly.

Leefstijladvies voor mensen met een lage SES

Vaker sporten. Minder alcohol drinken. Stoppen met roken. Nu echt op tijd naar bed. Dat leefstijlverandering lastig kan zijn, weten we allemaal. Maar voor sommigen lijkt het welhaast onmogelijk. Leefstijlverandering kost energie en aandacht. Wat als je daar helemaal geen ruimte voor hebt, omdat je wordt afgeleid door belangrijkere zaken, zoals de zorg voor een ziek familielid of doordat je de huur weer niet kunt betalen? Waar moet je het in zo’n situatie vandaan halen om gezonder te gaan leven? Vooral onder mensen met een lage sociaaleconomische status (SES) komt zo’n situatie regelmatig voor. Welke bijdrage zou de eerstelijnsgeneeskunde hieraan kunnen leveren? De oplossing is gecompliceerd en de weg ernaartoe is vaak frustrerend, vooral omdat gezondheidscommunicatie alleen kan werken als het in nevenschikking met andere instrumenten wordt gecombineerd. Het antirookbeleid is een mooi voorbeeld waar veel is bereikt door een combinatie van instrumenten.

Ethnicity and socioeconomic status are related to dietary patterns at age 5 in the Amsterdam born children and their development (ABCD) cohort