Exploring and Reducing the Impact of Neighborhoods on Health Disparities
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.10206
2024-05-16
JAMA Network Open
Abstract:Health is a complex construct, the consequence of an interplay of a myriad of factors—some known (smoking, exercise, diet, and stress), but most unknown. Health care professionals are motivated to help patients live long, healthy, happy lives. However, the root causes of good health have remained stubbornly elusive. Historically, clinicians have focused on diagnosing and controlling disease, achieving specific targets such as blood pressure and blood glucose control, preventing unhealthy complications, and minimizing devastating outcomes. However, this has not always led to good health; more factors are at play. In addition to expected variances in health, there are striking disparities in health worldwide. Certain groups of people die younger and bear the brunt of poor outcomes. 1 For example, Black US residents have nearly double the rate of end-stage kidney disease and kidney-related deaths than White US residents. 2 Initially, clinicians were blamed for the disparate outcomes. 3 However, as the health care system tested interventions to reduce disparities, it became clear that factors not in control of the health care system contributed to health and health outcomes. There is a web of influences across multiple domains involving a dynamic interaction of genetics, behaviors, as well as sociocultural determinants. A good place to explore these factors is the neighborhood in which an individual resides. Important contributors to health, life circumstances, and social determinants of health cluster within neighborhoods. Assessing factors at the neighborhood level provides a more nuanced exploration of health outcome influences compared with assessing elements at the individual level. 4 Neighborhood characteristics—including racial and ethnic composition, environmental exposures, as well as the social and physical or built environments—are correlated with health outcomes and have been identified as important aspects to consider in research and clinical management. 4 ,5 Similarly, evidence has shown that socioeconomic status is associated with physical and social environments within neighborhoods and is a potential target for health intervention to reduce disparities. 5 Living in neighborhoods where there is concentrated poverty, poor educational and vocational opportunities, high unemployment rates, higher rates of crime and violence, limited or no access to healthy food options, and reduced greenspace all contribute to poor health and suboptimal outcomes. Dr Oluwoye and colleagues 4 focus on neighborhood determinants of mental health, namely symptom severity among individuals with psychosis. They identified 3 types of neighborhoods as having disparate impacts on mental health: urban low-risk, urban high-risk, and rural. Urban low-risk neighborhoods had high income, educational attainment, and access to transportation and health care but also high levels of environmental exposures. Urban high-risk neighborhoods had low income and educational attainment and low access to health care with high access to transportation and environmental exposures. Rural areas had average income, average-to-low educational attainment, and limited access to health care and transportation but low levels of environmental exposure. In addition to well-established correlates of depression and anxiety, they found that urban high-risk neighborhoods had worse mental health compared with urban low-risk or rural areas. This finding is not surprising, given the challenges of day-to-day life that can occur in neighborhoods with higher risk profiles. For example, neighborhoods with high crime and gun violence cause chronic stress for those living there, a potent influencer of mental health. Furthermore, urban high-risk neighborhoods have decreased walkability, high pollution, poor food environments, inadequate recreational space for physical activity, high stress, low civic engagement, and decreased social connectedness. 5 ,6 Their conclusions supported the need for assessing and understanding the cumulative impact of neighborhood factors on health to improve health outcomes. The important question is what can be done to minimize risks for poor health outcomes in neighborhoods with higher risk profiles and limited resources? Fifteen years ago, the World Health Organization stated that "the unequal distribution of health-damaging experiences is not in any sense a natural phenomenon but is the result of a toxic combination of poor social policies and programs, unfair economic arrangements, and bad politics." 7 They outlined several steps that could close this gap: improve daily living conditions; tackle the inequitable distribution of power, money, and resources; measure and understand the problem; and assess the impact of action on reducing health disparities and improving health outco -Abstract Truncated-
medicine, general & internal