Strategic directions report for the social determinants of health project

This report presents the outcomes of a project undertaken by the VACCHO Public Health Research Unit to explore ways to build capacity in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander social determinants research. The project was funded by the Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal Health.----- The project involved a series of four social determinants research workshops conducted in July and August 2009 and a collaborative forum conducted in September 2009. Invitations to participate were extended to the VACCHO membership and the nine universities in Victoria. Three workshops were held with ACCHOs (in Bendigo, Melbourne and Gippsland), and one workshop with universities (in Melbourne).----- The workshops aimed to build VACCHO’s social determinants research capacity and provide direction for VACCHO on ways to more effectively engage in Aboriginal health research. Through the workshops, VACCHO aimed to work with ACCHOs to identify research processes and issues that are equitable and sustainable, and which address the social determinants of health.----- At the workshops, participants explored questions around the priorities for the social determinants of Aboriginal health and considered the key partnerships that might be important to social determinants research.----- At the workshops with ACCHOs, participants identified key research priorities and questions in Aboriginal social determinants and health. This focus reflects the need for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community representatives to identify the priorities in health and social determinants research. Identifying these priorities is important if researchers are to respond in a meaningful way and undertake relevant research in the most urgent areas of need. At the university workshop, participants focused on identifying research process and implementation issues in social determinants research.----- The final forum brought together ACCHOs, university representatives, invited presenters and participants from justice, education and housing departments, and representatives from non-government funding organisations. The forum aimed to provide an insight into how priorities and funding decisions are made, and how research can help to ensure they are influenced by the priorities of the community. The findings from the workshops were presented at the forum and used to develop pathways for future research.

Creating change in government to address the social determinants of health: How can efforts be improved?

Background The evidence base for the impact of social determinants of health has been strengthened considerably in the last decade. Increasingly, the public health field is using this as a foundation for arguments and actions to change government policies. The Health in All Policies (HiAP) approach, alongside recommendations from the 2010 Marmot Review into health inequalities in the UK (which we refer to as the ‘Fairness Agenda’), go beyond advocating for the redesign of individual policies, to shaping the government structures and processes that facilitate the implementation of these policies. In doing so, public health is drawing on recent trends in public policy towards ‘joined up government’, where greater integration is sought between government departments, agencies and actors outside of government. Methods In this paper we provide a meta-synthesis of the empirical public policy research into joined up government, drawing out characteristics associated with successful joined up initiatives. We use this thematic synthesis as a basis for comparing and contrasting emerging public health interventions concerned with joined-up action across government. Results We find that HiAP and the Fairness Agenda exhibit some of the characteristics associated with successful joined up initiatives, however they also utilise ‘change instruments’ that have been found to be ineffective. Moreover, we find that – like many joined up initiatives – there is room for improvement in the alignment between the goals of the interventions and their design. Conclusion Drawing on public policy studies, we recommend a number of strategies to increase the efficacy of current interventions. More broadly, we argue that up-stream interventions need to be ‘fit-for-purpose’, and cannot be easily replicated from one context to the next.

Social determinants of health and diabetic foot disease

Background Diabetic foot disease (DFD) is the leading cause of hospitalisation and lower extremity amputation (LEA) in people with diabetes. Many studies have established the relationship between DFD and clinical risk factors, such as peripheral neuropathy and peripheral arterial disease. Other studies have identified the relationship between diabetes and non-clinical risk factors termed social determinants of health (SDoH), such as socioeconomic status. However, it appears very few studies have investigated the relationship between DFD and SDoH. This paper aims to review the existing literature investigating the relationship between DFD and the SDoH factors socioeconomic status (SES), race and geographical remoteness (remoteness). Process Electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PubMed) were searched for studies reporting SES, race (including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander in Australia) and remoteness and their relationship to DFD and LEA. Exclusion criteria were studies conducted in developing countries and studies published prior to 2000. Findings Forty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed; 10 in Australia. Overall, 28 (58%) studies investigated LEA, 10 (21%) DFD, and 10 (21%) DFD and LEA as the DFD-related outcome. Thirty-six (75%) studies investigated the SDoH risk factor of race, 22 (46%) SES, and 20 (42%) remoteness. SES, race and remoteness were found to be individually associated with LEA and DFD in the majority of studies. Only four studies investigated interactions between SES, race and remoteness and DFD with contrasting findings. All four studies used only LEA as their investigated outcome. No Australian studies investigate the interaction of all three SDoH risk factors on DFD outcomes. Conclusions The SDoH risk factors of SES, race and GR appear to be individually associated with DFD. However, only few studies investigated the interaction of these three major SDoH risk factors and DFD outcomes with contrasting results. There is a clear gap in this area of DFD research and particularly in Australia. Until urgent future research is performed, current practice and policy does not adequately take into consideration the implication of SDoH on DFD.

Comprehensive school health, the social determinants of health, and the health status of children

As children are becoming increasingly inactive and obese, there is an urgent need for effective early prevention and intervention programs. One solution is a comprehensive school health (CSH) program, a health promotion initiative aimed at educating students about healthy behaviours and lifestyles, which also provides a link between the school, students, families, and the surrounding community. The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between different components of CSH programs, as well as three determinants of health (gender, social support, socio-economic status), and physical activity, on the aerobic fitness and body mass index (BMI) of children. A newly developed and pilot-tested survey derived from Health Canada's fourpart CSH model (instruction, social support, support services, and a healthy physical environment) was sent to elementary school principals. Data on the gender, physical activity, parental education, and social support levels of students from these schools were gathered from a previous study. Multiple regression procedures were conducted to estimate the relationships between CSH components, the social determinants of health, physical activity, and BMI and aerobic fitness. Results showed that three CSH components were significantly associated with both BMI and aerobic fitness values in children, but accounted for less than 5% of the variance in both variables. Physical activity partially mediated the relationship between the significant CSH components, BMI, and particularly aerobic fitness. Furthermore, the social determinant and physical activity variables played independent roles in aerobic fitness values. No moderating effects of the social determinants were discovered.

A Quantitative Study of Social Capital Components, Self-Reported Health Status and Social Determinants of Health

This quantitative descriptive co-relational study used telephone survey interviews and stratified random sampling to collect data related to Social Capital (SC) and its components (trust and safety, reciprocity, civic engagement and collective action) and selected determinants of health variables in Niagara Region, Canada. Among the four components of social capital, trust and safety levels were highest among all participants (m=5.42, SD=1.0), with community engagement yielding the lowest mean score for the sample (m=1.93, SD=.8). Reciprocity had the strongest association with all other components of SC (r=0.51). Those most likely to report low levels of SC and health were unattached and low-income females. Males were more likely to report higher trust and safety levels and higher levels of self-rated health. In this study, a linear relationship between self-reported health status and SC was not found. Marital and employment status were associated with differences in mean scores of SC and self-reported health.

Social determinants of health in the setting of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

Social determinants of health play an important role in explaining poor health outcomes across many chronic disease states. The impact of the social gradient in the setting of an inherited heart disease, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), has not been investigated. This study sought to profile the socioeconomic status of patients attending a specialized multidisciplinary clinic and to determine the impact on clinical factors, psychosocial wellbeing and adherence to medical advice.

The emergence of the social determinants of health on the policy agenda in Britain: A case study, 1980--2003

Numerous theories have been advanced in the effort to explain how a given policy issue manages to take root in the public sphere and subsequently move forward on the public legislative agenda—or not. This study examined how the social determinants of health (SDOH) came to be part of the legislative policy agenda in Britain from 1980 to 2003. ^ The specific objectives of the research were: (1) to conduct a sociopolitical analysis grounded in alternative agenda-setting theories to identify the factors responsible for moving the social determinants health perspective onto the British policy agenda; and (2) to determine which of the theories and related dimensions best accounted for the emergence of this perspective. ^ A triangulated content and context analysis of British news articles, historical accounts, and research commentaries of the SDOH movement was conducted guided by relevant agenda-setting theories set within a social movement framework to chronicle the emergence of the SDOH as a significant policy issue in Britain. ^ The most influential social movement and agenda setting elements in the emergence of the SDOH in Britain were issue generation tactics, framing efforts, mobilizing structures, and political opportunities grounded in social movement and agenda setting theories. Policy content or the details of the policy had comparatively little impact on the successful emergence of the SDOH. Despite resistance by the government, from 1980 to 1996 interest groups created a political understanding of the SDOH utilizing a framing package encompassing notions of inequality, fairness, and justice. This frame transmitted a powerful idea connected to a core set of British values and beliefs. After 1996, a shift in political opportunities cemented the institutional arrangements needed to sustain an environment conducive to the development and implementation of SDOH policies and programs. ^ This research demonstrates that the U.S. emergence of the SDOH on the policy agenda will depend upon: (1) U.S. ideals and values regarding poverty, inequality, race, health, and health care that will determine issue framing; (2) political opportunities that will emerge—or not—to advance the SDOH policy agenda; and (3) the mobilizing structures that support or oppose the issue. ^

Making life better: Monitoring the wider social determinants of health and well being - key indicators 2015

This report monitors progress against the key indicators of Northern Ireland’s public health strategy ‘Making Life Better’ launched by the Department of Health, Social Services & Public Safety (DHSSPS) in 2014. In addition to presenting the revised baseline positions for each of the key indicators of the framework, the report also monitors progress against each indicator by comparing the latest position with the baseline.

Social determinants of health - why we continue to ignore them in the search for improved population health outcomes!

There is now unequivocal evidence that the health status of individuals and of whole communities is socially and economically determined, as are many other aspects of our lives. This suggests, as advocates of public health and population health approaches argue, that our efforts in managing our health and wellbeing should focus much more on early intervention and prevention programs than has been the case to date. However, although this ideology of social and economic determinism is generally accepted, practice does not reflect such values. Indeed, as increasing demand at the critical end of health service provision sees us spending more and more of our limited health care resources on acute and chronic illness, less resources are devoted to constructing and maintaining health-creating communities and environments. Paradoxically, while most of our leaders, academics and policy makers have themselves been nurtured in a sound understanding of cause and effect in the world, they are ignoring these fundamental premises in their approaches to the provision and management of health care. This paper explores some of the reasons why this might be the case and draws on key evidence to suggest that the time has come for us to think more ideologically in approaching health care in the future.

Social determinants of health - why treat without changing what makes people sick?

Social determinants of health (SDHs) are the 'social circumstances in which people are born, grow up, live, work and age, including the health system', that increase the likelihood of health inequities in society. SDHs can be social, economic, demographic or geographical in nature. Examples include social exclusion, occupational and environmental exposure to health risks, unemployment or job insecurity, low levels of education, adverse early childhood development, culturally inappropriate healthcare, and poverty.