Use of different subjective health indicators to assess health inequalities in an urban immigrant population in north-western Italy: a cross-sectional study

Abstract

BackgroundDespite the steady growth of the immigrant population in Italy, data on the health status of immigrants are scarce. Our main goals were to measure Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL), Self-Rated Health (SRH) and morbidity among immigrants in Genoa. We aimed to assess the relative contribution of some social, structural and behavioral determinants to “within-group” health disparities.MethodsWe enrolled 502 subjects by means of snowball sampling. The SF-12 questionnaire, integrated with socio-demographic and health-related items, was used. Multivariate logistic and Poisson regression models were applied in order to identify characteristics associated with poor SRH, lower SF-12 scores and prevalence of self-reported morbidities.ResultsSubjects showed relatively moderate levels of HRQoL (median physical and mental scores of 51.6 and 47.3, respectively) and about 15% of them rated their health as fair or poor. Lower scores in the physical dimension of HRQoL were associated with the presence of morbidities and immigration for work and religious reasons, while those who had migrated for religious and family reasons displayed a lower probability of lower scores in the mental dimension of HRQoL. Poor SRH was associated with female gender, overweight/obesity and presence of morbidities. Moreover, compared with immigrants from countries with a low human development index, immigrants from highly developed societies showed significantly lower odds of reporting poor SRH. About one-third of respondents reported at least one medical condition, while the prevalence of multi-morbidity was 10%. Females, over 45-year-olds, overweight and long-term immigrants had a higher prevalence of medical conditions.ConclusionsOur study confirms the presence of health inequalities within a heterogeneous immigrant population. HRQoL, SRH and morbidity are valid, relatively rapid and cheap tools for measuring health inequalities, though they do so in different ways. These indicators should be used with caution and, if possible, simultaneously, as they could help to identify and to monitor more vulnerable subjects among immigrants.

Prevalence of Heart Failure and Adherence to Process Indicators: Which Socio-Demographic Determinants are Involved?

“…Our data only showed a statistically significant difference for 45- to 64-year-old males, however. To our knowledge, no estimates of the prevalence of CHF among immigrants are available in the literature, but if we consider the broader category of heart disease, several studies have reported that immigrants have lower mortality rates of heart disease than native populations [ 21 ], which are findings consistent with the “healthy migrant” effect already seen for other diseases [ 22 ].…”

Ethnicity does not account for differences in the health-related quality of life of Turkish, Moroccan, and Moluccan elderly in the Netherlands

“…There are some limitations to our study that need to be considered when interpreting our results. First, although the SF-36, the parent questionnaire for the SF-12, and the SF-12 itself are widely used valid instruments that have been previously used to measure HRQOL including immigrants [ 1 , 2 , 6 , 12 , 23 ], measurement bias might have been occurred by the blending of health and physical and mental function concepts in the SF-36 [ 24 , 25 ]. As our study focused on the physical and mental health summary scores, it could still be possible that ethnicity affected HRQOL independently of physical and mental functioning.…”

Access to and use of sexual and reproductive health services among street children in Uganda: Does Migration matter?

“…Existing research output focuses disproportionately on a few categories of migrants and health concerns, and on migration to and from high-income countries(9)(10) (11) (12). In Italy, female immigrants are at greater risk of receiving inadequate healthcare services and poor quality outcomes during their pregnancy and delivery compared to native females (13). These studies demonstrate that migrants are more likely to use modern contraception and antenatal care than non-migrants.…”