Racial and ethnic disparities in diabetes mellitus and hypertension: Influence of income and insurance status in a cross-sectional study of the United States

Racial/ethnic disparities in diabetes mellitus (DM) and hypertension (HTN) have been observed and explained by socioeconomic status (education level, income level, etc.), screening, early diagnosis, treatment, prognostic factors, and adherence to treatment regimens. To the author's knowledge, there are no studies addressing disparities in hypertension and diabetes mellitus utilizing Hispanics as the reference racial/ethnic group and adjusting for sociodemographics and prognostic factors. This present study examined racial/ethnic disparities in HTN and DM and assessed whether this disparity is explained by sociodemographics. To assess these associations, the study utilized a cross-sectional design and examined the distribution of the covariates for racial/ethnic group differences, using the Pearson Chi Square statistic. The study focused on Non-Hispanic Blacks since this ethnic group is associated with the worst health outcomes. Logistic regression was used to estimate the prevalence odds ratio (POR) and to adjust for the confounding effects of the covariates. Results indicated that except for insurance coverage, there were statistically significant differences between Non-Hispanic Blacks and Non-Hispanic Whites, as well as Hispanics with respect to study covariates. In the unadjusted logistic regression model, there was a statistically significant increased prevalence of hypertension among Non-Hispanic Blacks compared to Hispanics, POR 1.36, 95% CI 1.02-1.80. Low income was statistically significantly associated with increased prevalence of hypertension, POR 0.38, 95% CI 0.32-0.46. Insurance coverage, though not statistically significant, was associated with an increase in the prevalence of hypertension, p>0.05. Concerning DM, Non-Hispanic Blacks were more likely to be diabetic, POR 1.10, 95% CI 0.85-1.47. High income was statistically significantly associated with decreased prevalence of DM, POR 0.47, 95% CI 0.39-0.57. After adjustment for the relevant covariates, the racial disparities between Hispanics and Non-Hispanic Blacks in HTN was removed, adjusted prevalence odds (APOR) 1.21, 95% CI 0.88-1.67. In this sample, there was racial/ethnic disparity in hypertension but not in diabetes mellitus between Hispanics and Non-Hispanic Blacks, with disparities in hypertension associated with socioeconomic status (family income, education, marital status) and also by alcohol, physical activity and age. However, race, education and BMI as class variables were statistically significantly associated with hypertension and diabetes mellitus p<0.0001. ^

Pregnancy intention, intimate partner violence, and the use of prenatal care in Jordan

Previous research has suggested an association between intimate partner violence and pregnancy intention status, and pregnancy intention status and the use of prenatal care services, however much of these studies have been conducted in high income countries (HIC) rather than low and middle income countries (LMIC). The objectives of this study were to examine the relationship between pregnancy intention status and intimate partner violence, and pregnancy intention status and the use of prenatal care among ever-married women in Jordan.^ Data were collected from a nationally representative sample of women interviewed in the 2007 Jordan Demographic and Health Survey. The sample was restricted to ever-married women, 15–49 years of age, who had a live birth within the five years preceding the survey. Multivariate logistic regression analyses was used to determine the relationship between intimate partner violence and pregnancy intention status, and pregnancy intention status and the use of prenatal care services.^ Women who reported a mistimed pregnancy (PORadj 1.96, 95% CI: 1.31–2.95), as well as an unwanted pregnancy (PORadj 1.32, 95% CI: 0.80–2.18) had a higher odds of experiencing lifetime physical and/or sexual abuse compared with women reporting a wanted pregnancy. Women not initiating prenatal care by the end of the first trimester had statistically significant higher odds of reporting both a mistimed (PORadj 2.07, 95% CI: 1.55–2.77) and unwanted pregnancy (PORadj 2.36, 95% CI: 1.68–3.31), compared with women initiating care in the first trimester. Additionally, women not receiving the adequate number of prenatal care visits for their last pregnancy had a higher odds of reporting an unwanted pregnancy (PORadj 2.11, 95% CI: 1.35–3.29) and mistimed pregnancy (POR adj 1.41, 95% CI: 0.96–2.07).^ Reducing intimate partner violence may decrease the prevalence of mistimed or unwanted pregnancies, and reducing both unwanted and mistimed pregnancies may decrease the prevalence of women not receiving timely and adequate prenatal care among women in this population. Further research, particularly in LMIC, is needed regarding the determinants of unintended pregnancy and its association with intimate partner violence as well as with the use of prenatal care services. ^