Gender inequalities in occupational health related to the unequal distribution of working and employment conditions: a systematic review

Introduction: Gender inequalities exist in work life, but little is known about their presence in relation to factors examined in occupation health settings. The aim of this study was to identify and summarize the working and employment conditions described as determinants of gender inequalities in occupational health in studies related to occupational health published between 1999 and 2010. Methods: A systematic literature review was undertaken of studies available in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Sociological Abstracts, LILACS, EconLit and CINAHL between 1999 and 2010. Epidemiologic studies were selected by applying a set of inclusion criteria to the title, abstract, and complete text. The quality of the studies was also assessed. Selected studies were qualitatively analysed, resulting in a compilation of all differences between women and men in the prevalence of exposure to working and employment conditions and work-related health problems as outcomes. Results: Most of the 30 studies included were conducted in Europe (n=19) and had a cross-sectional design (n=24). The most common topic analysed was related to the exposure to work-related psychosocial hazards (n=8). Employed women had more job insecurity, lower control, worse contractual working conditions and poorer self-perceived physical and mental health than men did. Conversely, employed men had a higher degree of physically demanding work, lower support, higher levels of effort-reward imbalance, higher job status, were more exposed to noise and worked longer hours than women did. Conclusions: This systematic review has identified a set of working and employment conditions as determinants of gender inequalities in occupational health from the occupational health literature. These results may be useful to policy makers seeking to reduce gender inequalities in occupational health, and to researchers wishing to analyse these determinants in greater depth.

Welfare state regimes and gender inequalities in the exposure to work-related psychosocial hazards

Background: Gender inequalities in the exposure to work-related psychosocial hazards are well established. However, little is known about how welfare state regimes influence these inequalities. Objectives: To examine the relationship between welfare state regimes and gender inequalities in the exposure to work-related psychosocial hazards in Europe, considering occupational social class. Methods: We used a sample of 27, 465 workers from 28 European countries. Dependent variables were high strain, iso-strain, and effort-reward imbalance, and the independent was gender. We calculated the prevalence and prevalence ratio separately for each welfare state regime and occupational social class, using multivariate logistic regression models. Results: More female than male managers/professionals were exposed to: high strain, iso-strain, and effort–reward imbalance in Scandinavian [adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR) = 2·26; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1·87–2·75; 2·12: 1·72–2·61; 1·41: 1·15–1·74; respectively] and Continental regimes (1·43: 1·23–1·54; 1·51: 1·23–1·84; 1·40: 1·17–1·67); and to high strain and iso-strain in Anglo-Saxon (1·92: 1·40–2·63; 1·85: 1·30–2·64; respectively), Southern (1·43: 1·14–1·79; 1·60: 1·18–2·18), and Eastern regimes (1·56: 1·35–1·81; 1·53: 1·28–1·83). Conclusion: Gender inequalities in the exposure to work-related psychosocial hazards were not lower in those welfare state regimes with higher levels of universal social protection policies.

Gender sensitivity in national health plans in Latin America and the European Union

Objectives: To evaluate the situation regarding gender sensitivity in national health plans in Latin America and the European Union for the decade 2000–2010. Methods: A systematic search and content analysis of national health plans were carried out within 37 countries. Gender sensitivity, defined as the extent to which a health plan considers gender as a central category and develops measures to reduce any gender-related inequalities, was analysed through an ad hoc checklist. Results: The description of health problems by sex was more frequent than intervention proposals aimed at reducing gender health disparities. The greatest number of specific intervention proposals targeted at overcoming gender-based health inequalities were associated with sexual and/or reproductive health, gender based violence, the working environment and human resources training. Compared to the European Union member states, Latin American health plans were found to be generally more gender sensitive. Conclusions: National health plans are still generally lacking in gender sensitivity. Disparities exist in health policy formulation in favour of men, whilst women's health continues to be identified mainly with reproductive health. If gender sensitivity is not taken into account, efforts to improve the quality of clinical care will be insufficient as gender inequalities will persist.

Desigualdades de género en salud laboral en España

Objetivos: Analizar las desigualdades de género en las condiciones de empleo, trabajo, conciliación de la vida laboral y familiar, y en los problemas de salud relacionados con el trabajo en una muestra de la población ocupada en España en el año 2007 teniendo en cuenta la clase social y el sector de actividad. Métodos: Las desigualdades de género se analizaron mediante 25 indicadores en los 11.054 trabajadores entrevistados en la VI Encuesta Nacional de Condiciones de Trabajo. Se calcularon las odds ratio (OR) y sus intervalos de confianza del 95% (IC95%) mediante modelos de regresión logística multivariados, estratificando por clase social ocupacional y sector de actividad. Resultados: Más mujeres que hombres trabajaban sin contrato (OR = 1,83; IC95%: 1,51-2,21), con alto esfuerzo o baja recompensa (1,14:1,05-1,25) y sufriendo acoso sexual (2,85:1,75-4,62), discriminación (1,60:1,26-2,03) y más dolores osteomusculares (1,38:1,19-1,59). Más hombres que mujeres trabajaban a turnos (0,86:0,79-0,94), con altos niveles de ruido (0,34:0,30-0,40), altas exigencias físicas (0,58:0,54-0,63) y sufriendo más lesiones por accidentes de trabajo (0,67:0,59-0,76). Las trabajadoras no manuales mostraron trabajar con un contrato temporal (1,34:1,09-1,63), expuestas a más riesgos psicosociales y sufriendo mayor discriminación (2,47:1,49-4,09) y enfermedades profesionales (1,91:1,28-2,83). En el sector de la industria las desigualdades de género fueron más marcadas. Conclusiones: En España existen importantes desigualdades de género en las condiciones de empleo, trabajo y en los problemas de salud relacionados con el trabajo, que se ven influenciadas por la clase social y el sector de actividad, y que sería necesario tener en consideración en las políticas públicas de salud laboral.

Las desigualdades de género en la ciencia: Gaceta Sanitaria da un paso adelante

Las desigualdades de género están presentes en la familia, el trabajo, los salarios, los recursos económicos, el uso del tiempo y el poder, de manera que las mujeres tienen una peor situación. La desigual distribución del poder se refleja también en las instituciones y las estructuras relacionadas con la ciencia, y a su vez se plasma en la producción científica. En este editorial se contextualiza y presenta una iniciativa promovida por el equipo editorial de Gaceta Sanitaria para responder a estas desigualdades a través de la nueva «Política de Gaceta Sanitaria para fomentar la igualdad de género en la publicación científica».

Desigualdades de género en la investigación en salud pública y epidemiología en España (2007-2014)

Objetivo: Analizar las desigualdades de género en investigación en salud pública y epidemiología en España, en el periodo 2007-2014. Método: Estudio descriptivo según sexo de posiciones de liderazgo del Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red (CIBER), especialmente en el área temática de epidemiología y salud pública (CIBERESP) en 2014; de sociedades científicas de salud pública (SESPAS) y epidemiología (SEE), 2009-2014; y de proyectos de investigación solicitados (13.320) y financiados (4699), e importes de convocatorias de Acción Estratégica en Salud (AES), 2007-2013. Resultados: Existe una clara infrarrepresentación de mujeres líderes y contratadas en investigación de excelencia en salud pública (CIBERESP), con predominio de los hombres en puestos de decisión. Aunque los proyectos de investigación de la Acción Estratégica en Salud (AES) liderados por mujeres han crecido ligeramente entre 2007 y 2013, entre los solicitados no alcanzan el 50%, con excepción de los de la Comisión de Salud Pública. La brecha de género es aún mayor en proyectos financiados. Los proyectos liderados por hombres tienen mayor probabilidad de obtener financiación, alcanzando el 29% en los de salud pública. Persiste una segregación horizontal de género en posiciones de reconocimiento científico en congresos de SESPAS y SEE. Conclusiones: La sobrerrepresentación de líderes masculinos en la investigación en salud pública en España debe entenderse como indicador y consecuencia del androcentrismo en las sociedades científicas y los grupos profesionales. Esta situación sexista pone en riesgo la existencia de productos y servicios innovadores desde la perspectiva de género que den respuestas a necesidades y demandas de toda la sociedad. Se necesitan más mujeres en investigación que tengan incorporada esta perspectiva.

Gender and health inequalities: intersections with other relevant axes of oppression

The risk of disease, disability, and mortality as well as access to health services are unfairly distributed among the population, with certain groups bearing an unequally larger burden of ill health and poorer access to care due to gender, sexual identity/orientation, ethnic background, or class. According to the WHO Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH), these health inequalities emanate from socioeconomic and political factors (governance, cultural values, macroeconomic policies), which generate a set of socioeconomic positions in society according to which populations are stratified based on gender, ethnicity, education, income, or other factors. These societal inequalities influence people’s material and psychosocial circumstances as well as behavioral and biological factors, which in turn impact on health inequalities. Tackling gender, race/ethnic, and socioeconomic inequalities in society is thus recognized as the most powerful action to cope with unequal health risks distribution, and social innovations focusing on these ‘root causes’ are needed in order to prevent and stop endemic social inequalities and social exclusion in health within low-income as well as high-income countries. Increasing existing knowledge and making visible the health status of the most vulnerable and invisible groups are critical in order to contribute to this imperative challenge.

Mapping the awareness of inequalities in health programs in Spanish communities: moving forward together

The aim of this study is to map the awareness of gender, socioeconomic, immigrant and ethnic health inequalities in health at schools, maternal health and traffic injury health prevention programs. The study was conducted in the 19 health descentralized areas in Spain, 17 autonomous community (ACs) and the 2 autonomous cities (ACities). The data were collected from May 2008 to January 2009. The unit of analysis was the collection of policy documents setting out the programs mentioned above and the related support material in each AC. A reading guide was used to analyze the awareness of inequalities. With regard to health at schools, 2 of 10 programs show a high awareness of inequalities and include many specific proposals to be implemented at the local level. Regarding maternal health, 13 ACs have prepared support material with high awareness of inequalities to be implemented. A traffic injury program has been created in two ACs. We map the whole situation in Spain regarding the health programs that we have used as examples and their awareness of inequalities. We can conclude that there are differences between the regions studied in Spain and in general, the awareness of inequalities is low.

Inequality in analgesic prescription in Spain: a gender development issue

Objectives: It is well known that sex differences in analgesic prescription are not merely the logical result of greater prevalence of pain in women, since this therapeutic variability is related to factors such as educational level or social class. This study aims to analyse the relationship between analgesic prescription and gender development in different regions of Spain. Methods: Cross-sectional study of sex-differences in analgesic prescription according to the gender development of the regions studied. Analgesic prescription, pain and demographic variables were obtained from the Spanish Health Interview Survey in 2006. Gender development was measured with the Gender Development Index (GDI). A logistic regression analysis was conducted to compare analgesic prescription by sex in regions with a GDI above or below the Spanish average. Results: Once adjusted by pain, age and social class, women were more likely to be prescribed analgesics than men, odds ratio (OR) = 1.74 (1.59-1.91), as residents in regions with a lower GDI compared with those in region with a higher GDI: ORWomen = 1.26 (1.12-1.42), ORMen = 1.30 (1.13-1.50). Women experiencing pain in regions with a lower GDI were more likely than men to be treated by a general practitioner rather than by a specialist, OR = 1.32 (1.04-1.67), irrespective of age and social class. Conclusions: Gender bias may be one of the pathways by which inequalities in analgesic treatment adversely affect women's health. Moreover, research into the adequacy of analgesic treatment and the possible medicalisation of women should consider contextual factors, such as gender development.

Looking twice at the gender equity index for public health impact

Background: It has been shown that gender equity has a positive impact on the everyday activities of people (decision making, income allocation, application and observance of norms/rules) which affect their health. Gender equity is also a crucial determinant of health inequalities at national level; thus, monitoring is important for surveillance of women’s and men’s health as well as for future health policy initiatives. The Gender Equity Index (GEI) was designed to show inequity solely towards women. Given that the value under scrutiny is equity, in this paper a modified version of the GEI is proposed, the MGEI, which highlights the inequities affecting both sexes. Methods: Rather than calculating gender gaps by means of a quotient of proportions, gaps in the MGEI are expressed in absolute terms (differences in proportions). The Spearman’s rank coefficient, calculated from country rankings obtained according to both indexes, was used to evaluate the level of concordance between both classifications. To compare the degree of sensitivity and obtain the inequity by the two methods, the variation coefficient of the GEI and MGEI values was calculated. Results: Country rankings according to GEI and MGEI values showed a high correlation (rank coef. = 0.95). The MGEI presented greater dispersion (43.8%) than the GEI (19.27%). Inequity towards men was identified in the education gap (rank coef. = 0.36) when using the MGEI. According to this method, many countries shared the same absolute value for education but with opposite signs, for example Azerbaijan (−0.022) and Belgium (0.022), reflecting inequity towards women and men, respectively. This also occurred in the empowerment gap with the technical and professional job component (Brunei:-0.120 vs. Australia, Canada Iceland and the U.S.A.: 0.120). Conclusion: The MGEI identifies and highlights the different areas of inequities between gender groups. It thus overcomes the shortcomings of the GEI related to the aim for which this latter was created, namely measuring gender equity, and is therefore of great use to policy makers who wish to understand and monitor the results of specific equity policies and to determine the length of time for which these policies should be maintained in order to correct long-standing structural discrimination against women.

Social determinants of sexual satisfaction in Spain considered from the gender perspective

Aims: To describe gender- and social class-related inequalities in sexual satisfaction and analyze their relationship with self-perceived health status. Methods: This population-based, cross-sectional study included 7384 sexually active people aged 16 years and over residing in Spain in 2009 (3951 men and 3433 women). The explanatory variables were gender, age, social class, share in performing domestic tasks, spend time looking after oneself, collaborate economically in supporting the family, caring for children, self-perceived health status, and the desire to increase or decrease frequency of having sexual relations. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression models were fitted. Results: Among women, sexual satisfaction declines progressively after age 45. Sexual satisfaction is 1.7 times higher among women who look after themselves and who feel good compared with those who do not. The odds of wanting to increase sex is 3.3 times higher for women who are satisfied compared with women who desire a lower frequency of sexual intercourses; and good perceived health was associated with sexual satisfaction. In satisfied men, the corresponding odds is 1.9 times that of men desiring to reduce their frequency of sex. Conclusions: Gender and social class inequalities are found in sexual satisfaction. This is associated with perceived health status, adding evidence in support of the World Health Organization definition of sexual health.