Dataset Information

Burden of current and past smoking across 28 European countries in 2017: A cross-sectional analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Most studies use the prevalence of current smoking as an indicator to quantify the burden of smoking. However, length and intensity of smoking, as well as time since cessation for former smokers are also known to impact smoking-related health risks. The aim of this study was to quantify and compare the burden of smoking across the European Union (EU) using a range of smoking burden indicators.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional analysis using data from the March 2017 Eurobarometer 87.1 (n=27901, people aged ≥15 years) in 28 European Union Member States (EU MS) and the Tobacco Control Scale. We defined five indicators of smoking burden including the prevalence of current and ever smoking, length of smoking, pack-years, and discounted pack-years, and ranked EU MS by each indicator. Two-level linear and logistic regressions were performed to assess the association between these indicators and sociodemographic and tobacco policy factors.

Results

Wide variations across the EU countries were observed in all smoking burden indicators. While some MS ranked consistently high (e.g. Greece, France) or consistently low (e.g. Ireland, United Kingdom) in all indicators, we found substantial discrepancies in ranking depending on the indicator used for MS such as Malta, Denmark, Finland and the Netherlands. All indicators of smoking burden were lower among women and respondents without financial difficulties; however, the magnitude of those inequalities varied two-fold among the different indicators.

Conclusions

Using a range of smoking burden indicators can be more informative than relying on prevalence alone. Our analysis highlights the limitations of relying solely on prevalence of current smoking to estimate the burden of smoking and the potential value of more nuanced indicators. We recommend that multiple and more nuanced indicators that consider former smokers, intensity and duration of smoking should be utilized to monitor tobacco use and evaluate tobacco control policies.

SUBMITTER: Teshima A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9194927 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCaregiving in depression imposes a complex health and economic burden. Moreover, there is a paucity of studies examining the impact of caregiving for adult relatives with unipolar depression (CG-UD). This study assessed the burden among CG-UD in five western European (EUR5) countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom) compared with caregivers of adults with other chronic comorbidities (CG-OD) and general non-caregiving (non-CG) population.MethodsA retrospective observational study was conducted using the 2016 National Health and Wellness Survey (NHWS) in EUR5. Differences in humanistic burden (health status and health-related quality of life [HRQoL]) and economic burden (work productivity and activity impairments, health care resource utilization [HRU]) were assessed between CG-UD and CG-OD respondents. Caregiver-specific burden (caregiving responsibilities and caregiver reaction assessment [CRA]) was assessed between caregiver groups. Generalized linear models were used to compare between the groups on the outcomes after adjusting for potential confounders.ResultsOf the 77,418 survey respondents examined, 1380 identified as CG-UD, 6470 as CG-OD and 69,334 as non-CG. Compared to CG-OD and non-CG, CG-UD, reported significantly lower health status (e.g., EuroQoL-5 Dimensions-5 Levels [EQ-5D-5L]: CG-UD = 0.63, CG-OD = 0.67, and non-CG = 0.73, p < 0.001) and HRQoL (e.g., mental component score: CG-UD = 35.0, CG-OD = 37.8, and non-CG = 40.7, p < 0.001). Although effect sizes were small (d < 0.2), minimal clinically important differences (MCID) were apparent for HRQoL and health status. Increased economic-related burden was observed for work and activity impairment (e.g., absenteeism: CG-UD = 32.6%, CG-OD = 26.5%, and non-CG = 14.8%, p < 0.001) and HRU (e.g., healthcare provider [HCP; mean, past 6 months]: CG-UD = 10.5, CG-OD = 8.6, and non-CG = 6.8, p < 0.001). Caregiving-specific burden was associated with experiencing a greater lack of family support (CG-UD: 2.9 vs CG-OD: 2.8, p < 0.01), impact on finances (CG-UD: 3.0 vs CG-OD: 2.9, p = 0.036), and on the caregiver's schedule (CG-UD: 3.1 vs CG-OD: 3.0, p = 0.048).ConclusionCaregivers of persons with chronic disease experience an excess humanistic and economic burden compared to the general population, with a greater burden confronting caregiver for adults with depression. These findings illustrate the far-reaching burden of depression on both the patient and the relatives who care for them.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Systematic collection of mortality/morbidity data over time is crucial for monitoring trends in population health, developing health policies, assessing the impact of health programs. In Poland, a comprehensive analysis describing trends in disease burden for major conditions has never been published. The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) provides data on the burden of over 300 diseases in 195 countries since 1990. We used the GBD database to undertake an assessment of disease burden in Poland, evaluate changes in population health between 1990-2017, and compare Poland with other Central European (CE) countries. METHODS:The results of GBD 2017 for 1990 and 2017 for Poland and CE were used to assess rates and trends in years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with disability (YLDs), disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). Data came from cause-of-death registration systems, population health surveys, disease registries, hospitalization databases, and the scientific literature. Analytical approaches have been used to adjust for missing data, errors in cause-of-death certification, and differences in data collection methodology. Main estimation strategies were ensemble modelling for mortality and Bayesian meta-regression for disability. RESULTS:Between 1990-2017, age-standardized YLL rates for all causes declined in Poland by 46.0% (95% UI: 43.7-48.2), YLD rates declined by 4.0% (4.2-4.9), DALY rates by 31.7% (29.2-34.4). For both YLLs and YLDs, greater relative declines were observed for females. There was a large decrease in communicable, maternal, neonatal, and nutritional disease DALYs (48.2%; 46.3-50.4). DALYs due to non-communicable diseases (NCDs) decreased slightly (2.0%; 0.1-4.6). In 2017, Poland performed better than CE as a whole (ranked fourth for YLLs, sixth for YLDs, and fifth for DALYs) and achieved greater reductions in YLLs and DALYs than most CE countries. In 2017 and 1990, the leading cause of YLLs and DALYs in Poland and CE was ischaemic heart disease (IHD), and the leading cause of YLDs was low back pain. In 2017, the top 20 causes of YLLs and YLDs in Poland and CE were the same, although in different order. In Poland, age-standardized DALYs from neonatal causes, other cardiovascular and circulatory diseases, and road injuries declined substantially between 1990-2017, while alcohol use disorders and chronic liver diseases increased. The highest observed-to-expected ratios were seen for alcohol use disorders for YLLs, neonatal sepsis for YLDs, and falls for DALYs (3.21, 2.65, and 2.03, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:There was relatively little geographical variation in premature death and disability in CE in 2017, although some between-country differences existed. Health in Poland has been improving since 1990; in 2017 Poland outperformed CE as a whole for YLLs, YLDs, and DALYs. While the health gap between Poland and Western Europe has diminished, it remains substantial. The shift to NCDs and chronic disability, together with marked between-gender health inequalities, poses a challenge for the Polish health-care system. IHD is still the leading cause of disease burden in Poland, but DALYs from IHD are declining. To further reduce disease burden, an integrated response focused on NCDs and population groups with disproportionally high burden is needed.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:The first World Health Organization (WHO) global health sector strategy on hepatitis B and C viruses (HBV and HCV) has called for the elimination of viral hepatitis as a major public health threat by 2030. This study assesses policies and programmes in support of elimination efforts as reported by patient groups in Europe. METHODS:In 2016 and 2017, hepatitis patient groups in 25 European countries participated in a cross-sectional survey about their countries' policy responses to HBV and HCV. The English-language survey addressed overall national response; public awareness/engagement; disease monitoring; prevention; testing/diagnosis; clinical assessment; and treatment. We performed a descriptive analysis of data and compared 2016 and 2017 findings. RESULTS:In 2017, 72% and 52% of the 25 European study countries were reported to not have national HBV and HCV strategies respectively. The number of respondents indicating that their governments collaborated with civil society on viral hepatitis control increased from 13 in 2016 to 18 in 2017. In both 2016 and 2017, patient groups reported that 9 countries (36%) have disease registers for HBV and 11 (44%) have disease registers for HCV. The number of countries reported to have needle and syringe exchange programmes available in all parts of the country dropped from 10 (40%) in 2016 to 8 in 2017 (32%). In both 2016 and 2017, patient groups in 5 countries (20%) reported that HCV treatment is available in non-hospital settings. From 2016 to 2017, the reported number of countries with no restrictions on access to direct-acting antivirals for HCV increased from 3 (12%) to 7 (28%), and 5 fewer countries were reported to refuse treatment to people who are currently injecting drugs. CONCLUSIONS:The patient-led Hep-CORE study offers a unique perspective on the readiness of study countries to undertake comprehensive viral hepatitis elimination efforts. Viral hepatitis monitoring should be expanded to address policy issues more comprehensively and to incorporate civil society perspectives, as is the case with global HIV monitoring. Policy components should also be explicitly added to the WHO framework for monitoring country-level progress against viral hepatitis.

Project description:IntroductionOveruse of medication to treat migraine attacks can lead to development of a new type of headache or significant worsening of pre-existing headache, known as medication overuse headache. However, data concerning the burden of medication overuse (MO) in migraine are limited. This study aimed to assess the humanistic burden of MO in individuals with migraine from five European countries.MethodsData are from the 2020 National Health and Wellness Survey-a cross-sectional, population-based survey conducted in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK. Data were included from adults (≥ 18 years) with a self-reported diagnosis of migraine and at least one migraine attack and one headache in the past 30 days. MO was defined as (i) use of simple analgesics/over-the-counter medications on ≥ 15 days/month; or (ii) use of migraine medication, including combination analgesics, on ≥ 10 days/month. Humanistic burden of MO was assessed using the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12v2), EuroQol 5-Dimensions 5-Levels (EQ-5D), Short-Form 6-Dimensions (SF-6D), and Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS). The association of MO with humanistic burden was evaluated using generalized linear models adjusted for potential confounders in the full migraine population and in subgroups defined by headache frequency (monthly headache days [MHDs] 1-3, 4-7, 8-14, or ≥ 15).ResultsAmong individuals with migraine, humanistic burden (SF-12v2, SF-6D, EQ-5D, and MIDAS) was higher in individuals who reported MO (n = 431) versus no MO (n = 3554), even after adjustment for confounding variables (p < 0.001 for all measures). MIDAS and EQ-5D scores were higher in individuals with MO than without, at all levels of headache frequency. For SF-12v2 and SF-6D, differences between groups with/without MO were seen only at lower levels of headache frequency (MHD 1-3 and 4-7).ConclusionAmong people with migraine, those who report MO face a greater humanistic burden than those without MO, irrespective of headache frequency.