Health Reports最新文献

Background: The objective of this study was to describe sex-specific hospitalization rates among Indigenous people in Canada (excluding Quebec), separately for First Nations people living on and off reserve, Inuit living in Inuit Nunangat (excluding Nunavik), Métis, and the non-Indigenous population.

Data and methods: The 2006 and 2011 Canadian Census Health and Environment Cohorts (CanCHECs) were used, allowing hospital records to be examined by Indigenous identity as reported on the census. Five years of hospitalization data were used for each CanCHEC. Causes of hospitalization were based on the most responsible diagnosis and coded at the chapter level according to the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10-CA). Age-standardized hospitalization rates (ASHRs) were calculated per 100,000 population, and rate ratios (RRs) were calculated for each Indigenous group relative to non-Indigenous people.

Results: ASHRs were higher among Indigenous people than among non-Indigenous people; this was true for females and males from both the 2006 and the 2011 cohorts. Hospitalization patterns varied by sex and Indigenous group. The greatest disparities with the non-Indigenous population were observed among on-reserve First Nations females and males from both cohorts. Elevated RRs were observed for diseases of the endocrine, nutritional and metabolic system among First Nations females and males living on reserve; hospitalizations for mental health among First Nations females and males living off reserve and Inuit males; and diseases of the respiratory system among Inuit females. For Métis females and males, equally elevated RRs were observed for diseases of the endocrine system and mental health. ASHRs for most causes decreased between the 2006 and 2011 cohorts, with the exception of ASHRs for mental health among First Nations females and males living on reserve, which increased.

Discussion: Findings are consistent with recognized health disparities between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people. Further research is warranted to understand reported differences in hospitalization patterns.

The family environment is an important influence on the health and behaviours of children. Few large-scale datasets include detailed and objectively measured health data about multiple individuals from the same family who are living in the same household. The Canadian Health Measures Survey (CHMS) is a repeating, cross-sectional survey that selects two members of a household-a child and a randomly selected older member of the household aged 12 to 79 years-with at least one child aged 3 to 11 years in residence. These paired respondent records, available in the CHMS relationship files, provide unique opportunities to researchers interested in examining associations between two members of the same household for health behaviours and outcomes. A range of pairings are captured in the relationship files (e.g., parent and child, siblings, grandchild and grandparent) with birth parent-child pairs being the most common. These paired respondent data are an important analytical asset of the CHMS and enhance the research potential of the survey significantly.

Background: Few quantitative studies have used national-level data to examine access to mental health consultation (MHC) by immigrants in Canada, and even fewer studies investigate MHCs using the following variables: immigrant admission category, duration in Canada since landing and world source regions. This study examines MHCs by immigrants and refugees-compared with those of Canadian-born respondents-while controlling for self-reported mental health (SRMH) and immigrant characteristics, using a population-based survey linked to immigrant landing information. This study, which is based on a linked database, allows for much richer insight into immigrant populations than most previous studies.

Data and methods: Based on data from four cycles (2011 to 2014) of the Canadian Community Health Survey linked to data from the Longitudinal Immigration Database, the odds ratios of having had MHCs are compared between the Canadian-born population and immigrants by immigration dimensions, while controlling for SRMH. Results are hierarchically adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic factors and sense of belonging.

Results: After the above-mentioned factors were controlled for, immigrants were much less likely than Canadian-born respondents to access MHCs. Specifically, compared with the Canadian-born population that had high levels of SRMH, immigrants with high levels of SRMH were statistically less likely to have had an MHC (odds ratio [OR]=0.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] from 0.4 to 0.5), while those with low SRMH levels were more likely to report an MHC (OR=4.8, 95% CI from 4.5 to 5.1, for the Canadian-born population but OR=1.8, 95% CI from 1.5 to 2.1, for immigrants). Most Asian immigrants with low SRMH levels were only as likely to report MHCs as Canadian-born respondents with high SRMH levels. Refugees with low SRMH levels also had only a slightly elevated MHC level (OR=1.6, 95% CI from 1.1 to 2.3) compared with Canadian-born individuals with high SRMH levels. Overall, refugees were not more likely than immigrants of other admission categories to report having had an MHC, even though previous findings have shown that refugees report low levels of SRMH.

Discussion: This study provides new evidence on the differences in access to MHC between Canadian-born individuals and immigrants by various characteristics, while controlling for SRMH. Results probably reflect the structural or cultural barriers to MHC and point to a possible pathway to either maintain or improve mental health among immigrants.

Background: This study aims to measure cancer incidence and mortality rates of Registered First Nations people in Ontario and compare them with those of other people in Ontario from 1991 to 2010.

Data and methods: The federal Indian Register, the Ontario Cancer Registry and the Registered Persons Database were linked to develop a cohort of First Nations people diagnosed with cancer in Ontario. Sex-and site-specific age-standardized cancer incidence and mortality rates, and selected trends over time, were calculated. Rate ratios (RRs) were used to compare rates in First Nations peoples with those of other people in Ontario.

Results: The First Nations cohort comprised 194,392 people, with 6,859 cancer diagnoses. First Nations people had higher rates for certain cancers than others in Ontario: lung (males RR 1.19; females RR 1.47), colorectal (males RR 1.36; females RR 1.34) and kidney (males RR1.95; females RR 2.23). While lung cancer rates rose in First Nations females (annual percent change [APC] +2.67), they fell at a similar rate (APC -2.28) in males. Cervical cancer rates fell (APC -9.53) and approached the rate among other females in Ontario. Kidney cancer rates increased in First Nations people.

Discussion: First Nations people in Ontario have higher incidence and mortality for certain cancers compared with other people in Ontario. However, the declines in cervical cancer rates in First Nations females and lung cancer rates in First Nations males illustrate the likely impact of Pap test uptake and smoking cessation programs. Community-led efforts to develop culturally appropriate prevention and screening programs are essential to further reduce cancer rates in First Nations people.

Background: Residential greenness has been associated with health benefits, such as lower risk of mortality, cardiovascular disease, obesity, adverse birth outcomes and asthma and better psychological health. However, the variation in greenness across socioeconomic and demographic characteristics in urban areas of Canada has not been well documented.

Data and methods: Respondents to the 2016 Census long-form questionnaire were assigned estimates of exposure to residential greenness based on the mean Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) (from 2012 or the most recent year available) within a 500 m buffer around their home, based on postal code. Census weights were used to determine differences in average exposure to greenness according to selected demographic and socioeconomic characteristics.

Results: Mean residential greenness among the 5.3 million census respondents in urban Canada was 0.44 units of the NDVI (standard deviation = 0.18 units). Greenness was lower among immigrants (particularly recent immigrants), some groups designated as visible minorities (particularly people of Filipino ancestry), lower-income households and tenants (i.e., NDVI values ranging from 0.40 to 0.43 units). Greenness values were highest among White non-immigrants and higher-income households (i.e., NDVI values ranging from 0.46 to 0.47 units).

Discussion: Given the potentially multifaceted role that greenness plays in health outcomes, the inequalities in residential greenness described here may contribute to producing or exacerbating existing health inequalities in the Canadian population.

Background: Researchers, policy makers, and urban planners require tools to better understand the complex relationship between gentrification and health. The Gentrification, Urban Interventions and Equity (GENUINE) tool is an open-access, map-based tool that allows users to explore measures of gentrification for Canadian cities and incorporate them into their work.

Data and methods: The phenomenon of gentrification has manifested differently across cities. The GENUINE tool was developed to include four distinct gentrification measures that have been used in the United States and Canada and that rely on different combinations of change in census indicators related to income, housing, occupation, education and age. The measures were computed for all census tracts within the 36 Canadian census metropolitan areas to identify gentrifiable areas in 2006 and those that gentrified between 2006 and 2016.

Results: Depending on the measure, by 2016, 2% to 20% of census tracts had experienced gentrification, corresponding to between 2% (418,065 people) and 17% (4,266,434) of the Canadian population living in gentrified areas. Generally, metropolitan areas with populations over 1 million people had a greater proportion of their population living in gentrified areas (2% to 18%) compared with metropolitan areas with fewer than 250,000 residents (1% to 14%).

Discussion: With attention on healthy cities only expanding, GENUINE provides pan-Canadian indicators of gentrification, which can be an integral part of solution-oriented research and advancing cities toward designing healthy and equitable communities.

Background: The Canadian government legalized non-medical cannabis use by adults in October 2018 to minimize associated harms and redirect profits from criminals. In October 2019, a wider array of products, including edibles, was legalized, with entry into the legal market beginning in December.

Data and methods: Three quarters (the first quarters of 2018 and 2019 and the fourth quarter of 2020) of the National Cannabis Survey were used to examine changes in cannabis use (overall use and daily or almost daily (DAD) use), consumption methods, products and sources.

Results: Cannabis use in the past three months was higher in late 2020 (20.0%) than in 2019 (17.5%) and 2018 (14.0%), and this was particularly the case among: females (for whom rates rose to equal male rates for the first time), adults aged 25 and older, and some provinces. Similarly, DAD use, at 7.9% also increased. Higher percentages of Canadians reported getting at least some of their cannabis from legal sources or growing it, and fewer were relying on friends and family or illegal sources in 2020.

Discussion: This study spans three years-from before legalization to about two years after. It provides a more complete picture of the law's impact on cannabis use and related behaviours, given the more established legal cannabis industry better equipped to compete with the black market on price, convenience and selection. Findings demonstrate that change is continuing, and, as before, some cautions and assurances remain. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cannabis use continues to be difficult to measure. Monitoring remains important, given the ever-changing provincial retail landscapes; the introduction of new products; and the pressure by the industry to remove or adjust potency limits, and allow widespread delivery, farm-gate sales and cannabis lounges.

Background: Frailty is a complex syndrome that is associated with aging but not synonymous with the normal aging process. It has been associated with all-cause mortality, but less is known about frailty and mortality from specific causes.

Data and methods: Data from the 2013 and 2014 Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) linked to the Canadian Vital Statistics - Death Database were used to estimate the prevalence of frailty among Canadians aged 65 or older. Levels of frailty were based on validated cut-points for the 30-item frailty index. The relationship of frailty to mortality risk during the period of three to five years following the CCHS interview was assessed with Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for sociodemographic factors and health behaviours. Associations between frailty and mortality from neoplasms, circulatory diseases and disease of the respiratory system were examined in separate models.

Results: An estimated 1.1 million (22%) community-dwelling older adults were frail in 2013 and 2014, and another 1.6 million (32%) were considered pre-frail. Frailty was more common among females than males and among those in older age groups. The risk of mortality increased significantly with increasing levels of frailty, even after accounting for sociodemographic factors and health behaviours. This was the case for all-cause mortality, as well as for death from three major underlying causes-neoplasms, and diseases of the circulatory and respiratory systems.

Discussion: Even individuals who were classified as pre-frail had an increased risk of mortality overall and from three leading causes compared with those who were robust, demonstrating the importance of screening community-dwelling older adults for frailty.

Background: Prescription medications are used throughout the life course, including among children and youth. Prescribing practices may be influenced by emerging medical conditions, the availability of new medications, changing clinical practices, and evolving knowledge of the safety and effectiveness of medications. The Canadian Health Measures Survey (CHMS) provides national-level information to help monitor the use of prescribed medications in the population.

Data and methods: Based on data from the CHMS (2012 to 2017), this article describes prescription medication use in the past month among those aged 3 to 19 years. Information on up to 45 prescription medications was recorded and classified according to Health Canada's Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification. Frequencies and bivariate analyses examined medication use by sociodemographic and health-related factors. The most common medication classes were identified for each age group.

Results: An estimated 23% of Canadian children and youth (1.5 million) had used at least one prescription medication in the past month and 9% had used two or more prescription medications.Prescription medication use was more common among those who reported lower levels of general and mental health, as well as among those with asthma (51%), a mood disorder (71%), attention deficit disorder (60%) or a learning disability (43%). Medications for the respiratory and nervous systems were among those most commonly prescribed. Of youth aged 14 years or older, 4% had misused prescription medications for non-medicinal purposes, for the experience, for the feeling they cause or to get high.

Discussion: Prescription medication use among children and youth is common in Canada. It is associated with lower levels of self-reported health and the presence of chronic conditions. The estimates provide a benchmark to help monitor prescription drug use in Canada.

Background: Veterans are more likely than other Canadians to have chronic health conditions, making access to health care an important issue. However, little research has addressed health care access and use among veterans. This paper examines access and use among veterans compared with other Canadians.

Data and methods: Health care access and use indicators were examined for Regular Force veterans using the 2016 Life After Service Survey. Information for male and female veterans was compared with information on the Canadian general population from the 2015 and 2016 Canadian Community Health Survey, using age-adjusted rates and 95% confidence intervals.

Results: More than 80% of male and female veterans reported having a regular medical doctor in the 12 months before the survey. The majority of veterans (71% of males and 81% of females) had consulted a family doctor, while a minority had been hospitalized (8% of males and females). These rates were similar to those in the Canadian general population. However, veteran consultation rates for mental health care and with audiologists, speech therapists or occupational therapists among both sexes were double to triple those of the Canadian general population. Among veterans, males reported lower rates of unmet needs compared with females.

Discussion: Veterans had similar rates of access to a regular medical doctor and higher rates of use compared with other Canadians. However, these may be comparatively low, given previous findings on higher rates of disability and some chronic conditions among veterans. Noted differences between males and females highlight the importance of research and services that account for sex and gender. The extent to which health care needs explain health care use and barriers to care requires further research.