The complexity of quantifying the impact of war on population health: a Syrian experience

Quantitative analysis was performed using MSF’s medical and humanitarian data to show the indirect, or less visible, impact of war on public health with a primary focus on child’s health in Northern Syria between 2013-2016. In conclusion, different ways should be identified to more systematically capitalise on quantitative and qualitative data. This way, population’s plight can be better advocated in complex emergencies such as Syria

Policies on return and reintegration of displaced healthcare workers towards rebuilding conflict-affected health systems: a review for The Lancet-AUB Commission on Syria.

BACKGROUND: War and armed conflicts severely disrupt all health system components, including the healthcare workforce. Although data is limited on the scale of health care worker (HCW) displacement in conflict zones, it is widely acknowledged that conflict conditions result in the displacement of a significant portion of qualified HCWs from their country of origin. While voluntary HCW return is integral to health system rebuilding in conflict-affected and post-conflict settings, there has been little exploration of the nature of national or international policies which encourage HCW return and reintegration to their home countries in the post-conflict period. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to identify policies and policy recommendations intended to facilitate the return of displaced HCWs to their home countries and acknowledge their contribution to rebuilding the post-conflict health system. We searched three bibliographic databases and a range of organisational and national health agency websites to identify peer-reviewed articles and grey literature published in English or Arabic between 1 January 1990 to 24 January 2021, and extracted relevant information. We classified policies and policy recommendations using an adapted version of the UNHCR 4Rs Framework. RESULTS: We identified nine peer-review articles and four grey literature reports that fit our inclusion criteria, all of which were published in English. These covered issues of repatriation (n = 3), reintegration (n = 2), health system rehabilitation and reconstruction (n = 2); six documents covered several of these themes. Information was available for nine conflict contexts: Afghanistan, Iraq, Kosovo, Lebanon, Namibia, Northern Uganda, South Sudan, Timor Leste, and Zimbabwe. Findings demonstrate that health system rebuilding and rehabilitation serve as precursors and reinforcers of the successful return, repatriation, and reintegration of displaced HCWs. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the significant numbers of HCWs displaced by conflict, this study identified few specific policies and limited information explicitly focused on the repatriation and reintegration of such workers to their home country in the post-conflict period. Additional research is needed to understand the particular barriers faced by conflict-displaced HCWs in returning to their home country. Conflict-affected and post-conflict states should develop policies and initiatives that address factors within and beyond the health sector to encourage displaced HCW return and provide sustainable reintegration solutions for those who return to post-conflict health systems

The multitarget fecal immunochemical test versus the fecal immunochemical test for programmatic colorectal cancer screening: a cross-sectional intervention study with paired design

BACKGROUND: Many screening programs for colorectal cancer (CRC) use the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) to triage individuals for colonoscopy. Although these programs reduce CRC incidence and CRC-related mortality, the detection of advanced precursor lesions (advanced adenomas and advanced serrated polyps) by FIT could be improved. As an alternative for FIT, the antibody-based multitargetFIT (mtFIT) has been proposed. The mtFIT measures three protein markers: hemoglobin, calprotectin, and serpin family F member 2. In a retrospective diagnostic accuracy study in a large colonoscopy-controlled series (n = 1284), mtFIT showed increased sensitivity for advanced neoplasia (AN), at equal specificity, compared to FIT (42.9% versus 37.3%; p = 0.025). This increase was mainly due to a higher sensitivity of mtFIT for advanced adenomas (37.8% versus 28.1% for FIT; p = 0.006). The present mtFIT study aims to prospectively validate these findings in the context of the Dutch national CRC screening program. METHOD: The mtFIT study is a cross-sectional intervention study with a paired design. Eligible subjects for the Dutch FIT-based national CRC screening program are invited to perform mtFIT in addition to FIT. Samples are collected at home, from the same bowel movement, and are shipped to a central laboratory by postal mail. If either one or both tests are positive, participants are referred for colonoscopy. Detailed colonoscopy and pathology data are centrally stored in a national screening database (ScreenIT; Topicus, Deventer, the Netherlands) that is managed by the screening organization, and will be retrieved for this study. We aim to determine the relative sensitivity for AN, comprising of CRC, advanced adenomas and advanced serrated polyps, of mtFIT compared to FIT at an equal positivity rate. Additionally, we will use the Adenoma and Serrated Pathway to Colorectal CAncer model to predict lifetime health effects and costs for programmatic mtFIT- versus FIT-based screening. The target sample size is 13,131 participants. DISCUSSION: The outcome of this study will inform on the comparative clinical utility of mtFIT versus FIT in the Dutch national CRC screening program and is an important step forward in the development of a new non-invasive stool test for CRC screening. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov ; NCT05314309, registered April 6th 2022, first inclusions March 25th 2022 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=NCT05314309&cntry=&state=&city=&dist =

The multitarget fecal immunochemical test versus the fecal immunochemical test for programmatic colorectal cancer screening: a cross-sectional intervention study with paired design

BACKGROUND: Many screening programs for colorectal cancer (CRC) use the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) to triage individuals for colonoscopy. Although these programs reduce CRC incidence and CRC-related mortality, the detection of advanced precursor lesions (advanced adenomas and advanced serrated polyps) by FIT could be improved. As an alternative for FIT, the antibody-based multitargetFIT (mtFIT) has been proposed. The mtFIT measures three protein markers: hemoglobin, calprotectin, and serpin family F member 2. In a retrospective diagnostic accuracy study in a large colonoscopy-controlled series (n = 1284), mtFIT showed increased sensitivity for advanced neoplasia (AN), at equal specificity, compared to FIT (42.9% versus 37.3%; p = 0.025). This increase was mainly due to a higher sensitivity of mtFIT for advanced adenomas (37.8% versus 28.1% for FIT; p = 0.006). The present mtFIT study aims to prospectively validate these findings in the context of the Dutch national CRC screening program. METHOD: The mtFIT study is a cross-sectional intervention study with a paired design. Eligible subjects for the Dutch FIT-based national CRC screening program are invited to perform mtFIT in addition to FIT. Samples are collected at home, from the same bowel movement, and are shipped to a central laboratory by postal mail. If either one or both tests are positive, participants are referred for colonoscopy. Detailed colonoscopy and pathology data are centrally stored in a national screening database (ScreenIT; Topicus, Deventer, the Netherlands) that is managed by the screening organization, and will be retrieved for this study. We aim to determine the relative sensitivity for AN, comprising of CRC, advanced adenomas and advanced serrated polyps, of mtFIT compared to FIT at an equal positivity rate. Additionally, we will use the Adenoma and Serrated Pathway to Colorectal CAncer model to predict lifetime health effects and costs for programmatic mtFIT- versus FIT-based screening. The target sample size is 13,131 participants. DISCUSSION: The outcome of this study will inform on the comparative clinical utility of mtFIT versus FIT in the Dutch national CRC screening program and is an important step forward in the development of a new non-invasive stool test for CRC screening. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov ; NCT05314309, registered April 6th 2022, first inclusions March 25th 2022 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=NCT05314309&cntry=&state=&city=&dist =