Objective To investigate whether population based primary prevention (risk factor reduction in apparently healthy people) might be more powerful than current government initiatives favouring risk factor reduction in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) (secondary prevention).
In: Bulletin of the World Health Organization: the international journal of public health = Bulletin de l'Organisation Mondiale de la Santé, Band 88, Heft 10, S. 769-776
In: Bulletin of the World Health Organization: the international journal of public health = Bulletin de l'Organisation Mondiale de la Santé, Band 88, Heft 2, S. 120-130
In: Bulletin of the World Health Organization: the international journal of public health = Bulletin de l'Organisation Mondiale de la Santé, Band 90, Heft 11, S. 847-853
Wasim,Maziak:Florida International University Fouad,Fouad:American University of Beirut Rana,Khatib:Community and Public Health ; Article published in : Bull World Health Organ 2012 ; 90 pp. 847–853 | doi:10.2471/BLT.12.104968 ; Public policy plays a key role in improving population health and in the control of diseases, including non-communicable diseases. However, an evidence-based approach to formulating healthy public policy has been difficult to implement, partly on account of barriers that hinder integrated work between researchers and policy-makers. This paper describes a "policy effectiveness–feasibility loop" (PEFL) that brings together epidemiological modelling, local situation analysis and option appraisal to foster collaboration between researchers and policy-makers. Epidemiological modelling explores the determinants of trends in disease and the potential health benefits of modifying them. Situation analysis investigates the current conceptualization of policy, the level of policy awareness and commitment among key stakeholders, and what actually happens in practice, thereby helping to identify policy gaps. Option appraisal integrates epidemiological modelling and situation analysis to investigate the feasibility, costs and likely health benefits of various policy options. The authors illustrate how PEFL was used in a project to inform public policy for the prevention of cardiovascular diseases and diabetes in four parts of the eastern Mediterranean. They conclude that PEFL may offer a useful framework for researchers and policy-makers to successfully work together to generate evidence-based policy, and they encourage further evaluation of this approach.
Background: This paper examines one EC-funded multinational project (RESCAP-MED), with a focus on research capacity building (RCB) concerning non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in the Mediterranean Middle East and North Africa. By the project's end (2015), the entire region was engulfed in crisis. Objective: Designed before this crisis developed in 2011, the primary purpose of RESCAP-MED was to foster methodological skills needed to conduct multi-disciplinary research on NCDs and their social determinants. RESCAP-MED also sought to consolidate regional networks for future collaboration, and to boost existing regional policy engagement in the region on the NCD challenge. This analysis examines the scope and sustainability of RCB conducted in a context of intensifying political turmoil. Methods: RESCAP-MED linked two sets of activities. The first was a framework for training early- and mid-career researchers through discipline-based and writing workshops, plus short fellowships for sustained mentoring. The second integrated public-facing activities designed to raise the profile of the NCD burden in the region, and its implications for policymakers at national level. Key to this were two conferences to showcase regional research on NCDs, and the development of an e-learning resource (NETPH). Results: Seven discipline-based workshops (with 113 participants) and 6 workshops to develop writing skills (84 participants) were held, with 18 fellowship visits. The 2 symposia in Istanbul and Beirut attracted 280 participants. Yet the developing political crisis tagged each activity with a series of logistical challenges, none of which was initially envisaged. The immediacy of the crisis inevitably deflected from policy attention to the challenges of NCDs. Conclusions: This programme to strengthen research capacity for one priority area of global public health took place as a narrow window of political opportunity was closing. The key lessons concern issues of sustainability and the paramount importance of responsively shaping a context-driven RCB.
