RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: With enough advanced notice, dengue outbreaks can be mitigated. As a climate-sensitive disease, environmental conditions and past patterns of dengue can be used to make predictions about future outbreak risk. These predictions improve public health planning and decision-making to ultimately reduce the burden of disease. Past approaches to dengue forecasting have used seasonal climate forecasts, but the predictive ability of a system using different lead times in a year-round prediction system has been seldom explored. Moreover, the transition from theoretical to operational systems integrated with disease control activities is rare. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We introduce an operational seasonal dengue forecasting system for Vietnam where Earth observations, seasonal climate forecasts, and lagged dengue cases are used to drive a superensemble of probabilistic dengue models to predict dengue risk up to 6 months ahead. Bayesian spatiotemporal models were fit to 19 years (2002-2020) of dengue data at the province level across Vietnam. A superensemble of these models then makes probabilistic predictions of dengue incidence at various future time points aligned with key Vietnamese decision and planning deadlines. We demonstrate that the superensemble generates more accurate predictions of dengue incidence than the individual models it incorporates across a suite of time horizons and transmission settings. Using historical data, the superensemble made slightly more accurate predictions (continuous rank probability score [CRPS] = 66.8, 95% CI 60.6-148.0) than a baseline model which forecasts the same incidence rate every month (CRPS = 79.4, 95% CI 78.5-80.5) at lead times of 1 to 3 months, albeit with larger uncertainty. The outbreak detection capability of the superensemble was considerably larger (69%) than that of the baseline model (54.5%). Predictions were most accurate in southern Vietnam, an area that experiences semi-regular seasonal dengue transmission. The system also demonstrated added value across multiple areas compared to previous practice of not using a forecast. We use the system to make a prospective prediction for dengue incidence in Vietnam for the period May to October 2020. Prospective predictions made with the superensemble were slightly more accurate (CRPS = 110, 95% CI 102-575) than those made with the baseline model (CRPS = 125, 95% CI 120-168) but had larger uncertainty. Finally, we propose a framework for the evaluation of probabilistic predictions. Despite the demonstrated value of our forecasting system, the approach is limited by the consistency of the dengue case data, as well as the lack of publicly available, continuous, and long-term data sets on mosquito control efforts and serotype-specific case data. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that by combining detailed Earth observation data, seasonal climate forecasts, and state-of-the-art models, dengue outbreaks can be predicted across a broad range of settings, with enough lead time to meaningfully inform dengue control. While our system omits some important variables not currently available at a subnational scale, the majority of past outbreaks could be predicted up to 3 months ahead. Over the next 2 years, the system will be prospectively evaluated and, if successful, potentially extended to other areas and other climate-sensitive disease systems.
Asunto(s)
Dengue/epidemiología , Brotes de Enfermedades , Salud Pública/métodos , Dengue/virología , Predicción/métodos , Humanos , Incidencia , Modelos Estadísticos , Estaciones del Año , Vietnam/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite the evidence that many stroke survivors report longer term unmet needs, the provision of longer term care is limited. To address this, we are conducting a programme of research to develop an evidence-based and replicable longer term care strategy. The developed complex intervention (named New Start), which includes needs identification, exploration of social networks and components of problem solving and self-management, was designed to improve quality of life by addressing unmet needs and increasing participation. METHODS/DESIGN: A multicentre, cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial designed to inform the design of a possible future definitive cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) and explore the potential clinical and cost-effectiveness of New Start. Ten stroke services across the UK will be randomised on a 1:1 basis either to implement New Start or continue with usual care only. New Start will be delivered by trained facilitators and will be offered to all stroke survivors within the services allocated to the intervention arm. Stroke survivors will be eligible for the trial if they are 4-6 months post-stroke and residing in the community. Carers (if available) will also be invited to take part. Invitation to participate will be initiated by post and outcome measures will be collected via postal questionnaires at 3, 6 and 9 months after recruitment. Outcome data relating to perceived health and disability, wellbeing and quality of life as well as unmet needs will be collected. A 'study within a trial' (SWAT) is planned to determine the most acceptable format in which to provide the postal questionnaires. Details of health and social care service usage will also be collected to inform the economic evaluation. The feasibility of recruiting services and stroke survivors to the trial and of collecting postal outcomes will be assessed and the potential for effectiveness will be investigated. An embedded process evaluation (reported separately) will assess implementation fidelity and explore and clarify causal assumptions regarding implementation. DISCUSSION: This feasibility trial with embedded process evaluation will allow us to gather important and detailed data regarding methodological and implementation issues to inform the design of a possible future definitive cRCT of this complex intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN38920246 . Registered 22 June 2016.
Asunto(s)
Cuidadores/psicología , Cuidados a Largo Plazo/métodos , Autocuidado/métodos , Rehabilitación de Accidente Cerebrovascular/métodos , Accidente Cerebrovascular/terapia , Adaptación Psicológica , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Estudios de Factibilidad , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Humanos , Cuidados a Largo Plazo/economía , Salud Mental , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Ensayos Clínicos Pragmáticos como Asunto , Calidad de Vida , Autocuidado/economía , Accidente Cerebrovascular/diagnóstico , Accidente Cerebrovascular/fisiopatología , Accidente Cerebrovascular/psicología , Rehabilitación de Accidente Cerebrovascular/economía , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Reino UnidoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The proportion of the world's population aged over 60 years is increasing. Therefore, there is a need to examine different methods of healthcare provision for this population. Medical day hospitals provide multidisciplinary health services to older people in one location. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness of medical day hospitals for older people in preventing death, disability, institutionalisation and improving subjective health status. SEARCH METHODS: Our search included the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Register of Studies, CENTRAL (2013, Issue 7), MEDLINE via Ovid (1950-2013 ), EMBASE via Ovid (1947-2013) and CINAHL via EbscoHost (1980-2013). We also conducted cited reference searches, searched conference proceedings and trial registries, hand searched select journals, and contacted relevant authors and researchers to inquire about additional data. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing medical day hospitals with alternative care for older people (mean/median > 60 years of age). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data from included trials. We used standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration. Trials were sub-categorised as comprehensive care, domiciliary care or no comprehensive care. MAIN RESULTS: Sixteen trials (3689 participants) compared day hospitals with comprehensive care (five trials), domiciliary care (seven trials) or no comprehensive care (four trials). Overall there was low quality evidence from these trials for the following results.For the outcome of death, there was no strong evidence for or against day hospitals compared to other treatments overall (odds ratio (OR) 1.05; 95% CI 0.85 to 1.28; P = 0.66), or to comprehensive care (OR 1.26; 95% CI 0.87 to 1.82; P = 0.22), domiciliary care (OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.61 to 1.55; P = 0.89), or no comprehensive care (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.63 to 1.22; P = 0.43).For the outcome of death or deterioration in activities of daily living (ADL), there was no strong evidence for day hospital attendance compared to other treatments (OR 1.07; 95% CI 0.76 to 1.49; P = 0.70), or to comprehensive care (OR 1.18; 95% CI 0.63 to 2.18; P = 0.61), domiciliary care (OR 1.41; 95% CI 0.82 to 2.42; P = 0.21) or no comprehensive care (OR 0.76; 95% CI 0.56 to 1.05; P = 0.09).For the outcome of death or poor outcome (institutional care, dependency, deterioration in physical function), there was no strong evidence for day hospitals compared to other treatments (OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.74 to 1.15; P = 0.49), or compared to comprehensive care (OR 1.05; 95% CI 0.79 to 1.40; P = 0.74) or domiciliary care (OR 1.08; 95% CI 0.67 to 1.74; P = 0.75). However, compared with no comprehensive care there was a difference in favour of day hospitals (OR 0.72; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.99; P = 0.04).For the outcome of death or institutional care, there was no strong evidence for day hospitals compared to other treatments overall (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.63 to 1.14; P = 0.28), or to comprehensive care (OR 1.00; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.44; P = 0.99), domiciliary care (OR 1.05; 95% CI 0.57 to1.92; P = 0. 88) or no comprehensive care (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.40 to 1.00; P = 0.05).For the outcome of deterioration in ADL, there was no strong evidence that day hospital attendance had a different effect than other treatments overall (OR 1.11; 95% CI 0.68 to 1.80; P = 0.67) or compared with comprehensive care (OR 1.21; 0.58 to 2.52; P = 0.61), or domiciliary care (OR 1.59; 95% CI 0.87 to 2.90; P = 0.13). However, day hospital patients showed a reduced odds of deterioration compared with those receiving no comprehensive care (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.97; P = 0.04) and significant subgroup differences (P = 0.04).For the outcome of requiring institutional care, there was no strong evidence for day hospitals compared to other treatments (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.58 to 1.21; P = 0.35), or to comprehensive care (OR 0.91; 95% CI 0.70 to 1.19; P = 0.49), domiciliary care (OR 1.49; 95% CI 0.53 to 4.25; P = 0.45), or no comprehensive care (OR 0.58; 95% CI 0.28 to 1.20; P = 0.14). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is low quality evidence that medical day hospitals appear effective compared to no comprehensive care for the combined outcome of death or poor outcome, and for deterioration in ADL. There is no clear evidence for other outcomes, or an advantage over other medical care provision.
Asunto(s)
Centros de Día/normas , Geriatría , Servicios de Salud para Ancianos/estadística & datos numéricos , Actividades Cotidianas , Anciano , Centros de Día/estadística & datos numéricos , Investigación sobre Servicios de Salud , Servicios de Atención de Salud a Domicilio/normas , Humanos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Arsenic contamination of groundwater in Bangladesh is a widespread public health hazard. Water sources without high arsenic levels are scarce, affecting people's availability for work and other activities when they have to seek safe water to drink. While children are particularly susceptible to chronic arsenic exposure, limited information and heavy constraints on resources may preclude people in developing countries from taking protective actions. Since parents are primary decision-makers for children, a model of stochastic decision-making analytically linking parent health and child health is used to frame the valuation of avoiding arsenic exposure using an averting behavior model. The results show that safe drinking water programs do work and that people do take protective actions. The results can help guide public health mitigation policies, and examine whether factors such as child health and time required for remediation have an effect on mitigation measures.
Asunto(s)
Arsénico , Exposición a Riesgos Ambientales/prevención & control , Conductas Relacionadas con la Salud , Padres/psicología , Conducta de Reducción del Riesgo , Contaminantes Químicos del Agua , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Bangladesh , Niño , Protección a la Infancia , Agua Potable , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Modelos Teóricos , Población Rural , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: the worldwide population is ageing. One expected consequence of this is an increase in morbidity and an associated increased demand for long-term care. Physical rehabilitation is beneficial in older people, but relatively little is known about effects in residents of long-term care facilities. OBJECTIVE: to examine the effects of physical rehabilitation on activities of daily living (ADL) in elderly residents of long-term care facilities. METHODS: systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. We included studies that compared the effect of a physical rehabilitation intervention on independence in ADL with either no intervention or an alternative intervention in older people (over 60 years) living in long-term care facilities. We searched 19 databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar. Two researchers independently screened papers and extracted data. Outcomes of included studies were combined in a standardised mean difference random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: thirteen of 14 studies identified were included in the meta-analysis. Independence in ADL was improved by 0.24 standard units (95% CI: 0.11-0.38; P = 0.0005). This is equivalent to 1.3 points on the Barthel Index (0-20 scale). No significant differences in effect were found based on participant or intervention characteristics. Larger sample size and low attrition were associated with smaller estimates of effect. All studies were assessed to be at risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: physical rehabilitation may improve independence for elderly long-term care facility residents, but mean effects are small. It is unclear which interventions are most appropriate.
Asunto(s)
Actividades Cotidianas , Envejecimiento , Hogares para Ancianos , Cuidados a Largo Plazo/métodos , Casas de Salud , Modalidades de Fisioterapia , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Distribución de Chi-Cuadrado , Evaluación Geriátrica , Humanos , Persona de Mediana EdadRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The worldwide population is progressively ageing, with an expected increase in morbidity and demand for long-term care. Physical rehabilitation is beneficial in older people, but relatively little is known about effects on long-term care residents. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2009. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of rehabilitation interventions directed at maintaining, or improving, physical function for older people in long-term care through the review of randomised and cluster randomised controlled trials. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the trials registers of the following Cochrane entities: the Stroke Group (May 2012), the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group (April 2012), and the Rehabilitation and Related Therapies Field (April 2012). In addition, we searched 20 relevant electronic databases, including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, 2009, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1966 to December 2009), EMBASE (1980 to December 2009), CINAHL (1982 to December 2009), AMED (1985 to December 2009), and PsycINFO (1967 to December 2009). We also searched trials and research registers and conference proceedings; checked reference lists; and contacted authors, researchers, and other relevant Cochrane entities. We updated our searches of electronic databases in 2011 and listed relevant studies as awaiting assessment. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised studies comparing a rehabilitation intervention designed to maintain or improve physical function with either no intervention or an alternative intervention in older people (over 60 years) who have permanent long-term care residency. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. The primary outcome was function in activities of daily living. Secondary outcomes included exercise tolerance, strength, flexibility, balance, perceived health status, mood, cognitive status, fear of falling, and economic analyses. We investigated adverse effects, including death, morbidity, and other events. We synthesised estimates of the primary outcome with the mean difference; mortality data, with the risk ratio; and secondary outcomes, using vote-counting. MAIN RESULTS: We included 67 trials, involving 6300 participants. Fifty-one trials reported the primary outcome, a measure of activities of daily living. The estimated effects of physical rehabilitation at the end of the intervention were an improvement in Barthel Index (0 to 100) scores of six points (95% confidence interval (CI) 2 to 11, P = 0.008, seven studies), Functional Independence Measure (0 to 126) scores of five points (95% CI -2 to 12, P = 0.1, four studies), Rivermead Mobility Index (0 to 15) scores of 0.7 points (95% CI 0.04 to 1.3, P = 0.04, three studies), Timed Up and Go test of five seconds (95% CI -9 to 0, P = 0.05, seven studies), and walking speed of 0.03 m/s (95% CI -0.01 to 0.07, P = 0.1, nine studies). Synthesis of secondary outcomes suggested there is a beneficial effect on strength, flexibility, and balance, and possibly on mood, although the size of any such effect is unknown. There was insufficient evidence of the effect on other secondary outcomes. Based on 25 studies (3721 participants), rehabilitation does not increase risk of mortality in this population (risk ratio 0.95, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.13). However, it is possible bias has resulted in overestimation of the positive effects of physical rehabilitation. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Physical rehabilitation for long-term care residents may be effective, reducing disability with few adverse events, but effects appear quite small and may not be applicable to all residents. There is insufficient evidence to reach conclusions about improvement sustainability, cost-effectiveness, or which interventions are most appropriate. Future large-scale trials are justified.
Asunto(s)
Cuidados a Largo Plazo , Rehabilitación , Actividades Cotidianas , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Trastornos del Conocimiento/rehabilitación , Terapia por Ejercicio , Femenino , Hogares para Ancianos , Humanos , Masculino , Casas de Salud , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To review non-drug treatments for dementia; to provide a source of evidence for informal carers who want ideas about non-drug approaches for dementia, that they might try or that they could try to access. The systematic review addresses: what non-drug treatments work and what do they work for? What non-drug treatments might work and what for? What non-drug treatments do not work? METHODS: Literature searches of seven electronic databases (AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PSYCINFO, Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews and DARE) were carried out in November 2007 using the following search terms (or derivatives): dementia/Alzheimer's AND Review AND non-drug therapies and aimed at finding systematic reviews. RESULTS: Thirty-three reviews were identified; 25 were judged to be high or good quality. Studies within these systematic reviews were characterised by weak study designs with small sample numbers. Three interventions were found to be effective for use with particular symptoms of dementia: music or music therapy, hand massage or gentle touch and physical activity/exercise. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst informal carers can apply some of the interventions highlighted in the home setting at little or no cost to themselves or to health or social care services, others are likely to require training or instruction. Service providers and commissioners should explore current and future provision of more structured group activities for people with dementia; in particular the provision of group music therapy and group exercise activities that meet the needs of both the person with dementia and their carer.