Conectar
Diabetic foot ulcer is a debilitating complication of long-standing diabetes mellitus. Patients lose their earning potential, face repeated hospitalizations, and are forced to bear heavy treatment costs. This places an enormous financial burden on the patients and their families. This study seeks to ascertain the out-of-pocket expenditure among these patients and correlate it with their risk factor profile. In this hospital-based cross-sectional study, a total of 154 patients with diabetic foot ulcers or amputations have been studied with an elaborate patient questionnaire and relevant clinical examinations. The costs incurred and the risk factors of the patients were analyzed for statistical association. The median total annual out-of-pocket expenditure for the management of diabetic foot ulcers among the study participants was found to be ₹29 775 (₹9650–₹81 120) ($378.14 [$122.56–$1030.22]). Out of the total expenditure, 58.49% went towards direct medical costs, 5.64% towards direct non-medical costs, and 35.88% for indirect costs. Medications, ulcer dressing and periodic debridement have accounted for 79.26% of direct medical costs. Transportation (61.37%) and patient's loss of income (89.45%) account for the major costs under the direct non-medical and indirect cost categories, respectively. A high ulcer grade and area, long ulcer duration, and past history of ulcers have higher expenditure. Patients seeking treatment from private establishments and those engaged in professional/skilled occupations have higher expenses. Adequate dressing of foot ulcers and proper footwear are associated with lower treatment expenditure. 68.8% of the participants have faced catastrophic expenditure due to treatment costs of diabetic foot ulcers. Adequate glycaemic control and proper foot care are necessary. Patients must seek medical care at the earliest in case of foot ulceration. Clinicians must provide proper wound care, institute effective antibiotics, and manage the complications. Government and insurance schemes are required to alleviate the patients' financial burden.
This study examined whether the US President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) funding had effects beyond HIV, specifically on several measures of maternal and child health in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). The results of previous research on the question of PEPFAR health spillovers have been inconsistent. This study, using a large, multicountry panel data set of 157 LMICs including 90 recipient countries, adds to the literature.
Seven indicators including child and maternal mortality, several child vaccination rates and anaemia among childbearing-age women are important population health indicators. Panel data and difference-in-differences estimators (DID) were used to estimate the impact of the PEPFAR programme from inception in 2004 to 2018 using a comparison group of 67 LMICs. Several different models of baseline (2004) covariates were used to help balance the comparison and treatment groups. Staggered DID was used to estimate impacts since all countries did not start receiving aid at PEPFAR’s inception.
All 157 LMICs from 1990 to 2018.
90 LMICs receiving PEPFAR aid and cohorts of those countries, including those required to submit annual country operational plans (COP), other recipient countries (non-COP), and three groupings of countries based on cumulative amount of per capita aid received (high, medium, low).
PEPFAR aid to combat the HIV epidemic.
Maternal mortality and child mortality rates, vaccination rates to protect children for diphtheria, whooping cough and tetanus, measles, HepB3, and tetanus, and prevalence of anaemia in women of childbearing age.
Across PEPFAR recipient countries, large, favourable PEPFAR health effects were found for rates of childhood immunisation, child mortality and maternal mortality. These beneficial health effects were large and significant in all segments of PEPFAR recipient countries studied. We also found significant and favourable programme effects on the prevalence of anaemia in women of childbearing age in PEPFAR recipient countries receiving the most intensive financial support from the PEPFAR programme. Other recipient countries did not demonstrate significant effects on anaemia.
This study demonstrated that important health indicators, beyond HIV, have been consistently and favourably influenced by PEPFAR presence. Child and maternal mortality have been substantially reduced, and childhood immunisation rates increased. We also found no evidence of ‘crowding out’ or negative spillovers in these resource-poor countries. These findings add to the body of evidence that PEPFAR has had favourable health effects beyond HIV. The implications of these findings are that foreign aid for health in one area may have favourable health effects in other areas in recipient countries. More research is needed on the influence of the mechanisms at work that create these spillover health effects of PEPFAR.
The Re-Evaluating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions (REVISE) Trial aims to determine the impact of the proton pump inhibitor pantoprazole compared with placebo on clinically important upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding in the intensive care unit (ICU), 90-day mortality and other endpoints in critically ill adults. The objective of this report is to describe the rationale, methodology, ethics and management of REVISE.
REVISE is an international, randomised, concealed, stratified, blinded parallel-group individual patient trial being conducted in ICUs in Canada, Australia, Saudi Arabia, UK, US, Kuwait, Pakistan and Brazil. Patients≥18 years old expected to remain invasively mechanically ventilated beyond the calendar day after enrolment are being randomised to either 40 mg pantoprazole intravenously or an identical placebo daily while mechanically ventilated in the ICU. The primary efficacy outcome is clinically important upper GI bleeding within 90 days of randomisation. The primary safety outcome is 90-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes include rates of ventilator-associated pneumonia, Clostridioides difficile infection, new renal replacement therapy, ICU and hospital mortality, and patient-important GI bleeding. Tertiary outcomes are total red blood cells transfused, peak serum creatinine level in the ICU, and duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU and hospital stay. The sample size is 4800 patients; one interim analysis was conducted after 2400 patients had complete 90-day follow-up; the Data Monitoring Committee recommended continuing the trial.
All participating centres receive research ethics approval before initiation by hospital, region or country, including, but not limited to – Australia: Northern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee and Mater Misericordiae Ltd Human Research Ethics Committee; Brazil: Comissão Nacional de Ética em Pesquisa; Canada: Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board; Kuwait: Ministry of Health Standing Committee for Coordination of Health and Medical Research; Pakistan: Maroof Institutional Review Board; Saudi Arabia: Ministry of National Guard Health Affairs Institutional Review Board: United Kingdom: Hampshire B Research Ethics Committee; United States: Institutional Review Board of the Nebraska Medical Centre. The results of this trial will inform clinical practice and guidelines worldwide.
FreshRSS 