Background: We examined the association of housing affordability with physical and mental health in Hong Kong, where there is a lack of related research despite having the worst housing affordability problem in the world, considering potential mediating effect of deprivation. Methods: A stratified random sample of 1978 Hong Kong adults were surveyed. Housing affordability was defined using the residual-income (after housing costs) approach. Health-related quality of life was assessed by the Short-Form Health Survey version 2 (SF-12v2), from which the physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS) measures were derived. Multivariable linear regressions were performed to assess associations of housing affordability with PCS and MCS scores, adjusting for sociodemographic, socioeconomic and lifestyle factors. Mediation analyses were also conducted to assess the mediating role of deprivation on the effect of housing affordability on PCS or MCS. Results: Dose–response relationships were observed between housing affordability and mean PCS score (β (95% CI) compared with the highest affordable fourth quartile: −2.53 (−4.05 to −1.01), −2.23 (−3.54 to −0.92), −0.64 (−1.80 to 0.51) for the first, second and third quartiles, respectively) and mean MCS score (β (95% CI): −3.87 (−5.30 to –2.45), −2.35 (−3.59 to −1.11), −1.28 (−2.40 to –0.17) for the first, second and third quartiles, respectively). Deprivation mediated 34.3% of the impact of housing unaffordability on PCS and 15.8% of that on MCS. Conclusions: Housing affordability affects physical and mental health, partially through deprivation, suggesting that housing policies targeting deprived individuals may help reduce health inequality in addition to targeting the housing affordability problem.

Background We examined whether COVID-19 could exert inequalities in socioeconomic conditions and health in Hong Kong, where there has been a relatively low COVID-19 incidence. Methods 752 adult respondents from a previous random sample participated in a telephone survey from 20 April to 11 May 2020. We examined demographic and socioeconomic factors, worry of COVID-19, general health, economic activity, and personal protective equipment (PPE) and related hygiene practice by deprivation status. The associations between deprivation and negative COVID-19 related issues were analysed using binary logistic regressions, while the associations of these issues with health were analysed using linear regressions. Path analysis was conducted to determine the direct effect of deprivation, and the indirect effects via COVID-19 related issues, on health. Interactions between deprivation and the mediators were also tested. Results Deprived individuals were more likely to have job loss/instability, less reserves, less utilisation and more concerns of PPE. After adjustments for potential confounders, being deprived was associated with having greater risk of low reserve of face masks, being worried about the disease and job loss/instability. Being deprived had worse physical (β=−0.154, p<0.001) and mental health (β=−0.211, p<0.001) and had an indirect effect on mental health via worry and job loss/instability (total indirect effect: β=−0.027, p=0.017; proportion being mediated=11.46%). In addition, significant interaction between deprivation and change of economic activity status was observed on mental health-related quality of life. Conclusion Even if the COVID-19 incidence was relatively low, part of the observed health inequality can be explained by people’s concerns over livelihood and economic activity, which were affected by the containment measures. We should look beyond the incidence to address COVID-19 related health inequalities.

The severity of COVID-19 infections could be exacerbated by the epidemic of chronic diseases and underlying inequalities in social determinants of health. Nonetheless, there is scanty evidence in regions with a relatively well-controlled outbreak. This study examined the socioeconomic patterning of COVID-19 severity and its effect modification with multimorbidity in Hong Kong. 3074 local COVID-19 cases diagnosed from 5 July to 31 October 2020 were analyzed and followed up until 30 November 2020. Data on residential addresses, socio-demographic background, COVID-19 clinical conditions, and pre-existing chronic diseases of confirmed cases were retrieved from the Centre for Health Protection and the Hospital Authority. Results showed that, despite an independent adverse impact of multimorbidity on COVID-19 severity (aOR = 2.35 [95% CI = 1.72–3.19]), it varied across the socioeconomic ladder, with no significant risk among those living in the wealthiest areas (aOR = 0.80 [0.32–2.02]). Also, no significant association of the area-level income-poverty rate with severe COVID-19 was observed. In conclusion, the socioeconomic patterning of severe COVID-19 was mild in Hong Kong. Nonetheless, socioeconomic position interacted with multimorbidity to determine COVID-19 severity with a mitigated risk among the socioeconomically advantaged. Plausible explanations include the underlying socioeconomic inequalities in chronic disease management and the equity impact of the public-private dual-track healthcare system.

Background Mental illness is a major disease burden in the world and disproportionately affects the socially disadvantaged, but studies on the longitudinal association of poverty with anxiety and stress are rare, especially in Asia. Using data from Hong Kong, we aimed to (1) assess the cross-sectional association of poverty with anxiety and stress at baseline, and (2) to examine whether baseline poverty and change in poverty status over time are associated with a subsequent change in anxiety and stress. Methods Data were obtained from two waves of a territory-wide longitudinal survey in Hong Kong, with sample sizes of n=1970 and n=1224 for baseline and follow-up, respectively. Poverty was measured with a Deprivation Index and income-poverty. Anxiety and stress symptoms were assessed using Chinese Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale—21 Items. We conducted cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses on the association of poverty with anxiety and stress. Outcomes Deprivation, but not income-poverty, was significantly associated with both outcomes at baseline. Increased deprivation over time was associated with greater score and increased risk of anxiety and stress. Persistent deprivation over time was associated with greater anxiety and stress, and increased risk of incident anxiety. Interpretation Deprivation could have significant independent effects on anxiety and stress, even after adjusting for the effects of income-poverty. Greater attention should be paid to deprivation in policymaking to tackle the inequalities of mental health problems, especially since stress and anxiety are precursors to more severe forms of mental illness and other comorbidities.

Individual-level deprivation takes into account the non-monetary aspects of poverty that neither income poverty nor socio-economic factors could fully capture; however, it has rarely been considered in existing studies on social inequality in obesity. Therefore, we examined the associations of deprivation, beyond income poverty, with both general and abdominal obesity. A territory-wide two-stage stratified random sample of 2282 community-dwelling Hong Kong adults was surveyed via face-to-face household interviews between 2014 and 2015. Deprivation was assessed by a Deprivation Index specific to the Hong Kong population. General obesity was defined as body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25 kg/m², while abdominal obesity was defined as waist circumference (WC) ≥ 90 cm/80 cm for male/female. Multivariable binary logistic regressions were performed. Deprivation was independently associated with abdominal obesity (odds ratios (OR) = 1.68; 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.27–2.22); however, no significant association was found with general obesity (OR=1.03; CI: 0.77–1.38). After additional adjustment for BMI, deprivation remained strongly associated with abdominal obesity (OR=2.00; CI: 1.41–2.83); and after further adjustment for WC, deprivation had a marginal inverse association with general obesity (OR=0.72; CI: 0.51–1.01). Deprivation is an important risk factor of abdominal obesity and plays a critical role in capturing the preferential abdominal fat deposition beyond income poverty.