Health First: An evidence-based alcohol strategy for the UK

Alcohol is taken for granted in the UK today. It is easy to get hold of, increasingly affordable, advertised everywhere and accepted by many as an integral part of daily life. Yet, despite this, the great majority of the population recognise the harm that alcohol causes. They believe that drinking damages health, drives anti social behaviour, harms children and families and creates huge costs for the NHS and the Police. They are right. Every year in the UK, there are thousands of deaths and over a million hospital admissions related to drinking. More than two in five (44%) violent crimes are committed under the influence of alcohol, as are 37% of domesti c violence incidents. One fifth of all violent crime occurs in or near pubs and clubs and 45% of adults avoid town centres at night because of drunken behaviour. The personal, social and economic cost of alcohol has been estimated to be up to £55bn for England and £7.5bn for Scotland. None of this should be taken for granted. The impact of drinking on public health and community safety is so great that radical steps are needed to change our relationship with alcohol. We need to imagine a society where low or no alcohol consumpti on is the norm, drunkenness is socially unacceptable and town centres are safe and welcoming places for everyone to use. Our vision is for a safer, healthier and happier world where the harm caused by alcohol is minimised. This vision is achievable. But only if we tackle the primary drivers of alcohol consumption. The evidence is clear: the most effective way to reduce the harm from alcohol is to reduce the affordability, availability and attractiveness of alcohol products. It is not enough to limit the damage once people are drunk, dependent, ill or dying. We need to intervene earlier in order to reduce consumption across the entire population. The tools are available. The ‘four Ps' of the marketing mix - price, product, promotion and place - are used by alcohol producers and retailers to increase their sales of alcohol. They can also be used by government to reduce alcohol sales, alcohol consumption and alcohol-related harm. Alcohol taxes are an effective public health measure as they raise prices and suppress demand. However, if they do not keep pace with both inflation and incomes, alcohol products will become more affordable over time. This has been the case in the UK. Deep discounting by retailers has also driven down the price of alcohol and encouraged heavy drinkers to maintain dangerous levels of consumption. These problems need to be tackled by a combinati on of more effective fiscal policy and controls on pricing and discounting. Alcohol products are an extraordinary anomaly. Unlike most food products, they are both remarkably harmful and excepti onally lightly regulated. As with other toxic products, the product label ought to communicate the content of the product and the risks of its consumpti on. Regulation should drive out products that appeal to young people while also incentivising the development and sale of lower strength products. The pervasive marketing of alcohol products in the UK is indefensible. Current restrictions are woefully inadequate: children and young people are regularly exposed to alcohol adverti sing in both old and new media. Only a complete ban on all alcohol advertising and sponsorship will make a lasting diff erence. Licensing practice in the UK is out of date. The focus on pubs and bars has allowed shops and supermarkets to become the dominant players in alcohol sales. Consequently, alcohol is now more available than it has ever been. This has driven pre-loading: getting drunk on cheap, shop-bought alcohol before heading out to late-opening night life. Licensing must focus on public health and seek to control the overall availability of alcohol as well as the effects of drunkenness. Beyond these populati on-level approaches, many more targeted measures are needed to reduce alcohol-related harm. Early interventi on by health and social care professionals is an important and underexploited opportunity to prevent problems developing. Stronger drink driving measures are also required. All these measures are needed. Together, they provide a template for an integrated and comprehensive strategy to tackle the harm from alcohol in the UK.Additional co-authors: Gerry McElwee, Dr Kieran Moriarty CBE, Dr Robin Purshouse, Dr Peter Rice, Alison Rogers, George Roycroft , Chit Selvarajah, Don Shenker, Eric Appleby, Dr Nick Sheron, and Colin Shevill

New metrics for the Lancet Standing Commission on Liver Disease in the UK

Health Polic

Effects of a high-dose 24-h infusion of tranexamic acid on death and thromboembolic events in patients with acute gastrointestinal bleeding (HALT-IT): an international randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Background: Tranexamic acid reduces surgical bleeding and reduces death due to bleeding in patients with trauma. Meta-analyses of small trials show that tranexamic acid might decrease deaths from gastrointestinal bleeding. We aimed to assess the effects of tranexamic acid in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding. Methods: We did an international, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled trial in 164 hospitals in 15 countries. Patients were enrolled if the responsible clinician was uncertain whether to use tranexamic acid, were aged above the minimum age considered an adult in their country (either aged 16 years and older or aged 18 years and older), and had significant (defined as at risk of bleeding to death) upper or lower gastrointestinal bleeding. Patients were randomly assigned by selection of a numbered treatment pack from a box containing eight packs that were identical apart from the pack number. Patients received either a loading dose of 1 g tranexamic acid, which was added to 100 mL infusion bag of 0·9% sodium chloride and infused by slow intravenous injection over 10 min, followed by a maintenance dose of 3 g tranexamic acid added to 1 L of any isotonic intravenous solution and infused at 125 mg/h for 24 h, or placebo (sodium chloride 0·9%). Patients, caregivers, and those assessing outcomes were masked to allocation. The primary outcome was death due to bleeding within 5 days of randomisation; analysis excluded patients who received neither dose of the allocated treatment and those for whom outcome data on death were unavailable. This trial was registered with Current Controlled Trials, ISRCTN11225767, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01658124. Findings: Between July 4, 2013, and June 21, 2019, we randomly allocated 12 009 patients to receive tranexamic acid (5994, 49·9%) or matching placebo (6015, 50·1%), of whom 11 952 (99·5%) received the first dose of the allocated treatment. Death due to bleeding within 5 days of randomisation occurred in 222 (4%) of 5956 patients in the tranexamic acid group and in 226 (4%) of 5981 patients in the placebo group (risk ratio [RR] 0·99, 95% CI 0·82–1·18). Arterial thromboembolic events (myocardial infarction or stroke) were similar in the tranexamic acid group and placebo group (42 [0·7%] of 5952 vs 46 [0·8%] of 5977; 0·92; 0·60 to 1·39). Venous thromboembolic events (deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism) were higher in tranexamic acid group than in the placebo group (48 [0·8%] of 5952 vs 26 [0·4%] of 5977; RR 1·85; 95% CI 1·15 to 2·98). Interpretation: We found that tranexamic acid did not reduce death from gastrointestinal bleeding. On the basis of our results, tranexamic acid should not be used for the treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding outside the context of a randomised trial

Mobile health tools for the management of chronic respiratory diseases

International audienceBackground: The market of mobile health (mHealth) technology is rapidly evolving,making new mobile technologies potentially available for healthcare systems. Patientempowerment through self‐monitoring of symptoms, shared decision making withthe physician, and easily accessible education are important features extending thereach of mHealth technology beyond traditional care.Methods: Two digital distribution platforms (Apple App Store and Google PlayStore) were searched for currently available mobile applications (apps) for patientswith chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs). A new index (score ranging from 0 to 10)was developed to assess the potential of apps as a tool to empower patientsthrough mobile technology (based on self‐monitoring, personalized feedback, andpatient education app features).Results: One hundred and twelve apps were retained for analysis and could beclassified in 5 categories: Asthma (n = 71), COPD (n = 15), Asthma and COPD(n = 15), Rhinitis and Asthma (n = 5), and Rhinosinusitis (n = 6). Eighty percentwere developed by medical technology companies compared to 18% by medicaldoctors and 2% by pharmaceutical companies. Two‐thirds of apps allow diseaseself‐monitoring, whereas over half of apps provide patient feedback throughgraphs. Sixty percent of apps contain easily accessible patient education material.Only three percent of apps reach a score of ≥7 on the newly designed patientempowerment index.Conclusions: A variety of apps are available for patients with CRDs of which onlyfew were developed by or jointly with medical doctors. The majority of these appsinclude self‐monitoring tools, but only few also provide personalized feedback,which is needed to adopt these apps into daily care

Addressing liver disease in the UK: a blueprint for attaining excellence in health care and reducing premature mortality from lifestyle issues of excess consumption of alcohol, obesity, and viral hepatitis.

Liver disease in the UK stands out as the one glaring exception to the vast improvements made during the past 30 years in health and life expectancy for chronic disorders such as stroke, heart disease, and many cancers. Mortality rates have increased 400% since 1970, and in people younger than 65 years have risen by almost fi ve-times. Liver disease constitutes the third commonest cause of premature death in the UK and the rate of increase of liver disease is substantially higher in the UK than other countries in western Europe. More than 1 million admissions to hospital per year are the result of alcohol-related disorders, and both the number of admissions and the increase in mortality closely parallel the rise in alcohol consumption in the UK during the past three decades. The new epidemic of obesity is equally preventable. Of the 25% of the population now categorised as obese, most will have non-alcoholic fatty liver disease many (up to 1 in 20 of the UK population) will have ongoing infl ammation and scarring that fi nally leads to cirrhosis. Of those patients with cirrhosis, 5-10% will get liver cancer. This increasing burden of liver disease is added to by chronic viral hepatitis; annual deaths from hepatitis C have almost quadrupled since 1996 and about 75% of people infected are estimated to be still unrecognised. The same applies to chronic hepatitis B infection, in which progression to cirrhosis and liver cancer also happens. The number of silently infected individuals in the UK is increasing every year as a result of immigration from countries with a high prevalence of hepatitis B and hepatitis C infections. Costs to the UK's National Health Service are equally staggering, with estimates of £3.5 billion per year for alcohol-related health problems and £5.5 billion per year for the consequences of obesity. Obesity costs are almost certainly an underestimate now that the disorder is recognised as an important factor in several common cancers, including breast cancer and colon cancer.1 Obesity is a factor in metabolic disorders-the basis of diabetes, hypertension, cardiac diseases, and strokes. Furthermore, the poorest and most susceptible in society have the highest incidence of liver disorders, making liver disease a major issue for health inequalities. Of particular concern is the 2013 National Confi dential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death (NCEPOD) report,2 which showed that the care of patients acutely sick with liver disease dying in hospital was judged to be good in less than half of patients; other unacceptable fi ndings were the inadequate facilities and lack of expertise of those caring for patients. Also, it is increasingly evident that defi ciencies exist in primary care, which has crucial opportunities for early diagnosis and prevention of progressive disease. The aim of this Commission is to provide the strongest evidence base through involvement of experts from a wide cross-section of disciplines, making fi rm recommendations to reduce the unacceptable premature mortality and dsease burden from avoidable causes and to improve the standard of care for patients with liver disease in hospital. From the substantial number of recommendations given in our Commission, we selected those that will have the greatest eff ect and that need urgent implementation. Although the recommendations are based mostly on data from England, they have wider application to the UK as a whole, and are in accord with the present strategy for health-care policy by the Scottish Health Boards, the Health Department of Wales, and the Department of Health and Social Services in Northern Ireland. Our ten key recommendations are based on the strong evidence base and are in line with reports in 2014 of several other enquiries, including from the 2014 All Party Parliamentary Group on Hepatology3 and the All Party Parliamentary Group on alochol misuse. Results showing the value of a minimum unit price policy in targeting heavy drinkers were published in The Lancet in May, 2014, and the European Observatory on Health Polcy, together with the Department of Health and NHS England, has drawn attention to four areas of premature mortality, including liver disease, in which the UK lags behind other European countries. Such stark contrasts with our European neighbours are unacceptable and in this Commission we give clear, evidence-based policy proposals for the UK Government to use in closing the gap in liver disease

Effects of a high-dose 24-h infusion of tranexamic acid on death and thromboembolic events in patients with acute gastrointestinal bleeding (HALT-IT): an international randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BackgroundTranexamic acid reduces surgical bleeding and reduces death due to bleeding in patients with trauma. Meta-analyses of small trials show that tranexamic acid might decrease deaths from gastrointestinal bleeding. We aimed to assess the effects of tranexamic acid in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding.MethodsWe did an international, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled trial in 164 hospitals in 15 countries. Patients were enrolled if the responsible clinician was uncertain whether to use tranexamic acid, were aged above the minimum age considered an adult in their country (either aged 16 years and older or aged 18 years and older), and had significant (defined as at risk of bleeding to death) upper or lower gastrointestinal bleeding. Patients were randomly assigned by selection of a numbered treatment pack from a box containing eight packs that were identical apart from the pack number. Patients received either a loading dose of 1 g tranexamic acid, which was added to 100 mL infusion bag of 0·9% sodium chloride and infused by slow intravenous injection over 10 min, followed by a maintenance dose of 3 g tranexamic acid added to 1 L of any isotonic intravenous solution and infused at 125 mg/h for 24 h, or placebo (sodium chloride 0·9%). Patients, caregivers, and those assessing outcomes were masked to allocation. The primary outcome was death due to bleeding within 5 days of randomisation; analysis excluded patients who received neither dose of the allocated treatment and those for whom outcome data on death were unavailable. This trial was registered with Current Controlled Trials, ISRCTN11225767, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01658124.FindingsBetween July 4, 2013, and June 21, 2019, we randomly allocated 12 009 patients to receive tranexamic acid (5994, 49·9%) or matching placebo (6015, 50·1%), of whom 11 952 (99·5%) received the first dose of the allocated treatment. Death due to bleeding within 5 days of randomisation occurred in 222 (4%) of 5956 patients in the tranexamic acid group and in 226 (4%) of 5981 patients in the placebo group (risk ratio [RR] 0·99, 95% CI 0·82–1·18). Arterial thromboembolic events (myocardial infarction or stroke) were similar in the tranexamic acid group and placebo group (42 [0·7%] of 5952 vs 46 [0·8%] of 5977; 0·92; 0·60 to 1·39). Venous thromboembolic events (deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism) were higher in tranexamic acid group than in the placebo group (48 [0·8%] of 5952 vs 26 [0·4%] of 5977; RR 1·85; 95% CI 1·15 to 2·98).InterpretationWe found that tranexamic acid did not reduce death from gastrointestinal bleeding. On the basis of our results, tranexamic acid should not be used for the treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding outside the context of a randomised trial.</div