Health Equity Indicators for the English NHS: a longitudinal whole-population study at the small-area level

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 admini...

Access to Norwegian healthcare system – challenges for sub-Saharan African immigrants

“…Access to health care services is often one of the indicators of equity in health care provision [10]. Providing health care on equal terms has become a challenge for the health care system all over the world [11][12][13][14].…”

Inequalities in access to health and social care among adults with multiple sclerosis: A scoping review of the literature

“…In this scoping review, we identified and reviewed studies 35 which used a quantitative methodology to investigate intra-national (in-country) 36 variations in access across the care pathway and health systems of different 37 inequality groups among populations of adult MS patients. the Cochrane and Campbell Equity methods group checklist [23] to guide the development of the study protocol, study implementation and presentation of 1 findings. This study was funded by Salford Royal NHS Hospitals Foundation Trust.…”

“…As the focus was on adult MS patients, we excluded any study in which 37 more than 5% of the population was under 16 years of age. We also excluded 38 studies comparing MS patients with the general population or with other patient 39 groups, studies investigating uptake of alternative or complementary therapies, those 40 that focused on uptake of lifestyles rather than the services which promote lifestyle 41 5 modification, those investigating DMT adherence rather than prescription and studies 1 where the outcome was perceived or reported need, rather than comparative need. The full characteristics of the 36 studies is shown in supplementary The effect of gender was examined across all access subcategories for which there 20 were studies, and disability and socioeconomic status across all but one.…”

Inequality and the NHS hospital crisis: why social disadvantage needs attention

“…Less well known, however, is the greater increase in emergency admission of patients for inpatient hospital treatment (Blunt, 2013 …”

“…his requires better integration of local patient information between primary, secondary and social care, with speciic attention to deprivation. NHS England has now started producing local indicators of inequality in potentially avoidable emergency hospitalization that could be used routinely to ind out whether local initiatives are making a diference to local health inequalities (Cookson et al, 2016a). hese indicators show how well each local NHS area is doing at tackling inequality in avoidable admissions compared with other similar NHS areas.…”