OBJECTIVES: HIV/AIDS surveillance methods are under revision as the diversity of HIV epidemics is becoming more apparent. The so called "2nd generation surveillance (SGS) systems" aim to enhance surveillance by broadening the range of indicators to prevalence, behaviors and correlates, for a better understanding and a more complete and timely awareness of evolving epidemics. METHODS: Concepts of HIV SGS are reviewed with a special focus on injecting drug users, a major at-risk and hard to reach group in Europe, a region with mainly low or concentrated epidemics. RESULTS: The scope of HIV/AIDS surveillance needs to be broadened following principles of SGS. Specifically for IDUs we propose including hepatitis C data as indicator for injecting risk in routine systems like those monitoring sexually transmitted infections and information on knowledge and attitudes as potential major determinants of risk behavior. CONCLUSIONS: The suggested approach should lead to more complete and timely information for public health interventions, however there is a clear need for comparative validation studies to assess the validity, reliability and cost-effectiveness of traditional and enhanced HIV/AIDS surveillance systems.
To compare the 1-year (previously published) and 3-year objective and subjective cure rates, and complications, related to the use of a collagen-coated transvaginal mesh for anterior vaginal wall prolapse against a conventional anterior repair.
Randomised controlled study.
Six departments of obstetrics and gynaecology in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark.
A total of 138 women, of 55 years of age or older, admitted for stage =2 anterior vaginal wall prolapse.
The women scheduled for primary anterior vaginal wall prolapse surgery were randomised between conventional anterior colporrhaphy and surgery with a collagen-coated prolene mesh. All patients were evaluated using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) assessment before and after surgery. Symptoms related to pelvic organ prolapse were evaluated using the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) and the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20).
In order to investigate the significance and outcome of self-reported pain and fibromyalgia (FM) in a female population, 214 women with initially self-reported pain were interviewed and examined in 1990 and 1995. In 1990 the sample was categorised into four pain status groups: 46 individuals (21%) with nonchronic (recurrent) pain, 69 (32%) with chronic regional pain 42 (20%) with chronic multifocal pain and 57 with chronic widespread pain (CWP). The last group comprised 39 (18%) women with FM, fulfilling the American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria. The frequency of tender points, associated symptoms called historical variables and individuals with low education increased statistically significantly with increasing pain status. In 1995, 48 women had non-chronic pain (23%), 46 (21%) chronic regional pain, 39 (18%) chronic multifocal pain and 81 (38%) CWP; of these, 71 (33%) had FM. Eleven of the 39 women initially with FM no longer fulfilled the criteria. The risk of developing CWP among the 157 individuals with initially a lower pain status was statistically higher in women with chronic multifocal pain than in women with less pain extension. Self-reported pain constitutes a continuum of pain severity and thus of clinical and social significance. The overall outcome was poor with an increase of individuals with CWP and FM. The prognosis of chronic multifocal pain, CWP and FM was especially poor. About half of the women with non-chronic pain or chronic regional pain did not deteriorate. However, because the process of developing FM started with localised pain in most cases, self-reported pain of any severity confers a risk for developing FM. Identifying possible risk factors for FM are at present under study and will be presented separately in another report.
Drug dependency may develop during long-term benzodiazepine use, indicated, for example, by dose escalation. The first benzodiazepine chosen may affect the risk of dose escalation.
To detect possible differences in benzodiazepine use between new users of diazepam and oxazepam over time.
This 5-year prescription database study included 19 747 new benzodiazepine users, inhabitants of Norway, aged 30-60 years, with first redemption for diazepam or oxazepam.
Individuals starting on diazepam versus oxazepam were analysed by logistic regression with sex, age, other drug redemptions, prescriber's specialty, household income, education level, type of work, and vocational rehabilitation support as background variables. Time to reach a daily average intake of =1 defined daily doses (DDD) over a 3-month period was analysed using a Cox proportional hazard regression model.
New users of oxazepam had a higher risk for dose escalation compared with new users of diazepam. This was true even when accounting for differences in sociodemographic status and previous drug use (hazard ratio [HR] 1.33, 95% confidence interval = 1.17 to 1.51).
Most doctors prescribed, according to recommendations, oxazepam to individuals they may have regarded as prone to and at risk of dependency. However, these individuals were at higher risk for dose escalation even when accounting for differences in sociodemographic status and previous drug use. Differences between the two user groups could be explained by different preferences for starting drug, DDD for oxazepam being possibly too low, and some unaccounted differences in illness.
Over a period of two months in 1988 and 1989 general practitioners in the Norwegian county of Møre and Romsdal recorded all contacts with their patients. Participation was close to 100%. We report data from 10,850 surgery consultations with elderly patients (65 years and older). 60% of the consultations involved female patients, and 58% of the patients were 65-74 years old. New diagnoses were made in one-third of the cases; two-thirds were follow-ups. The most common groups of diagnoses were cardiovascular (28%), musculoskeletal (13%), psychiatric (8%) and respiratory diseases (8%). Almost 10% of all consultations were for hypertension. Drugs were prescribed in 45% of all cases. 27% of all prescriptions were for cardiovascular drugs, and 25% were for drugs for the nervous system. The 20 most common diagnoses made up more than half of the total number of diagnoses. Almost 70% of all prescriptions were for the ten most common therapeutic groups.
Department of Psychosocial Science, University of Bergen, P.O. Box 7807, N-5020 Bergen, Norway; Norwegian Competence Center for Sleep Disorders, Jonas Lies vei 65, 5021 Bergen, Norway. Electronic address: email@example.com.
We aimed to investigate the 10-year trend in the prevalence of insomnia symptoms, insomnia cases, and use of hypnotic agents in the adult Norwegian population.
Data from two representative surveys assessing identical insomnia symptoms in the adult population of Norway, one conducted in 1999-2000 (N=2001) and one conducted in 2009-2010 (N=2000), were compared.
Controlling for basic demographic variables, significant increases were found over the 10-year study period in the prevalence of sleep-onset insomnia from 13.1% to 15.2%, dissatisfaction with sleep from 8.2% to 13.6%, daytime impairment from 14.8% to 18.8%, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV) insomnia cases from 11.9% to 15.5%, and hypnotic agent use from 6.9% to 11.1%. No secular trend was found for maintenance insomnia or for early morning awakening insomnia. Across the two surveys, women reported a higher prevalence of insomnia than men. Age was positively associated with the prevalence of nocturnal sleep problems and use of hypnotic agents but was inversely associated with daytime impairment. Individuals with low socioeconomic status (SES) reported a higher prevalence of several insomnia symptoms.
Insomnia seems to be on the rise in the general adult population, which gives reason for concern. Prevention of insomnia and cost-effective interventions should receive higher priority in the future.
The Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services (NOKC) reports 30-day survival as a quality indicator for Norwegian hospitals. The indicators have been published annually since 2011 on the website of the Norwegian Directorate of Health (www.helsenorge.no), as part of the Norwegian Quality Indicator System authorized by the Ministry of Health. Openness regarding calculation of quality indicators is important, as it provides the opportunity to critically review and discuss the method. The purpose of this article is to describe the data collection, data pre-processing, and data analyses, as carried out by NOKC, for the calculation of 30-day risk-adjusted survival probability as a quality indicator.
Three diagnosis-specific 30-day survival indicators (first time acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke and hip fracture) are estimated based on all-cause deaths, occurring in-hospital or out-of-hospital, within 30 days counting from the first day of hospitalization. Furthermore, a hospital-wide (i.e. overall) 30-day survival indicator is calculated. Patient administrative data from all Norwegian hospitals and information from the Norwegian Population Register are retrieved annually, and linked to datasets for previous years. The outcome (alive/death within 30 days) is attributed to every hospital by the fraction of time spent in each hospital. A logistic regression followed by a hierarchical Bayesian analysis is used for the estimation of risk-adjusted survival probabilities. A multiple testing procedure with a false discovery rate of 5% is used to identify hospitals, hospital trusts and regional health authorities with significantly higher/lower survival than the reference. In addition, estimated risk-adjusted survival probabilities are published per hospital, hospital trust and regional health authority. The variation in risk-adjusted survival probabilities across hospitals for AMI shows a decreasing trend over time: estimated survival probabilities for AMI in 2011 varied from 80.6% (in the hospital with lowest estimated survival) to 91.7% (in the hospital with highest estimated survival), whereas it ranged from 83.8% to 91.2% in 2013.
Since 2011, several hospitals and hospital trusts have initiated quality improvement projects, and some of the hospitals have improved the survival over these years. Public reporting of survival/mortality indicators are increasingly being used as quality measures of health care systems. Openness regarding the methods used to calculate the indicators are important, as it provides the opportunity of critically reviewing and discussing the methods in the literature. In this way, the methods employed for establishing the indicators may be improved.
Cites: PLoS Med. 2010;7(11):e100100421151347
Cites: Med Care. 2010 Dec;48(12):1117-2120978451
Cites: BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12:36423088745
Cites: Qual Saf Health Care. 2003 Apr;12(2):100-612679505
Cites: Int J Qual Health Care. 2001 Dec;13(6):475-8011769750
Cites: BMJ Open. 2015;5(3):e00674125808167
Cites: BMJ. 2003 Apr 12;326(7393):816-912689983
Cites: Int J Qual Health Care. 2003 Dec;15(6):523-3014660535
Cites: Stat Med. 1994 May 15;13(9):889-9038047743
Cites: Health Care Financ Rev. 1995 Summer;16(4):107-2710151883
Cites: Heart. 1996 Jul;76(1):70-58774332
Cites: Stat Med. 1997 Dec 15;16(23):2645-649421867
Cites: Med Care. 2005 Nov;43(11):1130-916224307
Cites: Circulation. 2006 Jan 24;113(3):456-6216365198
Cites: Am J Epidemiol. 2011 Mar 15;173(6):676-8221330339