Preventive Care Use among the Belgian Elderly Population: Does Socio-Economic Status Matter?
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methods
2.1. Survey Data: The Belgian Health Interview Survey
2.2. Preventive Care Use
2.3. Socio-Economic Status
2.4. Socio-Demographic Characteristics, Health Status and Risk Factors
2.5. Statistical Methods
3. Results
Characteristic | Number of Participants | Percentage of the Total |
---|---|---|
Total | 4,544 | 100.0 |
Year of the Survey | ||
2004 | 2,513 | 48.6 |
2008 | 2,031 | 51.4 |
Age, mean (SD) | 4,544 | 77.3 (0.12) |
Age (years) | ||
65–74 | 1,958 | 57.4 |
75–84 | 1,442 | 35.7 |
≥85 | 1,144 | 6.9 |
Sex | ||
female | 2,690 | 57.2 |
male | 1,854 | 42.8 |
Living situation | ||
cohabitant with other(s) in a home situation | 2,249 | 60.1 |
living alone | 1,910 | 32.6 |
no information | 385 | 7.3 |
Place of residence | ||
Flemish region | 1,751 | 61.7 |
Brussels Capital region | 1,111 | 8.0 |
Walloon region | 1,682 | 30.3 |
BMI | ||
no information | 324 | 6.1 |
<18.5 | 160 | 2.5 |
18.5–25 | 1,897 | 39.2 |
25–30 | 1,599 | 38.3 |
30+ | 564 | 13.9 |
Smoking status | ||
No information | 913 | 13.9 |
Never | 2,185 | 50.4 |
Former | 1,015 | 24.9 |
Occasionally/daily | 431 | 10.8 |
Physical activity | ||
No information | 1,683 | 33.5 |
≥30 min/day | 520 | 16.3 |
<30 min/day | 2,341 | 50.2 |
Self-assessed health 2 | ||
No information | 744 | 10.5 |
Good to very good health | 2,145 | 51.3 |
Moderate, bad to very bad health | 1,655 | 38.2 |
Longstanding illness or health problem | ||
No information | 815 | 12.0 |
No | 2,110 | 50.6 |
Yes | 1,619 | 37.4 |
Highest level of education within the household | ||
No information | 156 | 2.9 |
No degree or primary education | 1,377 | 28.7 |
Lower secondary | 1,045 | 24.6 |
Higher secondary | 1,091 | 26.2 |
Higher education | 866 | 17.6 |
Equivalent household income (€) | ||
No information | 699 | 14.4 |
<750 | 686 | 14.3 |
750–1,000 | 945 | 21.2 |
1,000–1,500 | 1,595 | 38.0 |
1,500–2,500 | 521 | 10.1 |
>2,500 | 98 | 2.0 |
Blood cholesterol measurement in past 5 years | ||
No information | 77 | 1.6 |
Yes | 2,883 | 63.1 |
No | 1,584 | 35.3 |
Blood sugar measurement in past 3 years | ||
No information | 1,256 | 22.1 |
Yes | 2,378 | 55.3 |
No | 910 | 22.6 |
Influenza immunization in past year | ||
No information | 77 | 1.6 |
Yes | 2,883 | 63.1 |
No | 1,584 | 35.3 |
Pneumococcus immunization in past 5 years | ||
No information | 596 | 14.0 |
Yes | 653 | 13.4 |
No | 3,259 | 72.6 |
Preventive Service | Pneumococcus Immunization (in past 5 years) | Influenza Immunization (in past year) | Blood Cholesterol Measurement (in past 5 years) | Blood Sugar Measurement (in past 3 years) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Age | 1.01 (0.99–1.03) | 1.04 (1.02–1.05) *** | 0.99 (0.97–1.02) | 1.01 (1.00–1.03) |
Gender | ||||
Female | 0.72 (0.55–0.93) *** | 0.83 (0.67–1.02) | 1.24 (0.93–1.66) | 1.20 (0.95–1.52) |
Male | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
Region | ||||
Flemish region | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
Brussels region | 2.17 (1.55–3.03) *** | 0.87 (0.66–1.13) | 1.23 (0.85–1.77) | 1.56 (1.15–2.12) ** |
Walloon region | 1.61 (1.17–2.21) ** | 0.86 (0.68–1.09) | 1.41 (1.00–1.98) * | 1.36 (1.05–1.77) *** |
Year | ||||
2004 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
2008 | 0.93 (0.72–1.21) | 1.15 (0.94–1.42) | 1.70 (1.25–2.32) *** | 1.62 (1.28–2.06) *** |
Living situation | ||||
with other(s) at home | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
living alone | 0.56 (0.42–0.75) *** | 0.80 (0.64–0.99) *** | 0.85 (0.62–1.67) | 1.09 (0.85–1.40) |
Self-assessed health | ||||
good to very good health | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
fair, bad to very bad | 1.22 (0.94–1.59) | 1.62 (1.31–2.01) *** | 1.54 (1.13–2.11) ** | 1.28 (1.01–1.63) ** |
Longstanding illness or health problem | ||||
No | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
Yes | 1.41 (1.09–1.83) ** | 1.55 (1.26–1.91) *** | 2.05 (1.50–2.81) *** | 1.76 (1.38–2.24) *** |
BMI | ||||
<18.5 | 2.45 (1.23–4.89) ** | 1.01 (0.53–1.95) | 0.45 (0.21–0.96) * | 0.46 (0.24–0.88) * |
18.5–25 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
25–30 | 1.24 (0.93–1.65) | 1.47 (1.17–1.85) *** | 1.10 (0.79–1.52) | 1.17 (0.90–1.52) |
30+ | 0.96 (0.62–1.48) | 1.41 (1.02–1.95) * | 1.13 (0.70–1.82) | 1.00 (0.70–1.43) |
Smoking status | ||||
never | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
former | 1.21 (0.88–1.67) | 0.97 (0.75–1.26) | 1.40 (0.96–2.04) | 1.21 (0.90–1.63) |
occasionally/daily | 1.45 (0.95–2.20) | 0.76 (0.54–1.07) | 0.93 (0.58–1.49) | 0.86 (0.59–1.25) |
Physical activity | ||||
≥30 min/day | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
<30 min/day | 1.43 (1.00–2.04) | 1.14 (0.88–1.48) | 0.76 (0.51–1.13) | 0.97 (0.71–1.31) |
Highest level of education within the household | ||||
No degree or primary education | 0.65 (0.45–0.94) * | 1.05 (0.78–1.40) | 0.44 (0.28–0.67) *** | 0.48 (0.34–0.69) *** |
Lower secondary | 0.81 (0.55–1.81) | 1.07 (0.79–1.45) | 0.59 (0.37–0.95) * | 0.57 (0.39–0.82) ** |
Higher secondary | 1.04 (0.73–1.49) | 1.04 (0.77–1.40) | 0.65 (0.41–1.05) | 0.58 (0.41–0.83) ** |
Higher education | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
Equivalent household income (€) | ||||
<750 | 2.69 (0.79–9.12) | 1.31 (0.70–2.44) | 0.78 (0.33–1.86) | 0.80 (0.39–1.64) |
750–1,000 | 3.06 (0.92–10.15) | 1.21 (0.66–2.21) | 1.05 (0.45–2.47) | 0.99 (0.49–1.99) |
1,000–1,500 | 3.10 (0.94–10.15) | 1.74 (0.96–3.14) | 1.35 (0.59–3.13) | 1.05 (0.53–2.09) |
1,500–2,500 | 4.04 (1.21–13.54) * | 1.28 (0.67–2.40) | 1.32 (0.54–3.22) | 1.21 (0.58–2.51) |
>2,500 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
Preventive Service | Pneumococcus Immunization (in past 5 years) | Influenza Immunization (in past year) | Blood Cholesterol Measurement (in past 5 years) | Blood Sugar Measurement (in past 3 years) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Age | 1.02 (1.00–1.04) * | 1.04 (1.02–1.06) *** | 1.00 (0.98–1.02) | 1.01 (0.99–1.03) |
Gender | ||||
Female | 0.84 (0.61–1.16) | 0.76 (0.59–0.97) * | 1.56 (1.09–2.22) ** | 1.27 (0.95–1.68) |
Male | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
Region | ||||
Flemish region | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
Brussels’ region | 2.08 (1.45–2.98) *** | 0.86 (0.65–1.15) | 1.12 (0.75–1.67) | 1.43 (1.03–1.99) * |
Walloon region | 1.59 (1.14–2.20) ** | 0.80 (0.62–1.03) | 1.38 (0.97–1.96) | 1.27 (0.97–1.68) |
Year | ||||
2004 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
2008 | 0.90 (0.68–1.19) | 1.10 (0.88–1.38) | 1.54 (1.12–2.14) ** | 1.58 (1.23–2.04) *** |
Living situation | ||||
with other(s) at home | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
living alone | 0.53 (0.39–0.72) *** | 0.85 (0.68–1.08) | 0.90 (0.65–1.25) | 1.12 (0.86–1.46) |
Self-assessed health | ||||
good to very good health | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
fair, bad to very bad | 1.0 (0.75–1.37) | 1.45 (1.13–1.85) ** | 1.39 (0.97–1.98) | 1.16 (0.88–1.54) |
Longstanding illness or health problem | ||||
No | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
Yes | 1.28 (0.96–1.71) | 1.36 (1.08–1.72) ** | 1.86 (1.31–2.65) *** | 1.68 (1.28–2.21) *** |
BMI | ||||
<18.5 | 2.15 (1.06–4.37) * | 0.96 (0.49–1.86) | 0.36 (0.17–0.79) ** | 0.38 (0.20–0.75) ** |
18.5–25 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
25–30 | 1.28 (0.95–1.72) | 1.45 (1.15–1.84) ** | 1.04 (0.74–1.45) | 1.15 (0.88–1.51) |
30+ | 1.04 (0.66–1.73) | 1.28 (0.92–1.79) | 1.11 (0.68–1.81) | 0.98 (0.67–1.42) |
Smoking status | ||||
never | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
former | 1.20 (0.86–1.67) | 0.90 (0.69–1.18) | 1.33 (0.90–1.96) | 1.12 (0.83–1.53) |
occasionally/daily | 1.43 (0.92–2.21) | 0.76 (0.54–1.08) | 0.98 (0.60–1.60) | 0.86 (0.59–1.12) |
Physical activity | ||||
≥30 min/day | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
<30 min/day | 1.22 (0.83–1.79) | 1.06 (0.80–1.40) | 0.63 (0.41–0.95) * | 0.81 (0.59–1.12) |
Highest level of education within the household | ||||
No degree or primary education | 0.78 (0.51–1.19) | 0.98 (0.70–1.37) | 0.43 (0.26–0.71) *** | 0.47 (0.32–0.70) *** |
Lower secondary | 0.91 (0.60–1.37) | 1.03 (0.74–1.43) | 0.60 (0.36–0.99) * | 0.58 (0.39–0.87) ** |
Higher secondary | 1.13 (0.77–1.66) | 0.97 (0.71–1.33) | 0.61 (0.37–1.01) | 0.55 (0.38–0.81) ** |
Higher education | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
Equivalent household income (€) | ||||
<750 | 3.03 (0.87–10.57) | 1.18 (0.61–2.28) | 1.08 (0.43–2.70) | 1.27 (0.59–2.73) |
750–1,000 | 3.40 (1.00–11.58) * | 1.02 (0.54–1.92) | 1.32 (0.53–3.25) | 1.41 (0.67–2.96) |
1,000–1,500 | 3.27 (0.98–10.88) | 1.54 (0.83–2.83) | 1.45 (0.60–3.46) | 1.27 (0.62–2.60) |
1,500–2,500 | 3.94 (1.16–13.33) * | 1.21 (0.64–2.29) | 1.22 (0.49–3.04) | 1.23 (0.58–2.61) |
>2,500 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Conflicts of interest
References
- Mackenbach, J.P.; Meerding, W.J.; Kunst, A.E. Economic Implications of Socioeconomic Inequalities in Health in the European Union. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_determinants/socio_economics/documents/socioeco_inequalities_en.pdf (accessed on 17 December 2013).
- Hoeck, S.; François, G.; van der Heyden, J.; Geerts, J.; van Hal, G. Healthcare utilisation among the Belgian elderly in relation to their socio-economic status. Health Policy 2011, 99, 174–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoeck, S.; François, G.; Geerts, J.; van der Heyden, J.; Vandewoude, M.; van Hal, G. Health-care and home-care utilization among frail elderly persons in Belgium. Eur. J. Public Health 2012, 22, 671–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lorant, V.; Boland, B.; Humblet, P.; Deliege, D. Equity in prevention and health care. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2002, 56, 510–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cutler, D.M.; Lleras-Muney, A. Understanding differences in health behaviors by education. J. Health Econ. 2009, 29, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hunter, D.; Killoran, A. Tackling Health Inequalities: Turning Policy into Practice? NHS. Health Development Agency: London, UK, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Culica, D.; Rohrer, J.; Ward, M.; Hilsenrath, P.; Pomrehn, P. Medical checkups: Who does not get them? Amer. J. Public Health 2002, 92, 88–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oxley, H. Policies for Healthy Ageing: An Overview; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Cohen, J.T.; Neumann, P.J.; Weinstein, M.C. Does preventive care save money? Health economics and the presidential candidates. N. Engl. J. Med. 2008, 358, 661–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fineberg, H.V. The paradox of disease prevention. Celebrated in principle, resisted in practice. JAMA 2013, 310, 85–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patel, R.; Lawlor, D.A.; Ebrahim, S. Socio-economic position and the use of preventive health care in older British women: A cross sectional study using data from the British women’s heart and health study cohort. Fam. Pract. 2007, 24, 7–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stirbu, I.; Kunst, A.E.; Mielck, A.; Mackenbach, J.P. Educational Inequalities in Preventives Services Among Elderly in Europe. In Tackling Health Inequalities in Europe: An Integrated Approach; Department of Public Health, University Medical Centre Rotterdam: Rotterdam, the Netherlands, 2007; pp. 483–499. [Google Scholar]
- Jusot, F.; Or, Z.; Sirven, N. Variations in preventive care utilization in Europe. Eur. J. Ageing 2012, 9, 15–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carrieri, V.; Wuebker, A. Assessing inequalities in preventive care use in Europe. Health Policy 2013, in press. [Google Scholar]
- Schmitz, H.; Wübker, A. What determines influenza vaccination take-up of elderly Europeans? Health Economics 2011, 20, 1281–1297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carrieri, V.; Bilger, M. Preventive care: Underused even when free. Is there something else at work? Appl. Econ. 2013, 45, 239–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dalton, A.R.H.; Bottle, R.A.; Okoro, C.; Majeed, F.A.; Millett, C. Uptake of the NHS health checks programme in a deprived, culturally diverse setting: Cross sectional study. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2011, 65, 422–429. [Google Scholar]
- Dryden, R.; Williams, B.; McCowan, C.; Themessl-Huber, M. What do we know about who does and does not attend general health checks? Findings from a narrative scoping review. BMC Public Health 2012, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jefferson, T.; Rudin, M.; di Pietrantonj, C.; Rivetti, D.; Rivetti, A.; Demicheli, V. Efficacy and effectiveness of influenza vaccines in elderly people: A systematic review. Lancet 2005, 336, 1165–1174. [Google Scholar]
- Christenson, B.; Hedlund, J.; Lundbergh, P.; Ortqvist, A. Additive preventive effect of influenza and pneumococcal vaccines in elderly persons. Eur. Resp. J. 2004, 23, 363–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kohlhammer, Y.; Schnoor, M.; Schwartz, M.; Raspe, H.T. Determinants of influenza and pneumococcal vaccination in elderly people: A systematic review. Public Health 2007, 121, 742–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ward, L.; Draper, J. A review of the factors involved in older people’s decision making with regard to influenza vaccination: A literature review. J. Clin. Nurs. 2007, 17, 5–16. [Google Scholar]
- Zimmerman, R.; Nowalk, M.P.; Tabbarah, M.; Hart, J.A.; Fox, D.E.; Raymund, M. Understanding adult vaccination in urban, lower-socio-economic settings: Influence of physician and prevention systems. Ann. Fam. Med. 2009, 7, 534–541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Endrich, M.M.; Blank, P.R.; Szucs, T.D. Influenza vaccination uptake and socioeconomic determinantsin 11 European countries. Vaccine 2009, 27, 4018–4024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiatti, C.; di Rosa, M.; Barbadoro, P.; Lamura, G.; di Stanislao, F.; Prospero, E. Letter to the editor: Socioeconomic determinants of influenza vaccination among older adults in Italy. Prev. Med. 2010, 51, 332–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steinberg, D.; Gotto, A.M. Preventing coronary artery disease by lowering cholesterol levels: Fifty years from bench to bedside. J. Am. Med. Assn. 1999, 282, 2043–2050. [Google Scholar]
- Damiani, G.; Federico, B.; Bianchi, C.; Ronconi, A.; Basso, D.; Fiorenza, S.; Sassi, F. Socio-economic status and prevention of cardiovascular disease in Italy: Evidence from a national health survey. Eur. J. Public Health 2011, 21, 591–596. [Google Scholar]
- Ricci-Cabello, I.; Ruiz-Perez, I.; de Labry-Lima, A.O.; Marquez-Calderon, S. Do social inequalities exist in terms of the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, control and monitoring of diabetes? A systematic review. Health Soc. Care Community 2010, 18, 572–587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodin, D.; Stirbu, I.; Ekholm, O. Educational inequalities in blood pressure and cholesterol screening in nine European countries. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2012, 66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bowden, R.G. Comparisons of cholesterol screening participants and non-participants in a university setting. Int. Electron. J. Health Educ. 2001, 4, 100–104. [Google Scholar]
- Lairson, D.R.; Chan, W.; Newmark, G.R. Determinants of the demand for breast cancer screening among women veterans in the United States. Soc. Sci. Med. 2005, 61, 1608–1617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Böhmer, M.M.; Walter, D.; Falkenhorst, G.; Müters, S.; Krause, G.; Wichmann, O. Barriers to pandemic influenza vaccination and uptake of seasonal influenza vaccine in the post-pandemic season in Germany. BMC Public Health 2012, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andrew, M.K.; McNeil, S.; Merry, H.; Rockwood, K. Rates of influenza vaccination in older adults and factors associated with vaccine use: A secondary analysis of the Canadian study of health and aging. BMC Public Health 2004, 4, 36–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Shahrabani, S.; Benzion, U. The effects of socioeconomic factors on the decision to be vaccinated: The case of flu shot vaccination. Isr. Med. Assoc. J. 2006, 8, 630–634. [Google Scholar]
- Lowensteyn, I.; Joseph, L.; Levinton, C.; Abrahamowicz, M.; Steinert, Y.; Grover, S. Can computerized risk profiles help patients improve their coronary risk? The results of the coronary health assessment study (CHAS). Prev. Med. 1998, 27, 730–737. [Google Scholar]
- Vaccination Guide; (in Dutch). Belgian Superior Health Council: Brussels, Belgium, 2009.
- Demarest, S.; van der Heyden, J.; Charafeddine, R.; Drieskens, S.; Tafforeau, J. Methodological basics and evolution of the Belgian health interview survey 1997–2008. Arch. Public Health 2013, 71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dalstra, J.A.; Kunst, A.E.; Mackenbach, J.P. A comparative appraisal of the relationship of education, income and housing tenure with less than good health among the elderly in Europe. Soc. Sci. Med. 2006, 62, 2046–2060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Atkinson, A.B.; Rainwater, C.; Smeeding, T.M. Income Distribution in OECD Countries: The Evidence from the Luxembourg Income Study (LIS). OECD Social Policy Study; Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development: Paris, France, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Hagenaars, A.; de Vos, K.; Zaïdi, M.A. Comparison Between Poverty Rates in Wave 1 ECHP for 1993. Office for official publications of the European Communities: Luxembourg, Luxembourg, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Braveman, P.A.; Cubbin, C.; Egerter, S. Socioeconomic status in health research: One size does not fit all. JAMA 2005, 294, 2879–2888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oakes, M.J.; Rossi, P.H. The measurement of SES in health research: current practice and steps toward a new approach. Soc. Sci. Med. 2003, 56, 769–784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gerkens, S.; Farfan, M.I.; Desomer, A.; Stordeur, S.; de Waroux, M.; van de Voorde, C.; van de Sande, S.; Leonard, C. The Belgian Health System in 2010; Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre (KCE): Brussel, Belgium, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Corens, D. Belgium: Health system review. Health Syst. Transit. 2007, 9, 1–172. [Google Scholar]
- Roberfroid, D.; Stordeur, S.; Camberlin, C.; van de Voorde, C.; Vrijens, F.; Léonard, C. Physician Workforce Supply in Belgium: Current Situation and Challenges; Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre (KCE): Brussels, Belgium, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Statistics and Indicators for 30 Countries; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development: Paris, France, 2009.
- Or, Z.; Jusot, F.; Yilmaz, E. Impact of Health Care System on Socioeconomic Inequalities in Doctor Use. Available online: http://www.irdes.fr/EspaceAnglais/Publications/WorkingPapers/DT17ImpactHealthCareSystSocioeconomicInequalities.pdf (accessed on 17 December 2013).
- Adler, N.E.; Newman, K. Socioeconomic disparities in health: Pathways and policies. Health Affair. 2002, 21, 60–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Or, Z.; Jusot, F.; Yilmaz, E. The European Union Working Group on Socioeconomic Inequalities in Health. Inégalite’s Sociales de Recours aux Soins en Europe: Quel Rôle Pour le Système de Soins? Revue. Econ. 2009, 60, 521–543. [Google Scholar]
- Hoeck, S.; van der Heyden, J.; Geerts, J.; van Hal, G. Equity in GP and specialist contacts by older persons in Belgium. Int. J. Public Health 2013, 58, 593–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nichol, K.L.; Zimmerman, R. Generalist and subspecialist physicians’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations for elderly and other high-risk patients: A nationwide survey. Arch. Intern. Med. 2001, 161, 2702–2708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Malley, M.; Earp, J.A.; Hawley, S.T.; Schell, M.J.; Mathews, H.F.; Mitchell, J. The association of race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and physician recommendation for mammography: Who gets the message about breast cancer screening? Amer. J. Public Health 2001, 91, 49–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dalstra, J.A.; Kunst, A.E.; Borrell, C. Socioeconomic differences in the prevalence of common chronic diseases: An overview of eight European countries. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2005, 34, 316–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
© 2013 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
Share and Cite
Hoeck, S.; Van der Heyden, J.; Geerts, J.; Van Hal, G. Preventive Care Use among the Belgian Elderly Population: Does Socio-Economic Status Matter? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2014, 11, 355-372. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110100355
Hoeck S, Van der Heyden J, Geerts J, Van Hal G. Preventive Care Use among the Belgian Elderly Population: Does Socio-Economic Status Matter? International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2014; 11(1):355-372. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110100355
Chicago/Turabian StyleHoeck, Sarah, Johan Van der Heyden, Joanna Geerts, and Guido Van Hal. 2014. "Preventive Care Use among the Belgian Elderly Population: Does Socio-Economic Status Matter?" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 11, no. 1: 355-372. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110100355