DNA repair efficiency in young hypertensive: Is lifestyle a prooxidant factor?

Background: High prevalence of hypertension (HTN) is of major concern among the middle-aged population of Kerala. Understudied in the context of HTN is oxidative damage to DNA, which is caused by free radical assaults. The modern lifestyle associated with an unhealthy diet and lack of exercise plays a key role in oxidative stress induction. Aims and Objectives: The objective of this study was to assess the significance of oxidative stress and the effectiveness of DNA repair mechanisms in young hypertensives along with how it correlates with aspects of lifestyle. Materials and Methods: This prospective case–control study enrolled clinically proven hypertensive patients referred from the outpatient department of Hridayalaya, Institute of Preventive Cardiology, Thiruvananthapuram, to Genetika, a research center for Cytogenetic Studies in South Kerala. Hypertensive patients (n=180) within the age group of 18–39 were compared with matched healthy controls (n=140). Associated lifestyle factors were determined. Results: In comparison to controls, cases had noticeably higher mean levels of malondialdehyde (MDA) and mean break per cell (P<0.05). There was a difference that was statistically significant (P<0.05) between the patients and controls in terms of diet, exercise, physical activity, obesity, mental stress, alcohol, and tobacco use. On comparing MDA and mean break per cell values with lifestyle factors, a statistically significant difference was detected (P<0.05). Observed a significant positive correlation of break per cell value with MDA (P<0.05). Conclusion: The current study demonstrated increased DNA damage and decreased DNA repair efficiency in young hypertensive and was strongly associated with lifestyle factors. Appropriate measures such as regular BP checkups, regular exercises, and abstinence from alcohol and smoking are to be taken for the prevention and control of HTN

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

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

Estimating global injuries morbidity and mortality: methods and data used in the Global Burden of Disease 2017 study

BACKGROUND: While there is a long history of measuring death and disability from injuries, modern research methods must account for the wide spectrum of disability that can occur in an injury, and must provide estimates with sufficient demographic, geographical and temporal detail to be useful for policy makers. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 study used methods to provide highly detailed estimates of global injury burden that meet these criteria. METHODS: In this study, we report and discuss the methods used in GBD 2017 for injury morbidity and mortality burden estimation. In summary, these methods included estimating cause-specific mortality for every cause of injury, and then estimating incidence for every cause of injury. Non-fatal disability for each cause is then calculated based on the probabilities of suffering from different types of bodily injury experienced. RESULTS: GBD 2017 produced morbidity and mortality estimates for 38 causes of injury. Estimates were produced in terms of incidence, prevalence, years lived with disability, cause-specific mortality, years of life lost and disability-adjusted life-years for a 28-year period for 22 age groups, 195 countries and both sexes. CONCLUSIONS: GBD 2017 demonstrated a complex and sophisticated series of analytical steps using the largest known database of morbidity and mortality data on injuries. GBD 2017 results should be used to help inform injury prevention policy making and resource allocation. We also identify important avenues for improving injury burden estimation in the future

Measuring universal health coverage based on an index of effective coverage of health services in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

Background Achieving universal health coverage (UHC) involves all people receiving the health services they need, of high quality, without experiencing financial hardship. Making progress towards UHC is a policy priority for both countries and global institutions, as highlighted by the agenda of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and WHO's Thirteenth General Programme of Work (GPW13). Measuring effective coverage at the health-system level is important for understanding whether health services are aligned with countries' health profiles and are of sufficient quality to produce health gains for populations of all ages. Methods Based on the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019, we assessed UHC effective coverage for 204 countries and territories from 1990 to 2019. Drawing from a measurement framework developed through WHO's GPW13 consultation, we mapped 23 effective coverage indicators to a matrix representing health service types (eg, promotion, prevention, and treatment) and five population-age groups spanning from reproductive and newborn to older adults (≥65 years). Effective coverage indicators were based on intervention coverage or outcome-based measures such as mortality-to-incidence ratios to approximate access to quality care; outcome-based measures were transformed to values on a scale of 0–100 based on the 2·5th and 97·5th percentile of location-year values. We constructed the UHC effective coverage index by weighting each effective coverage indicator relative to its associated potential health gains, as measured by disability-adjusted life-years for each location-year and population-age group. For three tests of validity (content, known-groups, and convergent), UHC effective coverage index performance was generally better than that of other UHC service coverage indices from WHO (ie, the current metric for SDG indicator 3.8.1 on UHC service coverage), the World Bank, and GBD 2017. We quantified frontiers of UHC effective coverage performance on the basis of pooled health spending per capita, representing UHC effective coverage index levels achieved in 2019 relative to country-level government health spending, prepaid private expenditures, and development assistance for health. To assess current trajectories towards the GPW13 UHC billion target—1 billion more people benefiting from UHC by 2023—we estimated additional population equivalents with UHC effective coverage from 2018 to 2023. Findings Globally, performance on the UHC effective coverage index improved from 45·8 (95% uncertainty interval 44·2–47·5) in 1990 to 60·3 (58·7–61·9) in 2019, yet country-level UHC effective coverage in 2019 still spanned from 95 or higher in Japan and Iceland to lower than 25 in Somalia and the Central African Republic. Since 2010, sub-Saharan Africa showed accelerated gains on the UHC effective coverage index (at an average increase of 2·6% [1·9–3·3] per year up to 2019); by contrast, most other GBD super-regions had slowed rates of progress in 2010–2019 relative to 1990–2010. Many countries showed lagging performance on effective coverage indicators for non-communicable diseases relative to those for communicable diseases and maternal and child health, despite non-communicable diseases accounting for a greater proportion of potential health gains in 2019, suggesting that many health systems are not keeping pace with the rising non-communicable disease burden and associated population health needs. In 2019, the UHC effective coverage index was associated with pooled health spending per capita (r=0·79), although countries across the development spectrum had much lower UHC effective coverage than is potentially achievable relative to their health spending. Under maximum efficiency of translating health spending into UHC effective coverage performance, countries would need to reach $1398 pooled health spending per capita (US$ adjusted for purchasing power parity) in order to achieve 80 on the UHC effective coverage index. From 2018 to 2023, an estimated 388·9 million (358·6–421·3) more population equivalents would have UHC effective coverage, falling well short of the GPW13 target of 1 billion more people benefiting from UHC during this time. Current projections point to an estimated 3·1 billion (3·0–3·2) population equivalents still lacking UHC effective coverage in 2023, with nearly a third (968·1 million [903·5–1040·3]) residing in south Asia. Interpretation The present study demonstrates the utility of measuring effective coverage and its role in supporting improved health outcomes for all people—the ultimate goal of UHC and its achievement. Global ambitions to accelerate progress on UHC service coverage are increasingly unlikely unless concerted action on non-communicable diseases occurs and countries can better translate health spending into improved performance. Focusing on effective coverage and accounting for the world's evolving health needs lays the groundwork for better understanding how close—or how far—all populations are in benefiting from UHC. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

Not Available

Not AvailableNot AvailableNot Availabl

Not Available

Not AvailableNot AvailableNot Availabl

Not Available

Not AvailableNot AvailableNot Availabl

Not Available

Not AvailableNot AvailableNot Availabl