Health Inequities in Manitoba: Is the Socioeconomic Gap

Recommendations

Info

Chapter 6: Primary Care and Prevention Figure 6.15: Hospitalization Due to Tuberculosis Disparity Rate Ratios by Urban and Rural Income Quintile 130 University of Manitoba Adjusted by (2004/05-2007/08) age & sex, per 100,000 residents, all ages Disparity Rate Ratios 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1: 1984/85- 1988/89 2: 1989/90- 1993/94 3: 1994/95- 1998/99 Figure 6.16: Hospitalization Due to Tuberculosis Disparity Rate Differences by Urban and Rural Income Quintile Adjusted by (2004/05-2007/08) age & sex, per 100,000 residents, all ages 4: 1999/00- 2003/04 5: 2004/05- 2007/08 Urban Disparity Rate Ratios 14.46 9.31 10.11 11.58 9.43 Rural Disparity Rate Ratios 2.72 6.40 5.96 6.37 5.83 Urban Disparity Rate Ratios T5 to T1: 0.65 (95% CI 0.28, 1.50) NS Rural Disparity Rate Ratios T5 to T1: 2.14 (95% CI 1.20, 3.82) p< .01 Disparity Rate Differences 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1: 1984/85- 1988/89 2: 1989/90- 1993/94 Time Period (fiscal years) 3: 1994/95- 1998/99 Source: Manitoba Centre for Health Policy, 2010 4: 1999/00- 2003/04 5: 2004/05- 2007/08 Urban Disparity Rate Differences 35.20 23.40 21.98 21.99 19.19 Rural Disparity Rate Differences 26.22 22.45 29.85 25.28 47.91 Urban Disparity Rate Differences T5 to T1: 0.55, p< .001 Rural Disparity Rate Differences T5 to T1: 1.83, p< .001 Time Period (fiscal years) This page edited May 18, 2011. Source: Manitoba Centre for Health Policy, 2010
Health Inequities in Manitoba: Is the Socioeconomic Gap in Health Widening or Narrowing Over Time? Cervical Cancer Screening Definition Also called a Papanicolaou (Pap) test, cervical cancer screening is based on the examination of cells collected from the cervix to reveal pre–malignant (before cancer) and malignant (cancer) changes as well as changes due to non–cancerous conditions such as inflammation from infections. Cervical cancer screening was measured as the age–adjusted proportion of women aged 18–69 who received at least one Pap test in three fiscal years, from 1984/85–1986/87 through to 2005/06–2007/08. Crude rates are available in the appendix. See Glossary for tariff codes used. The denominator includes all Manitoba female residents aged 18–69 in the three–year period. Women who have had a complete hysterectomy surgery were excluded from both the numerator and denominator. Rates for northern and remote areas served by nursing stations may be underestimated due to missing data. Time Periods Percentage of women aged 18–69 over a three–year period T1: 1984/85–1986/87 64.76 T2: 1987/88–1989/90 67.85 T3: 1990/91–1992/93 66.73 T4: 1993/94–1995/96 65.47 T5: 1996/97–1998/99 65.80 T6: 1999/00–2001/02 67.21 T7: 2002/03–2004/05 65.64 T8: 2005/06–2007/08 65.50 Key Findings: Cervical Cancer Screening Manitoba overall rates: • From the first time period T1 (1984/85–1986/87) to the last time period T8 (2005/06–2007/08), Pap test rates have been relatively stable from 64.8% to 65.5% provincially. Rates by neighbourhood income quintile over time: Rural: • Comparing only T1 to T8, the Pap test rate among rural women aged 18–69 remained similar in most rural quintiles, with the exception of R1 where rates may have decreased over time. 6 6 In the case of certain indicators where fewer events or percentages occur in the lowest compared to the highest quintile (such as in the case of Pap tests), DRRs are below 1 and DRDs are negative—the directions of differences are somewhat non–intuitive. The “lower” the ratio below 1 (for example, 0.7 rather than 0.8), the greater the disparity (i.e., 30% compared to 20% difference). As well, the more negative the difference (for example, –20 compared to –10), the greater the disparity. So what appears as a positive outcome (“lower” disparity) of lower DRRs or lower DRDs on the y–axis is actually a greater disparity. Manitoba Centre for Health Policy 131
Page 1 and 2:
HEALTH INEQUITIES IN MANITOBA: Is t
Page 3 and 4:
About the Manitoba Centre For Healt
Page 5 and 6:
Dr. Patricia Martens acknowledges t
Page 7 and 8:
Key findings: High School Completio
Page 9 and 10:
List of Figures Figure 1.1 Distribu
Page 11 and 12:
Figure 4.27 Adjusted Lorenz Curve f
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 6.15 Hospitalization Due to
Page 15 and 16:
List of Tables Table E.1 Changes in
Page 17 and 18:
Figure A3.6 Adjusted Lorenz Curve f
Page 19 and 20:
Executive Summary Health status and
Page 21 and 22:
(derived from Table E.1’s columns
Page 23 and 24:
Table E.1: Continued Indicator RURA
Page 25 and 26:
Table E.1: Continued Indicator RURA
Page 27 and 28:
Table Table E.2: E.2: Is Is the the
Page 29 and 30:
This page edited May 18, 2011. Tabl
Page 31 and 32:
References Commission on Social Det
Page 33 and 34:
Health Inequities in Manitoba: Is t
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Table 2.1: Neighbourhood Income Qui
Page 51 and 52:
Table 2.3: Neighbourhood Table 2.3:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Figure 3.2: Premature Mortality Rat
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Figure 3.10: Potential Years of Lif
Page 69 and 70:
Cumulative Percent of Potential Yea
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Figure 3.18: Under Five Mortality R
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Figure 4.2: Teen Pregnancy Rates Ov
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Figure 4.10: High School Completion
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Figure 4.18: Dental Extraction Rate
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Figure 4.26: Breastfeeding Initiati
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112: References: Health Inequities in Ma
Page 113 and 114: Health Inequities in Manitoba: Is t
Page 117 and 118: Figure 5.2: Diabetes Prevalence Ove
Page 125 and 126: Figure 5.10: Amputations Among Figu
Page 133 and 134: Figure 5.18: Ischemic Heart Disease
Page 141 and 142: Figure 5.26: Multiple Sclerosis Pre
Page 145 and 146: References: Health Inequities in Ma
Page 151 and 152: Figure 6.2: Continuity of Care Prev
Page 159 and 160: Figure 6.10: Hospitalization Due to
Page 161: Health Inequities in Manitoba: Is t
Page 167 and 168: CONFIDENTIAL -- NOT FOR DISTRIBUTIO
Page 175 and 176: Figure 7.2: Prevalence of Cumulativ
Page 179 and 180: Dementia Health Inequities in Manit
Page 183 and 184: Figure 7.10: Dementia Prevalence Ov
Page 191 and 192: Figure 7.18: Prevalence of Complete
Page 195 and 196: Reference Health Inequities in Mani
Page 201 and 202: Figure 8.2: Post-AMI Care: Beta-Blo
Page 205 and 206: Reference Health Inequities in Mani
Page 209 and 210: Table 9.1: Continued Indicator RURA
Page 211 and 212: Table 9.1: Continued Health Inequit
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Table A2.3: Crude Numbers of Mortal
Page 245 and 246:
Table A2.5: Crude Numbers for High
Page 247 and 248:
Table A2.7: Crude Numbers for Denta
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Table A2.11: Crude Numbers for Isch
Page 253 and 254:
Table A2.13: Crude Numbers for Cont
Page 255 and 256:
CONFIDENTIAL ‐‐ NOT FOR DISTRIB
Page 257 and 258:
Table A2.17: Crude Numbers for Cumu
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Figure A3.2: High School Appendix C
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269:
Copies of MCHP publications are ava
show all

Health Inequities in Manitoba: Is the Socioeconomic Gap

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?