Social determinants of health (SDoH), which encompass the economic, social, environmental, and psychosocial factors that influence health, play a significant role in the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors as well as CVD morbidity and mortality. The COVID-19 pandemic and the current social justice movement sparked by the death of George Floyd have laid bare long-existing health inequities in our society driven by SDoH. Despite a recent focus on these structural drivers of health disparities, the impact of SDoH on cardiovascular health and CVD outcomes remains understudied and incompletely understood. To further investigate the mechanisms connecting SDoH and CVD, and ultimately design targeted and effective interventions, it is important to foster interdisciplinary efforts that incorporate translational, epidemiological, and clinical research in examining SDoH-CVD relationships. This review aims to facilitate research coordination and intervention development by providing an evidence-based framework for SDoH rooted in the lived experiences of marginalized populations. Our framework highlights critical structural/socioeconomic, environmental, and psychosocial factors most strongly associated with CVD and explores several of the underlying biologic mechanisms connecting SDoH to CVD pathogenesis, including excess stress hormones, inflammation, immune cell function, and cellular aging. We present landmark studies and recent findings about SDoH in our framework, with careful consideration of the constructs and measures utilized. Finally, we provide a roadmap for future SDoH research focused on individual, clinical, and policy approaches directed towards developing multilevel community-engaged interventions to promote cardiovascular health.

Scientific advances in healthcare have been disproportionately distributed across social strata. Disease burden is also disproportionately distributed, with marginalized groups having the highest risk of poor health outcomes. Social determinants are thought to influence healthcare delivery and the management of chronic diseases among marginalized groups, but the current conceptualization of social determinants lacks a critical focus on the experiences of people within their environment. The purpose of this article is to integrate the literature on marginalization and situate the concept in the framework of social determinants of health. We demonstrate that social position links marginalization and social determinants of health. This perspective provides a critical lens to assess the societal power dynamics that influence the construction of the socio-environmental factors affecting health. Linking marginalization with social determinants of health can improve our understanding of the inequities in health care delivery and the disparities in chronic disease burden among vulnerable groups.

Many HF patients were poor at interpreting and managing their symptoms. These results suggest a subgroup of patients to target for intervention.

Background: Three behaviors advocated to minimize fluid-related hospitalizations in patients with heart failure (HF) are restricted sodium and fluid intake and consistent oral diuretic use. Adherence to behaviors intended to decrease risk of hospitalization is believed to vary over time, but surprisingly little research has addressed patterns of adherence in HF patients.Objective: To describe patterns over time of 3 recommended self-care behaviors (i.e., diet, fluid intake, and diuretic dosing) in adults with HF and to determine how time and behavior influenced adherence rates.

Social determinants of health (SDH) are known to influence health. Adequate self-care maintenance improves heart failure (HF) outcomes. However, the relationship between self-care maintenance and SDH remains unclear. Explore the relationship between sociodemographic indicators of social position and self-care maintenance in adults with HF. This was a secondary analysis of data from a cross-sectional descriptive study of 543 adults with HF. Participants completed the Self-Care of HF Index and a sociodemographic survey. We used multiple regression with backward elimination to determine which SDH variables were determinants of self-care maintenance. Marital status ( p = .02) and race ( p = .02) were significant determinants of self-care maintenance. Education ( p = .06) was highest in Whites (35.6%). These variables explained only 3.8% of the variance in self-care maintenance. Race, education, and marital status were associated with HF self-care maintenance. SDH is complex and cannot be explained with simple sociodemographic characteristics.

Background The burden of heart failure (HF) is unequally distributed among population groups. Few study authors have described social determinants of health (SDoH) enabling/impeding self-care. Aim The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between SDoH and self-care in patients with HF. Methods Using a convergent mixed-methods design, we assessed SDoH and self-care in 104 patients with HF using the Protocol for Responding to and Assessing Patients' Assets, Risks, and Experiences (PRAPARE) and the Self-Care of HF Index v7.2 with self-care maintenance, symptom perception, and self-care management scales. Multiple regression was used to assess the relationship between SDoH and self-care. One-on-one in-depth interviews were conducted in patients with poor (standardized score ≤ 60, n = 17) or excellent (standardized score ≥ 80, n = 20) self-care maintenance. Quantitative and qualitative results were integrated. Results Participants were predominantly male (57.7%), with a mean age of 62.4 ± 11.6 years, with health insurance (91.4%) and some college education (62%). Half were White (50%), many were married (43%), and most reported adequate income (53%). The money and resources core domain of PRAPARE significantly predicted self-care maintenance (P = .019), and symptom perception (P = .049) trended significantly after adjusting for other PRAPARE core domains (personal characteristics, family and home, and social and emotional health) and comorbidity. Participants discussed social connectedness, health insurance coverage, individual upbringing, and personal experiences as facilitators of self-care behavior. Conclusion Several SDoH influence HF self-care. Patient-specific interventions that address the broader effects of these factors may promote self-care in patients with HF.

No abstract

While it is well known from numerous epidemiologic investigations that social determinants (socioeconomic, environmental, and psychosocial factors exposed to over the life-course) can dramatically impact cardiovascular health, the molecular mechanisms by which social determinants lead to poor cardiometabolic outcomes are not well understood. This review comprehensively summarizes a variety of current topics surrounding the biological effects of adverse social determinants (i.e., the biology of adversity), linking translational and laboratory studies with epidemiologic findings. With a strong focus on the biological effects of chronic stress, we highlight an array of studies on molecular and immunological signaling in the context of social determinants of health (SDoH). The main topics covered include biomarkers of sympathetic nervous system and hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis activation, and the role of inflammation in the biology of adversity focusing on glucocorticoid resistance and key inflammatory cytokines linked to psychosocial and environmental stressors (PSES). We then further discuss the effect of SDoH on immune cell distribution and characterization by subset, receptor expression, and function. Lastly, we describe epigenetic regulation of the chronic stress response and effects of SDoH on telomere length and aging. Ultimately, we highlight critical knowledge gaps for future research as we strive to develop more targeted interventions that account for SDoH to improve cardiometabolic health for at-risk, vulnerable populations.