18 research outputs found
Patient attitudes toward using computers to improve health services delivery
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to examine the acceptability of point of care computerized prompts to improve health services delivery among a sample of primary care patients. METHODS: Primary data collection. Cross-sectional survey. Patients were surveyed after their visit with a primary care provider. Data were obtained from patients of ten community-based primary care practices in the spring of 2001. RESULTS: Almost all patients reported that they would support using a computer before each visit to prompt their doctor to: "do health screening tests" (92%), "counsel about health behaviors (like diet and exercise)" (92%) and "change treatments for health conditions" (86%). In multivariate testing, the only variable that was associated with acceptability of the point of care computerized prompts was patient's confidence in their ability to answer questions about their health using a computer (beta = 0.39, p = .001). Concerns about data security were expressed by 36.3% of subjects, but were not related to acceptability of the prompts. CONCLUSIONS: Support for using computers to generate point of care prompts to improve quality-oriented processes of care was high in our sample, but may be contingent on patients feeling familiar with their personal medical history
Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 354 diseases and injuries for 195 countries and territories, 1990-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017
Background:
The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2017 (GBD 2017) includes a comprehensive assessment of incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability (YLDs) for 354 causes in 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2017. Previous GBD studies have shown how the decline of mortality rates from 1990 to 2016 has led to an increase in life expectancy, an ageing global population, and an expansion of the non-fatal burden of disease and injury. These studies have also shown how a substantial portion of the world's population experiences non-fatal health loss with considerable heterogeneity among different causes, locations, ages, and sexes. Ongoing objectives of the GBD study include increasing the level of estimation detail, improving analytical strategies, and increasing the amount of high-quality data.
Methods:
We estimated incidence and prevalence for 354 diseases and injuries and 3484 sequelae. We used an updated and extensive body of literature studies, survey data, surveillance data, inpatient admission records, outpatient visit records, and health insurance claims, and additionally used results from cause of death models to inform estimates using a total of 68â781 data sources. Newly available clinical data from India, Iran, Japan, Jordan, Nepal, China, Brazil, Norway, and Italy were incorporated, as well as updated claims data from the USA and new claims data from Taiwan (province of China) and Singapore. We used DisMod-MR 2.1, a Bayesian meta-regression tool, as the main method of estimation, ensuring consistency between rates of incidence, prevalence, remission, and cause of death for each condition. YLDs were estimated as the product of a prevalence estimate and a disability weight for health states of each mutually exclusive sequela, adjusted for comorbidity. We updated the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary development indicator of income per capita, years of schooling, and total fertility rate. Additionally, we calculated differences between male and female YLDs to identify divergent trends across sexes. GBD 2017 complies with the Guidelines for Accurate and Transparent Health Estimates Reporting.
Findings:
Globally, for females, the causes with the greatest age-standardised prevalence were oral disorders, headache disorders, and haemoglobinopathies and haemolytic anaemias in both 1990 and 2017. For males, the causes with the greatest age-standardised prevalence were oral disorders, headache disorders, and tuberculosis including latent tuberculosis infection in both 1990 and 2017. In terms of YLDs, low back pain, headache disorders, and dietary iron deficiency were the leading Level 3 causes of YLD counts in 1990, whereas low back pain, headache disorders, and depressive disorders were the leading causes in 2017 for both sexes combined. All-cause age-standardised YLD rates decreased by 3·9% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 3·1â4·6) from 1990 to 2017; however, the all-age YLD rate increased by 7·2% (6·0â8·4) while the total sum of global YLDs increased from 562 million (421â723) to 853 million (642â1100). The increases for males and females were similar, with increases in all-age YLD rates of 7·9% (6·6â9·2) for males and 6·5% (5·4â7·7) for females. We found significant differences between males and females in terms of age-standardised prevalence estimates for multiple causes. The causes with the greatest relative differences between sexes in 2017 included substance use disorders (3018 cases [95% UI 2782â3252] per 100â000 in males vs s1400 [1279â1524] per 100â000 in females), transport injuries (3322 [3082â3583] vs 2336 [2154â2535]), and self-harm and interpersonal violence (3265 [2943â3630] vs 5643 [5057â6302]).
Interpretation:
Global all-cause age-standardised YLD rates have improved only slightly over a period spanning nearly three decades. However, the magnitude of the non-fatal disease burden has expanded globally, with increasing numbers of people who have a wide spectrum of conditions. A subset of conditions has remained globally pervasive since 1990, whereas other conditions have displayed more dynamic trends, with different ages, sexes, and geographies across the globe experiencing varying burdens and trends of health loss. This study emphasises how global improvements in premature mortality for select conditions have led to older populations with complex and potentially expensive diseases, yet also highlights global achievements in certain domains of disease and injury
Conversion of urine protein-creatinine ratio or urine dipstick to urine albumin-creatinine ratio for use in CKD screening and prognosis
Background: Although measuring albuminuria is the preferred method for defining and staging chronic kidney disease (CKD), total urine protein or dipstick protein is often measured instead.
Objective: To develop equations for converting urine proteinâcreatinine ratio (PCR) and dipstick protein to urine albuminâcreatinine ratio (ACR) and to test their diagnostic accuracy in
CKD screening and staging.
Design: Individual participantâbased meta-analysis.
Setting: 12 research and 21 clinical cohorts.
Participants: 919 383 adults with same-day measures of ACR and PCR or dipstick protein.
Measurements: Equations to convert urine PCR and dipstick protein to ACR were developed and tested for purposes of CKD screening (ACR â„30 mg/g) and staging (stage A2: ACR of 30 to
299 mg/g; stage A3: ACR â„300 mg/g).
Results: Median ACR was 14 mg/g (25th to 75th percentile of cohorts, 5 to 25 mg/g). The association between PCR and ACR was inconsistent for PCR values less than 50 mg/g. For higher
PCR values, the PCR conversion equations demonstrated moderate sensitivity (91%, 75%, and 87%) and specificity (87%, 89%, and 98%) for screening (ACR >30 mg/g) and classification into
stages A2 and A3, respectively. Urine dipstick categories of trace or greater, trace to +, and ++ for screening for ACR values greater than 30 mg/g and classification into stages A2 and A3,
respectively, had moderate sensitivity (62%, 36%, and 78%) and high specificity (88%, 88%, and 98%). For individual risk prediction, the estimated 2-year 4-variable kidney failure risk equation using predicted ACR from PCR had discrimination similar to that of using observed ACR.
Limitation: Diverse methods of ACR and PCR quantification were used; measurements were not always performed in the same urine sample.
Conclusion: Urine ACR is the preferred measure of albuminuria; however, if ACR is not available, predicted ACR from PCR or urine dipstick protein may help in CKD screening, staging, and
prognosis.
Primary Funding Source: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and National Kidney Foundation