Measuring and decomposing oral health inequalities in an UK population.
Measuring and decomposing oral health inequalities in an UK population.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/cdoe.12071
复制
发表时间：
2013-12
影响因子：
2.3
通讯作者：
Steele J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Shen J;Wildman J;Steele J
由于健康不平等在政策议程上的地位很高，本研究测量了英国口腔健康的不平等。我们将口腔健康的客观临床测量（天然牙齿数量）与口腔健康影响的自我报告测量（口腔健康影响概况，OHIP）进行比较，以确定测量类型是否影响测量的不平等程度。基尼系数和浓度指数（CIs）是根据1998年英国成人牙齿健康调查的数据计算的，随后进行分解。由于OHIP的信息只针对有齿个体，所以对天然牙齿的数量进行了两个样本的分析-整个样本和只有有齿个体的样本，后者可以直接与OHIP进行比较。我们发现相当大的整体纯口腔健康不平等(牙齿数量：基尼系数= 0.68（包括无齿），基尼系数= 0.40（不包括无齿）；OHIP：基尼系数= 0.33)和收入相关的不平等(牙齿数量：CI = 0.35（包括无齿），CI = 0.15（不包括无齿）；OHIP: CI = 0.03)，且牙数的CI一般高于OHIP。不同年龄组间存在差异，牙数CI随年龄增长而增加（不含无牙颌：16-30岁CI = 0.01, 65岁以上CI = 0.11；含无牙颌：16-30岁CI = 0.01, 65岁以上CI = 0.19）。然而，OHIP的不平等在最年轻的年龄组中是最高的（CI = 0.05）。牙齿数量反映了一生中损伤的积累，而OHIP记录了更直接的问题。在英国，存在着相当大的纯粹口腔健康不平等和与收入有关的口腔健康不平等。使用复杂的方法来衡量口腔健康不平等，我们已经能够比较口腔健康不平等与一般健康不平等。研究结果为未来的比较提供了基准，但也表明，健康措施的类型可能对我们如何思考和衡量口腔健康不平等具有相当重要的意义。
With health inequalities high on the policy agenda, this study measures oral health inequalities in the UK. We compare an objective clinical measure of oral health (number of natural teeth) with a self-reported measure of the impact of oral health (the Oral Health Impact Profile, OHIP) to establish whether the type of measure affects the scale of inequality measured. Gini coefficients and Concentration Indices (CIs) are calculated with subsequent decompositions using data from the 1998 UK Adult Dental Health Survey. Because the information on OHIP is only available on dentate individuals, analyses on the number of natural teeth are conducted for two samples – the entire sample and the sample with dentate individuals only, the latter to allow direct comparison with OHIP. We find considerable overall pure oral health inequalities (number of teeth: Gini = 0.68 (including edentate), Gini = 0.40 (excluding edentate); OHIP: Gini = 0.33) and income-related inequalities for both measures (number of teeth: CI = 0.35 (including edentate), CI = 0.15 (excluding edentate); OHIP: CI = 0.03), and the CI is generally higher for the number of teeth than for OHIP. There are differences across age groups, with CI increasing with age for the number of teeth (excluding edentate: 16–30 years: CI = 0.01, 65 + years: CI = 0.11; including edentate: 16–30 years: CI = 0.01, 65 + years: CI = 0.19). However, inequalities for OHIP were highest in the youngest age group (CI = 0.05). Number of teeth reflects the accumulation of damage over a lifetime, while OHIP records more immediate concerns. There are considerable pure oral health inequalities and income-related oral health inequalities in the UK. Using sophisticated methods to measure oral health inequality, we have been able to compare inequality in oral health with inequality in general health. The results provide a benchmark for future comparisons but also indicate that the type of health measure may be of considerable significance in how we think about and measure oral health inequalities.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
7.6
作者：
Sabbah, W.;Tsakos, G.;Watt, R. G.
通讯作者：
Watt, R. G.
影响因子：
7.6
作者：
Do, L. G.;Spencer, A. J.;Liu, P.
通讯作者：
Liu, P.
影响因子：
5.2
作者：
d'Uva, Teresa Bago;Lindeboom, Maarten;van Doorslaer, Eddy
通讯作者：
van Doorslaer, Eddy
影响因子：
3.5
作者：
Johnston, David W.;Propper, Carol;Shields, Michael A.
通讯作者：
Shields, Michael A.
影响因子：
12.7
作者：
Tsakos, Georgios;Demakakos, Paneyotes;Watt, Richard G.
通讯作者：
Watt, Richard G.