Public health research systems in the European union

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Strengthening health research is an important objective for international health organisations, but there has been less attention to support for health research in Europe. We describe the public-health (population and organisational level) research systems in the 27 European Union countries.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We developed a typology for describing health research structures based on funding streams and strategies. We drew data from internet sources and asked country informants to review these for consistency and completeness. The structures were described as organograms and narratives in country profiles for each of the 27 EU member states. National public-health research structures included public and independent funding organisations, 'mixed' institutions (which receive funds, and both use and allocate them) and provider institutions.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Most health research is funded through ministries of science or science councils (and sometimes foundations), while parliaments and regions may also contribute. National institutes of public health are usually funded by ministries of health. Many national research organisations both determine research programmes and undertake health research, but there is a move towards public-health sciences within the universities, and a transition from internal grants to competitive funding. Of 27 national research strategies, 17 referred to health and 11 to public health themes. Although all countries had strategies for public health itself, we found little coherence in public-health research programmes. The European Commission has country contact points for both EU research and health programmes, but they do not coordinate with national health-research programmes.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Public-health research is broadly distributed across programmes in EU countries. Better understanding of research structures, programmes and results would improve recognition for public health in Europe, and contribute to practice. EU ministries of health should give greater attention to national public-health research strategies and programmes, and the European Union and the World Health Organisation can provide coordination and support.</p

Major Hemorrhage Risk Associated with Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Real-world, observational studies have investigated the safety profile of Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOACs) on Major Hemorrhage (MH) used for stroke prevention in Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation (NVAF). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the comparative safety of DOACs versus other DOACs and versus Vitamin K Antagonists (VKAs) adhering to PRISMA guidelines. We defined MH according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis statement or as the composite outcome of intracranial, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, respiratory, cavitary and musculoskeletal bleeding in case of studies using International Statistical Classification of Diseases codes for patient selection. Methods: We systematically investigated two databases (Medline, Embase) until April of 2021, gathered observational studies and extracted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) on our outcome of interest. Additional subgroup analyses according to DOAC dosing, prior diagnosis of chronic kidney disease, prior diagnosis of stroke, history of previous use of VKA, the users’ age, the users’ gender and study population geographic region were conducted. All analyses were performed with a random-effects model. Results: From this search, 55 studies were included and 76 comparisons were performed. The MH risk associated with Rivaroxaban use was higher than the risk with Dabigatran use (HR: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.21–1.45, I2: 12.39%) but similar to VKA use (HR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.87–1.02, I2: 76.57%). The MH risk associated with Dabigatran use was lower than the risk with VKA use (HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.64–0.90, I2: 87.57%). The MH risk associated with Apixaban use was lower than the risk with Dabigatran use (HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.64–0.88, I2: 58.66%), with Rivaroxaban use (HR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.50–0.68, I2: 74.16%) and with VKA use (HR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.55–0.65, I2: 58.83%). Our aforementioned subgroup analyses revealed similar results. Conclusions: All in all, Apixaban was associated with a reduced MH risk compared to Dabigatran, Rivaroxaban and VKA. Dabigatran was associated with a reduced MH risk compared to both Rivaroxaban and VKA. © 2022 The Author(s). Published by IMR Press

Portopulmonary Hypertension: A Review of the Current Literature

Portopulmonary hypertension is defined as the development of pulmonary arterial hypertension in the setting of portal hypertension with or without liver cirrhosis. Portal hypertension-associated haemodynamic changes, including hyperdynamic state, portosystemic shunts and splanchnic vasodilation, induce significant alterations in pulmonary vascular bed and play a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of the disease. If left untreated, portopulmonary hypertension results in progressive right heart failure, with a poor prognosis. Although Doppler echocardiography is the best initial screening tool for symptomatic patients and liver transplantation candidates, right heart catheterisation remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of the disease. Severe portopulmonary hypertension exerts a prohibitive risk to liver transplantation by conferring an elevated perioperative mortality risk. It is important for haemodynamic parameters to correspond with non-severe portopulmonary hypertension before patients can proceed with the liver transplantation. Small uncontrolled studies and a recent randomised controlled trial have reported promising results with vasodilatory therapies in clinical and haemodynamic improvement of patients, allowing a proportion of patients to undergo liver transplantation. In this review, the epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnostic approach and management of portopulmonary hypertension are discussed. We also highlight fields of ongoing investigation pertinent to risk stratification and optimal patient selection to maximise long-term benefit from currently available treatments. © 2022 Australian and New Zealand Society of Cardiac and Thoracic Surgeons (ANZSCTS) and the Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand (CSANZ