Targeted community screening in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation enhances the detection of liver fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Risk-factor-based community screening has been used to identify early liver disease. Risk-factor prevalence and liver-related outcomes are significantly affected by socioeconomic deprivation. However, the impact on targeted community screening is unknown. We evaluated the influence of deprivation on fibrosis detection within a population screening pathway. METHODS: A total of 1613 patients were assessed using 2 pathways: Proactive case finding at 7 primary care practices (PCPs) and a comparator standard-of-care pathway. Individuals with specific risk factors were identified: obesity (BMI >30 kg/m2), type 2 diabetes, alcohol consumption >400/>280 g/week in males/females, respectively, coding for steatosis and ALT >50/>35 IU/mL in males/females, respectively. Liver stiffness measurement (LSM) ≥8.0 kPa was used to determine fibrosis, and the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) was used to determine deprivation at the individual and neighborhood level. RESULTS: In all, 325 (20.1%) patients had LSM ≥8.0 kPa. Fibrosis detection increased with the number of risk factors [2: OR 2.47 (p=0.027, 95% CI 1.11-5.50), 3: OR 5.19 (p <0.001, 95% CI 2.34-11.53), 4: OR 10.19 (p <0.001, 95% CI 4.44-23.40), 5: OR 23.40 (p <0.001, 95% CI 6.15-89.04)]. Patients with a low IMD score (<10) had significantly lower median LSMs than those with a high IMD score (>50) [5.4 kPa vs. 6.0 kPa (p=0.0005)]. In the proactive case finding pathway, obesity prevalence was higher in PCPs in areas of high deprivation [83.5% vs. 65.6% (p=0.003)]. Fibrosis detection was significantly higher in PCPs situated in neighborhoods with high socioeconomic deprivation compared with low deprivation [27.0% vs. 8.6% (p=0.028)]. CONCLUSION: Liver fibrosis detection was disproportionately higher in neighborhoods with greater socioeconomic deprivation. Screening strategies targeting areas with higher deprivation could increase the diagnostic yield of advanced fibrosis.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PubMed
Published
2026-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/hc9.0000000000001036
Primary Topic
Liver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Targeted community screening in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation enhances the detection of liver fibrosis.

Neil A. Hanley, Indra Neil Guha, Huw Purssell, Christopher Mysko et al.
PubMed
Liver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
article

Targeted community screening in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation enhances the detection of liver fibrosis.

Neil A. Hanley, Indra Neil Guha, Huw Purssell, Christopher Mysko, Jennifer A. Scott, Stephanie Landi, Oliver Street, Varinder Singh Athwal, Deepankar Gahloth, L Bennett, Alexander A. Warner-Levy, Karen Piper Hanley
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Risk-factor-based community screening has been used to identify early liver disease. Risk-factor prevalence and liver-related outcomes are significantly affected by socioeconomic deprivation. However, the impact on targeted community screening is unknown. We evaluated the influence of deprivation on fibrosis detection within a population screening pathway. METHODS: A total of 1613 patients were assessed using 2 pathways: Proactive case finding at 7 primary care practices (PCPs) and a comparator standard-of-care pathway. Individuals with specific risk factors were identified: obesity (BMI >30 kg/m2), type 2 diabetes, alcohol consumption >400/>280 g/week in males/females, respectively, coding for steatosis and ALT >50/>35 IU/mL in males/females, respectively. Liver stiffness measurement (LSM) ≥8.0 kPa was used to determine fibrosis, and the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) was used to determine deprivation at the individual and neighborhood level. RESULTS: In all, 325 (20.1%) patients had LSM ≥8.0 kPa. Fibrosis detection increased with the number of risk factors [2: OR 2.47 (p=0.027, 95% CI 1.11-5.50), 3: OR 5.19 (p <0.001, 95% CI 2.34-11.53), 4: OR 10.19 (p <0.001, 95% CI 4.44-23.40), 5: OR 23.40 (p <0.001, 95% CI 6.15-89.04)]. Patients with a low IMD score (<10) had significantly lower median LSMs than those with a high IMD score (>50) [5.4 kPa vs. 6.0 kPa (p=0.0005)]. In the proactive case finding pathway, obesity prevalence was higher in PCPs in areas of high deprivation [83.5% vs. 65.6% (p=0.003)]. Fibrosis detection was significantly higher in PCPs situated in neighborhoods with high socioeconomic deprivation compared with low deprivation [27.0% vs. 8.6% (p=0.028)]. CONCLUSION: Liver fibrosis detection was disproportionately higher in neighborhoods with greater socioeconomic deprivation. Screening strategies targeting areas with higher deprivation could increase the diagnostic yield of advanced fibrosis.

PubMedVol. 10(10)
University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust (GB), University of Nottingham (GB), Manchester Academic Health Science Centre (GB), University of Manchester (GB), Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre (GB), University of Birmingham (GB)
No poverty
Openalex Percentile: Top 34%
Liver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.