| 1. |
- Guwatudde, D, et al.
(författare)
-
Study protocol for the SMART2D adaptive implementation trial: a cluster randomised trial comparing facility-only care with integrated facility and community care to improve type 2 diabetes outcomes in Uganda, South Africa and Sweden
- 2018
-
Ingår i: BMJ open. - : BMJ. - 2044-6055. ; 8:3, s. e019981-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is increasingly contributing to the global burden of disease. Health systems in most parts of the world are struggling to diagnose and manage T2D, especially in low-income and middle-income countries, and among disadvantaged populations in high-income countries. The aim of this study is to determine the added benefit of community interventions onto health facility interventions, towards glycaemic control among persons with diabetes, and towards reduction in plasma glucose among persons with prediabetes.Methods and analysisAn adaptive implementation cluster randomised trial is being implemented in two rural districts in Uganda with three clusters per study arm, in an urban township in South Africa with one cluster per study arm, and in socially disadvantaged suburbs in Stockholm, Sweden with one cluster per study arm. Clusters are communities within the catchment areas of participating primary healthcare facilities. There are two study arms comprising a facility plus community interventions arm and a facility-only interventions arm. Uganda has a third arm comprising usual care. Intervention strategies focus on organisation of care, linkage between health facility and the community, and strengthening patient role in self-management, community mobilisation and a supportive environment. Among T2D participants, the primary outcome is controlled plasma glucose; whereas among prediabetes participants the primary outcome is reduction in plasma glucose.Ethics and disseminationThe study has received approval in Uganda from the Higher Degrees, Research and Ethics Committee of Makerere University School of Public Health and from the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology; in South Africa from the Biomedical Science Research Ethics Committee of the University of the Western Cape; and in Sweden from the Regional Ethical Board in Stockholm. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and scientific meetings.Trial registration numberISRCTN11913581; Pre-results.
|
|
| 2. |
- Murphy, A., et al.
(författare)
-
Inequalities in the use of secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease by socioeconomic status: evidence from the PURE observational study
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Lancet Global Health. - 2214-109X. ; 6:3
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background There is little evidence on the use of secondary prevention medicines for cardiovascular disease by socioeconomic groups in countries at different levels of economic development. Methods We assessed use of antiplatelet, cholesterol, and blood-pressure-lowering drugs in 8492 individuals with self-reported cardiovascular disease from 21 countries enrolled in the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study. Defining one or more drugs as a minimal level of secondary prevention, wealth-related inequality was measured using the Wagstaff concentration index, scaled from -1 (pro-poor) to 1 (pro-rich), standardised by age and sex. Correlations between inequalities and national health-related indicators were estimated. Findings The proportion of patients with cardiovascular disease on three medications ranged from 0% in South Africa (95% CI 0-1.7), Tanzania (0-3.6), and Zimbabwe (0-5.1), to 49.3% in Canada (44.4-54.3). Proportions receiving at least one drug varied from 2.0% (95% CI 0.5-6.9) in Tanzania to 91.4% (86.6-94.6) in Sweden. There was significant (p<0.05) pro-rich inequality in Saudi Arabia, China, Colombia, India, Pakistan, and Zimbabwe. Pro-poor distributions were observed in Sweden, Brazil, Chile, Poland, and the occupied Palestinian territory. The strongest predictors of inequality were public expenditure on health and overall use of secondary prevention medicines. Interpretation Use of medication for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease is alarmingly low. In many countries with the lowest use, pro-rich inequality is greatest. Policies associated with an equal or pro-poor distribution include free medications and community health programmes to support adherence to medications. Copyright (c) The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
|
|
