Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 23
Filter
1.
BMJ Open ; 13(5): e069355, 2023 05 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2322691

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Data linkage systems have proven to be a powerful tool in support of combating and managing the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the interoperability and the reuse of different data sources may pose a number of technical, administrative and data security challenges. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol aims to provide a case study for linking highly sensitive individual-level information. We describe the data linkages between health surveillance records and administrative data sources necessary to investigate social health inequalities and the long-term health impact of COVID-19 in Belgium. Data at the national institute for public health, Statistics Belgium and InterMutualistic Agency are used to develop a representative case-cohort study of 1.2 million randomly selected Belgians and 4.5 million Belgians with a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis (PCR or antigen test), of which 108 211 are COVID-19 hospitalised patients (PCR or antigen test). Yearly updates are scheduled over a period of 4 years. The data set covers inpandemic and postpandemic health information between July 2020 and January 2026, as well as sociodemographic characteristics, socioeconomic indicators, healthcare use and related costs. Two main research questions will be addressed. First, can we identify socioeconomic and sociodemographic risk factors in COVID-19 testing, infection, hospitalisations and mortality? Second, what is the medium-term and long-term health impact of COVID-19 infections and hospitalisations? More specific objectives are (2a) To compare healthcare expenditure during and after a COVID-19 infection or hospitalisation; (2b) To investigate long-term health complications or premature mortality after a COVID-19 infection or hospitalisation; and (2c) To validate the administrative COVID-19 reimbursement nomenclature. The analysis plan includes the calculation of absolute and relative risks using survival analysis methods. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study involves human participants and was approved by Ghent University hospital ethics committee: reference B.U.N. 1432020000371 and the Belgian Information Security Committee: reference Beraadslaging nr. 22/014 van 11 January 2022, available via https://www.ehealth.fgov.be/ehealthplatform/file/view/AX54CWc4Fbc33iE1rY5a?filename=22-014-n034-HELICON-project.pdf. Dissemination activities include peer-reviewed publications, a webinar series and a project website.The pseudonymised data are derived from administrative and health sources. Acquiring informed consent would require extra information on the subjects. The research team is prohibited from gaining additional knowledge on the study subjects by the Belgian Information Security Committee's interpretation of the Belgian privacy framework.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Belgium/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , SARS-CoV-2 , Pandemics , Cohort Studies
2.
Scand J Public Health ; : 14034948211024478, 2021 Jul 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2287125

ABSTRACT

Recent estimates have reiterated that non-fatal causes of disease, such as low back pain, headaches and depressive disorders, are amongst the leading causes of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). For these causes, the contribution of years lived with disability (YLD) - put simply, ill-health - is what drives DALYs, not mortality. Being able to monitor trends in YLD closely is particularly relevant for countries that sit high on the socio-demographic spectrum of development, as it contributes more than half of all DALYs. There is a paucity of data on how the population-level occurrence of disease is distributed according to severity, and as such, the majority of global and national efforts in monitoring YLD lack the ability to differentiate changes in severity across time and location. This raises uncertainties in interpreting these findings without triangulation with other relevant data sources. Our commentary aims to bring this issue to the forefront for users of burden of disease estimates, as its impact is often easily overlooked as part of the fundamental process of generating DALY estimates. Moreover, the wider health harms of the COVID-19 pandemic have underlined the likelihood of latent and delayed demand in accessing vital health and care services that will ultimately lead to exacerbated disease severity and health outcomes. This places increased importance on attempts to be able to differentiate by both the occurrence and severity of disease.

3.
PLoS One ; 18(1): e0280990, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2214823

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization declared a pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), on March 11, 2020. The standardized approach of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) allows for quantifying the combined impact of morbidity and mortality of diseases and injuries. The main objective of this study was to estimate the direct impact of COVID-19 in France in 2020, using DALYs to combine the population health impact of infection fatalities, acute symptomatic infections and their post-acute consequences, in 28 days (baseline) up to 140 days, following the initial infection. METHODS: National mortality, COVID-19 screening, and hospital admission data were used to calculate DALYs based on the European Burden of Disease Network consensus disease model. Scenario analyses were performed by varying the number of symptomatic cases and duration of symptoms up to a maximum of 140 days, defining COVID-19 deaths using the underlying, and associated, cause of death. RESULTS: In 2020, the estimated DALYs due to COVID-19 in France were 990 710 (1472 per 100 000), with 99% of burden due to mortality (982 531 years of life lost, YLL) and 1% due to morbidity (8179 years lived with disability, YLD), following the initial infection. The contribution of YLD reached 375%, assuming the duration of 140 days of post-acute consequences of COVID-19. Post-acute consequences contributed to 49% of the total morbidity burden. The contribution of YLD due to acute symptomatic infections among people younger than 70 years was higher (67%) than among people aged 70 years and above (33%). YLL among people aged 70 years and above, contributed to 74% of the total YLL. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 had a substantial impact on population health in France in 2020. The majority of population health loss was due to mortality. Men had higher population health loss due to COVID-19 than women. Post-acute consequences of COVID-19 had a large contribution to the YLD component of the disease burden, even when we assume the shortest duration of 28 days, long COVID burden is large. Further research is recommended to assess the impact of health inequalities associated with these estimates.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Disabled Persons , Male , Humans , Female , COVID-19/epidemiology , Disability-Adjusted Life Years , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome , SARS-CoV-2 , France/epidemiology
4.
BMJ Open ; 12(11): e063573, 2022 11 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2137753

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: There is growing evidence that the impact of COVID-19 crisis may be stronger for individuals with multimorbidity, frailty and lower socioeconomic status. Existing reviews focus on few, mainly short-term effects of COVID-19 illness and patients with single chronic disease. Information is also largely missing for population representative samples.Applying population-based approach, the systematic reviews will have two objectives: (1) to evaluate the aetiological roles of frailty, multimorbidity and socioeconomic status on SARS-CoV-2 infection probability, hospitalisation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation and COVID-19 related mortality among general population and (2) to investigate the prognostic roles of frailty, multimorbidity and socioeconomic characteristics on the risk of hospitalisation, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, COVID-19 mortality, functioning, quality of life, disability, mental health and work absence. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: For this ongoing work, four databases were searched: PubMed, Embase, WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease and PsycINFO, for the period between January 2020 and April 7 2021. Peer-reviewed published literature in English and all types of population-based studies will be considered. Studies using standard tools to assess multimorbidity such as disease count, comorbidity indices or disease combinations will be retained, as well as studies with standard scales and scores for frailty or measurement of a socioeconomic gradient. Initial search included 10 139 articles, 411 for full-text reading. Results will be summarised by risk factor, objective and outcome. The feasibility of meta-analysis will be determined by the findings and will aim to better understand uncertainties of the results. Quality of studies will be assessed using standardised scales. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study will be based on published evidence, and it is exempt from the ethical approval. This work is part of the Population Health Information Research Infrastructure (PHIRI) project. Dissemination of the results will imply conference presentation, submission for scientific publication and PHIRI project report. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021249444.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Frailty , Humans , Frailty/epidemiology , Multimorbidity , SARS-CoV-2 , Prognosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Quality of Life , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Socioeconomic Factors , Meta-Analysis as Topic
6.
BMC Public Health ; 22(1): 1699, 2022 09 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2038700

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Smoking is one of the leading causes of preventable mortality and morbidity worldwide, with the European Region having the highest prevalence of tobacco smoking among adults compared to other WHO regions. The Belgian Health Interview Survey (BHIS) provides a reliable source of national and regional estimates of smoking prevalence; however, currently there are no estimates at a smaller geographical resolution such as the municipality scale in Belgium. This hinders the estimation of the spatial distribution of smoking attributable mortality at small geographical scale (i.e., number of deaths that can be attributed to tobacco). The objective of this study was to obtain estimates of smoking prevalence in each Belgian municipality using BHIS and calculate smoking attributable mortality at municipality level. METHODS: Data of participants aged 15 + on smoking behavior, age, gender, educational level and municipality of residence were obtained from the BHIS 2018. A Bayesian hierarchical Besag-York-Mollie (BYM) model was used to model the logit transformation of the design-based Horvitz-Thompson direct prevalence estimates. Municipality-level variables obtained from Statbel, the Belgian statistical office, were used as auxiliary variables in the model. Model parameters were estimated using Integrated Nested Laplace Approximation (INLA). Deviance Information Criterion (DIC) and Conditional Predictive Ordinate (CPO) were computed to assess model fit. Population attributable fractions (PAF) were computed using the estimated prevalence of smoking in each of the 589 Belgian municipalities and relative risks obtained from published meta-analyses. Smoking attributable mortality was calculated by multiplying PAF with age-gender standardized and stratified number of deaths in each municipality. RESULTS: BHIS 2018 data included 7,829 respondents from 154 municipalities. Smoothed estimates for current smoking ranged between 11% [Credible Interval 3;23] and 27% [21;34] per municipality, and for former smoking between 4% [0;14] and 34% [21;47]. Estimates of smoking attributable mortality constituted between 10% [7;15] and 47% [34;59] of total number of deaths per municipality. CONCLUSIONS: Within-country variation in smoking and smoking attributable mortality was observed. Computed estimates should inform local public health prevention campaigns as well as contribute to explaining the regional differences in mortality.


Subject(s)
Smoking , Tobacco Smoking , Adult , Bayes Theorem , Belgium/epidemiology , Cities , Humans , Smoking/epidemiology
7.
Arch Public Health ; 80(1): 188, 2022 Aug 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1993386

ABSTRACT

Population-based cohorts allow providing answers to a wide range of policy-relevant research questions. In Belgium, existing cohort-like initiatives are limited by their focus on specific population groups or specific topics, or they lack a true longitudinal design. Since 2016, consultations and deliberative processes have been set up to explore the opportunities for a population-based cohort in Belgium. Through these processes, several recommendations emerged to pave the way forward - i.e., to facilitate the establishment of administrative linkages, increase digitalisation, secure long-term financial and organisational efforts, establish a consortium of the willing, and identify and tackle ethical and legal bottlenecks. This comment summarizes these recommendations, as these opportunities should be explored in depth to consolidate the existing collaborations between different stakeholders, and refers to current initiatives that can further facilitate the establishment of a Belgian population-based cohort and, more generally, administrative and health data linkage and reuse for research and policy-making.

8.
Front Public Health ; 10: 907012, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1963637

ABSTRACT

Objectives: Quantifying the combined impact of morbidity and mortality is a key enabler to assessing the impact of COVID-19 across countries and within countries relative to other diseases, regions, or demographics. Differences in methods, data sources, and definitions of mortality due to COVID-19 may hamper comparisons. We describe efforts to support countries in estimating the national-level burden of COVID-19 using disability-adjusted life years. Methods: The European Burden of Disease Network developed a consensus methodology, as well as a range of capacity-building activities to support burden of COVID-19 studies. These activities have supported 11 national studies so far, with study periods between January 2020 and December 2021. Results: National studies dealt with various data gaps and different assumptions were made to face knowledge gaps. Still, they delivered broadly comparable results that allow for interpretation of consistencies, as well as differences in the quantified direct health impact of the pandemic. Discussion: Harmonized efforts and methodologies have allowed for comparable estimates and communication of results. Future studies should evaluate the impact of interventions, and unravel the indirect health impact of the COVID-19 crisis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cost of Illness , Humans , Morbidity , Pandemics , Quality-Adjusted Life Years
9.
Int J Public Health ; 67: 1604699, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1903253

ABSTRACT

Objectives: Burden of Disease frameworks facilitate estimation of the health impact of diseases to be translated into a single measure, such as the Disability-Adjusted-Life-Year (DALY). Methods: DALYs were calculated as the sum of Years of Life Lost (YLL) and Years Lived with Disability (YLD) directly associated with COVID-19 in the Republic of Ireland (RoI) from 01 March 2020, to 28 February 2021. Life expectancy is based on the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study life tables for 2019. Results: There were 220,273 confirmed cases with a total of 4,500 deaths as a direct result of COVID-19. DALYs were estimated to be 51,622.8 (95% Uncertainty Intervals [UI] 50,721.7, 52,435.8). Overall, YLL contributed to 98.5% of the DALYs. Of total symptomatic cases, 6.5% required hospitalisation and of those hospitalised 10.8% required intensive care unit treatment. COVID-19 was likely to be the second highest cause of death over our study's duration. Conclusion: Estimating the burden of a disease at national level is useful for comparing its impact with other diseases in the population and across populations. This work sets out to standardise a COVID-19 BoD methodology framework for the RoI and comparable nations in the EU.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Disabled Persons , COVID-19/epidemiology , Disability-Adjusted Life Years , Humans , Ireland/epidemiology , Life Expectancy , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , SARS-CoV-2
10.
Frontiers in public health ; 10, 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1898117

ABSTRACT

Objectives Quantifying the combined impact of morbidity and mortality is a key enabler to assessing the impact of COVID-19 across countries and within countries relative to other diseases, regions, or demographics. Differences in methods, data sources, and definitions of mortality due to COVID-19 may hamper comparisons. We describe efforts to support countries in estimating the national-level burden of COVID-19 using disability-adjusted life years. Methods The European Burden of Disease Network developed a consensus methodology, as well as a range of capacity-building activities to support burden of COVID-19 studies. These activities have supported 11 national studies so far, with study periods between January 2020 and December 2021. Results National studies dealt with various data gaps and different assumptions were made to face knowledge gaps. Still, they delivered broadly comparable results that allow for interpretation of consistencies, as well as differences in the quantified direct health impact of the pandemic. Discussion Harmonized efforts and methodologies have allowed for comparable estimates and communication of results. Future studies should evaluate the impact of interventions, and unravel the indirect health impact of the COVID-19 crisis.

12.
Arch Public Health ; 80(1): 58, 2022 Feb 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1789138

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Belgium monitors the burden of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) and antimicrobial use in nursing homes (NHs) by participating in the European point prevalence surveys (PPSs) organised in long-term care facilities (HALT surveys). We present the main findings of the three national PPSs conducted in NHs participating in at least one of these surveys, and in a cohort that participated in all three consecutive surveys. METHODS: All NHs were invited to voluntarily participate and conduct the survey on one single day in May-September 2010 (HALT-1), in April-May 2013 (HALT-2) or in September-November 2016 (HALT-3). Data were collected at institutional, ward and resident level. A detailed questionnaire had to be completed for all eligible (i.e. living full time in the facility since at least 24 h, present at 8:00 am and willing to participate) residents receiving at least one systemic antimicrobial agent and/or presenting at least one active HAI on the PPS day. The onset of signs/symptoms had to occur more than 48 h after the resident was (re-)admitted to the NH. RESULTS: A total of 107, 87 and 158 NHs conducted the HALT-1, HALT-2 and HALT-3 survey, respectively. The median prevalence of residents with antimicrobial agent(s) increased from 4.3% (95% confidence interval (CI): 3.5-4.8%) in HALT-1 to 4.7% (95% CI: 3.5-6.5%) in HALT-2 and 5.0% (95% CI: 4.2-5.9%) in HALT-3. The median prevalence of residents with HAI(s) varied from 1.8% (95% CI: 1.4-2.7%) in HALT-1 to 3.2% (95% CI: 2.2-4.2%) in HALT-2 and 2.7% (95% CI: 2.1-3.4%) in HALT-3. Our post-hoc analysis on the cohort (n = 25 NHs) found similar trends. In all three surveys, respiratory tract infections were most frequently reported, followed by skin/wound infections in HALT-1 and urinary tract infections in HALT-2 and HALT-3. Antimicrobials were most commonly prescribed for the therapeutic treatment of an infection: 66.4% in HALT-1, 60.9% in HALT-2 and 64.1% in HALT-3. Uroprophylaxis accounted for 28.7%, 35.6% and 28.4% of all prescriptions, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: None withstanding the limitations peculiar to the study design, the PPSs enabled us to assess the occurrence of and to increase awareness for HAIs and rational antimicrobial use in NHs at both local and national level.

13.
Arch Public Health ; 80(1): 105, 2022 Apr 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1770577

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) combine the impact of morbidity and mortality and can enable comprehensive, and comparable, assessments of direct and indirect health harms due to COVID-19. Our aim was to estimate DALYs directly due to COVID-19 in Scotland, during 2020; and contextualise its population impact relative to other causes of disease and injury. METHODS: National deaths and daily case data were used. Deaths were based on underlying and contributory causes recorded on death certificates. We calculated DALYs based on the COVID-19 consensus model and methods outlined by the European Burden of Disease Network. DALYs were presented as a range, using a sensitivity analysis based on Years of Life Lost estimates using: cause-specific; and COVID-19 related deaths. All COVID-19 estimates were for 2020. RESULTS: In 2020, estimates of COVID-19 DALYs in Scotland ranged from 96,500 to 108,200. Direct COVID-19 DALYs were substantial enough to be framed as the second leading cause of disease and injury, with only ischaemic heart disease having a larger impact on population health. Mortality contributed 98% of total DALYs. CONCLUSIONS: The direct population health impact of COVID-19 has been very substantial. Despite unprecedented mitigation efforts, COVID-19 developed from a single identified case in early 2020 to a condition with an impact in Scotland second only to ischaemic heart disease. Periodic estimation of DALYs during 2021, and beyond, will provide indications of the impact of DALYs averted due to the national rollout of the vaccination programme and other continued mitigation efforts, although new variants may pose significant challenges.

15.
Euro Surveill ; 27(7)2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1703383

ABSTRACT

BackgroundCOVID-19 mortality, excess mortality, deaths per million population (DPM), infection fatality ratio (IFR) and case fatality ratio (CFR) are reported and compared for many countries globally. These measures may appear objective, however, they should be interpreted with caution.AimWe examined reported COVID-19-related mortality in Belgium from 9 March 2020 to 28 June 2020, placing it against the background of excess mortality and compared the DPM and IFR between countries and within subgroups.MethodsThe relation between COVID-19-related mortality and excess mortality was evaluated by comparing COVID-19 mortality and the difference between observed and weekly average predictions of all-cause mortality. DPM were evaluated using demographic data of the Belgian population. The number of infections was estimated by a stochastic compartmental model. The IFR was estimated using a delay distribution between infection and death.ResultsIn the study period, 9,621 COVID-19-related deaths were reported, which is close to the excess mortality estimated using weekly averages (8,985 deaths). This translates to 837 DPM and an IFR of 1.5% in the general population. Both DPM and IFR increase with age and are substantially larger in the nursing home population.DiscussionDuring the first pandemic wave, Belgium had no discrepancy between COVID-19-related mortality and excess mortality. In light of this close agreement, it is useful to consider the DPM and IFR, which are both age, sex, and nursing home population-dependent. Comparison of COVID-19 mortality between countries should rather be based on excess mortality than on COVID-19-related mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Belgium/epidemiology , Humans , Mortality , Nursing Homes , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
16.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 2454, 2022 02 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1684113

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 has affected all countries. Its containment represents a unique challenge for India due to a large population (> 1.38 billion) across a wide range of population densities. Assessment of the COVID-19 disease burden is required to put the disease impact into context and support future pandemic policy development. Here, we present the national-level burden of COVID-19 in India in 2020 that accounts for differences across urban and rural regions and across age groups. Input data were collected from official records or published literature. The proportion of excess COVID-19 deaths was estimated using the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, Washington data. Disability-adjusted life years (DALY) due to COVID-19 were estimated in the Indian population in 2020, comprised of years of life lost (YLL) and years lived with disability (YLD). YLL was estimated by multiplying the number of deaths due to COVID-19 by the residual standard life expectancy at the age of death due to the disease. YLD was calculated as a product of the number of incident cases of COVID-19, disease duration and disability weight. Scenario analyses were conducted to account for excess deaths not recorded in the official data and for reported COVID-19 deaths. The direct impact of COVID-19 in 2020 in India was responsible for 14,100,422 (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 14,030,129-14,213,231) DALYs, consisting of 99.2% (95% UI 98.47-99.64%) YLLs and 0.80% (95% UI 0.36-1.53) YLDs. DALYs were higher in urban (56%; 95% UI 56-57%) than rural areas (44%; 95% UI 43.4-43.6) and in men (64%) than women (36%). In absolute terms, the highest DALYs occurred in the 51-60-year-old age group (28%) but the highest DALYs per 100,000 persons were estimated for the 71-80 years old age group (5481; 95% UI 5464-5500 years). There were 4,815,908 (95% UI 4,760,908-4,924,307) DALYs after considering reported COVID-19 deaths only. The DALY estimations have direct and immediate implications not only for public policy in India, but also internationally given that India represents one sixth of the world's population.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Disability-Adjusted Life Years , Public Health/statistics & numerical data , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Child , Female , Humans , India/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , Public Health/methods , Rural Population/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Urban Population/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
17.
Euro Surveill ; 26(48)2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1613502

ABSTRACT

BackgroundCOVID-19-related mortality in Belgium has drawn attention for two reasons: its high level, and a good completeness in reporting of deaths. An ad hoc surveillance was established to register COVID-19 death numbers in hospitals, long-term care facilities (LTCF) and the community. Belgium adopted broad inclusion criteria for the COVID-19 death notifications, also including possible cases, resulting in a robust correlation between COVID-19 and all-cause mortality.AimTo document and assess the COVID-19 mortality surveillance in Belgium.MethodsWe described the content and data flows of the registration and we assessed the situation as of 21 June 2020, 103 days after the first death attributable to COVID-19 in Belgium. We calculated the participation rate, the notification delay, the percentage of error detected, and the results of additional investigations.ResultsThe participation rate was 100% for hospitals and 83% for nursing homes. Of all deaths, 85% were recorded within 2 calendar days: 11% within the same day, 41% after 1 day and 33% after 2 days, with a quicker notification in hospitals than in LTCF. Corrections of detected errors reduced the death toll by 5%.ConclusionBelgium implemented a rather complete surveillance of COVID-19 mortality, on account of a rapid investment of the hospitals and LTCF. LTCF could build on past experience of previous surveys and surveillance activities. The adoption of an extended definition of 'COVID-19-related deaths' in a context of limited testing capacity has provided timely information about the severity of the epidemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Epidemics , Belgium/epidemiology , Humans , Nursing Homes , SARS-CoV-2
18.
BMC Fam Pract ; 22(1): 233, 2021 11 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526602

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how patients with low socioeconomic status (SES) experience their chronic disease, and how it impacts health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Compared to their more affluent counterparts, worse outcomes have been reported. A better understanding of the domains of HRQoL that are relevant to these specific populations is therefore needed. We explored the experiences of living with a chronic disease in low SES persons. METHODS: A qualitative interview study was performed in Flanders, Belgium. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in chronically ill patients, selected through purposive sampling. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Analysis followed an inductive and iterative approach. RESULTS: Fifteen patients were interviewed. Six major themes were identified: a heavy bag to carry, loss of autonomous life, inner and outer loneliness, emotional imbalance, unmet need for support, and coping strategies. Patients experienced their illness as an additional problem on top of all other problems (i.e. financial/social problems, traumatic life events). In general, the disease burden and non-disease burden were mutually reinforcing, resulting in greater dependency, greater risk of social isolation, greater psychological distress, and greater risk of impaired HRQoL. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to provide detailed insight into the experiences of living with a chronic disease in low SES persons. A conceptual model is proposed that can be used in daily clinical practice to raise awareness among clinicians and health care providers that the patient's needs go beyond the disease itself. Future research is needed to validate and test the model.


Subject(s)
Adaptation, Psychological , Quality of Life , Chronic Disease , Humans , Qualitative Research , Social Class
19.
BMJ Open ; 11(11): e055630, 2021 11 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526508

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: unCoVer-Unravelling data for rapid evidence-based response to COVID-19-is a Horizon 2020-funded network of 29 partners from 18 countries capable of collecting and using real-world data (RWD) derived from the response and provision of care to patients with COVID-19 by health systems across Europe and elsewhere. unCoVer aims to exploit the full potential of this information to rapidly address clinical and epidemiological research questions arising from the evolving pandemic. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: From the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, partners are gathering RWD from electronic health records currently including information from over 22 000 hospitalised patients with COVID-19, and national surveillance and screening data, and registries with over 1 900 000 COVID-19 cases across Europe, with continuous updates. These heterogeneous datasets will be described, harmonised and integrated into a multi-user data repository operated through Opal-DataSHIELD, an interoperable open-source server application. Federated data analyses, without sharing or disclosing any individual-level data, will be performed with the objective to reveal patients' baseline characteristics, biomarkers, determinants of COVID-19 prognosis, safety and effectiveness of treatments, and potential strategies against COVID-19, as well as epidemiological patterns. These analyses will complement evidence from efficacy/safety clinical trials, where vulnerable, more complex/heterogeneous populations and those most at risk of severe COVID-19 are often excluded. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: After strict ethical considerations, databases will be available through a federated data analysis platform that allows processing of available COVID-19 RWD without disclosing identification information to analysts and limiting output to data aggregates. Dissemination of unCoVer's activities will be related to the access and use of dissimilar RWD, as well as the results generated by the pooled analyses. Dissemination will include training and educational activities, scientific publications and conference communications.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Europe , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
20.
BMC Public Health ; 21(1): 1827, 2021 10 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1463245

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) combine the impact of morbidity and mortality, allowing for comprehensive comparisons of the population. The aim was to estimate the DALYs due to Covid-19 in Malta (March 2020-21) and investigate its impact in relation to other causes of disease at a population level. METHODS: Mortality and weekly hospital admission data were used to calculate DALYs, based on the European Burden of Disease Network consensus Covid-19 model. Covid-19 infection duration of 14 days was considered. Sensitivity analyses for different morbidity scenarios, including post-acute consequences were presented. RESULTS: An estimated 70,421 people were infected (with and without symptoms) by Covid-19 in Malta (March 2020-1), out of which 1636 required hospitalisation and 331 deaths, contributing to 5478 DALYs. These DALYs positioned Covid-19 as the fourth leading cause of disease in Malta. Mortality contributed to 95% of DALYs, while post-acute consequences contributed to 60% of morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: Covid-19 over 1 year has impacted substantially the population health in Malta. Post-acute consequences are the leading morbidity factors that require urgent targeted action to ensure timely multidisciplinary care. It is recommended that DALY estimations in 2021 and beyond are calculated to assess the impact of vaccine roll-out and emergence of new variants.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Disabled Persons , Cost of Illness , Humans , Malta/epidemiology , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL