Allen Luke N, Pullar Jessica, Wickramasinghe Kremlin Khamarj, Williams Julianne, Roberts Nia, Mikkelsen Bente, Varghese Cherian, Townsend Nick
Centre on Population Approaches for NCD Prevention, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Health Library, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
BMJ Glob Health. 2018 Feb 19;3(1):e000535. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2017-000535. eCollection 2018.
Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are the leading cause of death and disability worldwide, with low-income and middle-income countries experiencing a disproportionately high burden. Since 2010 WHO has promoted 24 highly cost-effective interventions for NCDs, dubbed 'best buys'. It is unclear whether these interventions have been evaluated in low-income and lower-middle-income countries (LLMICs).
To systematically review research on interventions aligned to WHO 'best buys' for NCDs in LLMICs.
We searched 13 major databases and included papers conducted in the 83 World Bank-defined LLMICs, published between 1 January 1990 and 5 February 2015. Two reviewers independently screened papers and assessed risk of bias. We adopted a narrative approach to data synthesis. The primary outcomes were NCD-related mortality and morbidity, and risk factor prevalence.
We identified 2672 records, of which 36 were included (608 940 participants). No studies on 'best buys' were found in 89% of LLMICs. Nineteen of the 36 studies reported on the effectiveness of tobacco-related 'best buys', presenting good evidence for group interventions in reducing tobacco use but weaker evidence for interventions targeting individuals. There were fewer studies on smoking bans, warning labels and mass media campaigns, and no studies on taxes or marketing restrictions. There was supportive evidence that cervical screening and hepatitis B immunisation prevent cancer in LLMICs. A single randomised controlled trial supported polypharmacy for cardiovascular disease. Fourteen of the 'best buy' interventions did not have any good evidence for effectiveness in LLMICs.
We found studies on only 11 of the 24 interventions aligned with the WHO 'best buys' from LLMIC settings. Most LLMICs have not conducted research on these interventions in their populations. LLMICs should take action to implement and evaluate 'best buys' in their national context, based on national priorities, and starting with interventions with the strongest evidence base.
非传染性疾病(NCDs)是全球死亡和残疾的主要原因,低收入和中等收入国家承受着极高的负担。自2010年以来,世界卫生组织(WHO)推广了24种高成本效益的非传染性疾病干预措施,称为“最佳选择”。目前尚不清楚这些干预措施在低收入和中低收入国家(LLMICs)是否得到评估。
系统回顾在LLMICs中针对WHO非传染性疾病“最佳选择”干预措施的研究。
我们检索了13个主要数据库,并纳入了1990年1月1日至2015年2月5日期间在世界银行定义的83个LLMICs中开展的论文。两名评审员独立筛选论文并评估偏倚风险。我们采用叙述性方法进行数据综合。主要结局是非传染性疾病相关的死亡率和发病率以及危险因素患病率。
我们识别出2672条记录,其中36条被纳入(608940名参与者)。在89%的LLMICs中未发现关于“最佳选择”的研究。36项研究中的19项报告了与烟草相关“最佳选择”的有效性,为群体干预减少烟草使用提供了充分证据,但针对个体的干预证据较弱。关于吸烟禁令、警示标签和大众媒体宣传活动的研究较少,未发现关于税收或营销限制的研究。有支持性证据表明,子宫颈癌筛查和乙肝免疫接种可预防LLMICs中的癌症。一项随机对照试验支持心血管疾病的联合药物治疗。14项“最佳选择”干预措施在LLMICs中没有任何有效性的充分证据。
我们发现,在LLMICs环境中,仅对与WHO“最佳选择”相符的24项干预措施中的11项进行了研究。大多数LLMICs尚未针对其人群对这些干预措施进行研究。LLMICs应根据国家优先事项,并从证据最充分的干预措施开始,采取行动在本国实施和评估“最佳选择”。