Search

Background: Low socioeconomic status (SES) is an important prognosticator amongst patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This paper analysed the effects of SES on ACS outcomes., Methods: Medline and Embase were searched for articles reporting outcomes of ACS patients stratified by SES using a multidimensional index, comprising at least 2 of the following components: Income, Education and Employment. A comparative meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects models to estimate the risk ratio of all-cause mortality in low SES vs high SES populations, stratified according to geographical region, study year, follow-up duration and SES index., Results: A total of 29 studies comprising of 301,340 individuals were included, of whom 43.7% were classified as low SES. While patients of both SES groups had similar cardiovascular risk profiles, ACS patients of low SES had significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted HR:1.19, 95%CI: 1.10-1.1.29, p < 0.001) compared to patients of high SES, with higher 1-year mortality (RR:1.08, 95%CI:1.03-1.13, p = 0.0057) but not 30-day mortality (RR:1.07, 95%CI:0.98-1.16, p = 0.1003). Despite having similar rates of ST-elevation myocardial infarction and non-ST-elevation ACS, individuals with low SES had lower rates of coronary revascularisation (RR:0.95, 95%CI:0.91-0.99, p = 0.0115) and had higher cerebrovascular accident risk (RR:1.25, 95%CI:1.01-1.55, p = 0.0469). Excess mortality risk was independent of region (p = 0.2636), study year (p = 0.7271) and duration of follow-up (p = 0.0604) but was dependent on the SES index used (p < 0.0001)., Conclusion: Low SES is associated with increased mortality post-ACS, with suboptimal coronary revascularisation rates compared to those of high SES. Concerted efforts are needed to address the global ACS-related socioeconomic inequity., Registration and Protocol: The current study was registered with PROSPERO, ID: CRD42022347987., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors report no relationships that could be construed as a conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The obesity epidemic is a global health concern with Asian countries facing one of the most rapid rises in obesity rates. However, given the underwhelming long-term efficacy of weight loss strategies, especially in Asia, this review aimed to explore barriers and facilitators to weight management of patients with overweight and obesity in Asia., Methods: Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were searched for articles discussing barriers and facilitators of treatment to obesity from the perspectives of both health care professionals (HCPs) and patients. Qualitative and mixed method studies from Asia were included. Key quotes were extracted, coded, and thematically analyzed according to the methodology of Thomas and Harden., Results: A total of 26 articles were included in this review. From patient perspectives, 3 main themes were identified: factors influencing poor eating behavior, inhibiting lifestyle modifications, and facilitating lifestyle modifications. Patients highlighted several barriers including the lack of social support, physiologic limitations to exercise, and low health literacy. Rigid sociocultural norms and lack of accessible health care services, exercise facilities, and healthy food exacerbated the barriers. Facilitators to lifestyle modifications consisted of strong support systems and high health literacy. HCPs agreed that low health literacy, lack of social support, and patient motivation impeded patients' weight loss attempts but were unaware of the other barriers they faced., Conclusion: There are discrepancies between ideas of barriers and facilitators of HCPs and patients. A mixture of population level, primary care, and personal interventions are required to address this disparity, and enhanced health literacy can improve weight loss outcomes., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have no multiplicity of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 AACE. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)