Camila Bonfim, Flávia Alves, Érika Fialho, John A Naslund, Maurício L Barreto, Vikram Patel, Daiane Borges Machado
{"title":"有条件现金转移和精神疾病住院患者的死亡率:巴西Bolsa Família方案的队列研究。","authors":"Camila Bonfim, Flávia Alves, Érika Fialho, John A Naslund, Maurício L Barreto, Vikram Patel, Daiane Borges Machado","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1004486","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Psychiatric patients experience lower life expectancy compared to the general population. Conditional cash transfer programmes (CCTPs) have shown promise in reducing mortality rates, but their impact on psychiatric patients has been unclear. This study tests the association between being a Brazilian Bolsa Família Programme (BFP) recipient and the risk of mortality among people previously hospitalised with any psychiatric disorders.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>This cohort study utilised Brazilian administrative datasets, linking social and health system data from the 100 Million Brazilian Cohort, a population-representative study. We followed individuals who applied for BFP following a single hospitalisation with a psychiatric disorder between 2008 and 2015. The outcome was mortality and specific causes, defined according to International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision (ICD-10). Cox proportional hazards models estimated the hazard ratio (HR) for overall mortality and competing risks models estimated the HR for specific causes of death, both associated with being a BFP recipient, adjusted for confounders, and weighted with a propensity score. We included 69,901 psychiatric patients aged between 10 and 120, with the majority being male (60.5%), and 26,556 (37.99%) received BFP following hospitalisation. BFP was associated with reduced overall mortality (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87,0.98, p 0.018) and mortality due to natural causes (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83, 0.96, p < 0.001). Reduction in suicide (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.68, 1.21, p = 0.514) was observed, although it was not statistically significant. The BFP's effects on overall mortality were more pronounced in females and younger individuals. In addition, 4% of deaths could have been prevented if BFP had been present (population attributable risk (PAF) = 4%, 95% CI 0.06, 7.10).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>BFP appears to reduce mortality rates among psychiatric patients. While not designed to address elevated mortality risk in this population, this study highlights the potential for poverty alleviation programmes to mitigate mortality rates in one of the highest-risk population subgroups.</p>","PeriodicalId":49008,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":"21 12","pages":"e1004486"},"PeriodicalIF":15.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11649113/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conditional cash transfers and mortality in people hospitalised with psychiatric disorders: A cohort study of the Brazilian Bolsa Família Programme.\",\"authors\":\"Camila Bonfim, Flávia Alves, Érika Fialho, John A Naslund, Maurício L Barreto, Vikram Patel, Daiane Borges Machado\",\"doi\":\"10.1371/journal.pmed.1004486\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Psychiatric patients experience lower life expectancy compared to the general population. Conditional cash transfer programmes (CCTPs) have shown promise in reducing mortality rates, but their impact on psychiatric patients has been unclear. This study tests the association between being a Brazilian Bolsa Família Programme (BFP) recipient and the risk of mortality among people previously hospitalised with any psychiatric disorders.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>This cohort study utilised Brazilian administrative datasets, linking social and health system data from the 100 Million Brazilian Cohort, a population-representative study. We followed individuals who applied for BFP following a single hospitalisation with a psychiatric disorder between 2008 and 2015. The outcome was mortality and specific causes, defined according to International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision (ICD-10). Cox proportional hazards models estimated the hazard ratio (HR) for overall mortality and competing risks models estimated the HR for specific causes of death, both associated with being a BFP recipient, adjusted for confounders, and weighted with a propensity score. We included 69,901 psychiatric patients aged between 10 and 120, with the majority being male (60.5%), and 26,556 (37.99%) received BFP following hospitalisation. BFP was associated with reduced overall mortality (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87,0.98, p 0.018) and mortality due to natural causes (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83, 0.96, p < 0.001). Reduction in suicide (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.68, 1.21, p = 0.514) was observed, although it was not statistically significant. The BFP's effects on overall mortality were more pronounced in females and younger individuals. In addition, 4% of deaths could have been prevented if BFP had been present (population attributable risk (PAF) = 4%, 95% CI 0.06, 7.10).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>BFP appears to reduce mortality rates among psychiatric patients. While not designed to address elevated mortality risk in this population, this study highlights the potential for poverty alleviation programmes to mitigate mortality rates in one of the highest-risk population subgroups.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49008,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PLoS Medicine\",\"volume\":\"21 12\",\"pages\":\"e1004486\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":15.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11649113/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PLoS Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004486\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004486","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:与一般人群相比,精神病患者的预期寿命较低。有条件现金转移计划(cctp)已显示出降低死亡率的希望,但其对精神病患者的影响尚不清楚。本研究测试了巴西Bolsa Família计划(BFP)接受者与先前因任何精神疾病住院的人死亡风险之间的关系。方法和发现:这项队列研究利用了巴西的行政数据集,将来自1亿巴西队列的社会和卫生系统数据联系起来,这是一项具有人口代表性的研究。我们跟踪了2008年至2015年间因精神疾病住院治疗后申请BFP的个体。结果是根据国际疾病分类第十次修订(ICD-10)定义的死亡率和具体原因。Cox比例风险模型估计了总死亡率的风险比(HR),竞争风险模型估计了特定死亡原因的风险比(HR),两者都与BFP接受者相关,调整了混杂因素,并用倾向评分加权。我们纳入了69,901名年龄在10至120岁之间的精神病患者,其中大多数为男性(60.5%),26,556名(37.99%)在住院后接受了BFP。BFP与降低总死亡率(HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87,0.98, p 0.018)和自然原因死亡率(HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83, 0.96, p < 0.001)相关。自杀率降低(HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.68, 1.21, p = 0.514),但无统计学意义。BFP对总体死亡率的影响在女性和年轻个体中更为明显。此外,如果存在BFP, 4%的死亡本来可以避免(人群归因风险(PAF) = 4%, 95% CI 0.06, 7.10)。结论:BFP似乎降低了精神病患者的死亡率。虽然这项研究的目的不是为了解决这一人群中死亡率升高的问题,但它强调了减贫方案在降低最高风险人群之一的死亡率方面的潜力。
Conditional cash transfers and mortality in people hospitalised with psychiatric disorders: A cohort study of the Brazilian Bolsa Família Programme.
Background: Psychiatric patients experience lower life expectancy compared to the general population. Conditional cash transfer programmes (CCTPs) have shown promise in reducing mortality rates, but their impact on psychiatric patients has been unclear. This study tests the association between being a Brazilian Bolsa Família Programme (BFP) recipient and the risk of mortality among people previously hospitalised with any psychiatric disorders.
Methods and findings: This cohort study utilised Brazilian administrative datasets, linking social and health system data from the 100 Million Brazilian Cohort, a population-representative study. We followed individuals who applied for BFP following a single hospitalisation with a psychiatric disorder between 2008 and 2015. The outcome was mortality and specific causes, defined according to International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision (ICD-10). Cox proportional hazards models estimated the hazard ratio (HR) for overall mortality and competing risks models estimated the HR for specific causes of death, both associated with being a BFP recipient, adjusted for confounders, and weighted with a propensity score. We included 69,901 psychiatric patients aged between 10 and 120, with the majority being male (60.5%), and 26,556 (37.99%) received BFP following hospitalisation. BFP was associated with reduced overall mortality (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87,0.98, p 0.018) and mortality due to natural causes (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83, 0.96, p < 0.001). Reduction in suicide (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.68, 1.21, p = 0.514) was observed, although it was not statistically significant. The BFP's effects on overall mortality were more pronounced in females and younger individuals. In addition, 4% of deaths could have been prevented if BFP had been present (population attributable risk (PAF) = 4%, 95% CI 0.06, 7.10).
Conclusions: BFP appears to reduce mortality rates among psychiatric patients. While not designed to address elevated mortality risk in this population, this study highlights the potential for poverty alleviation programmes to mitigate mortality rates in one of the highest-risk population subgroups.
期刊介绍:
PLOS Medicine is a prominent platform for discussing and researching global health challenges. The journal covers a wide range of topics, including biomedical, environmental, social, and political factors affecting health. It prioritizes articles that contribute to clinical practice, health policy, or a better understanding of pathophysiology, ultimately aiming to improve health outcomes across different settings.
The journal is unwavering in its commitment to uphold the highest ethical standards in medical publishing. This includes actively managing and disclosing any conflicts of interest related to reporting, reviewing, and publishing. PLOS Medicine promotes transparency in the entire review and publication process. The journal also encourages data sharing and encourages the reuse of published work. Additionally, authors retain copyright for their work, and the publication is made accessible through Open Access with no restrictions on availability and dissemination.
PLOS Medicine takes measures to avoid conflicts of interest associated with advertising drugs and medical devices or engaging in the exclusive sale of reprints.