Sri Lankan tsunami refugees: a cross sectional study of the relationships between housing conditions and self-reported health

BACKGROUND: On the 26th December 2004 the Asian tsunami devastated the Sri Lankan coastline. More than two years later, over 14,500 families were still living in transitional shelters. This study compares the health of the internally displaced people (IDP), living in transitional camps with those in permanent housing projects provided by government and non-government organisations in Sri Lanka. METHODS: This study was conducted in seven transitional camps and five permanent housing projects in the south west of Sri Lanka. Using an interviewer-led questionnaire, data on the IDPs' self-reported health and housing conditions were collected from 154 participants from transitional camps and 147 participants from permanent housing projects. Simple tabulation with non-parametric tests and logistic regression were used to identify and analyse relationships between housing conditions and the reported prevalence of specific symptoms. RESULTS: Analysis showed that living conditions were significantly worse in transitional camps than in permanent housing projects for all factors investigated, except 'having a leaking roof'. Transitional camp participants scored significantly lower on self-perceived overall health scores than those living in housing projects. After controlling for gender, age and marital status, living in a transitional camp compared to a housing project was found to be a significant risk factor for the following symptoms; coughs OR: 3.53 (CI: 2.11-5.89), stomach ache 4.82 (2.19-10.82), headache 5.20 (3.09-8.76), general aches and pains 6.44 (3.67-11.33) and feeling generally unwell 2.28 (2.51-7.29). Within transitional camp data, the only condition shown to be a significant risk factor for any symptom was household population density, which increased the risk of stomach aches 1.40 (1.09-1.79) and headaches 1.33 (1.01-1.77). CONCLUSION: Internally displaced people living in transitional camps are a vulnerable population and specific interventions need to be targeted at this population to address the health inequalities that they report to be experiencing. Further studies need to be conducted to establish which aspects of their housing environment predispose them to poorer health

The overlapping burden of the three leading causes of disability and death in sub-Saharan African children

Despite substantial declines since 2000, lower respiratory infections (LRIs), diarrhoeal diseases, and malaria remain among the leading causes of nonfatal and fatal disease burden for children under 5 years of age (under 5), primarily in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). The spatial burden of each of these diseases has been estimated subnationally across SSA, yet no prior analyses have examined the pattern of their combined burden. Here we synthesise subnational estimates of the burden of LRIs, diarrhoea, and malaria in children under-5 from 2000 to 2017 for 43 sub-Saharan countries. Some units faced a relatively equal burden from each of the three diseases, while others had one or two dominant sources of unit-level burden, with no consistent pattern geographically across the entire subcontinent. Using a subnational counterfactual analysis, we show that nearly 300 million DALYs could have been averted since 2000 by raising all units to their national average. Our findings are directly relevant for decision-makers in determining which and targeting where the most appropriate interventions are for increasing child survival. © 2022, The Author(s).Funding text 1: This work was primarily supported by grant OPP1132415 from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. ; Funding text 2: This study was funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The corresponding author had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication. The non-consortium authors have no competing interests . Competing interests for consortium authors is as follows: Robert Ancuceanu reports receiving consultancy or speaker feeds from UCB, Sandoz, Abbvie, Zentiva, Teva, Laropharm, CEGEDIM, Angelini, Biessen Pharma, Hofigal, AstraZeneca, and Stada. Jacek Jerzy Jozwiak reports personal fees from Amgen, ALAB Laboratories, Teva, Synexus, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Zentiva, all outside the submitted work. Kewal Krishan reports non-financial support from UGC Centre of Advanced Study, CAS II, Department of Anthropology, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India, outside the submitted work. Walter Mendoza is a Program Analyst in Population and Development at the United Nations Population Fund-UNFPA Country Office in Peru, which does not necessarily endorse or support these findings. Maarten J Postma reports grants and personal fees from MSD, GSK, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novavax, BMS, Seqirus, Astra Zeneca, Sanofi, IQVIA, grants from Bayer, BioMerieux, WHO, EU, FIND, Antilope, DIKTI, LPDP, Budi, personal fees from Novartis, Quintiles, Pharmerit, owning stock options in Health-Ecore and PAG Ltd, and being advisor to Asc Academics, all outside the submitted work. Jasviner A Singh reports personal fees from Crealta/Horizon, Medisys, Fidia, UBM LLC, Trio health, Medscape, WebMD, Clinical Care options, Clearview healthcare partners, Putnam associates, Focus forward, Navigant consulting, Spherix, Practice Point communications, the National Institutes of Health, the American College of Rheumatology, and Simply Speaking, owning stock options in Amarin, Viking, Moderna, Vaxart pharmaceuticals and Charlotte’s Web Holdings, being a member of FDA Arthritis Advisory Committee, the steering committee of OMERACT, an international organization that develops measures for clinical trials and receives arm’s length funding from 12 pharmaceutical companies, and the Veterans Affairs Rheumatology Field Advisory Committee, and acting as Editor and Director of the UAB Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group Satellite Center on Network Meta-analysis, all outside the submitted work. Era Upadhyay has a patent A system and method of reusable filters for anti-pollution mask pending, and a patent A system and method for electricity generation through crop stubble by using microbial fuel cells pending

Global, regional, and national burden of stroke and its risk factors, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

Background: Regularly updated data on stroke and its pathological types, including data on their incidence, prevalence, mortality, disability, risk factors, and epidemiological trends, are important for evidence-based stroke care planning and resource allocation. The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) aims to provide a standardised and comprehensive measurement of these metrics at global, regional, and national levels. Methods: We applied GBD 2019 analytical tools to calculate stroke incidence, prevalence, mortality, disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), and the population attributable fraction (PAF) of DALYs (with corresponding 95% uncertainty intervals [UIs]) associated with 19 risk factors, for 204 countries and territories from 1990 to 2019. These estimates were provided for ischaemic stroke, intracerebral haemorrhage, subarachnoid haemorrhage, and all strokes combined, and stratified by sex, age group, and World Bank country income level. Findings: In 2019, there were 12·2 million (95% UI 11·0–13·6) incident cases of stroke, 101 million (93·2–111) prevalent cases of stroke, 143 million (133–153) DALYs due to stroke, and 6·55 million (6·00–7·02) deaths from stroke. Globally, stroke remained the second-leading cause of death (11·6% [10·8–12·2] of total deaths) and the third-leading cause of death and disability combined (5·7% [5·1–6·2] of total DALYs) in 2019. From 1990 to 2019, the absolute number of incident strokes increased by 70·0% (67·0–73·0), prevalent strokes increased by 85·0% (83·0–88·0), deaths from stroke increased by 43·0% (31·0–55·0), and DALYs due to stroke increased by 32·0% (22·0–42·0). During the same period, age-standardised rates of stroke incidence decreased by 17·0% (15·0–18·0), mortality decreased by 36·0% (31·0–42·0), prevalence decreased by 6·0% (5·0–7·0), and DALYs decreased by 36·0% (31·0–42·0). However, among people younger than 70 years, prevalence rates increased by 22·0% (21·0–24·0) and incidence rates increased by 15·0% (12·0–18·0). In 2019, the age-standardised stroke-related mortality rate was 3·6 (3·5–3·8) times higher in the World Bank low-income group than in the World Bank high-income group, and the age-standardised stroke-related DALY rate was 3·7 (3·5–3·9) times higher in the low-income group than the high-income group. Ischaemic stroke constituted 62·4% of all incident strokes in 2019 (7·63 million [6·57–8·96]), while intracerebral haemorrhage constituted 27·9% (3·41 million [2·97–3·91]) and subarachnoid haemorrhage constituted 9·7% (1·18 million [1·01–1·39]). In 2019, the five leading risk factors for stroke were high systolic blood pressure (contributing to 79·6 million [67·7–90·8] DALYs or 55·5% [48·2–62·0] of total stroke DALYs), high body-mass index (34·9 million [22·3–48·6] DALYs or 24·3% [15·7–33·2]), high fasting plasma glucose (28·9 million [19·8–41·5] DALYs or 20·2% [13·8–29·1]), ambient particulate matter pollution (28·7 million [23·4–33·4] DALYs or 20·1% [16·6–23·0]), and smoking (25·3 million [22·6–28·2] DALYs or 17·6% [16·4–19·0]). Interpretation: The annual number of strokes and deaths due to stroke increased substantially from 1990 to 2019, despite substantial reductions in age-standardised rates, particularly among people older than 70 years. The highest age-standardised stroke-related mortality and DALY rates were in the World Bank low-income group. The fastest-growing risk factor for stroke between 1990 and 2019 was high body-mass index. Without urgent implementation of effective primary prevention strategies, the stroke burden will probably continue to grow across the world, particularly in low-income countries. Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

Pooled analysis of WHO Surgical Safety Checklist use and mortality after emergency laparotomy

Background The World Health Organization (WHO) Surgical Safety Checklist has fostered safe practice for 10 years, yet its place in emergency surgery has not been assessed on a global scale. The aim of this study was to evaluate reported checklist use in emergency settings and examine the relationship with perioperative mortality in patients who had emergency laparotomy. Methods In two multinational cohort studies, adults undergoing emergency laparotomy were compared with those having elective gastrointestinal surgery. Relationships between reported checklist use and mortality were determined using multivariable logistic regression and bootstrapped simulation. Results Of 12 296 patients included from 76 countries, 4843 underwent emergency laparotomy. After adjusting for patient and disease factors, checklist use before emergency laparotomy was more common in countries with a high Human Development Index (HDI) (2455 of 2741, 89.6 per cent) compared with that in countries with a middle (753 of 1242, 60.6 per cent; odds ratio (OR) 0.17, 95 per cent c.i. 0.14 to 0.21, P <0001) or low (363 of 860, 422 per cent; OR 008, 007 to 010, P <0.001) HDI. Checklist use was less common in elective surgery than for emergency laparotomy in high-HDI countries (risk difference -94 (95 per cent c.i. -11.9 to -6.9) per cent; P <0001), but the relationship was reversed in low-HDI countries (+121 (+7.0 to +173) per cent; P <0001). In multivariable models, checklist use was associated with a lower 30-day perioperative mortality (OR 0.60, 0.50 to 073; P <0.001). The greatest absolute benefit was seen for emergency surgery in low- and middle-HDI countries. Conclusion Checklist use in emergency laparotomy was associated with a significantly lower perioperative mortality rate. Checklist use in low-HDI countries was half that in high-HDI countries.Peer reviewe

Mapping inequalities in exclusive breastfeeding in low- and middle-income countries, 2000–2018

Exclusive breastfeeding (EBF)-giving infants only breast-milk for the first 6 months of life-is a component of optimal breastfeeding practices effective in preventing child morbidity and mortality. EBF practices are known to vary by population and comparable subnational estimates of prevalence and progress across low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are required for planning policy and interventions. Here we present a geospatial analysis of EBF prevalence estimates from 2000 to 2018 across 94 LMICs mapped to policy-relevant administrative units (for example, districts), quantify subnational inequalities and their changes over time, and estimate probabilities of meeting the World Health Organization's Global Nutrition Target (WHO GNT) of ≥70% EBF prevalence by 2030. While six LMICs are projected to meet the WHO GNT of ≥70% EBF prevalence at a national scale, only three are predicted to meet the target in all their district-level units by 2030.This work was primarily supported by grant no. OPP1132415 from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Co-authors used by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (E.G.P. and R.R.3) provided feedback on initial maps and drafts of this manuscript. L.G.A. has received support from Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior, Brasil (CAPES), Código de Financiamento 001 and Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) (grant nos. 404710/2018-2 and 310797/2019-5). O.O.Adetokunboh acknowledges the National Research Foundation, Department of Science and Innovation and South African Centre for Epidemiological Modelling and Analysis. M.Ausloos, A.Pana and C.H. are partially supported by a grant from the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research and Innovation, CNDS-UEFISCDI, project no. PN-III-P4-ID-PCCF-2016-0084. P.C.B. would like to acknowledge the support of F. Alam and A. Hussain. T.W.B. was supported by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation through the Alexander von Humboldt Professor award, funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research. K.Deribe is supported by the Wellcome Trust (grant no. 201900/Z/16/Z) as part of his international intermediate fellowship. C.H. and A.Pana are partially supported by a grant of the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research and Innovation, CNDS-UEFISCDI, project no. PN-III-P2-2.1-SOL-2020-2-0351. B.Hwang is partially supported by China Medical University (CMU109-MF-63), Taichung, Taiwan. M.Khan acknowledges Jatiya Kabi Kazi Nazrul Islam University for their support. A.M.K. acknowledges the other collaborators and the corresponding author. Y.K. was supported by the Research Management Centre, Xiamen University Malaysia (grant no. XMUMRF/2020-C6/ITM/0004). K.Krishan is supported by a DST PURSE grant and UGC Centre of Advanced Study (CAS II) awarded to the Department of Anthropology, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India. M.Kumar would like to acknowledge FIC/NIH K43 TW010716-03. I.L. is a member of the Sistema Nacional de Investigación (SNI), which is supported by the Secretaría Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (SENACYT), Panamá. M.L. was supported by China Medical University, Taiwan (CMU109-N-22 and CMU109-MF-118). W.M. is currently a programme analyst in Population and Development at the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) Country Office in Peru, which does not necessarily endorses this study. D.E.N. acknowledges Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council. G.C.P. is supported by an NHMRC research fellowship. P.Rathi acknowledges support from Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India. Ramu Rawat acknowledges the support of the GBD Secretariat for supporting the reviewing and collaboration of this paper. B.R. acknowledges support from Manipal College of Health Professions, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal. A.Ribeiro was supported by National Funds through FCT, under the programme of ‘Stimulus of Scientific Employment—Individual Support’ within the contract no. info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/FCT/CEEC IND 2018/CEECIND/02386/2018/CP1538/CT0001/PT. S.Sajadi acknowledges colleagues at Global Burden of Diseases and Local Burden of Disease. A.M.S. acknowledges the support from the Egyptian Fulbright Mission Program. F.S. was supported by the Shenzhen Science and Technology Program (grant no. KQTD20190929172835662). A.Sheikh is supported by Health Data Research UK. B.K.S. acknowledges Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal for all the academic support. B.U. acknowledges support from Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal. C.S.W. is supported by the South African Medical Research Council. Y.Z. was supported by Science and Technology Research Project of Hubei Provincial Department of Education (grant no. Q20201104) and Outstanding Young and Middle-aged Technology Innovation Team Project of Hubei Provincial Department of Education (grant no. T2020003). The funders of the study had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript. The corresponding author had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication. All maps presented in this study are generated by the authors and no permissions are required to publish them

Mapping geographical inequalities in access to drinking water and sanitation facilities in low-income and middle-income countries, 2000-17

Background Universal access to safe drinking water and sanitation facilities is an essential human right, recognised in the Sustainable Development Goals as crucial for preventing disease and improving human wellbeing. Comprehensive, high-resolution estimates are important to inform progress towards achieving this goal. We aimed to produce high-resolution geospatial estimates of access to drinking water and sanitation facilities. Methods We used a Bayesian geostatistical model and data from 600 sources across more than 88 low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) to estimate access to drinking water and sanitation facilities on continuous continent-wide surfaces from 2000 to 2017, and aggregated results to policy-relevant administrative units. We estimated mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive subcategories of facilities for drinking water (piped water on or off premises, other improved facilities, unimproved, and surface water) and sanitation facilities (septic or sewer sanitation, other improved, unimproved, and open defecation) with use of ordinal regression. We also estimated the number of diarrhoeal deaths in children younger than 5 years attributed to unsafe facilities and estimated deaths that were averted by increased access to safe facilities in 2017, and analysed geographical inequality in access within LMICs. Findings Across LMICs, access to both piped water and improved water overall increased between 2000 and 2017, with progress varying spatially. For piped water, the safest water facility type, access increased from 40.0% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 39.4-40.7) to 50.3% (50.0-50.5), but was lowest in sub-Saharan Africa, where access to piped water was mostly concentrated in urban centres. Access to both sewer or septic sanitation and improved sanitation overall also increased across all LMICs during the study period. For sewer or septic sanitation, access was 46.3% (95% UI 46.1-46.5) in 2017, compared with 28.7% (28.5-29.0) in 2000. Although some units improved access to the safest drinking water or sanitation facilities since 2000, a large absolute number of people continued to not have access in several units with high access to such facilities (>80%) in 2017. More than 253 000 people did not have access to sewer or septic sanitation facilities in the city of Harare, Zimbabwe, despite 88.6% (95% UI 87.2-89.7) access overall. Many units were able to transition from the least safe facilities in 2000 to safe facilities by 2017; for units in which populations primarily practised open defecation in 2000, 686 (95% UI 664-711) of the 1830 (1797-1863) units transitioned to the use of improved sanitation. Geographical disparities in access to improved water across units decreased in 76.1% (95% UI 71.6-80.7) of countries from 2000 to 2017, and in 53.9% (50.6-59.6) of countries for access to improved sanitation, but remained evident subnationally in most countries in 2017. Interpretation Our estimates, combined with geospatial trends in diarrhoeal burden, identify where efforts to increase access to safe drinking water and sanitation facilities are most needed. By highlighting areas with successful approaches or in need of targeted interventions, our estimates can enable precision public health to effectively progress towards universal access to safe water and sanitation. Copyright (C) 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.Peer reviewe