Epidemiology and cost of herpes zoster and postherpetic neuralgia among patients treated in primary care centres in the valencian community of Spain

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Data on the epidemiology and costs related to herpes zoster (HZ) and postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) in Spain are scarce; therefore, studies are needed to evaluate the epidemiological and economic impact of HZ and its most common complication, PHN. The present study aimed to estimate the clinical and economic burden of HZ and PHN in Valencia (Spain).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We prospectively analyzed the burden of HZ and PHN and their attributable costs in patients from 25 general practices in the Autonomous Community of Valencia serving 36,030 persons aged > 14 years. All patients with a clinical diagnosis of HZ who attended these centers between December 1^st2006 and November 30^th2007 were asked to participate. Patients included were followed for 1 year.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 130 cases of HZ followed up, continued pain was experienced by 47.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 35.6-56.7%) at 1 month after rash onset, by 14.5% (95% CI = 7.8-1.2%) at 3 months, by 9.0% (95% CI = 3.7-14.3%) at 6 months, and by 5.9% (95% CI = 1.5-10.3%) at 12 months. The percentage of patients with PHN increased with age, from 21.4% (95% CI = 8.3-40) in patients < 50 years to 59.2% (95% CI = 44.4-74) in patients ≥ 70 years. The estimated total cost for the 130 HZ cases during the follow-up period was €49,160 ($67,349). Mean cost per patient was €378 (range 53-2,830) ($517, range 73-3,877).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This study shows that PHN is a relatively common complication of HZ and that both conditions combined give rise to a significant clinical and economic burden for patients and providers.</p

Gnotobiotic IL-10−/−; NF-κBEGFP Mice Develop Rapid and Severe Colitis Following Campylobacter jejuni Infection

Limited information is available on the molecular mechanisms associated with Campylobacter jejuni (C. jejuni) induced food-borne diarrheal illnesses. In this study, we investigated the function of TLR/NF-κB signaling in C. jejuni induced pathogenesis using gnotobiotic IL-10−/−; NF-κBEGFP mice. In vitro analysis showed that C. jejuni induced IκB phosphorylation, followed by enhanced NF-κB transcriptional activity and increased IL-6, MIP-2α and NOD2 mRNA accumulation in infected-mouse colonic epithelial cells CMT93. Importantly, these events were blocked by molecular delivery of an IκB inhibitor (Ad5IκBAA). NF-κB signalling was also important for C.jejuni-induced cytokine gene expression in bone marrow-derived dendritic cells. Importantly, C. jejuni associated IL-10−/−; NF-κBEGFP mice developed mild (day 5) and severe (day 14) ulcerating colonic inflammation and bloody diarrhea as assessed by colonoscopy and histological analysis. Macroscopic analysis showed elevated EGFP expression indicating NF-κB activation throughout the colon of C. jejuni associated IL-10−/−; NF-κBEGFP mice, while fluorescence microscopy revealed EGFP positive cells to be exclusively located in lamina propria mononuclear cells. Pharmacological NF-κB inhibition using Bay 11-7085 did not ameliorate C. jejuni induced colonic inflammation. Our findings indicate that C. jejuni induces rapid and severe intestinal inflammation in a susceptible host that correlates with enhanced NF-κB activity from lamina propria immune cells

End of life care in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review of the qualitative literature

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>End of life (EoL) care in sub-Saharan Africa still lacks the sound evidence-base needed for the development of effective, appropriate service provision. It is essential to make evidence from all types of research available alongside clinical and health service data, to ensure that EoL care is ethical and culturally appropriate. This article aims to synthesize qualitative research on EoL care in sub-Saharan Africa to inform policy, practice and further research. It seeks to identify areas of existing research; describe findings specifically relevant to the African context; and, identify areas lacking evidence.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Relevant literature was identified through eight electronic databases: AMED, British Nursing Index & Archive, CINAHL, EMBASE, IBSS, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and the Social Sciences Citation Index; and hand searches. Inclusion criteria were: published qualitative or mixed-method studies in sub-Saharan Africa, about EoL care. Study quality was assessed using a standard grading scale. Relevant data including findings and practice recommendations were extracted and compared in tabular format.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 407 articles initially identified, 51 were included in the qualitative synthesis. Nineteen came from South Africa and the majority (38) focused on HIV/AIDS. Nine dealt with multiple or unspecified conditions and four were about cancer. Study respondents included health professionals, informal carers, patients, community members and bereaved relatives. Informal carers were typically women, the elderly and children, providing total care in the home, and lacking support from professionals or the extended family. Twenty studies focused on home-based care, describing how programmes function in practice and what is needed to make them effective. Patients and carers were reported to prefer institutional care but this needs to be understood in context. Studies focusing on culture discussed good and bad death, culture-specific approaches to symptoms and illness, and the bereavement process.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The data support or complement the findings from quantitative research. The review prompts a reconsideration of the assumption that in Africa the extended family care for the sick, and that people prefer home-based care. The review identifies areas relevant for a research agenda on socio-cultural issues at the EoL in sub-Saharan Africa.</p

Past, present, and future of global health financing : a review of development assistance, government, out-of-pocket, and other private spending on health for 195 countries, 1995-2050

Background Comprehensive and comparable estimates of health spending in each country are a key input for health policy and planning, and are necessary to support the achievement of national and international health goals. Previous studies have tracked past and projected future health spending until 2040 and shown that, with economic development, countries tend to spend more on health per capita, with a decreasing share of spending from development assistance and out-of-pocket sources. We aimed to characterise the past, present, and predicted future of global health spending, with an emphasis on equity in spending across countries. Methods We estimated domestic health spending for 195 countries and territories from 1995 to 2016, split into three categories-government, out-of-pocket, and prepaid private health spending-and estimated development assistance for health (DAH) from 1990 to 2018. We estimated future scenarios of health spending using an ensemble of linear mixed-effects models with time series specifications to project domestic health spending from 2017 through 2050 and DAH from 2019 through 2050. Data were extracted from a broad set of sources tracking health spending and revenue, and were standardised and converted to inflation-adjusted 2018 US dollars. Incomplete or low-quality data were modelled and uncertainty was estimated, leading to a complete data series of total, government, prepaid private, and out-of-pocket health spending, and DAH. Estimates are reported in 2018 US dollars, 2018 purchasing-power parity-adjusted dollars, and as a percentage of gross domestic product. We used demographic decomposition methods to assess a set of factors associated with changes in government health spending between 1995 and 2016 and to examine evidence to support the theory of the health financing transition. We projected two alternative future scenarios based on higher government health spending to assess the potential ability of governments to generate more resources for health. Findings Between 1995 and 2016, health spending grew at a rate of 4.00% (95% uncertainty interval 3.89-4.12) annually, although it grew slower in per capita terms (2.72% [2.61-2.84]) and increased by less than $1 per capita over this period in 22 of 195 countries. The highest annual growth rates in per capita health spending were observed in upper-middle-income countries (5.55$ 8.0 trillion (7.8-8.1) in 2016 (comprising 8.6% [8.4-8.7] of the global economy and $10.3 trillion [10.1-10.6] in purchasing-power parity-adjusted dollars), with a per capita spending of US$ 5252 (5184-5319) in high-income countries, $491 (461-524) in upper-middle-income countries,$ 81 (74-89) in lower-middle-income countries, and $40 (38-43) in low-income countries. In 2016, 0.4$ 9.5 billion, 24.3% of total DAH), although spending on other infectious diseases (excluding tuberculosis and malaria) grew fastest from 2010 to 2018 (6.27% per year). The leading sources of DAH were the USA and private philanthropy (excluding corporate donations and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation). For the first time, we included estimates of China's contribution to DAH ($644.7 million in 2018). Globally, health spending is projected to increase to$ 15.0 trillion (14.0-16.0) by 2050 (reaching 9.4% [7.6-11.3] of the global economy and $ 21.3 trillion [19.8-23.1] in purchasing-power parity-adjusted dollars), but at a lower growth rate of 1.84% (1.68-2.02) annually, and with continuing disparities in spending between countries. In 2050, we estimate that 0.6% (0.6-0.7) of health spending will occur in currently low-income countries, despite these countries comprising an estimated 15.7% of the global population by 2050. The ratio between per capita health spending in high-income and low-income countries was 130.2 (122.9-136.9) in 2016 and is projected to remain at similar levels in 2050 (125.9 [113.7-138.1]). The decomposition analysis identified governments' increased prioritisation of the health sector and economic development as the strongest factors associated with increases in government health spending globally. Future government health spending scenarios suggest that, with greater prioritisation of the health sector and increased government spending, health spending per capita could more than double, with greater impacts in countries that currently have the lowest levels of government health spending. Interpretation Financing for global health has increased steadily over the past two decades and is projected to continue increasing in the future, although at a slower pace of growth and with persistent disparities in per-capita health spending between countries. Out-of-pocket spending is projected to remain substantial outside of high-income countries. Many low-income countries are expected to remain dependent on development assistance, although with greater government spending, larger investments in health are feasible. In the absence of sustained new investments in health, increasing efficiency in health spending is essential to meet global health targets.Peer reviewe

Past, present, and future of global health financing: a review of development assistance, government, out-of-pocket, and other private spending on health for 195 countries, 1995–2050

Background: Comprehensive and comparable estimates of health spending in each country are a key input for health policy and planning, and are necessary to support the achievement of national and international health goals. Previous studies have tracked past and projected future health spending until 2040 and shown that, with economic development, countries tend to spend more on health per capita, with a decreasing share of spending from development assistance and out-of-pocket sources. We aimed to characterise the past, present, and predicted future of global health spending, with an emphasis on equity in spending across countries. Methods: We estimated domestic health spending for 195 countries and territories from 1995 to 2016, split into three categories—government, out-of-pocket, and prepaid private health spending—and estimated development assistance for health (DAH) from 1990 to 2018. We estimated future scenarios of health spending using an ensemble of linear mixed-effects models with time series specifications to project domestic health spending from 2017 through 2050 and DAH from 2019 through 2050. Data were extracted from a broad set of sources tracking health spending and revenue, and were standardised and converted to inflation-adjusted 2018 US dollars. Incomplete or low-quality data were modelled and uncertainty was estimated, leading to a complete data series of total, government, prepaid private, and out-of-pocket health spending, and DAH. Estimates are reported in 2018 US dollars, 2018 purchasing-power parity-adjusted dollars, and as a percentage of gross domestic product. We used demographic decomposition methods to assess a set of factors associated with changes in government health spending between 1995 and 2016 and to examine evidence to support the theory of the health financing transition. We projected two alternative future scenarios based on higher government health spending to assess the potential ability of governments to generate more resources for health. Findings: Between 1995 and 2016, health spending grew at a rate of 4·00% (95% uncertainty interval 3·89–4·12) annually, although it grew slower in per capita terms (2·72% [2·61–2·84]) and increased by less than $1 per capita over this period in 22 of 195 countries. The highest annual growth rates in per capita health spending were observed in upper-middle-income countries (5·55 in lower-middle-income countries (3·71$8·0 trillion (7·8–8·1) in 2016 (comprising 8·6% [8·4–8·7] of the global economy and $10·3 trillion [10·1–10·6] in purchasing-power parity-adjusted dollars), with a per capita spending of US$5252 (5184–5319) in high-income countries, $491 (461–524) in upper-middle-income countries,$81 (74–89) in lower-middle-income countries, and $40 (38–43) in low-income countries. In 2016, 0·4 countries, despite these countries comprising 10·0 DAH targeted HIV/AIDS ($9·5 billion, 24·3% of total DAH), although spending on other infectious diseases (excluding tuberculosis and malaria) grew fastest from 2010 to 2018 (6·27% per year). The leading sources of DAH were the USA and private philanthropy (excluding corporate donations and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation). For the first time, we included estimates of China’s contribution to DAH ($644·7 million in 2018). Globally, health spending is projected to increase to$15·0 trillion (14·0–16·0) by 2050 (reaching 9·4% [7·6–11·3] of the global economy and $21·3 trillion [19·8–23·1] in purchasing-power parity-adjusted dollars), but at a lower growth rate of 1·84% (1·68–2·02) annually, and with continuing disparities in spending between countries. In 2050, we estimate that 0·6% (0·6–0·7) of health spending will occur in currently low-income countries, despite these countries comprising an estimated 15·7% of the global population by 2050. The ratio between per capita health spending in high-income and low-income countries was 130·2 (122·9–136·9) in 2016 and is projected to remain at similar levels in 2050 (125·9 [113·7–138·1]). The decomposition analysis identified governments’ increased prioritisation of the health sector and economic development as the strongest factors associated with increases in government health spending globally. Future government health spending scenarios suggest that, with greater prioritisation of the health sector and increased government spending, health spending per capita could more than double, with greater impacts in countries that currently have the lowest levels of government health spending Interpretation: Financing for global health has increased steadily over the past two decades and is projected to continue increasing in the future, although at a slower pace of growth and with persistent disparities in per-capita health spending between countries. Out-of-pocket spending is projected to remain substantial outside of high-income countries. Many low-income countries are expected to remain dependent on development assistance, although with greater government spending, larger investments in health are feasible. In the absence of sustained new investments in health, increasing efficiency in health spending is essential to meet global health targets. Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundatio

Health sector spending and spending on HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, and development assistance for health: progress towards Sustainable Development Goal 3

Background: Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 3 aims to “ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages”. While a substantial effort has been made to quantify progress towards SDG3, less research has focused on tracking spending towards this goal. We used spending estimates to measure progress in financing the priority areas of SDG3, examine the association between outcomes and financing, and identify where resource gains are most needed to achieve the SDG3 indicators for which data are available. Methods: We estimated domestic health spending, disaggregated by source (government, out-of-pocket, and prepaid private) from 1995 to 2017 for 195 countries and territories. For disease-specific health spending, we estimated spending for HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis for 135 low-income and middle-income countries, and malaria in 106 malaria-endemic countries, from 2000 to 2017. We also estimated development assistance for health (DAH) from 1990 to 2019, by source, disbursing development agency, recipient, and health focus area, including DAH for pandemic preparedness. Finally, we estimated future health spending for 195 countries and territories from 2018 until 2030. We report all spending estimates in inflation-adjusted 2019 US$, unless otherwise stated. Findings: Since the development and implementation of the SDGs in 2015, global health spending has increased, reaching$7·9 trillion (95% uncertainty interval 7·8–8·0) in 2017 and is expected to increase to $11·0 trillion (10·7–11·2) by 2030. In 2017, in low-income and middle-income countries spending on HIV/AIDS was$20·2 billion (17·0–25·0) and on tuberculosis it was $10·9 billion (10·3–11·8), and in malaria-endemic countries spending on malaria was$5·1 billion (4·9–5·4). Development assistance for health was $40·6 billion in 2019 and HIV/AIDS has been the health focus area to receive the highest contribution since 2004. In 2019,$374 million of DAH was provided for pandemic preparedness, less than 1% of DAH. Although spending has increased across HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria since 2015, spending has not increased in all countries, and outcomes in terms of prevalence, incidence, and per-capita spending have been mixed. The proportion of health spending from pooled sources is expected to increase from 81·6% (81·6–81·7) in 2015 to 83·1% (82·8–83·3) in 2030. Interpretation: Health spending on SDG3 priority areas has increased, but not in all countries, and progress towards meeting the SDG3 targets has been mixed and has varied by country and by target. The evidence on the scale-up of spending and improvements in health outcomes suggest a nuanced relationship, such that increases in spending do not always results in improvements in outcomes. Although countries will probably need more resources to achieve SDG3, other constraints in the broader health system such as inefficient allocation of resources across interventions and populations, weak governance systems, human resource shortages, and drug shortages, will also need to be addressed. Funding: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundatio

Toleration, Reasonableness, and Power

This chapter explores Rainer Forst’s justification-centric view of nondomination toleration. This view places an idea of equal respect and a corresponding requirement of reciprocal and general justification at the core of non-domination toleration. After reconstructing this view, this chapter addresses two issues. First, even if this idea of equal respect requires the limits of non-domination toleration to be drawn in a manner that is equally justifiable to all affected people, equal justifiability should not be understood in terms of Forst’s requirement of reciprocal and general acceptability. Second, for the equal justifiability of relevant constraints to ensure non-domination outcomes, discursive equality must be understood in substantive, purchase-sensitive terms. This means that a justification-centric view of non-domination toleration stands or falls with the participation value of what it regards as the standards of justification. This places reasonably contested matters of value at the heart of such views