Patient-reported impact of emergency laparotomy on employment and health status 1 year after surgery.

BACKGROUND: Whilst there has been significant improvement in mortality outcomes after emergency laparotomy, there is little information on longer term outcomes in the year after discharge. The main aim of the study was to assess the impact that an emergency laparotomy has on patients' and employment and health status 1 year after surgery. METHODS: This study was a questionnaire study conducted in a single centre district general hospital of patients who had undergone an emergency laparotomy between October 2015 and December 2016. Patients were included according to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit criteria. At screening, patients who were alive at 1 year and had the capacity to consent were approached between January and December 2017. Patients underwent a researcher-led telephone interview using a semi-structured questionnaire to assess the impact of emergency laparotomy on overall, general and physical health (Glasgow Benefit Inventory) as well as employment status. The symptoms that patients experienced and their impact were also recorded. RESULTS: Forty-two patients responded to and completed the questionnaire. Just over one-third of patients experienced a deterioration in their general or physical health and 21% of patients experienced a change in employment. Factors which significantly impacted on health status were stoma issues, postoperative morbidity and a change in employment (p < 0.05). The main symptoms which patients identified as being troublesome were altered bowel habit and stoma issues with a resultant social and psychological impact. CONCLUSIONS: One-third of patients experienced a deterioration in their psychosocial and physical health status as well as a change in employment during the first-year postsurgery. Larger research studies are required to define the impact of emergency laparotomy on patients in the longer term and more research is needed to improve perioperative rehabilitation in the postoperative period to ensure optimal functional gain after technically successful surgery.

A Systematic Review of Cognitive Functioning After Traumatic Brain Injury in Individuals Aged 10-30 Years.

Given the importance of the period of life from 10 to 30 years in terms of cognitive development and education, combined with the high incidence of traumatic brain injury (TBI) during this period, and limited consensus as to the pattern and degree of cognitive impairment post TBI during this period, we conducted a systematic review to investigate cognitive performance across a range of domains among individuals between the ages of 10 and 30 years who had sustained a TBI. We searched five databases and identified 799 unique records; 52 met our inclusion criteria. These studies reported cognitive function for intelligence, attention, memory, processing speed, and executive function. The majority of the studies reported significant effects, suggesting that TBI is associated with cognitive impairments in these domains. Nine of the studies used physiological tests (EEG and fMRI), the outcomes of which supported behaviorally demonstrated cognitive deficits. In the studies we reviewed, individuals aged 10-30 years who had experienced a TBI performed worse than healthy controls on cognitive function measures-specifically for attention, memory, processing speed, and executive function. In the studies that subjected the individuals with TBI to EEG and fMRI, atypical activation in associated brain regions was demonstrated while the individuals were undergoing cognitive tasks. However, caution should be taken when interpreting the overall results due to the high risk of bias across the majority of the studies. The broader implications of reduced cognitive performance after TBI across this age range are yet to be fully understood.

Common values in assessing health outcomes from disease and injury: disability weights measurement study for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010.

BACKGROUND: Measurement of the global burden of disease with disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) requires disability weights that quantify health losses for all non-fatal consequences of disease and injury. There has been extensive debate about a range of conceptual and methodological issues concerning the definition and measurement of these weights. Our primary objective was a comprehensive re-estimation of disability weights for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010 through a large-scale empirical investigation in which judgments about health losses associated with many causes of disease and injury were elicited from the general public in diverse communities through a new, standardised approach. METHODS: We surveyed respondents in two ways: household surveys of adults aged 18 years or older (face-to-face interviews in Bangladesh, Indonesia, Peru, and Tanzania; telephone interviews in the USA) between Oct 28, 2009, and June 23, 2010; and an open-access web-based survey between July 26, 2010, and May 16, 2011. The surveys used paired comparison questions, in which respondents considered two hypothetical individuals with different, randomly selected health states and indicated which person they regarded as healthier. The web survey added questions about population health equivalence, which compared the overall health benefits of different life-saving or disease-prevention programmes. We analysed paired comparison responses with probit regression analysis on all 220 unique states in the study. We used results from the population health equivalence responses to anchor the results from the paired comparisons on the disability weight scale from 0 (implying no loss of health) to 1 (implying a health loss equivalent to death). Additionally, we compared new disability weights with those used in WHO's most recent update of the Global Burden of Disease Study for 2004. FINDINGS: 13,902 individuals participated in household surveys and 16,328 in the web survey. Analysis of paired comparison responses indicated a high degree of consistency across surveys: correlations between individual survey results and results from analysis of the pooled dataset were 0·9 or higher in all surveys except in Bangladesh (r=0·75). Most of the 220 disability weights were located on the mild end of the severity scale, with 58 (26%) having weights below 0·05. Five (11%) states had weights below 0·01, such as mild anaemia, mild hearing or vision loss, and secondary infertility. The health states with the highest disability weights were acute schizophrenia (0·76) and severe multiple sclerosis (0·71). We identified a broad pattern of agreement between the old and new weights (r=0·70), particularly in the moderate-to-severe range. However, in the mild range below 0·2, many states had significantly lower weights in our study than previously. INTERPRETATION: This study represents the most extensive empirical effort as yet to measure disability weights. By contrast with the popular hypothesis that disability assessments vary widely across samples with different cultural environments, we have reported strong evidence of highly consistent results. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions, 1990-2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010.

BACKGROUND: Quantification of the disease burden caused by different risks informs prevention by providing an account of health loss different to that provided by a disease-by-disease analysis. No complete revision of global disease burden caused by risk factors has been done since a comparative risk assessment in 2000, and no previous analysis has assessed changes in burden attributable to risk factors over time. METHODS: We estimated deaths and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs; sum of years lived with disability [YLD] and years of life lost [YLL]) attributable to the independent effects of 67 risk factors and clusters of risk factors for 21 regions in 1990 and 2010. We estimated exposure distributions for each year, region, sex, and age group, and relative risks per unit of exposure by systematically reviewing and synthesising published and unpublished data. We used these estimates, together with estimates of cause-specific deaths and DALYs from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010, to calculate the burden attributable to each risk factor exposure compared with the theoretical-minimum-risk exposure. We incorporated uncertainty in disease burden, relative risks, and exposures into our estimates of attributable burden. FINDINGS: In 2010, the three leading risk factors for global disease burden were high blood pressure (7·0% [95% uncertainty interval 6·2-7·7] of global DALYs), tobacco smoking including second-hand smoke (6·3% [5·5-7·0]), and alcohol use (5·5% [5·0-5·9]). In 1990, the leading risks were childhood underweight (7·9% [6·8-9·4]), household air pollution from solid fuels (HAP; 7·0% [5·6-8·3]), and tobacco smoking including second-hand smoke (6·1% [5·4-6·8]). Dietary risk factors and physical inactivity collectively accounted for 10·0% (95% UI 9·2-10·8) of global DALYs in 2010, with the most prominent dietary risks being diets low in fruits and those high in sodium. Several risks that primarily affect childhood communicable diseases, including unimproved water and sanitation and childhood micronutrient deficiencies, fell in rank between 1990 and 2010, with unimproved water and sanitation accounting for 0·9% (0·4-1·6) of global DALYs in 2010. However, in most of sub-Saharan Africa childhood underweight, HAP, and non-exclusive and discontinued breastfeeding were the leading risks in 2010, while HAP was the leading risk in south Asia. The leading risk factor in Eastern Europe, most of Latin America, and southern sub-Saharan Africa in 2010 was alcohol use; in most of Asia, North Africa and Middle East, and central Europe it was high blood pressure. Despite declines, tobacco smoking including second-hand smoke remained the leading risk in high-income north America and western Europe. High body-mass index has increased globally and it is the leading risk in Australasia and southern Latin America, and also ranks high in other high-income regions, North Africa and Middle East, and Oceania. INTERPRETATION: Worldwide, the contribution of different risk factors to disease burden has changed substantially, with a shift away from risks for communicable diseases in children towards those for non-communicable diseases in adults. These changes are related to the ageing population, decreased mortality among children younger than 5 years, changes in cause-of-death composition, and changes in risk factor exposures. New evidence has led to changes in the magnitude of key risks including unimproved water and sanitation, vitamin A and zinc deficiencies, and ambient particulate matter pollution. The extent to which the epidemiological shift has occurred and what the leading risks currently are varies greatly across regions. In much of sub-Saharan Africa, the leading risks are still those associated with poverty and those that affect children. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.