Socioeconomic inequalities in low back pain among older people: the JAGES cross-sectional study.
Educational attainment
Health inequalities
Income
Low back pain
Occupation
Socioeconomic status
Subjective economic situation
Journal
International journal for equity in health
ISSN: 1475-9276
Titre abrégé: Int J Equity Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101147692
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
21 01 2019
21 01 2019
Historique:
received:
06
09
2018
accepted:
09
01
2019
entrez:
23
1
2019
pubmed:
23
1
2019
medline:
1
8
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Low back pain is an important public health issue across the world. However, it is unclear whether socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with low back pain. This study determines an association between SES and low back pain among older people. We used cross-sectional data derived from the year 2013 across 30 Japanese municipalities. The survey was conducted between October 2013 to December 2013. Functionally independent community-dwelling older adults aged 65 and above (n = 26,037) were eligible for the study. Multilevel Poisson regression analysis with a robust variance estimator was used to examine the association between SES and low back pain. Self-reported low back pain in the past year was used as a dependent variable. Educational attainment, past occupation, equivalized household income, wealth, and subjective economic situation represented SES and were separately analyzed as independent variables, adjusted for covariates including age and sex. The prevalence of low back pain was 63.4%. Overall, lower SES were more likely to suffer from low back pain compared with that for the highest. First, as for the educational attainment, the prevalence ratio (PR) (95% credible interval (CI)) for the lowest level was 1.07 (1.02-1.12). Second, as for the past occupation, the PR (95% CI) for the blue-collared workers compared with professionals was 1.06 (1.01-1.11). Third, as for the equalized household income, the PRs (95% CI) for lower middle and the lowest income levels were 1.08 (1.02-1.13) and 1.16 (1.10-1.23), respectively. Fourth, as for the wealth, the PRs (95% CI) for lower middle and the lowest wealth levels were 1.11 (1.04-1.19) and 1.18 (1.11-1.27), respectively. Fifth, as for the subjective economic situation, the PRs (95% CI) for lower middle and the lowest financial conditions were 1.18 (1.10-1.26) and 1.32 (1.22-1.44), respectively. Significant socioeconomic inequalities were observed in low back pain among older individuals in Japan. Policymakers and clinicians must understand the nature of these inequalities.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Low back pain is an important public health issue across the world. However, it is unclear whether socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with low back pain. This study determines an association between SES and low back pain among older people.
METHODS
We used cross-sectional data derived from the year 2013 across 30 Japanese municipalities. The survey was conducted between October 2013 to December 2013. Functionally independent community-dwelling older adults aged 65 and above (n = 26,037) were eligible for the study. Multilevel Poisson regression analysis with a robust variance estimator was used to examine the association between SES and low back pain. Self-reported low back pain in the past year was used as a dependent variable. Educational attainment, past occupation, equivalized household income, wealth, and subjective economic situation represented SES and were separately analyzed as independent variables, adjusted for covariates including age and sex.
RESULTS
The prevalence of low back pain was 63.4%. Overall, lower SES were more likely to suffer from low back pain compared with that for the highest. First, as for the educational attainment, the prevalence ratio (PR) (95% credible interval (CI)) for the lowest level was 1.07 (1.02-1.12). Second, as for the past occupation, the PR (95% CI) for the blue-collared workers compared with professionals was 1.06 (1.01-1.11). Third, as for the equalized household income, the PRs (95% CI) for lower middle and the lowest income levels were 1.08 (1.02-1.13) and 1.16 (1.10-1.23), respectively. Fourth, as for the wealth, the PRs (95% CI) for lower middle and the lowest wealth levels were 1.11 (1.04-1.19) and 1.18 (1.11-1.27), respectively. Fifth, as for the subjective economic situation, the PRs (95% CI) for lower middle and the lowest financial conditions were 1.18 (1.10-1.26) and 1.32 (1.22-1.44), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Significant socioeconomic inequalities were observed in low back pain among older individuals in Japan. Policymakers and clinicians must understand the nature of these inequalities.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30665404
doi: 10.1186/s12939-019-0918-1
pii: 10.1186/s12939-019-0918-1
pmc: PMC6341699
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Pagination
15Références
Pain. 2014 Jan;155(1):53-9
pubmed: 24012953
Lancet. 2016 Oct 8;388(10053):1545-1602
pubmed: 27733282
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2012 Dec;66(12):1116-21
pubmed: 22544921
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006 Mar 15;7:27
pubmed: 16539729
Obes Res. 2003 Aug;11(8):1018-26
pubmed: 12917508
BMJ. 2009 Nov 10;339:b4471
pubmed: 19903981
J Am Board Fam Med. 2014 Mar-Apr;27(2):189-98
pubmed: 24610181
Eur J Pain. 2014 Sep;18(8):1190-8
pubmed: 24577780
Health Econ. 2005 Dec;14(12):1197-215
pubmed: 15945040
Am J Ind Med. 2015 Feb;58(2):229-37
pubmed: 25603945
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2014 Jan;95(1):175-187.e9
pubmed: 24036161
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2000 Jun;23(5):343-6
pubmed: 10863254
Ann Rheum Dis. 2014 Jun;73(6):968-74
pubmed: 24665116
Psychol Med. 2005 Sep;35(9):1275-82
pubmed: 16168150
Am J Epidemiol. 2001 Jul 1;154(1):30-6
pubmed: 11427402
Soc Sci Med. 2006 Jan;62(2):510-22
pubmed: 16081196
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 20;12(1):e0169764
pubmed: 28107456
Am J Med. 2010 Jan;123(1):87.e7-35
pubmed: 20102998
Am J Epidemiol. 2003 May 15;157(10):940-3
pubmed: 12746247
Am J Epidemiol. 2005 Oct 15;162(8):779-86
pubmed: 16150891
Pain Med. 2014 Sep;15(9):1508-21
pubmed: 25138172
Arthritis Rheum. 2012 Jun;64(6):2028-37
pubmed: 22231424
Rev Saude Publica. 2015;49:
pubmed: 26487293
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003 Sep;51(9):1328-9
pubmed: 12919256
Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2009 Apr;82(5):643-52
pubmed: 18956210
Epidemiol Rev. 2004;26:53-62
pubmed: 15234947
Int J Equity Health. 2016 Jul 07;15(1):101
pubmed: 27388561
Man Ther. 2013 Jun;18(3):183-90
pubmed: 23146385
J Epidemiol. 2012;22(1):2-6
pubmed: 22156290
BMC Public Health. 2015 Jul 21;15:678
pubmed: 26194350
Clin Spine Surg. 2018 Feb;31(1):22-27
pubmed: 27875413
Br J Psychiatry. 2007 Apr;190:293-8
pubmed: 17401034
Pain Med. 2019 Mar 1;20(3):464-475
pubmed: 29701812
Public Health Genomics. 2011;14(4-5):307-16
pubmed: 20829577
Lancet. 2011 Sep 24;378(9797):1183-92
pubmed: 21885099
Pain. 2008 Sep 30;139(1):209-17
pubmed: 18472217
BMC Public Health. 2015 Sep 18;15:914
pubmed: 26385563
J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol. 1991 Jul-Sep;4(3):173-8
pubmed: 1953971
Int J Epidemiol. 2014 Aug;43(4):1314-27
pubmed: 24618188
Anesthesiology. 2017 Apr;126(4):688-696
pubmed: 28182584
PLoS One. 2016 May 27;11(5):e0155954
pubmed: 27232696
Pain Med. 2013 Sep;14(9):1316-31
pubmed: 23742160
Am J Epidemiol. 2017 Nov 1;186(9):1097-1103
pubmed: 28595286
Soc Sci Med. 2014 Jan;101:52-60
pubmed: 24560224
J Health Commun. 2013;18 Suppl 1:172-84
pubmed: 24093354
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007 Oct 1;32(21):2380-6
pubmed: 17906583
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2016 Apr;70(4):354-60
pubmed: 26567320
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2018 Jan 16;73(2):261-266
pubmed: 28525611