Characterizing the vulnerability of frequent emergency department users by applying a conceptual framework: a controlled, cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Frequent emergency department (ED) users meet several of the criteria of vulnerability, but this needs to be further examined taking into consideration all vulnerability's different dimensions. This study aimed to characterize frequent ED users and to define risk factors of frequent ED use within a universal health care coverage system, applying a conceptual framework of vulnerability. METHODS: A controlled, cross-sectional study comparing frequent ED users to a control group of non-frequent users was conducted at the Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland. Frequent users were defined as patients with five or more visits to the ED in the previous 12 months. The two groups were compared using validated scales for each one of the five dimensions of an innovative conceptual framework: socio-demographic characteristics; somatic, mental, and risk-behavior indicators; and use of health care services. Independent t-tests, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, Pearson's Chi-squared test and Fisher's exact test were used for the comparison. To examine the -related to vulnerability- risk factors for being a frequent ED user, univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used. RESULTS: We compared 226 frequent users and 173 controls. Frequent users had more vulnerabilities in all five dimensions of the conceptual framework. They were younger, and more often immigrants from low/middle-income countries or unemployed, had more somatic and psychiatric comorbidities, were more often tobacco users, and had more primary care physician (PCP) visits. The most significant frequent ED use risk factors were a history of more than three hospital admissions in the previous 12 months (adj OR:23.2, 95%CI = 9.1-59.2), the absence of a PCP (adj OR:8.4, 95%CI = 2.1-32.7), living less than 5 km from an ED (adj OR:4.4, 95%CI = 2.1-9.0), and household income lower than USD 2,800/month (adj OR:4.3, 95%CI = 2.0-9.2). CONCLUSIONS: Frequent ED users within a universal health coverage system form a highly vulnerable population, when taking into account all five dimensions of a conceptual framework of vulnerability. The predictive factors identified could be useful in the early detection of future frequent users, in order to address their specific needs and decrease vulnerability, a key priority for health care policy makers. Application of the conceptual framework in future research is warranted.

Worldwide trends in diabetes since 1980: a pooled analysis of 751 population-based studies with 4.4 million participants.

One of the global targets for non-communicable diseases is to halt, by 2025, the rise in the age-standardised adult prevalence of diabetes at its 2010 levels. We aimed to estimate worldwide trends in diabetes, how likely it is for countries to achieve the global target, and how changes in prevalence, together with population growth and ageing, are affecting the number of adults with diabetes. We pooled data from population-based studies that had collected data on diabetes through measurement of its biomarkers. We used a Bayesian hierarchical model to estimate trends in diabetes prevalence-defined as fasting plasma glucose of 7.0 mmol/L or higher, or history of diagnosis with diabetes, or use of insulin or oral hypoglycaemic drugs-in 200 countries and territories in 21 regions, by sex and from 1980 to 2014. We also calculated the posterior probability of meeting the global diabetes target if post-2000 trends continue. We used data from 751 studies including 4,372,000 adults from 146 of the 200 countries we make estimates for. Global age-standardised diabetes prevalence increased from 4.3% (95% credible interval 2.4-7.0) in 1980 to 9.0% (7.2-11.1) in 2014 in men, and from 5.0% (2.9-7.9) to 7.9% (6.4-9.7) in women. The number of adults with diabetes in the world increased from 108 million in 1980 to 422 million in 2014 (28.5% due to the rise in prevalence, 39.7% due to population growth and ageing, and 31.8% due to interaction of these two factors). Age-standardised adult diabetes prevalence in 2014 was lowest in northwestern Europe, and highest in Polynesia and Micronesia, at nearly 25%, followed by Melanesia and the Middle East and north Africa. Between 1980 and 2014 there was little change in age-standardised diabetes prevalence in adult women in continental western Europe, although crude prevalence rose because of ageing of the population. By contrast, age-standardised adult prevalence rose by 15 percentage points in men and women in Polynesia and Micronesia. In 2014, American Samoa had the highest national prevalence of diabetes (>30% in both sexes), with age-standardised adult prevalence also higher than 25% in some other islands in Polynesia and Micronesia. If post-2000 trends continue, the probability of meeting the global target of halting the rise in the prevalence of diabetes by 2025 at the 2010 level worldwide is lower than 1% for men and is 1% for women. Only nine countries for men and 29 countries for women, mostly in western Europe, have a 50% or higher probability of meeting the global target. Since 1980, age-standardised diabetes prevalence in adults has increased, or at best remained unchanged, in every country. Together with population growth and ageing, this rise has led to a near quadrupling of the number of adults with diabetes worldwide. The burden of diabetes, both in terms of prevalence and number of adults affected, has increased faster in low-income and middle-income countries than in high-income countries. Wellcome Trust.

Cardiovascular risk estimation and eligibility for statin therapy using different scoring systems in Europe: a population-based study in Switzerland

BACKGROUND: Recommendations for statin use for primary prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD) are based on estimation of the 10- year CHD risk. We compared the 10-year CHD risk assessments and eligibility percentages for statin therapy using three scoring algorithms currently used in Europe. METHODS: We studied 5683 women and men, aged 35-75, without overt cardiovascular disease (CVD), in a population-based study in Switzerland. We compared the 10-year CHD risk using three scoring schemes, i.e., the Framingham risk score (FRS) from the U.S. National Cholesterol Education Program's Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III), the PROCAM scoring scheme from the International Atherosclerosis Society (IAS), and the European risk SCORE for low-risk countries, without and with extrapolation to 60 years as recommended by the European Society of Cardiology guidelines (ESC). With FRS and PROCAM, high-risk was defined as a 10- year risk of fatal or non-fatal CHD>20% and a 10-year risk of fatal CVD≥5% with SCORE. We compared the proportions of high-risk participants and eligibility for statin use according to these three schemes. For each guideline, we estimated the impact of increased statin use from current partial compliance to full compliance on potential CHD deaths averted over 10 years, using a success proportion of 27% for statins. RESULTS: Participants classified at high-risk (both genders) were 5.8% according to FRS and 3.0% to the PROCAM, whereas the European risk SCORE classified 12.5% at high-risk (15.4% with extrapolation to 60 years). For the primary prevention of CHD, 18.5% of participants were eligible for statin therapy using ATP III, 16.6% using IAS, and 10.3% using ESC (13.0% with extrapolation) because ESC guidelines recommend statin therapy only in high-risk subjects. In comparison with IAS, agreement to identify eligible adults for statins was good with ATP III, but moderate with ESC. Using a population perspective, a full compliance with ATP III guidelines would reduce up to 17.9% of the 24′ 310 CHD deaths expected over 10 years in Switzerland, 17.3% with IAS and 10.8% with ESC (11.5% with extrapolation). CONCLUSIONS: Full compliance with guidelines for statin therapy would result in substantial health benefits, but proportions of high-risk adults and eligible adults for statin use varied substantially depending on the scoring systems and corresponding guidelines used for estimating CHD risk in Europe.