DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study.
SETTING: Twenty-three Asian countries and regions, covering 92.1% of the continent's population.
PARTICIPANTS: Ten low-income and lower-middle-income economies, five upper-middle-income economies, and eight high-income economies according to the World Bank classification.
INTERVENTIONS: Data closest to 2017 on critical care beds, including ICU and intermediate care unit beds, were obtained through multiple means, including government sources, national critical care societies, colleges, or registries, personal contacts, and extrapolation of data.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Cumulatively, there were 3.6 critical care beds per 100,000 population. The median number of critical care beds per 100,000 population per country and region was significantly lower in low- and lower-middle-income economies (2.3; interquartile range, 1.4-2.7) than in upper-middle-income economies (4.6; interquartile range, 3.5-15.9) and high-income economies (12.3; interquartile range, 8.1-20.8) (p = 0.001), with a large variation even across countries and regions of the same World Bank income classification. This number was independently predicted by the World Bank income classification on multivariable analysis, and significantly correlated with the number of acute hospital beds per 100,000 population (r = 0.19; p = 0.047), the universal health coverage service coverage index (r = 0.35; p = 0.003), and the Human Development Index (r = 0.40; p = 0.001) on univariable analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: Critical care bed capacity varies widely across Asia and is significantly lower in low- and lower-middle-income than in upper-middle-income and high-income countries and regions.
AIMS: (1) To investigate the association between birth weight and anthropometric measurements during adulthood; (2) to study the genetic and environmental influences on body measures including birth weight, weight and height among twins; and (3) to assess the variation in heritability versus environment among two cohorts of twins who lived in different geographical areas.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Twins were collected from two twin registers. Data on birth weight, adult weight and height in 430 MZ and 170 DZ twins living in two geographically distinct parts of the world were collected. A genetic analysis was performed using MX software.
RESULTS: Birth weight was associated with weight, height and BMI. Both MZ and DZ twins with low birth weight had shorter height during their adult life (p = 0.001), but only MZ twins with lower birth weight were lighter at adulthood (p = 0.001). Intra-pair differences in birth weight were not associated with differences in adult height (p = 0.366) or weight (p = 0.796). Additive genetic effects accounted for 53% of the variance in weight, 43% in height and 55% in birth weight. The remaining variance was attributed to unique environmental effects (15% for weight, 13% for height and 45% for birth weight and only 16% for BMI). Variability was found to be different in the two cohorts. The best fitting model for birth weight and BMI was additive genetic and non-shared environment and for weight and height was additive genetic, non-shared environment (plus common Environment).
CONCLUSIONS: Data suggests that the association between weight at birth and anthropometric measures in later life is influenced by both genetic and environmental factors. Living in different environments can potentially relate to variation found in the environment.
METHODS: We analysed the availability, costs, and affordability of blood pressure-lowering medicines with data recorded from 626 communities in 20 countries participating in the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiological (PURE) study. Medicines were considered available if they were present in the local pharmacy when surveyed, and affordable if their combined cost was less than 20% of the households' capacity to pay. We related information about availability and affordability to use of these medicines and blood pressure control with multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression models, and compared results for high-income, upper-middle-income, lower-middle-income, and low-income countries. Data for India are presented separately because it has a large generic pharmaceutical industry and a higher availability of medicines than other countries at the same economic level.
FINDINGS: The availability of two or more classes of blood pressure-lowering drugs was lower in low-income and middle-income countries (except for India) than in high-income countries. The proportion of communities with four drug classes available was 94% in high-income countries (108 of 115 communities), 76% in India (68 of 90), 71% in upper-middle-income countries (90 of 126), 47% in lower-middle-income countries (107 of 227), and 13% in low-income countries (nine of 68). The proportion of households unable to afford two blood pressure-lowering medicines was 31% in low-income countries (1069 of 3479 households), 9% in middle-income countries (5602 of 65 471), and less than 1% in high-income countries (44 of 10 880). Participants with known hypertension in communities that had all four drug classes available were more likely to use at least one blood pressure-lowering medicine (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2·23, 95% CI 1·59-3·12); p<0·0001), combination therapy (1·53, 1·13-2·07; p=0·054), and have their blood pressure controlled (2·06, 1·69-2·50; p<0·0001) than were those in communities where blood pressure-lowering medicines were not available. Participants with known hypertension from households able to afford four blood pressure-lowering drug classes were more likely to use at least one blood pressure-lowering medicine (adjusted OR 1·42, 95% CI 1·25-1·62; p<0·0001), combination therapy (1·26, 1·08-1·47; p=0·0038), and have their blood pressure controlled (1·13, 1·00-1·28; p=0·0562) than were those unable to afford the medicines.
INTERPRETATION: A large proportion of communities in low-income and middle-income countries do not have access to more than one blood pressure-lowering medicine and, when available, they are often not affordable. These factors are associated with poor blood pressure control. Ensuring access to affordable blood pressure-lowering medicines is essential for control of hypertension in low-income and middle-income countries.
FUNDING: Population Health Research Institute, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario, Canadian Institutes of Health Research Strategy for Patient Oriented Research through the Ontario SPOR Support Unit, the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, pharmaceutical companies (with major contributions from AstraZeneca [Canada], Sanofi Aventis [France and Canada], Boehringer Ingelheim [Germany amd Canada], Servier, and GlaxoSmithKline), Novartis and King Pharma, and national or local organisations in participating countries.
METHODS: We surveyed one key stakeholder from each of 27 countries with expertise in survivorship care on questions including the components/structure of follow-up care, delivery of treatment summaries and survivorship care plans, and involvement of primary care in survivorship. Descriptive analyses were performed to characterize results across countries and variations between the WHO income categories (low, middle, high). We also performed a qualitative content analysis of narratives related to survivorship care challenges to identify major themes.
RESULTS: Seven low- or /lower-middle-income countries (LIC/LMIC), seven upper-middle-income countries (UMIC), and 13 high-income countries (HICs) were included in this study. Results indicate that 44.4% of countries with a National Cancer Control Plan currently address survivorship care. Additional findings indicate that HICs use guidelines more often than those in LICs/LMICs and UMICs. There was great variation among countries regardless of income level. Common challenges include issues with workforce, communication and care coordination, distance/transportation issues, psychosocial support, and lack of focus on follow-up care.
CONCLUSION: This information can guide researchers, providers, and policy makers in efforts to improve the quality of survivorship care on a national and global basis. As the number of cancer survivors increases globally, countries will need to prioritize their long-term needs. Future efforts should focus on efforts to bridge oncology and primary care, building international partnerships, and implementation of guidelines.