Background: This paper examines one EC-funded multinational project (RESCAP-MED), with a focus on research capacity building (RCB) concerning non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in the Mediterranean Middle East and North Africa. By the project's end (2015), the entire region was engulfed in crisis. Objective: Designed before this crisis developed in 2011, the primary purpose of RESCAP-MED was to foster methodological skills needed to conduct multi-disciplinary research on NCDs and their social determinants. RESCAP-MED also sought to consolidate regional networks for future collaboration, and to boost existing regional policy engagement in the region on the NCD challenge. This analysis examines the scope and sustainability of RCB conducted in a context of intensifying political turmoil. Methods: RESCAP-MED linked two sets of activities. The first was a framework for training early- and mid-career researchers through discipline-based and writing workshops, plus short fellowships for sustained mentoring. The second integrated public-facing activities designed to raise the profile of the NCD burden in the region, and its implications for policymakers at national level. Key to this were two conferences to showcase regional research on NCDs, and the development of an e-learning resource (NETPH). Results: Seven discipline-based workshops (with 113 participants) and 6 workshops to develop writing skills (84 participants) were held, with 18 fellowship visits. The 2 symposia in Istanbul and Beirut attracted 280 participants. Yet the developing political crisis tagged each activity with a series of logistical challenges, none of which was initially envisaged. The immediacy of the crisis inevitably deflected from policy attention to the challenges of NCDs. Conclusions: This programme to strengthen research capacity for one priority area of global public health took place as a narrow window of political opportunity was closing. The key lessons concern issues of sustainability and the paramount importance of responsively shaping ...
In: Bulletin of the World Health Organization: the international journal of public health = Bulletin de l'Organisation Mondiale de la Santé, Band 96, Heft 11, S. 738-749
OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics and management of Diabetes mellitus (DM) patients from low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). METHODS: We systematically characterised consecutive DM patients attending public health services in urban settings in Indonesia, Peru, Romania and South Africa, collecting data on DM treatment history, complications, drug treatment, obesity, HbA1c and cardiovascular risk profile; and assessing treatment gaps against relevant national guidelines. RESULTS: Patients (median 59 years, 62.9% female) mostly had type 2 diabetes (96%), half for >5 years (48.6%). Obesity (45.5%) and central obesity (females 84.8%; males 62.7%) were common. The median HbA1c was 8.7% (72 mmol/mol), ranging from 7.7% (61 mmol/mol; Peru) to 10.4% (90 mmol/mol; South Africa). Antidiabetes treatment included metformin (62.6%), insulin (37.8%), and other oral glucose-lowering drugs (34.8%). Disease complications included eyesight problems (50.4%), EGFR <60 ml/min (18.9%), heart disease (16.5%) and proteinuria (14.7%). Many had an elevated cardiovascular risk with elevated blood pressure (36%), LDL (71.0%) and smoking (13%), but few were taking antihypertensive drugs (47.1%), statins (28.5%) and aspirin (30.0%) when indicated. Few patients on insulin (8.0%), statins (8.4%) and antihypertensives (39.5%) reached treatment targets according to national guidelines. There were large differences between countries in terms of disease profile and medication use. CONCLUSION: DM patients in government clinics in four LMIC with considerable growth of DM have insufficient glycaemic control, frequent macrovascular and other complications, and insufficient preventive measures for cardiovascular disease. These findings underline the need to identify treatment barriers and secure optimal DM care in such settings.
BACKGROUND: In the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013 (GBD 2013), knowledge about health and its determinants has been integrated into a comparable framework to inform health policy. Outputs of this analysis are relevant to current policy questions in England and elsewhere, particularly on health inequalities. We use GBD 2013 data on mortality and causes of death, and disease and injury incidence and prevalence to analyse the burden of disease and injury in England as a whole, in English regions, and within each English region by deprivation quintile. We also assess disease and injury burden in England attributable to potentially preventable risk factors. England and the English regions are compared with the remaining constituent countries of the UK and with comparable countries in the European Union (EU) and beyond. METHODS: We extracted data from the GBD 2013 to compare mortality, causes of death, years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with a disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) in England, the UK, and 18 other countries (the first 15 EU members [apart from the UK] and Australia, Canada, Norway, and the USA [EU15+]). We extended elements of the analysis to English regions, and subregional areas defined by deprivation quintile (deprivation areas). We used data split by the nine English regions (corresponding to the European boundaries of the Nomenclature for Territorial Statistics level 1 [NUTS 1] regions), and by quintile groups within each English region according to deprivation, thereby making 45 regional deprivation areas. Deprivation quintiles were defined by area of residence ranked at national level by Index of Multiple Deprivation score, 2010. Burden due to various risk factors is described for England using new GBD methodology to estimate independent and overlapping attributable risk for five tiers of behavioural, metabolic, and environmental risk factors. We present results for 306 causes and 2337 sequelae, and 79 risks or risk clusters. FINDINGS: Between 1990 and 2013, life expectancy from birth in England increased by 5·4 years (95% uncertainty interval 5·0-5·8) from 75·9 years (75·9-76·0) to 81·3 years (80·9-81·7); gains were greater for men than for women. Rates of age-standardised YLLs reduced by 41·1% (38·3-43·6), whereas DALYs were reduced by 23·8% (20·9-27·1), and YLDs by 1·4% (0·1-2·8). For these measures, England ranked better than the UK and the EU15+ means. Between 1990 and 2013, the range in life expectancy among 45 regional deprivation areas remained 8·2 years for men and decreased from 7·2 years in 1990 to 6·9 years in 2013 for women. In 2013, the leading cause of YLLs was ischaemic heart disease, and the leading cause of DALYs was low back and neck pain. Known risk factors accounted for 39·6% (37·7-41·7) of DALYs; leading behavioural risk factors were suboptimal diet (10·8% [9·1-12·7]) and tobacco (10·7% [9·4-12·0]). INTERPRETATION: Health in England is improving although substantial opportunities exist for further reductions in the burden of preventable disease. The gap in mortality rates between men and women has reduced, but marked health inequalities between the least deprived and most deprived areas remain. Declines in mortality have not been matched by similar declines in morbidity, resulting in people living longer with diseases. Health policies must therefore address the causes of ill health as well as those of premature mortality. Systematic action locally and nationally is needed to reduce risk exposures, support healthy behaviours, alleviate the severity of chronic disabling disorders, and mitigate the effects of socioeconomic deprivation. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Public Health England. ; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; Public Health England ; This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from Elsevier via http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00195-6
Background In the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013 (GBD 2013), knowledge about health and its determinants has been integrated into a comparable framework to inform health policy. Outputs of this analysis are relevant to current policy questions in England and elsewhere, particularly on health inequalities. We use GBD 2013 data on mortality and causes of death, and disease and injury incidence and prevalence to analyse the burden of disease and injury in England as a whole, in English regions, and within each English region by deprivation quintile. We also assess disease and injury burden in England attributable to potentially preventable risk factors. England and the English regions are compared with the remaining constituent countries of the UK and with comparable countries in the European Union (EU) and beyond. Methods We extracted data from the GBD 2013 to compare mortality, causes of death, years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with a disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) in England, the UK, and 18 other countries (the first 15 EU members [apart from the UK] and Australia, Canada, Norway, and the USA [EU15+]). We extended elements of the analysis to English regions, and subregional areas defined by deprivation quintile (deprivation areas). We used data split by the nine English regions (corresponding to the European boundaries of the Nomenclature for Territorial Statistics level 1 [NUTS 1] regions), and by quintile groups within each English region according to deprivation, thereby making 45 regional deprivation areas. Deprivation quintiles were defined by area of residence ranked at national level by Index of Multiple Deprivation score, 2010. Burden due to various risk factors is described for England using new GBD methodology to estimate independent and overlapping attributable risk for five tiers of behavioural, metabolic, and environmental risk factors. We present results for 306 causes and 2337 sequelae, and 79 risks or risk clusters. Findings Between 1990 and 2013, life expectancy from birth in England increased by 5·4 years (95% uncertainty interval 5·0–5·8) from 75·9 years (75·9–76·0) to 81·3 years (80·9–81·7); gains were greater for men than for women. Rates of age-standardised YLLs reduced by 41·1% (38·3–43·6), whereas DALYs were reduced by 23·8% (20·9–27·1), and YLDs by 1·4% (0·1–2·8). For these measures, England ranked better than the UK and the EU15+ means. Between 1990 and 2013, the range in life expectancy among 45 regional deprivation areas remained 8·2 years for men and decreased from 7·2 years in 1990 to 6·9 years in 2013 for women. In 2013, the leading cause of YLLs was ischaemic heart disease, and the leading cause of DALYs was low back and neck pain. Known risk factors accounted for 39·6% (37·7–41·7) of DALYs; leading behavioural risk factors were suboptimal diet (10·8% [9·1–12·7]) and tobacco (10·7% [9·4–12·0]). Interpretation Health in England is improving although substantial opportunities exist for further reductions in the burden of preventable disease. The gap in mortality rates between men and women has reduced, but marked health inequalities between the least deprived and most deprived areas remain. Declines in mortality have not been matched by similar declines in morbidity, resulting in people living longer with diseases. Health policies must therefore address the causes of ill health as well as those of premature mortality. Systematic action locally and nationally is needed to reduce risk exposures, support healthy behaviours, alleviate the severity of chronic disabling disorders, and mitigate the effects of socioeconomic deprivation. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Public Health England.
