Health, Disease and Mortality | Boltons Health Matters
Skip to main content

Health, Disease and Mortality

Healthier Lives: High Blood Pressure created by Public Health England is an interactive ‘heat map’ includes information on prevalence of the conditions and their complications, levels of care provided and the quality of care achieved in each area by local authority (LA), clinical commissioning group (CCG) and general practice, compared to the England average. This resource can be accessed by clicking here: http://bit.ly/13j7cxl

Longer Lives highlights premature mortality across every local authority in England, giving people important information to help them improve their community’s health. The interactive ‘heat map’ includes information on prevalence of the conditions and their complications, levels of care provided and the quality of care achieved in each area by local authority (LA), clinical commissioning group (CCG) and general practice, compared to the England average. This resource can be accessed by clicking here: http://bit.ly/1tF92Ck

In this document Public Health England publishes 7 priorities for the next 5 years, having looked closely at the evidence to determine where it can most effectively focus its efforts.

This overarching document sets out our commitment to support their partners with a programme of work that:

  • ensures credible, evidence-based advice is available on the key issues relating to the public’s health
  • develops our ability to engage and support the public in making healthier choices
  • mobilises support for broader action on improving the public’s health

It’s objective is to stimulate is a new movement that focuses on creating and protecting health, not only treating ill health. This document is an invitation to PHE ’colleagues’ across the health professions, local and national government, the voluntary and community sector and the public, to join us in applying the evidence of what we know works to achieve the step-change in the nation’s health that we all seek. This resource can be accessed by clicking here:  http://bit.ly/1wrikAO

The liver disease profiles provide an invaluable resource relating to one of the main causes of premature mortality nationally; a disease whose mortality rates are increasing in England, while decreasing in most EU countries. The local authority profiles will support the development of Joint Strategic Needs Assessments and work of Health and Wellbeing Boards presenting local key statistics and highlighting questions to ask locally about current action to prevent liver disease. The website contains data for Upper Tier Local Authorities, former Government Office regions, England and where available Lower Tier Local Authorities. The downloadable PDF profiles are produced for each Upper Tier Local Authority and contain key facts, prevention strategies, questions that you should ask locally and links to further resources. This resource can be accessed by clicking here: http://bit.ly/ZY2i6y and from here all data (including Bolton level) can obtained.

A presentation by The Kings Fund that provides an overview using England level data on health and health inqualities in England. The presentation is broken down into 3 main sections:

  1. Life expectancy,

  2. mortality and recorded causes of deathIllness and morbidity

  3. What are the main drivers of our health?

This resource can be accessed by clicking here: http://bit.ly/1vzoNwt

This briefing was commissioned by PHE and written by the Institute of Health Equity. It is a summary of a more detailed evidence review on the same topic and is intended primarily for directors of public health, public health teams and local authorities. This briefing and accompanying evidence reviews are part of a series commissioned by PHE to describe and demonstrate effective, practical local action on a range of social determinants of health.

You can view the briefing by clicking here:   http://bit.ly/1ytAshC

 

 

This briefing was commissioned by PHE and written by the Institute of Health Equity. It is a summary of a more detailed evidence review on the same topic and is intended primarily for directors of public health, public health teams and local authorities. This briefing and accompanying evidence reviews are part of a series commissioned by PHE to describe and demonstrate effective, practical local action on a range of social determinants of health.

You can view the briefing by clicking here: http://bit.ly/1EOxB4h

Key Messages

1.Economic impact tools can help support local authorities’ decisions on whether and how to invest on the social determinants of health.
2. Economic impact tools (such as cost-benefit analysis) are ways of assessing whether a particular action or intervention is likely to result in an overall benefit, and what the associated costs will be. They focus on the overall efficiency or value-for-money of taking one course of action versus another. They are designed to support investment decisions but cannot give answers alone about what action to take.
3. Most economic techniques, on their own, do not take distributional or equity effects into account - this is an important limitation. In many cases, there is a trade-off between equity and efficiency. It is therefore critical that evidence on inequalities, or the effect of an intervention for different social groups, is considered alongside economic measures when taking investment decisions for action on the social determinants of health.
4. The Social Return of Investment (SROI) approach is a helpful way of thinking about the wide range of social impacts that could arise from an intervention. The SROI approach may also be helpful for considering the effects of a programme of work for different groups
5. While there are relatively few examples of economic impact analysis on the social determinants of health, approaches to support investment decisions in this area are developing rapidly and are available. This paper summarises much of what is currently available. More need to be developed.
6. Service commissioners can play a vital role in developing best practice in this area, with support from Public Health England (PHE) by: ensuring high-quality data is collected on interventions; economic and equity

 

This briefing was commissioned by PHE and written by the Institute of Health Equity. It is a summary of a more detailed evidence review on the same topic and is intended primarily for directors of public health, public health teams and local authorities. This briefing and accompanying evidence reviews are part of a series commissioned by PHE to describe and demonstrate effective, practical local action on a range of social determinants of health.

You can view the briefing by clicking here: http://bit.ly/ZWsNtX

The associated evidence summary is: Local action on health inequalities: Reducing the number of young people not in employment, education or training (NEET)

Summary
1. Spending time not in employment, education or training (NEET) has been shown to have a detrimental effect on physical and mental health. This effect is greater when time spent NEET is at a younger age or lasts for longer.
2. The link between time spent NEET and poor health is partly due to an increased likelihood of unemployment, low wages, or low quality work later on in life. Being NEET can also have an impact on unhealthy behaviours and involvement in crime.
3. These negative health effects do not occur equally across the population, as the chance of being NEET is affected by area deprivation, socio-economic position, parental factors (such as employment, education, or attitudes), growing up in care, prior academic achievement and school experiences. Being NEET therefore occurs disproportionately among those already experiencing other sources of disadvantage.
4. Because the chances of becoming NEET follow a social gradient, reducing the proportion of people NEET could help to reduce health inequalities.
5. Local authorities have specific responsibilities and accountabilities for those who are NEET, particularly those aged 16-18. The raising of the participation age gives local authorities new roles, opportunities and challenges in supporting young people who are NEET.
6. Evidence of what works to reduce the proportion of young people NEET suggests that a successful strategy requires early intervention, tackling the barriers that young people face when attempting to move into education or employment. It also requires working across organisational and geographical boundaries and the involvement of local employers.
7. Tracking people, monitoring progress and programme evaluation can also help to drive improvements. Best practice from other successful programmes should be borne in mind when commissioning new services. For example, it is important that courses are accredited, not like school and developed in partnership with young people.

This briefing was commissioned by PHE and written by the Institute of Health Equity. It is a summary of a more detailed evidence review on the same topic and is intended primarily for directors of public health, public health teams and local authorities. This briefing and accompanying evidence reviews are part of a series commissioned by PHE to describe and demonstrate effective, practical local action on a range of social determinants of health.

You can view the briefing by clicking here: http://bit.ly/1wrU3do

The associated evidence summary is: Local action on health inequalities: Adult learning services

Summary
1. Adult learning can have indirect benefits by improving social capital and connectedness, health behaviour, skills, and employment outcomes, each of which affect health. There is also some evidence that adult learning has direct positive effects for mental health.
2. Improving skill levels and qualifications can have a positive economic impact – it has been estimated that the lifetime return on investment of level 1 courses for those aged 19-24 is £21.60 for every £1 invested.
3. There is a gradient in need for adult learning – people in more disadvantaged groups tend to have fewer qualifications, lower levels of initial education and lower skill levels. However, participation in adult learning tends to be lower among those who need it most. If this gradient in participation was reduced, provision could help to reduce health inequalities by improving skills and qualifications among most disadvantaged groups.
4. Local authorities have a key role both as a provider of learning and in partnership with others, including local businesses (in part through local enterprise partnerships), Jobcentres, the voluntary and community sector, and the education and training sector.
5. A lifecourse approach to learning is important. Those at different points will benefit most from different types of learning. For example, non-formal and informal learning for older people can decrease social isolation, whereas family learning for parents and children can help to tackle the intergenerational transfer of disadvantage.
6. Many adults in need of learning opportunities will face specific barriers to participating, such as financial constraint, which must be addressed if learning is to benefit all groups. To increase the likelihood of positive outcomes, many individuals will need support to manage this transition.
7. Employers can add value to local adult learning in many ways. They also have a training role in relation to their own employees, which local authorities can support and encourage.
8. Community engagement is key to understanding how best to deliver adult learning courses. Programmes can also use other community assets, such as libraries or universities.

This briefing was commissioned by PHE and written by the Institute of Health Equity. It is a summary of a more detailed evidence review on the same topic and is intended primarily for directors of public health, public health teams and local authorities. This briefing and accompanying evidence reviews are part of a series commissioned by PHE to describe and demonstrate effective, practical local action on a range of social determinants of health.

You can view the briefing by clicking here: http://bit.ly/1ytnBfn

The associated evidence summary is: Local action on health inequalities: Good quality parenting programmes and the home to school transition

Summary

  1. In 2013, 52% of all children reached a ‘good level of development’ at age five according to the Department for Education, compared to 36% of children who were eligible for free school meals.
  2. The quality of parenting affects children’s long-term physical, emotional, social and educational outcomes and therefore differences in parenting between social groups have implications for health inequalities.
  3. Positive, warm parenting, with firm boundaries and routines, supports social and emotional development and reduces behavioural problems.
  4. There is evidence that a range of parenting programmes designed for families with children of a particular age are effective.
  5. To reduce health inequalities, commissioning of parenting programmes should be part of a wider local system of measures to support parents. Good financial and emotional resources make it easier for parents to take good parenting actions.

Share this: