Dataset Information

Health impact assessment of waste management facilities in three European countries.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Policies on waste disposal in Europe are heterogeneous and rapidly changing, with potential health implications that are largely unknown. We conducted a health impact assessment of landfilling and incineration in three European countries: Italy, Slovakia and England.

Methods

A total of 49 (Italy), 2 (Slovakia), and 11 (England) incinerators were operating in 2001 while for landfills the figures were 619, 121 and 232, respectively. The study population consisted of residents living within 3 km of an incinerator and 2 km of a landfill. Excess risk estimates from epidemiological studies were used, combined with air pollution dispersion modelling for particulate matter (PM10) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). For incinerators, we estimated attributable cancer incidence and years of life lost (YoLL), while for landfills we estimated attributable cases of congenital anomalies and low birth weight infants.

Results

About 1,000,000, 16,000, and 1,200,000 subjects lived close to incinerators in Italy, Slovakia and England, respectively. The additional contribution to NO2 levels within a 3 km radius was 0.23, 0.15, and 0.14 ?g/m3, respectively. Lower values were found for PM10. Assuming that the incinerators continue to operate until 2020, we are moderately confident that the annual number of cancer cases due to exposure in 2001-2020 will reach 11, 0, and 7 in 2020 and then decline to 0 in the three countries in 2050. We are moderately confident that by 2050, the attributable impact on the 2001 cohort of residents will be 3,621 (Italy), 37 (Slovakia) and 3,966 (England) YoLL. The total exposed population to landfills was 1,350,000, 329,000, and 1,425,000 subjects, respectively. We are moderately confident that the annual additional cases of congenital anomalies up to 2030 will be approximately 2, 2, and 3 whereas there will be 42, 13, and 59 additional low-birth weight newborns, respectively.

Conclusions

The current health impacts of landfilling and incineration can be characterized as moderate when compared to other sources of environmental pollution, e.g. traffic or industrial emissions, that have an impact on public health. There are several uncertainties and critical assumptions in the assessment model, but it provides insight into the relative health impact attributable to waste management.

SUBMITTER: Forastiere F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3129292 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Health impact assessment of waste management facilities in three European countries.

Forastiere Francesco F Badaloni Chiara C de Hoogh Kees K von Kraus Martin K MK Martuzzi Marco M Mitis Francesco F Palkovicova Lubica L Porta Daniela D Preiss Philipp P Ranzi Andrea A Perucci Carlo A CA Briggs David D

Environmental health : a global access science source 20110602

<h4>Background</h4>Policies on waste disposal in Europe are heterogeneous and rapidly changing, with potential health implications that are largely unknown. We conducted a health impact assessment of landfilling and incineration in three European countries: Italy, Slovakia and England.<h4>Methods</h4>A total of 49 (Italy), 2 (Slovakia), and 11 (England) incinerators were operating in 2001 while for landfills the figures were 619, 121 and 232, respectively. The study population consisted of resid ...[more]

PMID: 21635784

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHealthcare waste management is very important due to its hazardous nature that can cause risk to human health and the environment. In developing countries, healthcare waste has not received much attention and has been disposed of together with municipal waste. The aim of the study was to assess the healthcare waste management practices in Addis Ababa City Administration Public Health Facilities.MethodsAn institutional-based cross-sectional design was used for the study at Addis Ababa city 15 Public health centres and 3 hospitals. Data were collected using self-administered questionnaires distributed to 636 randomly selected healthcare waste handlers and managers. Observational check list also used. The data were entered into the EPI- INFO version TM 7 and exported to IBM SPSS 20 for analysis. Both descriptive and analytic statistics were employed.ResultsAmong the respondents, 358 (90.86%) from health centres and 96.38% (133) from hospitals indicated that their facilities had separate containers for hazardous and non-hazardous waste however, 61 (15.48%) from health centres and 29 (21.01%) from hospitals indicated that healthcare waste containers were not clearly marked or labelled. The study found that the main forms of on-site treatment of healthcare waste for health centres and hospitals before disposal were burning. Manager respondents from the health centres 65 (92.86%), 64 (91.43%) and from hospitals 31 (91.18%), 30 (88.24%) indicated that healthcare waste handlers were used protective clothing when handling waste and were provided with protective clothing when handling healthcare waste respectively.ConclusionIn this study healthcare waste management among healthcare waste handlers and healthcare facility managers were not getting full attention. Collection of healthcare waste were not done regularly, containers were not clearly marked and were not located in appropriate areas where they might be needed. Support healthcare waste handlers by training help to improve their knowledge, attitude and practice.

Project description:BackgroundAn alarming number of public health-care facilities in low-income and middle-income countries lack basic water, sanitation, hygiene (WASH), and waste management services. This study estimates the costs of achieving full coverage of basic WASH and waste services in existing public health facilities in the 46 UN designated least-developed countries (LDCs).MethodsIn this modelling study, in-need facilities were quantified by combining published counts of public facilities with estimated basic WASH and waste service coverage. Country-specific per-facility capital and recurrent costs to deliver basic services were collected via survey of country WASH experts and officials between Sept 24 and Dec 24, 2020. Baseline cost estimates were modelled and discounted by 5% per year. Key assumptions were adjusted to produce lower and upper estimates, including adjusting the discount rate to 8% and 3% per year, respectively.FindingsAn estimated US$6·5 billion to $9·6 billion from 2021 to 2030 is needed to achieve full coverage of basic WASH and waste services in public health facilities in LDCs. Capital costs are $2·9 billion to $4·8 billion and recurrent costs are $3·6 billion to $4·8 billion over this time period. A mean of $0·24-0·40 per capita in capital investment is needed each year, and annual operations and maintenance costs are expected to increase from $0·10 in 2021 to $0·39-0·60 in 2030. Waste management accounts for the greatest share of costs, requiring $3·7 billion (46·6% of the total) in the baseline estimates, followed by $1·8 billion (23·1%) for sanitation, $1·5 billion (19·5%) for water, and $845 million (10·7%) for hygiene. Needs are greatest for non-hospital facilities ($7·4 billion [94%] of $7·9 billion) and for facilities in rural areas ($5·3 billion [68%]).InterpretationInvestment will need to increase to reach full coverage of basic WASH and waste services in public health facilities. Financial needs are modest compared with current overall health and WASH spending, and better service coverage will yield substantial health benefits. To sustain services and prevent degradation and early replacement, countries will need to routinely budget for operations and maintenance of WASH and waste management assets.FundingWHO (including underlying grants from the governments of Japan, the Netherlands, and the UK), World Bank (including an underlying grant from the Global Water Security and Sanitation Partnership), and UNICEF.TranslationsFor the Arabic, French and Portuguese translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Project description:PurposeAchieving greater health and social care integration is a policy priority in many countries, but challenges remain. We focused on governance and accountability for integrated care and explored arrangements that shape more integrated delivery models or systems in Italy, the Netherlands and Scotland. We also examined how the COVID-19 pandemic affected existing governance arrangements.Design/methodology/approachA case study approach involving document review and semi-structured interviews with 35 stakeholders in 10 study sites between February 2021 and April 2022. We used the Transparency, Accountability, Participation, Integrity and Capability (TAPIC) framework to guide our analytical enquiry.FindingsStudy sites ranged from bottom-up voluntary agreements in the Netherlands to top-down mandated integration in Scotland. Interviews identified seven themes that were seen to have helped or hindered integration efforts locally. Participants described a disconnect between what national or regional governments aspire to achieve and their own efforts to implement this vision. This resulted in blurred, and sometimes contradictory, lines of accountability between the centre and local sites. Flexibility and time to allow for national policies to be adapted to local contexts, and engaged local leaders, were seen to be key to delivering the integration agenda. Health care, and in particular acute hospital care, was reported to dominate social care in terms of policies, resource allocation and national monitoring systems, thereby undermining better collaboration locally. The pandemic highlighted and exacerbated existing strengths and weaknesses but was not seen as a major disruptor to the overall vision for the health and social care system.Research limitationsWe included a relatively small number of interviews per study site, limiting our ability to explore complexities within sites.OriginalityThis study highlights that governance is relatively neglected as a focus of attention in this context but addressing governance challenges is key for successful collaboration.

Project description:BackgroundSnakebite has become better recognized as a significant cause of death and disability in Sub-Saharan Africa, but the health economic consequences to victims and health infrastructures serving them remain poorly understood. This information gap is important as it provides an evidence-base guiding national and international health policy decision making on the most cost-effective interventions to better manage snakebite. Here, we assessed hospital-based data to estimate the health economic burden of snakebite in three regions of Burkina Faso (Centre-Ouest, Hauts Bassins and Sud-Ouest).MethodologyPrimary data of snakebite victims admitted to regional and district health facilities (eg, number of admissions, mortality, hospital bed days occupied) was collected in three regions over 17 months in 2013/14. The health burden of snakebite was assessed using Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) calculations based upon hospitalisation, mortality and disability data from admitted patients amongst other inputs from secondary sources (eg, populations, life-expectancy and age-weighting constants). An activity-based costing approach to determine the direct cost of snake envenoming included unit costs of clinical staff wages, antivenom, supportive care and equipment extracted from context-relevant literature.FindingsThe 10,165 snakebite victims admitted to hospital occupied 28,164 hospital bed days over 17 months. The annual rate of hospitalisation and mortality of admitted snakebite victims was 173 and 1.39/100,000 population, respectively. The estimated annual (i) DALYs lost was 2,153 (0.52/1,000) and (ii) cost to hospitals was USD 506,413 (USD 49/hospitalisation) in these three regions of Burkina Faso. These costs appeared to be influenced by the number of patients receiving antivenom (10.90% in total) in each area (highest in Sud-Ouest) and the type of health facility.ConclusionThe economic burden of snake envenoming is primarily shouldered by the rural health centres closest to snakebite victims-facilities that are typically least well equipped or resourced to manage this burden. Our study highlights the need for more research in other regions/countries to demonstrate the burden of snakebite and the socioeconomic benefits of its management. This evidence can guide the most cost-effective intervention from government and development partners to meet the snakebite-management needs of rural communities and their health centres.

Dataset Information

Health impact assessment of waste management facilities in three European countries.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Health impact assessment of waste management facilities in three European countries.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets