May measurement month 2017 : an analysis of blood pressure screening results worldwide
- Beaney, Thomas, Schutte, Aletta, Tomaszewski, Maciej, Ariti, Cono, Burrell, Louise, Castillo, Rafael, Charchar, Fadi, Damasceno, Albertino, Kruger, Ruan, Lackland, Daniel, Nilsson, Peter, Prabhakaran, Dorairaj, Ramirez, Agustin, Schlaich, Markus, Wang, Jiguang, Weber, Michael, Poulter, Neil
- Authors: Beaney, Thomas , Schutte, Aletta , Tomaszewski, Maciej , Ariti, Cono , Burrell, Louise , Castillo, Rafael , Charchar, Fadi , Damasceno, Albertino , Kruger, Ruan , Lackland, Daniel , Nilsson, Peter , Prabhakaran, Dorairaj , Ramirez, Agustin , Schlaich, Markus , Wang, Jiguang , Weber, Michael , Poulter, Neil
- Date: 2018
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: The Lancet Global Health Vol. 6, no. 7 (2018), p. e736-e743
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Background: Increased blood pressure is the biggest contributor to the global burden of disease and mortality. Data suggest that less than half of the population with hypertension is aware of it. May Measurement Month was initiated to raise awareness of the importance of blood pressure and as a pragmatic interim solution to the shortfall in screening programmes. Methods: This cross-sectional survey included volunteer adults (≥18 years) who ideally had not had their blood pressures measured in the past year. Each participant had their blood pressure measured three times and received a a questionnaire about demographic, lifestyle, and environmental factors. The primary objective was to raise awareness of blood pressure, measured by number of countries involved, number of people screened, and number of people who have untreated or inadequately treated hypertension (defined as systolic blood pressure ≥140 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure ≥90 mm Hg, or both, or on the basis of receiving antihypertensive medication). Multiple imputation was used to estimate the mean of the second and third blood pressure readings if these were not recorded. Measures of association were analysed using linear mixed models. Findings: Data were collected from 1 201 570 individuals in 80 countries. After imputation, of the 1 128 635 individuals for whom a mean of the second and third readings was available, 393 924 (34·9%) individuals had hypertension. 153 905 (17·3%) of 888 616 individuals who were not receiving antihypertensive treatment were hypertensive, and 105 456 (46·3%) of the 227 721 individuals receiving treatment did not have controlled blood pressure. Significant differences in adjusted blood pressures and hypertension prevalence were apparent between regions. Adjusted blood pressure was higher in association with antihypertensive medication, diabetes, cerebrovascular disease, smoking, and alcohol consumption. Blood pressure was higher when measured on the right arm than on the left arm, and blood pressure was highest on Saturdays. Interpretation: Inexpensive global screening of blood pressure is achievable using volunteers and convenience sampling. Pending the set-up of systematic surveillance systems worldwide, MMM will be repeated annually to raise awareness of blood pressure. Funding: International Society of Hypertension, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Servier Pharmaceutical Co.
- Authors: Beaney, Thomas , Schutte, Aletta , Tomaszewski, Maciej , Ariti, Cono , Burrell, Louise , Castillo, Rafael , Charchar, Fadi , Damasceno, Albertino , Kruger, Ruan , Lackland, Daniel , Nilsson, Peter , Prabhakaran, Dorairaj , Ramirez, Agustin , Schlaich, Markus , Wang, Jiguang , Weber, Michael , Poulter, Neil
- Date: 2018
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: The Lancet Global Health Vol. 6, no. 7 (2018), p. e736-e743
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Background: Increased blood pressure is the biggest contributor to the global burden of disease and mortality. Data suggest that less than half of the population with hypertension is aware of it. May Measurement Month was initiated to raise awareness of the importance of blood pressure and as a pragmatic interim solution to the shortfall in screening programmes. Methods: This cross-sectional survey included volunteer adults (≥18 years) who ideally had not had their blood pressures measured in the past year. Each participant had their blood pressure measured three times and received a a questionnaire about demographic, lifestyle, and environmental factors. The primary objective was to raise awareness of blood pressure, measured by number of countries involved, number of people screened, and number of people who have untreated or inadequately treated hypertension (defined as systolic blood pressure ≥140 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure ≥90 mm Hg, or both, or on the basis of receiving antihypertensive medication). Multiple imputation was used to estimate the mean of the second and third blood pressure readings if these were not recorded. Measures of association were analysed using linear mixed models. Findings: Data were collected from 1 201 570 individuals in 80 countries. After imputation, of the 1 128 635 individuals for whom a mean of the second and third readings was available, 393 924 (34·9%) individuals had hypertension. 153 905 (17·3%) of 888 616 individuals who were not receiving antihypertensive treatment were hypertensive, and 105 456 (46·3%) of the 227 721 individuals receiving treatment did not have controlled blood pressure. Significant differences in adjusted blood pressures and hypertension prevalence were apparent between regions. Adjusted blood pressure was higher in association with antihypertensive medication, diabetes, cerebrovascular disease, smoking, and alcohol consumption. Blood pressure was higher when measured on the right arm than on the left arm, and blood pressure was highest on Saturdays. Interpretation: Inexpensive global screening of blood pressure is achievable using volunteers and convenience sampling. Pending the set-up of systematic surveillance systems worldwide, MMM will be repeated annually to raise awareness of blood pressure. Funding: International Society of Hypertension, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Servier Pharmaceutical Co.
Mapping geographical inequalities in access to drinking water and sanitation facilities in low-income and middle-income countries, 2000-17
- Authors: Rahman, Muhammad Aziz
- Date: 2020
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Lancet Global Health Vol. 8, no. 9 (2020), p. E1162-E1185
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Background Universal access to safe drinking water and sanitation facilities is an essential human right, recognised in the Sustainable Development Goals as crucial for preventing disease and improving human wellbeing. Comprehensive, high-resolution estimates are important to inform progress towards achieving this goal. We aimed to produce high-resolution geospatial estimates of access to drinking water and sanitation facilities. Methods We used a Bayesian geostatistical model and data from 600 sources across more than 88 low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) to estimate access to drinking water and sanitation facilities on continuous continent-wide surfaces from 2000 to 2017, and aggregated results to policy-relevant administrative units. We estimated mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive subcategories of facilities for drinking water (piped water on or off premises, other improved facilities, unimproved, and surface water) and sanitation facilities (septic or sewer sanitation, other improved, unimproved, and open defecation) with use of ordinal regression. We also estimated the number of diarrhoeal deaths in children younger than 5 years attributed to unsafe facilities and estimated deaths that were averted by increased access to safe facilities in 2017, and analysed geographical inequality in access within LMICs. Findings Across LMICs, access to both piped water and improved water overall increased between 2000 and 2017, with progress varying spatially. For piped water, the safest water facility type, access increased from 40.0% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 39.4-40.7) to 50.3% (50.0-50.5), but was lowest in sub-Saharan Africa, where access to piped water was mostly concentrated in urban centres. Access to both sewer or septic sanitation and improved sanitation overall also increased across all LMICs during the study period. For sewer or septic sanitation, access was 46.3% (95% UI 46.1-46.5) in 2017, compared with 28.7% (28.5-29.0) in 2000. Although some units improved access to the safest drinking water or sanitation facilities since 2000, a large absolute number of people continued to not have access in several units with high access to such facilities (>80%) in 2017. More than 253 000 people did not have access to sewer or septic sanitation facilities in the city of Harare, Zimbabwe, despite 88.6% (95% UI 87.2-89.7) access overall. Many units were able to transition from the least safe facilities in 2000 to safe facilities by 2017; for units in which populations primarily practised open defecation in 2000, 686 (95% UI 664-711) of the 1830 (1797-1863) units transitioned to the use of improved sanitation. Geographical disparities in access to improved water across units decreased in 76.1% (95% UI 71.6-80.7) of countries from 2000 to 2017, and in 53.9% (50.6-59.6) of countries for access to improved sanitation, but remained evident subnationally in most countries in 2017. Interpretation Our estimates, combined with geospatial trends in diarrhoeal burden, identify where efforts to increase access to safe drinking water and sanitation facilities are most needed. By highlighting areas with successful approaches or in need of targeted interventions, our estimates can enable precision public health to effectively progress towards universal access to safe water and sanitation. **Please note that there are multiple authors for this article therefore only the name of the Federation University Australia affiliate is provided in this record**
- Description: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation CGIAR
- Authors: Rahman, Muhammad Aziz
- Date: 2020
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Lancet Global Health Vol. 8, no. 9 (2020), p. E1162-E1185
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Background Universal access to safe drinking water and sanitation facilities is an essential human right, recognised in the Sustainable Development Goals as crucial for preventing disease and improving human wellbeing. Comprehensive, high-resolution estimates are important to inform progress towards achieving this goal. We aimed to produce high-resolution geospatial estimates of access to drinking water and sanitation facilities. Methods We used a Bayesian geostatistical model and data from 600 sources across more than 88 low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) to estimate access to drinking water and sanitation facilities on continuous continent-wide surfaces from 2000 to 2017, and aggregated results to policy-relevant administrative units. We estimated mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive subcategories of facilities for drinking water (piped water on or off premises, other improved facilities, unimproved, and surface water) and sanitation facilities (septic or sewer sanitation, other improved, unimproved, and open defecation) with use of ordinal regression. We also estimated the number of diarrhoeal deaths in children younger than 5 years attributed to unsafe facilities and estimated deaths that were averted by increased access to safe facilities in 2017, and analysed geographical inequality in access within LMICs. Findings Across LMICs, access to both piped water and improved water overall increased between 2000 and 2017, with progress varying spatially. For piped water, the safest water facility type, access increased from 40.0% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 39.4-40.7) to 50.3% (50.0-50.5), but was lowest in sub-Saharan Africa, where access to piped water was mostly concentrated in urban centres. Access to both sewer or septic sanitation and improved sanitation overall also increased across all LMICs during the study period. For sewer or septic sanitation, access was 46.3% (95% UI 46.1-46.5) in 2017, compared with 28.7% (28.5-29.0) in 2000. Although some units improved access to the safest drinking water or sanitation facilities since 2000, a large absolute number of people continued to not have access in several units with high access to such facilities (>80%) in 2017. More than 253 000 people did not have access to sewer or septic sanitation facilities in the city of Harare, Zimbabwe, despite 88.6% (95% UI 87.2-89.7) access overall. Many units were able to transition from the least safe facilities in 2000 to safe facilities by 2017; for units in which populations primarily practised open defecation in 2000, 686 (95% UI 664-711) of the 1830 (1797-1863) units transitioned to the use of improved sanitation. Geographical disparities in access to improved water across units decreased in 76.1% (95% UI 71.6-80.7) of countries from 2000 to 2017, and in 53.9% (50.6-59.6) of countries for access to improved sanitation, but remained evident subnationally in most countries in 2017. Interpretation Our estimates, combined with geospatial trends in diarrhoeal burden, identify where efforts to increase access to safe drinking water and sanitation facilities are most needed. By highlighting areas with successful approaches or in need of targeted interventions, our estimates can enable precision public health to effectively progress towards universal access to safe water and sanitation. **Please note that there are multiple authors for this article therefore only the name of the Federation University Australia affiliate is provided in this record**
- Description: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation CGIAR
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »