Podcast on Identifying and Understanding Barriers to Care in Underserved Populations With MS in the United States.

Multiple sclerosis (MS) can affect people from all racial and ethnic backgrounds, but, historically, the incidence of MS in the United States was thought to be highest in White individuals. More recent data suggest that the incidence of MS in Black or African American individuals is comparable to that in White individuals. In Hispanic or Latino individuals, incidence of MS is lower, but age of onset may be earlier compared with White individuals. Additionally, there are important differences in MS disease severity, disease progression, and mortality in Black or African American and Hispanic or Latino populations. Compared with their White counterparts, individuals from these underrepresented groups are more likely to be affected by MS in specific areas of the nervous system, such as accelerated loss of retinal and brain tissue in Black or African American individuals and optic neuritis in Hispanic individuals. Additionally, Black or African American individuals with MS tend to have an aggressive disease course, earlier disability, and higher risk of requiring ambulatory assistance. Although these differences may be attributed to genetic factors, systemic racism and biases and barriers to accessing care may perpetuate health disparities. Moreover, non-White communities remain broadly underrepresented in clinical trials; however, it is vital that these populations are appropriately represented so that any potential differences in drug efficacy or safety implications are detected. Thus, it is important to increase awareness of MS in these populations. In this podcast, the authors discuss characteristics of MS in Black or African American and Hispanic or Latino populations, identify barriers to care, and propose solutions to improve access to MS care in these populations. MP4 (358385 KB).

The effectiveness of national-level containment and closure policies across income levels during the COVID-19 pandemic: an analysis of 113 countries.

Despite heterogeneity in income levels, countries implemented similarly strict containment and closure policies to mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic. This research assesses the effectiveness of these containment and closure policies, which we defined as larger decreases in mobility and smaller COVID-19 case and death growth rates. Using daily data for 113 countries on mobility and cumulative COVID-19 case and death counts over the 130 days between February 15, 2020 and June 23, 2020, we examined changes in mobility, morbidity, and mortality growth rates across the World Bank's income group classifications. Containment policies correlated with the largest declines in mobility in higher income countries. High-income countries also achieved lower COVID-19 case and death growth rates than low-income countries. This study finds better epidemiological outcomes of containment and closure policies for higher income countries than lower income countries. These findings urge policymakers to consider contextual differences, including levels of economic activity and the structure of the economy, when crafting policies in response to public health emergencies.

Methods for estimating economic benefits of surgical interventions in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: Studies indicate that many types of surgical care are cost-effective compared with other health interventions in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, global health investments to support these interventions remain limited. This study undertakes a scoping review of research on the economic impact of surgical interventions in LMICs to determine the methodologies used in measuring economic benefits. DESIGN: The Arksey and O'Malley methodological framework for scoping reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews checklist were used to review the data systematically. Online databases were used to identify papers published between 2005 and 2020, from which we selected 19 publications that quantitatively examined the economic benefits of surgical interventions in LMICs. RESULTS: Majority of publications (79%) reported the use of disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) to assess economic impact. In comparison, 21% used other measures, such as the value of statistical life or cost-effectiveness ratios, or no measure at all. 31% were systematic or retrospective reviews of the literature on surgical procedures in LMICs, while 69% either directly assessed economic impact in a specific area or evaluated the need for surgical procedures in LMICs. All studies reviewed related to the economic impact of surgical procedures in LMICs, with most about paediatric surgical procedures or a specific surgical specialty. CONCLUSION: To make informed policy decisions regarding global health investments, the economic impact must be accurately measured. Researchers employ a range of techniques to quantify the economic benefit of surgeries in LMICs, which limits understanding of overall economic value. We conclude that the literature would benefit from a careful selection of methods, incorporating age and disability weights based on the Global Burden of Disease weights, and converting DALYs to dollars using the value of statistical life approach and the human capital approach, reporting both estimates.