Making Chronic Conditions Count: 2. Coronary Heart Disease (Angina and Heart Attack)

Chronic conditions are responsible for a significant proportion of early deaths. They reduce quality of life in many of the adults living with them, represent substantial financial costs to patients and the health and social care system, and cause a significant loss of productivity to the economy. This report contains estimates and forecasts of the population prevalence of coronary heart disease (angina and heart attack), and it shows how it varies across the island and what change is expected between 2007, 2015 and 2020.

Making Chronic Conditions Count: 3. Hypertension

Chronic conditions are responsible for a significant proportion of early deaths. They reduce quality of life in many of the adults living with them, represent substantial financial costs to patients and the health and social care system, and cause a significant loss of productivity to the economy. This report contains estimates and forecasts of the population prevalence of hypertension and shows how it varies across the island and what change is expected between 2007, 2015 and 2020.

Making Chronic Conditions Count: 4. Stroke

Chronic conditions are responsible for a significant proportion of early deaths. They reduce quality of life in many of the adults living with them, represent substantial financial costs to patients and the health and social care system, and cause a significant loss of productivity to the economy. This report contains estimates and forecasts of the population prevalence of stroke, and it shows how it varies across the island and what change is expected between 2007, 2015 and 2020.

IPH response to Seanad Consultation Committee on 'Changes in lifestyle can prevent approximately one third of cancers. How does Government and Society respond to this challenge?'

IPH responded to the Seanad Consultation Committee on the consultation topic ‘Changes in lifestyle can prevent approximately one third of cancers.  How does Government and Society respond to this challenge?’. Between 2010 and 2020 the total number of cancers in Ireland is projected to increase by 40% for women and by just over 50% for men (National Cancer Registry).  A focus is needed on developing social, economical and built environments that support healthy choices. IPH presented recommendations based on the international evidence-base as well as national cancer data and research.

IPH response to European Review of the Social Determinants of Health and the Health Divide

IPH welcomes this European Review conducted by the Marmot Review Team which aims to inform action on social determinants of health and health equity within the forthcoming health policy for the European region, Health 2020. IPH calls for clear mandates supporting whole-of-government approaches to address social determinants and outlines some of the specific challenges and opportunities within the current Ireland and Northern Ireland policy landscape.

IPH response to DOE Consultation 'Preparing a Road Safety Strategy for Northern Ireland 2010-20'

The Department of Environment (NI)  recently held a consultation on preparing a new road safety strategy for Northern Ireland which will cover the years 2010 to 2020.  The consultation ran from 16 March 2010 to 15 June 2010.  The consultation paper outlined key challenges to be addressed over the lifetime of the strategy and proposed a number of action measures which have been agreed by the statutory road safety partners.  Views were invited on preparing a new road safety strategy for Northern Ireland that will shape the way ahead for safety on roads over the next decade.

IPH response to Department, Trade and Investment (NI) draft strategic energy framework

The draft Framework set out the proposed priorities for Northern Ireland's energy future over the next ten years or so and illustrates the key energy goals in term of competitiveness, security of energy supply, sustainablilty and infrastructure investment. It also proposes new and ambitious renewable electricity and renewable heat targets by 2020, which reflect the need for effected action against climate change and the need to address other policy goals in terms of security and sustainability of supply and costs.

Prevalence of chronic conditions – Hypertension

IPH has estimated and forecast clinical diagnosis rates of hypertension among adults for the years 2010, 2015 and 2020. In the Republic of Ireland, the data are based on the Survey of Lifestyle, Attitudes and Nutrition (SLÁN) 2007. The data describe the number of people who report that they have experienced doctor-diagnosed hypertension in the previous 12 months (annual clinical diagnosis). Data are available by age and sex for each Local Health Office of the Health Service Executive (HSE) in the Republic of Ireland. In Northern Ireland, the data is based on the Health and Social Wellbeing Survey 2005/06. The data describe the number of people who report that they have experienced doctor/nurse-diagnosed hypertension at any time in the past (lifetime clinical diagnosis). Data are available by age and sex for each Local Government District in Northern Ireland. Clinical diagnosis rates in the Republic of Ireland relate to the previous 12 months and are not directly comparable with clinical diagnosis rates in Northern Ireland which relate to anytime in the past.   The IPH estimated prevalence per cents may be marginally different to estimated prevalence per cents taken directly from the reference study. There are two reasons for this: 1) The IPH prevalence estimates relate to 2010 while the reference studies relate to earlier years (Northern Ireland Health and Social Wellbeing Survey 2005/06, Survey of Lifestyle, Attitudes and Nutrition 2007, Understanding Society 2009). Although we assume that the risk of the condition in the risk groups do not change over time, the distribution of the number of people in the risk groups in the population changes over time (eg the population ages).  This new distribution of the risk groups in the population means that the risk of the condition is weighted differently to the reference study and this results in a different overall prevalence estimate. 2) The IPH prevalence estimates are based on a statistical model of the reference study. The model includes a number of explanatory variables to predict the risk of the condition. Therefore the model does not include records from the reference study that are missing data on these explanatory variables. A prevalence estimate for a condition taken directly from the reference study would include these records.

Prevalence of chronic conditions – Coronary Heart Disease

IPH has estimated and forecast clinical diagnosis rates of CHD (heart attack and/or angina) among adults for the years 2010, 2015 and 2020. In the Republic of Ireland, the data are based on the Survey of Lifestyle, Attitudes and Nutrition (SLÁN) 2007 . The data describe the number of people who report that they have experienced doctor-diagnosed heart attack and/or angina in the previous 12 months (annual clinical diagnosis). Data is available by age and sex for each Local Health Office of the Health Service Executive (HSE) in the Republic of Ireland. In Northern Ireland, the data are based on the Health and Social Wellbeing Survey 2005/06 . The data describe the number of people who report that they have experienced doctor-diagnosed heart attack and/or angina at any time in the past (lifetime clinical diagnosis). Data are available by age and sex for each Local Government District in Northern Ireland. Clinical diagnosis rates in the Republic of Ireland relate to the previous 12 months and are not directly comparable with clinical diagnosis rates in Northern Ireland which relate to anytime in the past. The IPH estimated prevalence per cents may be marginally different to estimated prevalence per cents taken directly from the reference study. There are two reasons for this: 1) The IPH prevalence estimates relate to 2010 while the reference studies relate to earlier years (Northern Ireland Health and Social Wellbeing Survey 2005/06, Survey of Lifestyle, Attitudes and Nutrition 2007, Understanding Society 2009). Although we assume that the risk of the condition in the risk groups do not change over time, the distribution of the number of people in the risk groups in the population changes over time (eg the population ages).  This new distribution of the risk groups in the population means that the risk of the condition is weighted differently to the reference study and this results in a different overall prevalence estimate. 2) The IPH prevalence estimates are based on a statistical model of the reference study. The model includes a number of explanatory variables to predict the risk of the condition. Therefore the model does not include records from the reference study that are missing data on these explanatory variables. A prevalence estimate for a condition taken directly from the reference study would include these records.

Prevalence of chronic conditions – Chronic Airflow Obstruction

IPH has estimated and forecast clinical diagnosis rates of CAO among adults for the years 2010, 2015 and 2020. In the Republic of Ireland, the data are based on the Survey of Lifestyle, Attitudes and Nutrition (SLÁN) 2007. The data describe the number of people who report that they have experienced doctor-diagnosed chronic bronchitis, chronic obstructive lung (pulmonary) disease, or emphysema in the previous 12 months (annual clinical diagnosis). Data is available by age and sex for each Local Health Office of the Health Service Executive (HSE) in the Republic of Ireland. In Northern Ireland, the data are based on the Health and Social Wellbeing Survey 2005/06. The data describe the number of people who report that they have experienced doctor-diagnosed COPD or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease eg chronic bronchitis / emphysema or both disorders at any time in the past (lifetime clinical diagnosis). Data are available by age and sex for each Local Government District in Northern Ireland. Clinical diagnosis rates in the Republic of Ireland relate to the previous 12 months and are not directly comparable with clinical diagnosis rates in Northern Ireland which relate to anytime in the past.   The IPH estimated prevalence per cents may be marginally different to estimated prevalence per cents taken directly from the reference study. There are two reasons for this: 1) The IPH prevalence estimates relate to 2010 while the reference studies relate to earlier years (Northern Ireland Health and Social Wellbeing Survey 2005/06, Survey of Lifestyle, Attitudes and Nutrition 2007, Understanding Society 2009). Although we assume that the risk of the condition in the risk groups do not change over time, the distribution of the number of people in the risk groups in the population changes over time (eg the population ages).  This new distribution of the risk groups in the population means that the risk of the condition is weighted differently to the reference study and this results in a different overall prevalence estimate. 2) The IPH prevalence estimates are based on a statistical model of the reference study. The model includes a number of explanatory variables to predict the risk of the condition. Therefore the model does not include records from the reference study that are missing data on these explanatory variables. A prevalence estimate for a condition taken directly from the reference study would include these records.

Prevalence of chronic conditions – Musculoskeletal Conditions

IPH has estimated and forecast the number of adults with MSCs for the years 2010, 2015 and 2020. In the Republic of Ireland, the data are based on the Survey of Lifestyle, Attitudes and Nutrition (SLÁN) 2007 . The data describe the number of people who report that they have experienced doctor-diagnosed MSC in the previous 12 months:     Lower back pain or any other chronic back condition     Rheumatoid arthritis (inflammation of the joints)     Osteoarthritis (arthrosis, joint degradation) Data are  available by age and sex for each Local Health Office of the Health Service Executive (HSE) in the Republic of Ireland. In Northern Ireland, the data are based on the Health and Social Wellbeing Survey 2005/06 and Understanding Society 2009. The data describe the number of adults who:     Have ever consulted a doctor about back pain     Are currently receiving treatment for musculoskeletal problems (such as arthritis, rheumatism)     Have ever been told by a doctor or other health professional that they had have arthritis? Data are available by age and sex for each Local Government District in Northern Ireland. There are significant differences between the definitions used in RoI and NI and North-South comparisons are not valid. The RoI measures relate to specific MSCs in the previous 12 months that had been diagnosed by a doctor. The NI measures relate to doctor-consultations at any time in the past, doctor-diagnosis at any time in the past and current treatment. The IPH estimated prevalence per cents may be marginally different to estimated prevalence per cents taken directly from the reference study. There are two reasons for this: 1) The IPH prevalence estimates relate to 2010 while the reference studies relate to earlier years (Northern Ireland Health and Social Wellbeing Survey 2005/06, Survey of Lifestyle, Attitudes and Nutrition 2007, Understanding Society 2009). Although we assume that the risk of the condition in the risk groups do not change over time, the distribution of the number of people in the risk groups in the population changes over time (eg the population ages).  This new distribution of the risk groups in the population means that the risk of the condition is weighted differently to the reference study and this results in a different overall prevalence estimate. 2) The IPH prevalence estimates are based on a statistical model of the reference study. The model includes a number of explanatory variables to predict the risk of the condition. Therefore the model does not include records from the reference study that are missing data on these explanatory variables. A prevalence estimate for a condition taken directly from the reference study would include these records.

Address by Michea¡l Martin to the Conference - Legislating for Tobacco Free Society

Thank you Chairman I would like to extend a warm welcome to our keynote speakers, David Byrne of the European Commission, Derek Yach from the World Health Organisation, and Paul Quinn representing Congressman Marty Meehan who sends his apologies. When we include the speakers who will address later sessions, this is, undoubtedly, one of the strongest teams that have been assembled on tobacco control in Europe. The very strength of the team underlines what I see as a shift – a very necessary shift – in the way we perceive the tobacco issue. For the last twenty years, we have lived out a paradox. It isn´t a social side issue. I make no apology for the bluntness of what I´m saying, and will come back, a little later, to the radicalism I believe we need to bring – nationally – to this issue. For starters, though, I want to lay it on the line that what we´re talking about is an epidemic as deadly as any suffered by human kind throughout the centuries. Slower than some of those epidemics in its lethal action, perhaps. But an epidemic, nonetheless. According to the World Health Organisation tobacco accounted for just over 3 million annual deaths in 1990, rising to 4.023 million annual deaths in 1998. The numbers of deaths due to tobacco will rise to 8.4 million in 2020 and reach roughly 10 million annually by 2030. This is quite simply ghastly. Tobacco kills. It kills in many different ways. It kills increasing numbers of women. It does its damage directly and indirectly. For children, much of the damage comes from smoking by adults where children live, study, play and work. The very least we should be able to offer every child is breathable air. Air that doesn´t do them damage. We´re now seeing a global public health response to the tobacco epidemic. The Tobacco Free Initiative launched by the World Health Organisation was matched by significant tobacco control initiatives throughout the world. During this conference we will hear about the experiences our speakers had in driving these initiatives. This Tobacco Free Initiative poses unique challenges to our legal frameworks at both national and international levels; in particular it raises challenges about the legal context in which tobacco products are traded and asks questions about the impact of commercial speech especially on children, and the extent of the limitations that should be imposed on it. Politicians, supported by economists and lawyers as well as the medical profession, must continue to explore and develop this context to find innovative ways to wrap public health considerations around the trade in tobacco products – very tightly. We also have the right to demand a totally new paradigm from the tobacco industry. Bluntly, the tobacco industry plays the PR game at its cynical worst. The industry sells its products without regard to the harm these products cause. At the same time, to gain social acceptance, it gives donations, endowments and patronage to high profile events and people. Not good enough. This model of behaviour is no longer acceptable in a modern society. We need one where the industry integrates social responsibility and accountability into its day-to-day activities. We have waited for this change in behaviour from the tobacco industry for many decades. Unfortunately the documents disclosed during litigation in the USA and from other sources make very depressing reading; it is clear from them that any trust society placed in the tobacco industry in the past to address the health problems associated with its products was misplaced. This industry appears to lack the necessary leadership to guide it towards just and responsible action. Instead, it chooses evasion, deception and at times illegal activity to protect its profits at any price and to avoid its responsibilities to society and its customers. It has engaged in elaborate ´spin´ to generate political tolerance, scientific uncertainty and public acceptance of its products. Legislators must act now. I see no reason why the global community should continue to wait. Effective legal controls must be laid on this errant industry. We should also keep these controls under review at regular intervals and if they are failing to achieve the desired outcomes we should be prepared to amend them. In Ireland, as Minister for Health and Children, I launched a comprehensive tobacco control policy entitled “Towards a Tobacco Free Society“. OTT?Excessive?Unrealistic? On the contrary – I believe it to be imperative and inevitable. I honestly hold that, given the range of fatal diseases caused by tobacco use we have little alternative but to pursue the clear objective of creating a tobacco free society. Aiming at a tobacco free society means ensuring public and political opinion are properly informed. It requires help to be given to smokers to break the addiction. It demands that people are protected against environmental tobacco smoke and children are protected from any inducement to experiment with this product. Over the past year we have implemented a number of measures which will support these objectives; we have established an independent Office of Tobacco Control, we have introduced free nicotine replacement therapy for low-income earners, we have extended our existing prohibitions on tobacco advertising to the print media with some minor derogations for international publications. We have raised the legal age at which a person can be sold tobacco products to eighteen years. We have invested substantially more funds in health promotion activities and we have mounted sustained information campaigns. We have engaged in sponsorship arrangements, which are new and innovative for public bodies. I have provided health boards with additional resources to let them mount a sustained inspection and enforcement service. Health boards will engage new Directors of Tobacco Control responsible for coordinating each health board´s response and for liasing with the Tobacco Control Agency I set up earlier this year. Most recently, I have published a comprehensive Bill – The Public Health (Tobacco) Bill, 2001. This Bill will, among other things, end all forms of product display and in-store advertising and will require all retailers to register with the new Tobacco Control Agency. Ten packs of cigarettes will be banned and transparent and independent testing procedures of tobacco products will be introduced. Enforcement officers will be given all the necessary powers to ensure there is full compliance with the law. On smoking in public places we will extend the existing areas covered and it is proposed that I, as Minister for Health and Children, will have the powers to introduce further prohibitions in public places such as pubs and the work place. I will also provide for the establishment of a Tobacco Free Council to advise and assist on an ongoing basis. I believe the measures already introduced and those additional ones proposed in the Bill have widespread community support. In fact, you´re going to hear a detailed presentation from the MRBI which will amply illustrate the extent of this support. The great thing is that the support comes from smokers and non-smokers alike. Bottom line, Ladies and Gentlemen, is that we are at a watershed. As a society (if you´ll allow me to play with a popular phrase) we´ve realised it´s time to ´wake up and smell the cigarettes.´ Smell them. See them for what they are. And get real about destroying their hold on our people. The MRBI survey makes it clear that the single strongest weapon we have when it comes to preventing the habit among young people is price. Simple as that. Price. Up to now, the fear of inflation has been a real impediment to increasing taxes on tobacco. It sounds a serious, logical argument. Until you take it out and look at it a little more closely. Weigh it, as it were, in two hands. I believe – and I believe this with a great passion – that we must take cigarettes out of the equation we use when awarding wage increases. I am calling on IBEC and ICTU, on employers and trade unions alike, to move away from any kind of tolerance of a trade that is killing our citizens. At one point in industrial history, cigarettes were a staple of the workingman´s life. So it was legitimate to include them in the ´basket´ of goods that goes to make up the Consumer Price Index. It isn´t legitimate to include them any more. Today, I´m saying that society collectively must take the step to remove cigarettes from the basket of normality, from the list of elements which constitute necessary consumer spending. I´m saying: “We can no longer delude ourselves. We must exclude cigarettes from the considerations we address in central wage bargaining. We must price cigarettes out of the reach of the children those cigarettes will kill.” Right now, in the monthly Central Statistics Office reports on consumer spending, the figures include cigarettes. But – right down at the bottom of the page – there´s another figure. Calculated without including cigarettes. I believe that if we continue to use the first figure as our constant measure, it will be an indictment of us as legislators, as advocates for working people, as public health professionals. If, on the other hand, we move to the use of the second figure, we will be sending out a message of startling clarity to the nation. We will be saying “We don´t count an addictive, killer drug as part of normal consumer spending.” Taking cigarettes out of the basket used to determine the Consumer Price Index will take away the inflation argument. It will not be easy, in its implications for the social partners. But it is morally inescapable. We must do it. Because it will help us stop the killer that is tobacco. If we can do it, we will give so much extra strength to health educators and the new Tobacco Control Association. This new organisation of young people who already have branches in over fifteen counties, is represented here today. The young adults who make up its membership are well placed to advise children of the dangers of tobacco addiction in a way that older generations cannot. It would strengthen their hand if cigarettes move – in price terms – out of the easy reach of our children Finally, I would like to commend so many public health advocates who have shown professional and indeed personal courage in their commitment to this critical public health issue down through the years. We need you to continue to challenge and confront this grave public health problem and to repudiate the questionable science of the tobacco industry. The Research Institute for a Tobacco Free Society represents a new and dynamic form of partnership between government and civil society. It will provide an effective platform to engage and mobilise the many different professional and academic skills necessary to guide and challenge us. I wish the conference every success.

Review of ALCES funded Adult Literacy Provision

Following the publication of the International Adult Literacy Survey (IALS), the White Paper on Adult Education set targets for the participation of adults with low levels of literacy and numeracy in VEC provision. These participation targets have been attained. It is not known if the skill levels of the Irish population have changed since 1995 but the publication of the results of the OECD’s Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC) in October 2013 will provide this information. The Skills Strategy and other Government policy statements relating to activation measures propose that an additional 500,000 individuals within the workforce need to progress by at least one level on the National Framework of Qualifications (NFQ) by 2020. While no new overall strategy for the development of Adult Literacy in Ireland has been devised since the publication of the White Paper in 2000, there have been a number of specific initiatives taken by Government which complement the initial provision framework (Intensive Literacy (ITABE), DEIS Family Literacy, projects focused on the workplace). Blended and distance learning initiatives have also been supported. These issues should inform the development of any new Adult Literacy strategy by SOLAS.

Annual Quality Report 2013/2014

Annual quality reports are a recommendation of the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety's (DHSSPS) Quality 2020: a 10 year strategy to protect and improve quality in Health and Social Care in Northern Ireland.

Annual Quality Report 2014/2015

Annual quality reports are a recommendation of the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety's (DHSSPS) Quality 2020: a 10 year strategy to protect and improve quality in Health and Social Care in Northern Ireland.