Association of socioeconomic deprivation with outcomes in critically ill adult patients: an observational prospective multicenter cohort study

Abstract

Background: The influence of socioeconomic deprivation on health inequalities is established, but its effect on critically ill patients remains unclear, due to inconsistent definitions in previous studies. Methods: Prospective multicenter cohort study conducted from March to June 2018 in eight ICUs in the Greater Paris area. All admitted patients aged ≥ 18 years were enrolled. Socioeconomic phenotypes were identified using hierarchical clustering, based on education, health insurance, income, and housing. Association of phenotypes with 180-day mortality was assessed using Cox proportional hazards models. Results: A total of 1,748 patients were included. Median age was 62.9 [47.4–74.5] years, 654 (37.4%) patients were female, and median SOFA score was 3 [1–6]. Study population was clustered in five phenotypes with increasing socioeconomic deprivation. Patients from phenotype A (n = 958/1,748, 54.8%) were without socioeconomic deprivation, patients from phenotype B (n = 273/1,748, 15.6%) had only lower education levels, phenotype C patients (n = 117/1,748, 6.7%) had a cumulative burden of 1[1–2] deprivations and all had housing deprivation, phenotype D patients had 2 [1–2] deprivations, all of them with income deprivation, and phenotype E patients (n = 93/1,748, 5.3%) included patients with 3 [2–4] deprivations and included all patients with health insurance deprivation. Patients from phenotypes D and E were younger, had fewer comorbidities, more alcohol and opiate use, and were more frequently admitted due to self-harm diagnoses. Patients from phenotype C (predominant housing deprivation), were more frequently admitted with diagnoses related to chronic respiratory diseases and received more non-invasive positive pressure ventilation. Following adjustment for age, sex, alcohol and opiate use, socioeconomic phenotypes were not associated with increased 180-day mortality: phenotype A (reference); phenotype B (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval CI 0.65–1.12); phenotype C (HR, 0.56; 95% CI 0.34–0.93); phenotype D (HR, 1.09; 95% CI 0.78–1.51); phenotype E (HR, 1.20; 95% CI 0.73–1.96). Conclusions: In a universal health care system, the most deprived socioeconomic phenotypes were not associated with increased 180-day mortality. The most disadvantaged populations exhibit distinct characteristics and medical conditions that may be addressed through targeted public health interventions.