Socioeconomic and geographic inequalities in headache disability in Brazil: The 2019 National Health Survey

Carregando...
Imagem de Miniatura
Citações na Scopus
3
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2023
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
WILEY
Citação
HEADACHE, v.63, n.1, p.114-126, 2023
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Objective: To map the socioeconomic and geographic inequalities in headache disability in Brazil.Background: Headache disability and its social determinants are poorly investigated in Brazil.Methods: This is a secondary, cross-sectional analysis of the 2019 National Health Survey database, a representative sample of the Brazilian population. Working-aged Brazilians (aged >= 14 years) were included in the analyses (n = 225,563). Headache disability was inquired through questions on the number of days the respondent was unable to perform customary daily activities in the past 2 weeks. Proportion estimates and the mean days lost were compared between socioeconomic categories. Sample weights were used.Results: Among 14 disease-related disability groups, headache disability (n = 1228) was the second most prevalent disability in adolescents and fifth among adults aged < 50 years. In the headache disability sample, there was a higher proportion of females at 72.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 68.5%-75.9%), with a mean (95% CI) age of 41.1 (40.1-42.0) years and days lost due to disability of 3.4 (3.2-3.6) days. The sociodemographic distribution across income strata (quartiles) of the headache disability sample showed the highest proportions at the lowest income quartile in the Northeast region (15.4%, 95% CI 12.8%-18.4%), for people of Brown color (17.5%, 95% CI 14.7%-20.7%), and with the lowest education level (l3.6%, 95% CI 11.3%-16.2%). Black people, those from the North region, and those with the lowest education level had more days lost than White people (mean [95% CI] 4.1 [3.5-4.6] vs. 3.1 [2.8-3.4] days, p = 0.008), those from the Southeast region (mean [95% CI] 3.8 [3.4-4.2] vs. 2.8 [2.4-3.3] days, p = 0.022), and people with the highest education level (mean [95% CI] 3.9 [3.6-4.2] vs. 2.8 [2.3-3.3] days, p = 0.005), respectively.Conclusion: In Brazil, headache disability is one of the leading causes of disability and it is characterized by socioeconomic inequalities.
Palavras-chave
epidemiology, headache disorders, health inequities, migraine, socioeconomic factors
Referências
  1. Abbafati C, 2020, LANCET, V396, P1204, DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30925-9
  2. Atasoy HT, 2005, HEADACHE, V45, P25, DOI 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2005.05006.x
  3. Baena CP, 2018, CEPHALALGIA, V38, P1525, DOI 10.1177/0333102417737784
  4. Bigal ME, 2000, HEADACHE, V40, P241, DOI 10.1046/j.1526-4610.2000.00035.x
  5. Bigal ME, 2003, HEADACHE, V43, P742, DOI 10.1046/j.1526-4610.2003.03132.x
  6. Bor J, 2017, LANCET, V389, P1475, DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30571-8
  7. Braveman PA, 2010, AM J PUBLIC HEALTH, V100, pS186, DOI 10.2105/AJPH.2009.166082
  8. Burch R, 2018, HEADACHE, V58, P496, DOI 10.1111/head.13281
  9. Burch RC, 2019, NEUROL CLIN, V37, P631, DOI 10.1016/j.ncl.2019.06.001
  10. Charleston L, 2021, J NATL MED ASSOC, V113, P223, DOI 10.1016/j.jnma.2020.09.148
  11. Choi YJ, 2018, J HEADACHE PAIN, V19, DOI 10.1186/s10194-018-0911-x
  12. Barros MBD, 2016, INT J EQUITY HEALTH, V15, DOI 10.1186/s12939-016-0439-0
  13. de Oliveira AB, 2022, NEUROL SCI, V43, P2723, DOI 10.1007/s10072-021-05618-z
  14. Dooley JM, 2016, CEPHALALGIA, V36, P936, DOI 10.1177/0333102415617414
  15. Goetzel RZ, 2004, J OCCUP ENVIRON MED, V46, P398, DOI 10.1097/01.jom.0000121151.40413.bd
  16. Goulart AC, 2014, HEADACHE, V54, P1310, DOI 10.1111/head.12397
  17. Griep RH, 2016, AM J IND MED, V59, P987, DOI 10.1002/ajim.22620
  18. Gururaj Gopalakrishna, 2014, Indian J Public Health, V58, P241, DOI 10.4103/0019-557X.146280
  19. Hagen K, 2002, CEPHALALGIA, V22, P672, DOI 10.1046/j.1468-2982.2002.00413.x
  20. Hammond NG, 2019, HEADACHE, V59, P1547, DOI 10.1111/head.13610
  21. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estat??stica-IBGE, 2010, CENS DEM 2010, P1
  22. Kristoffersen ES, 2014, J PAIN RES, V7, P367, DOI 10.2147/JPR.S46071
  23. Lima Alaine Souza, 2014, Rev. paul. pediatr., V32, P256, DOI 10.1590/0103-0582201432212113
  24. Malta Deborah Carvalho, 2021, Rev. bras. epidemiol., V24, pe210011, DOI 10.1590/1980-549720210011.supl.2
  25. Malta DC, 2011, EPIDEMIOL SERV SAUDE, V20, P425, DOI 10.5123/S1679-49742011000400002
  26. Moura EC, 2009, REV PANAM SALUD PUBL, V26, P17, DOI 10.1590/S1020-49892009000700003
  27. Okamura, 2020, REV BRAS EPIDEMIOL, V23, P1
  28. Oliveira AB., 2021, CEPHALALGIA, V41, P1467, DOI 10.1177/03331024211029217
  29. Oliveira AB, 2020, CEPHALALGIA, V40, P597, DOI 10.1177/0333102419889357
  30. Peres, 2021, HEADACHE MED, V12, P152
  31. Peres MFP, 2020, ARQ NEURO-PSIQUIAT, V78, P50, DOI [10.1590/0004-282X20190144, 10.1590/0004-282x20190144]
  32. Peres MFP, 2019, J HEADACHE PAIN, V20, DOI 10.1186/s10194-019-1036-6
  33. Peres MFP, 2019, HEADACHE, V59, P86, DOI 10.1111/head.13457
  34. Peres MFP, 2017, J HEADACHE PAIN, V18, DOI 10.1186/s10194-017-0742-1
  35. Queiroz LP, 2009, CEPHALALGIA, V29, P642, DOI 10.1111/j.1468-2982.2008.01782.x
  36. Queiroz LP, 2015, HEADACHE, V55, P32, DOI 10.1111/head.12511
  37. Selekler MH, 2013, J HEADACHE PAIN, V14, DOI 10.1186/1129-2377-14-88
  38. Stewart WF, 2008, J OCCUP ENVIRON MED, V50, P736, DOI 10.1097/JOM.0b013e31818180cb
  39. Stewart WF, 2010, J OCCUP ENVIRON MED, V52, P8, DOI 10.1097/JOM.0b013e3181c1dc56
  40. Stopa SR, 2020, EPIDEMIOL SERV SAUDE, V29, DOI 10.1590/S1679-49742020000500004
  41. VanderPluym JH, 2022, CURR PAIN HEADACHE R, V26, P415, DOI 10.1007/s11916-022-01042-w
  42. Winter AC, 2012, CEPHALALGIA, V32, P159, DOI 10.1177/0333102411430854
  43. Yu SY, 2012, HEADACHE, V52, P582, DOI 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2011.02061.x