BACKGROUND: In the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013 (GBD 2013), knowledge about health and its determinants has been integrated into a comparable framework to inform health policy. Outputs of this analysis are relevant to current policy questions in England and elsewhere, particularly on health inequalities. We use GBD 2013 data on mortality and causes of death, and disease and injury incidence and prevalence to analyse the burden of disease and injury in England as a whole, in English regions, and within each English region by deprivation quintile. We also assess disease and injury burden in England attributable to potentially preventable risk factors. England and the English regions are compared with the remaining constituent countries of the UK and with comparable countries in the European Union (EU) and beyond. METHODS: We extracted data from the GBD 2013 to compare mortality, causes of death, years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with a disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) in England, the UK, and 18 other countries (the first 15 EU members [apart from the UK] and Australia, Canada, Norway, and the USA [EU15+]). We extended elements of the analysis to English regions, and subregional areas defined by deprivation quintile (deprivation areas). We used data split by the nine English regions (corresponding to the European boundaries of the Nomenclature for Territorial Statistics level 1 [NUTS 1] regions), and by quintile groups within each English region according to deprivation, thereby making 45 regional deprivation areas. Deprivation quintiles were defined by area of residence ranked at national level by Index of Multiple Deprivation score, 2010. Burden due to various risk factors is described for England using new GBD methodology to estimate independent and overlapping attributable risk for five tiers of behavioural, metabolic, and environmental risk factors. We present results for 306 causes and 2337 sequelae, and 79 risks or risk clusters. FINDINGS: Between 1990 and 2013, life expectancy from birth in England increased by 5·4 years (95% uncertainty interval 5·0-5·8) from 75·9 years (75·9-76·0) to 81·3 years (80·9-81·7); gains were greater for men than for women. Rates of age-standardised YLLs reduced by 41·1% (38·3-43·6), whereas DALYs were reduced by 23·8% (20·9-27·1), and YLDs by 1·4% (0·1-2·8). For these measures, England ranked better than the UK and the EU15+ means. Between 1990 and 2013, the range in life expectancy among 45 regional deprivation areas remained 8·2 years for men and decreased from 7·2 years in 1990 to 6·9 years in 2013 for women. In 2013, the leading cause of YLLs was ischaemic heart disease, and the leading cause of DALYs was low back and neck pain. Known risk factors accounted for 39·6% (37·7-41·7) of DALYs; leading behavioural risk factors were suboptimal diet (10·8% [9·1-12·7]) and tobacco (10·7% [9·4-12·0]). INTERPRETATION: Health in England is improving although substantial opportunities exist for further reductions in the burden of preventable disease. The gap in mortality rates between men and women has reduced, but marked health inequalities between the least deprived and most deprived areas remain. Declines in mortality have not been matched by similar declines in morbidity, resulting in people living longer with diseases. Health policies must therefore address the causes of ill health as well as those of premature mortality. Systematic action locally and nationally is needed to reduce risk exposures, support healthy behaviours, alleviate the severity of chronic disabling disorders, and mitigate the effects of socioeconomic deprivation. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Public Health England.
In the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013 (GBD 2013), knowledge about health and its determinants has been integrated into a comparable framework to inform health policy. Outputs of this analysis are relevant to current policy questions in England and elsewhere, particularly on health inequalities. We use GBD 2013 data on mortality and causes of death, and disease and injury incidence and prevalence to analyse the burden of disease and injury in England as a whole, in English regions, and within each English region by deprivation quintile. We also assess disease and injury burden in England attributable to potentially preventable risk factors. England and the English regions are compared with the remaining constituent countries of the UK and with comparable countries in the European Union (EU) and beyond.
Background: In the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013 (GBD 2013), knowledge about health and its determinants has been integrated into a comparable framework to inform health policy. Outputs of this analysis are relevant to current policy questions in England and elsewhere, particularly on health inequalities. We use GBD 2013 data on mortality and causes of death, and disease and injury incidence and prevalence to analyse the burden of disease and injury in England as a whole, in English regions, and within each English region by deprivation quintile. We also assess disease and injury burden in England attributable to potentially preventable risk factors. England and the English regions are compared with the remaining constituent countries of the UK and with comparable countries in the European Union (EU) and beyond. Methods: We extracted data from the GBD 2013 to compare mortality, causes of death, years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with a disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) in England, the UK, and 18 other countries (the first 15 EU members [apart from the UK] and Australia, Canada, Norway, and the USA [EU15+]). We extended elements of the analysis to English regions, and subregional areas defined by deprivation quintile (deprivation areas). We used data split by the nine English regions (corresponding to the European boundaries of the Nomenclature for Territorial Statistics level 1 [NUTS 1] regions), and by quintile groups within each English region according to deprivation, thereby making 45 regional deprivation areas. Deprivation quintiles were defined by area of residence ranked at national level by Index of Multiple Deprivation score, 2010. Burden due to various risk factors is described for England using new GBD methodology to estimate independent and overlapping attributable risk for five tiers of behavioural, metabolic, and environmental risk factors. We present results for 306 causes and 2337 sequelae, and 79 risks or risk clusters. Findings: Between 1990 and 2013, life expectancy from birth in England increased by 5·4 years (95% uncertainty interval 5·0–5·8) from 75·9 years (75·9–76·0) to 81·3 years (80·9–81·7); gains were greater for men than for women. Rates of age-standardised YLLs reduced by 41·1% (38·3–43·6), whereas DALYs were reduced by 23·8% (20·9–27·1), and YLDs by 1·4% (0·1–2·8). For these measures, England ranked better than the UK and the EU15+ means. Between 1990 and 2013, the range in life expectancy among 45 regional deprivation areas remained 8·2 years for men and decreased from 7·2 years in 1990 to 6·9 years in 2013 for women. In 2013, the leading cause of YLLs was ischaemic heart disease, and the leading cause of DALYs was low back and neck pain. Known risk factors accounted for 39·6% (37·7–41·7) of DALYs; leading behavioural risk factors were suboptimal diet (10·8% [9·1–12·7]) and tobacco (10·7% [9·4–12·0]). Interpretation: Health in England is improving although substantial opportunities exist for further reductions in the burden of preventable disease. The gap in mortality rates between men and women has reduced, but marked health inequalities between the least deprived and most deprived areas remain. Declines in mortality have not been matched by similar declines in morbidity, resulting in people living longer with diseases. Health policies must therefore address the causes of ill health as well as those of premature mortality. Systematic action locally and nationally is needed to reduce risk exposures, support healthy behaviours, alleviate the severity of chronic disabling disorders, and mitigate the effects of socioeconomic deprivation.
In: Newton , J N , Briggs , A D M , Murray , C J L , Dicker , D , Foreman , K J , Wang , H , Naghavi , M , Forouzanfar , M H , Ohno , S L , Barber , R M , Vos , T , Stanaway , J D , Schmidt , J C , Hughes , A J , Fay , D F J , Ecob , R , Gresser , C , McKee , M , Rutter , H , Abubakar , I , Ali , R , Anderson , H R , Banerjee , A , Bennett , D A , Bernabé , E , Bhui , K S , Biryukov , S M , Bourne , R R , Brayne , C E G , Bruce , N G , Brugha , T S , Burch , M , Capewell , S , Casey , D , Chowdhury , R , Coates , M M , Cooper , C , Critchley , J A , Dargan , P I , Dherani , M K , Elliott , P , Ezzati , M , Fenton , K A , Fraser , M S , Fürst , T , Greaves , F , Green , M A , Gunnell , D J , Hannigan , B M , Hay , R J , Hay , S I , Hemingway , H , Larson , H J , Looker , K J , Lunevicius , R , Lyons , R A , Marcenes , W , Mason-Jones , A J , Matthews , F E , Moller , H , Murdoch , M E , Newton , C R , Pearce , N , Piel , F B , Pope , D , Rahimi , K , Rodriguez , A , Scarborough , P , Schumacher , A E , Shiue , I , Smeeth , L , Tedstone , A , Valabhji , J , Williams , H C , Wolfe , C D A , Woolf , A D & Davis , A C J 2015 , ' Changes in health in England, with analysis by English regions and areas of deprivation, 1990-2013 : a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013 ' , Lancet , vol. 386 , no. 10010 , pp. 2257–2274 . https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00195-6
BACKGROUND: In the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013 (GBD 2013), knowledge about health and its determinants has been integrated into a comparable framework to inform health policy. Outputs of this analysis are relevant to current policy questions in England and elsewhere, particularly on health inequalities. We use GBD 2013 data on mortality and causes of death, and disease and injury incidence and prevalence to analyse the burden of disease and injury in England as a whole, in English regions, and within each English region by deprivation quintile. We also assess disease and injury burden in England attributable to potentially preventable risk factors. England and the English regions are compared with the remaining constituent countries of the UK and with comparable countries in the European Union (EU) and beyond. METHODS: We extracted data from the GBD 2013 to compare mortality, causes of death, years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with a disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) in England, the UK, and 18 other countries (the first 15 EU members [apart from the UK] and Australia, Canada, Norway, and the USA [EU15+]). We extended elements of the analysis to English regions, and subregional areas defined by deprivation quintile (deprivation areas). We used data split by the nine English regions (corresponding to the European boundaries of the Nomenclature for Territorial Statistics level 1 [NUTS 1] regions), and by quintile groups within each English region according to deprivation, thereby making 45 regional deprivation areas. Deprivation quintiles were defined by area of residence ranked at national level by Index of Multiple Deprivation score, 2010. Burden due to various risk factors is described for England using new GBD methodology to estimate independent and overlapping attributable risk for five tiers of behavioural, metabolic, and environmental risk factors. We present results for 306 causes and 2337 sequelae, and 79 risks or risk clusters. FINDINGS: Between 1990 and 2013, life expectancy from birth in England increased by 5·4 years (95% uncertainty interval 5·0-5·8) from 75·9 years (75·9-76·0) to 81·3 years (80·9-81·7); gains were greater for men than for women. Rates of age-standardised YLLs reduced by 41·1% (38·3-43·6), whereas DALYs were reduced by 23·8% (20·9-27·1), and YLDs by 1·4% (0·1-2·8). For these measures, England ranked better than the UK and the EU15+ means. Between 1990 and 2013, the range in life expectancy among 45 regional deprivation areas remained 8·2 years for men and decreased from 7·2 years in 1990 to 6·9 years in 2013 for women. In 2013, the leading cause of YLLs was ischaemic heart disease, and the leading cause of DALYs was low back and neck pain. Known risk factors accounted for 39·6% (37·7-41·7) of DALYs; leading behavioural risk factors were suboptimal diet (10·8% [9·1-12·7]) and tobacco (10·7% [9·4-12·0]). INTERPRETATION: Health in England is improving although substantial opportunities exist for further reductions in the burden of preventable disease. The gap in mortality rates between men and women has reduced, but marked health inequalities between the least deprived and most deprived areas remain. Declines in mortality have not been matched by similar declines in morbidity, resulting in people living longer with diseases. Health policies must therefore address the causes of ill health as well as those of premature mortality. Systematic action locally and nationally is needed to reduce risk exposures, support healthy behaviours, alleviate the severity of chronic disabling disorders, and mitigate the effects of socioeconomic deprivation. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Public Health England.