Dataset Information

Anisakis sensitization in different population groups and public health impact: A systematic review.

ABSTRACT: Anisakis simplex spp. sensitization rates have increased worldwide, with a significant impact on health-care systems. To date, no clear-cut diagnostic criteria and laboratory algorithm have been established, so anisakiasis still represents an under-reported health problem whose clinical manifestations, when present, mimic the much more common allergic and digestive disorders. Aim of the study was to systematically review the available literature on the prevalence of sensitization against Anisakis in the general population and in specific population groups, taking into account the impact of the different available diagnostic techniques on the epidemiological data. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, relevant papers reporting Anisakis sensitization epidemiological data were found covering a period ranging from 1996 to February 2017. Overall, 41 studies comprising 31,701 participants from eleven countries were included in the qualitative synthesis. General asymptomatic population resulted sensitized to Anisakis in 0.4 to 27.4% of cases detected by means of indirect ELISA or ImmunoCAP specific IgE detection, and between 6.6% and 19.6% of the samples by Skin prick test (SPT). Occupationally exposed workers (fishermen, fishmongers and workers of fish-processing industries) documented specific IgE between 11.7% and 50% of cases, whereas SPT positivity ranged between 8% and 46.4%. Symptomatic allergic patients to any kind of allergen were found to be positive to Anisakis specific IgE detection between 0.0% (in children with mastocytosis) to 81.3% (among adults with shellfish allergy). Results highlighted that hypersensitivity prevalence estimates varied widely according to geographical area, characteristics of the population studied, diagnostic criteria and laboratory assays. Further studies are needed to overcome the documented misdiagnosis by improving the diagnostic approach and, consequently, providing more affordable estimates in order to address public health interventions on populations at high risk of exposure to Anisakis and to tailor health services related to specific groups.

SUBMITTER: Mazzucco W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6147426 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Anisakis sensitization in different population groups and public health impact: A systematic review.

Mazzucco Walter W Raia Daniele Domenico DD Marotta Claudia C Costa Antonella A Ferrantelli Vincenzo V Vitale Francesco F Casuccio Alessandra A

PloS one 20180920 9

Anisakis simplex spp. sensitization rates have increased worldwide, with a significant impact on health-care systems. To date, no clear-cut diagnostic criteria and laboratory algorithm have been established, so anisakiasis still represents an under-reported health problem whose clinical manifestations, when present, mimic the much more common allergic and digestive disorders. Aim of the study was to systematically review the available literature on the prevalence of sensitization against Anisaki ...[more]

PMID: 30235242

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveUniversal Health Coverage aims to address the challenges posed by healthcare inequalities and inequities by increasing the accessibility and affordability of healthcare for the entire population. This review provides information related to impact of public-funded health insurance (PFHI) on financial risk protection and utilisation of healthcare.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesMedline (via PubMed, Web of Science), Scopus, Social Science Research Network and 3ie impact evaluation repository were searched from their inception until 15 July 2020, for English-language publications.Eligibility criteriaStudies giving information about the different PFHI in India, irrespective of population groups (above 18 years), were included. Cross-sectional studies with comparison, impact evaluations, difference-in-difference design based on before and after implementation of the scheme, pre-post, experimental trials and quasi-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion.Data extraction and synthesisData extraction was performed by three reviewers independently. Due to heterogeneity in population and study design, statistical pooling was not possible; therefore, narrative synthesis was performed.OutcomesUtilisation of healthcare, willingness-to-pay (WTP), out-of-pocket expenditure (including outpatient and inpatient), catastrophic health expenditure and impoverishment.ResultsThe impact of PFHI on financial risk protection reports no conclusive evidence to suggest that the schemes had any impact on financial protection. The impact of PFHIs such as Rashtriya Swasthy Bima Yojana, Vajpayee Arogyashree and Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana showed increased access and utilisation of healthcare services. There is a lack of evidence to conclude on WTP an additional amount to the existing monthly financial contribution.ConclusionDifferent central and state PFHIs increased the utilisation of healthcare services by the beneficiaries, but there was no conclusive evidence for reduction in financial risk protection of the beneficiaries.RegistrationNot registered.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To determine the economic impact of medication non-adherence across multiple disease groups. DESIGN:Systematic review. EVIDENCE REVIEW:A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed and Scopus in September 2017. Studies quantifying the cost of medication non-adherence in relation to economic impact were included. Relevant information was extracted and quality assessed using the Drummond checklist. RESULTS:Seventy-nine individual studies assessing the cost of medication non-adherence across 14 disease groups were included. Wide-scoping cost variations were reported, with lower levels of adherence generally associated with higher total costs. The annual adjusted disease-specific economic cost of non-adherence per person ranged from $949 to $44?190 (in 2015 US$). Costs attributed to 'all causes' non-adherence ranged from $5271 to $52?341. Medication possession ratio was the metric most used to calculate patient adherence, with varying cut-off points defining non-adherence. The main indicators used to measure the cost of non-adherence were total cost or total healthcare cost (83% of studies), pharmacy costs (70%), inpatient costs (46%), outpatient costs (50%), emergency department visit costs (27%), medical costs (29%) and hospitalisation costs (18%). Drummond quality assessment yielded 10 studies of high quality with all studies performing partial economic evaluations to varying extents. CONCLUSION:Medication non-adherence places a significant cost burden on healthcare systems. Current research assessing the economic impact of medication non-adherence is limited and of varying quality, failing to provide adaptable data to influence health policy. The correlation between increased non-adherence and higher disease prevalence should be used to inform policymakers to help circumvent avoidable costs to the healthcare system. Differences in methods make the comparison among studies challenging and an accurate estimation of true magnitude of the cost impossible. Standardisation of the metric measures used to estimate medication non-adherence and development of a streamlined approach to quantify costs is required. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42015027338.

Dataset Information

Anisakis sensitization in different population groups and public health impact: A systematic review.

Publications

Anisakis sensitization in different population groups and public health impact: A systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets