Residential segregation, dividing walls and mental health: A population-based record linkage study

Background
Neighbourhood segregation has been described as a fundamental determinant of physical health, but literature on its effect on mental health is less clear. Whilst most previous research has relied on conceptualized measures of segregation, Northern Ireland is unique as it contains physical manifestations of segregation in the form of segregation barriers (or “peacelines”) which can be used to accurately identify residential segregation.
Methods
We used population-wide health record data on over 1.3 million individuals, to analyse the effect of residential segregation, measured by both the formal Dissimilarity Index and by proximity to a segregation barrier, on the likelihood of poor mental health.
Results
Using multi-level logistic regression models we found residential segregation measured by the Dissimilarity Index poses no additional risk to the likelihood of poor mental health after adjustment for area-level deprivation. However, residence in an area segregated by a “peaceline” increases the likelihood of antidepressant medication by 19% (OR=1.19, 95% CI: 1.14, 1.23) and anxiolytic medication by 39% (OR=1.39, 95% CI: 1.32, 1.48), even after adjustment for gender, age, conurbation, deprivation and crime.
Conclusions
Living in an area segregated by a ‘peaceline’ is detrimental to mental health suggesting segregated areas characterised by a heightened sense of ‘other’ pose a greater risk to mental health. The difference in results based on segregation measure highlights the importance of choice of measure when studying segregation.

Novel methods of drug administration for the treatment and care of older patients

The number of older people globally is increasing, contributing to a growing burden of morbidity and mortality. With this shift in population demographic, comes a new challenge in terms of appropriate healthcare for the over 65 years age group. As medication is the principal therapeutic intervention, it is essential that it be fully optimised, to meet the needs of this heterogeneous population. The most common routes of drug administration are oral and injectable, which may display some limitations for older people, in cases of dysphagia or frailty for example. This review considers alternative methods of drug delivery to the norm, specifically discussing the nasal, pulmonary and transdermal routes, as well as novel orally disintegrating tablets. The changing physiology as ageing occurs must be considered in the development of novel drug delivery devices. This review considers the various aspects of ageing that will influence future drug formulation design and development.

Using administrative data to understand mental health in Northern Ireland:Results from two exemplar projects

Mental health is unevenly distributed in the Northern Ireland population. Administrative data on psychotropic medication prescribing is increasingly being used in research into population mental health. This paper illustrates how these data indicate concentrations of poor mental health in Northern Ireland, e.g. within deprived neighbourhoods, at interfaces, among older persons admitted to care homes and among persons bereaved through sudden death or suicide. This briefing also aims to widen the debate about mental health from a disorder/service paradigm to a whole population approach.

Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug Use is Not Associated With Reduced Risk of Barrett’s Esophagus

OBJECTIVES: Regular use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is associated with a reduced risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma. Epidemiological studies examining the association between NSAID use and the risk of the precursor lesion, Barrett’s esophagus, have been inconclusive.

METHODS: We analyzed pooled individual-level participant data from six case-control studies of Barrett’s esophagus in the Barrett’s and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Consortium (BEACON). We compared medication use from 1474 patients with Barrett’s esophagus separately with two control groups: 2256 population-based controls and 2018 gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) controls. Study-specific odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using multivariable logistic regression models and were combined using a random effects meta-analytic model.

RESULTS: Regular (at least once weekly) use of any NSAIDs was not associated with the risk of Barrett’s esophagus (vs. population-based controls, adjusted OR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.76–1.32; I2=61%; vs. GERD controls, adjusted OR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.82–1.19; I2=19%). Similar null findings were observed among individuals who took aspirin or non-aspirin NSAIDs. We also found no association with highest levels of frequency (at least daily use) and duration (≥5 years) of NSAID use. There was evidence of moderate between-study heterogeneity; however, associations with NSAID use remained non-significant in “leave-one-out” sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS: Use of NSAIDs was not associated with the risk of Barrett’s esophagus. The previously reported inverse association between NSAID use and esophageal adenocarcinoma may be through reducing the risk of neoplastic progression in patients with Barrett’s esophagus.