Suchergebnisse

Objective: To introduce a conceptual structure that can be used to organise the evidence base for Health Impact Assessment (HIA).Background: HIA can be used to judge the potential health effects of a policy, programme or project on a population, and the distribution of those effects. Progress has been made in incorporating HIA into routine practice, especially (in the UK) at local level. However, these advances have mainly been restricted to process issues, including policy engagement and community involvement, while the evidence base has been relatively neglected.Relating policies to their impact on health: The key distinctive feature of HIA is that determinants of health are not taken as given, but rather as factors that themselves have determinants. Nine ways are distinguished in which evidence on health and its determinants can be related to policy, and examples are given from the literature. The most complete of these is an analysis of health effects in the context of a comparison of options. A simple model, the policy/risk assessment model (PRAM), is introduced as a framework that relates changes in levels of exposures or other risk factors to changes in health status. This approach allows a distinction to be made between the technical process of HIA and the political process of decision making, which involves lines of accountability. Extension of the PRAM model to complex policy areas and its adaptation to non-quantitative examples are discussed.Issues for the future: A sound evidence base is essential to the long term reputation of HIA. Research gaps are discussed, especially the need for evidence connecting policy options with changes in determinants of health. It is proposed that policy options could be considered as "exposure" variables in research. The methodology needs to be developed in the course of work on specific issues, concentrated in policy areas that are relatively tractable.Conclusions: A system of coordination needs to be established, at national or supranational level, building on existing initiatives. The framework suggested in this paper can be used to collate and evaluate what is already known, both to identify gaps where research is required and to enable an informed judgement to be made about the potential health impacts of policy options. These judgements should be made widely available for policy makers and for those undertaking health impact assessment.

Objective: To increase the positive and mitigate the negative health impacts of the mayor's draft transport strategy for London.Design: A rapid prospective health impact assessment (HIA) of the penultimate draft of the strategy, using a review commissioned by the regional director of public health; an appraisal of congestion charging; and a participatory workshop. Two audits of changes were performed to assess the impact on policy of the HIA process.Setting: Regional government policy development. Intervention: Recommendations from the rapid HIA were fed back into the drafting process.Main outcome measure: Changes ( a) between the penultimate draft and the draft for public consultation and (b) between that and the final mayoral strategy.Results: The draft transport strategy published for consultation differed in a number of respects from the previous version. Almost all the recommendations from the HIA were incorporated into the final strategy. Significant changes included promoting sustainable travel plans for workplaces and schools; giving priority to infrastructure and services that benefit London's deprived communities; increased emphasis on promoting walking and cycling and reducing reliance on private cars; and a commitment to track the health impacts of the final strategy and its implementation. Specific additions included re-allocating road space.Conclusion: HIA was successful in influencing the transport strategy for London, resulting in several improvements from a health viewpoint. HIA is an effective method both for bringing about significant change in policy proposals and in increasing policy makers' understanding of determinants of health and hence in changing attitudes of policy makers.

Background. South Africa (SA) has a long history of goldmining that has resulted in locally high levels of environmental contamination from uranium and its decay products (radium-226 and radon-222) from the mine tailings. Populations living around mine tailings of the Witwatersrand goldfields may be exposed through various pathways, raising concern about potential health risks associated with haematological malignancies (HMs), for which evidence is inconclusive.Objectives. We designed a prospective case-series study of HMs at Chris Hani Baragwanath Academic Hospital (CHBAH), Johannesburg, the major public hospital in the area, to describe demographic and clinical characteristics, lifetime residential history and potential environmental uranium exposure pathways.Methods. All patients, male and female, aged ≥18 years and newly diagnosed with any form of leukaemia, lymphoma or myeloma at the CHBAH Haematology Unit in 2014 and 2015 were considered for inclusion in the study. Information on uranium exposure pathways and lifetime residential history was recorded from interviewer-administered questionnaires. These characteristics were described overall and according to subtypes of HM.Results. Of 556 patients with HMs diagnosed in 2014 and 2015 at CHBAH, 189 patients aged 18 - 90 years were interviewed, mainly with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) (37.6%), leukaemia (32.8%) and Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) (13.8%). HIV status was positive for 39.2% of the patients, mostly with NHL and HL. Potential environmental uranium exposure pathways were identified. Working on goldmines was reported by 12 patients (6.3%). Consumption of soil (geophagia) was a habit of 51 patients (27.0%), particularly during pregnancy. Drinking water was mainly piped water (76.6% in childhood and 97.9% in adulthood). Animal products and vegetables were most frequently obtained from stores (82.0% and 68.7%, respectively, in childhood and 96.3% and 83.6% in adulthood). Patients were referred to CHBAH by government clinic doctors (44.4%), referral hospitals (24.3%) and private doctors (20.1%). Most participants had been born and lived in Gauteng Province and Soweto (94.7% and 58.2%, respectively), and reported two lifetime places of residence on average and living at their current residence for ≥20 years (49.2%).Conclusions. We identified potential environmental uranium exposure pathways (occupational, lifestyle related and domestic) among patients with HMs that could have resulted in increased uranium exposure. HIV is common among patients with HMs. Together with the results from a previous retrospective case series of HMs at CHBAH (2004 - 2013), our findings suggest that further research on environmental uranium exposure in mining areas and HM risk in residents is warranted.