Income and professional inequalities in chronic diseases: prevalence and incidence in France

OBJECTIVES

In France, almost nine of 10 deaths are caused by non-communicable diseases, and there is significant social inequality in mortality rates. However, it is not easy to collect robust data on the incidence and prevalence of such diseases according to socio-economic status. Based on data from the link between the primary longitudinal population sample and the national health data system, the aim of our study was to compute the standardised incidence and prevalence of seven major groups of chronic diseases according to socio-economic status.

STUDY DESIGN

Descriptive retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

This was a descriptive retrospective cohort study on a weighted representative sample of the French population, comprising 3.4 million individuals from data collected 2016-2017. Main chronic disease categories include diabetes, cancers, psychiatric disorders, liver and pancreatic diseases, neurological conditions, respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, calculated from the 2016-2017 period by combining health care consumption and diagnoses received during hospitalisations and/or associated with specific full healthcare coverage. Socio-economic status was measured by disposable income from the 2013-2014 tax returns and census-derived socioprofessional groups, and findings were standardised for age and sex.

RESULTS

For all disease categories except cancers, standardised incidence rates showed a gradient favouring the wealthiest, with a risk ratio between the first and tenth standard of living deciles ranging from 1.4 (cardiovascular diseases) to 2.8 (diabetes). Incidence of all disease categories, except cancers, was higher for all groups compared with executives and higher academic professions (risk ratios between workers and executives ranged from 2.0 to 1.3 in psychiatric and cardiovascular diseases, respectively). Conversely, cancer incidence rate followed a flat curve, reduced in the two poorest standard of living deciles, and there were no significant differences between socioprofessional groups. Standardised prevalence rates followed the same patterns, although risk ratios were highest for psychiatric diseases, varying according to sex and disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Deep social inequalities in incidence and prevalence of chronic diseases were observed in a large representative sample of the French population. The reverse social inequalities in cancer incidence and prevalence calls for more detailed research into cancer types and selection mechanisms, the data from which would allow the long-term monitoring of such disparities.

[How information on a patient's social status is gathered. An anthropological analysis of the discourses employed in private medical practice]

BACKGROUND

A number of studies have highlighted differences and even discrimination in health care offer according to social category, and shown that they contribute to the production of inequality. On the other hand, when the health care system treats every patient equally, and does not take personal difficulties into consideration, some authors have suggested inequality "by omission". That is why public health actors at different levels have recommended systematic collection of information on patients' social status. The objective of this article is to analyze data gathering on patients' socio-economic condition and its repercussions.

METHODS

The survey is based on more than 50 semi-structured face-to-face interviews with doctors and dentists in private practice. Their answers were subjected to socio-anthropological analysis.

RESULTS

While some practitioners collect information on patients' social status proactively by systematic interrogation, others proceed indirectly and in accordance with subjective criteria. Quite often, patient status remains ignored, usually due to lack of interest, and less frequently because practitioners wish to guard against any risk of stigmatizing underprivileged patients. Different rationales may explain these attitudes: need to prioritize relevant information, wish to observe equity and equality, determination to refrain from social labeling, desire to protect patient self-esteem and to reinforce the practitioner-patient relationship. When identification does occur, it is essentially justified by a desire to adapt the care pathway to potential socio-economic obstacles.

CONCLUSION

When a patient's social situation is sought out by private doctors and dentists, they are mainly concerned with customizing care pathways by taking financial impediments into close consideration. In most cases, their justifications for asking questions are subjective; by doing so, they inadvertently introduce arbitrariness in an area where the French state endeavors to produce social justice via provisions such as "CMU" ("universal", across the board health coverage). Systematic questioning on a patient's social status can represent a form of supplementary if unconscious symbolic violence toward frequently disqualified persons; what is more, it runs the risk of inducing stereotypes and manifesting prejudice. Only when contextualized does such questioning seem appropriate. On the other hand, when a practitioner misses out on social issues liable to impede care and treatment, he will probably have no "second chance" to address these concerns. Some practitioners have emphasized a need for suitable timing and contextualizing of questions on a patient's social status, and for putting them forward in a climate of trust.

[The local organization of health equity or the mistakes of intersectorality]

In recent years, there has been a new institutional set of developments in France aimed at promoting the adoption of partnership-based, cross-sectoral and modulated health policies based on the health status of the population. Nevertheless, because addressing the challenge of health equity depends largely on the mobilization of a large number of protagonists with very heterogeneous initiatives, interests and values, the conduct of such policies potentially opens up a space for confrontation between those who wish to promote it and those who refuse, challenge, circumvent or neutralize the reconfigurations of public action and the work routines it inevitably induces. This company can therefore be marked by tensions and additional constraints for the actors. In this context, it remains largely conditional.