Cervical cancer trend in the Republic of Kazakhstan and attitudes towards cervical cancer screening in urban and rural areas

Cervical cancer (CC) continues to be a significant global health issue, which in part can be attributed to disparities in access to CC screening services. This study aims to conduct a trend of CC in Kazakhstan and to compare attitudes towards the screening program between women living in urban and rural areas. In the first stage, we conducted a trend study of CC indicators in Kazakhstan using official statistics. In the second stage, a cross-sectional study was conducted using a structured questionnaire to assess adherence to screening. The trend study reveals a decline in cervical cancer mortality rates (from 7.15 to 5.93 per 100,000 female inhabitants) over the period studied, while the incidence remains stable (from 18.51 to 19.38 per 100,000 female inhabitants). Regional variations in Period Prevalence rates were observed. Significant differences were found in screening participation rates between urban n = 41 (74%) and rural n = 23 (38%) women, p < 0.001, as well as awareness of the screening program (urban: n = 15 (27%), rural: n = 35 (58%), p < 0.001). The trend study highlights a decrease in cervical cancer mortality rates over the specified period, accompanied by a consistent incidence rate. Additionally, regional disparities in period prevalence rates of cervical cancer were observed. The primary factor contributing to the low adherence of rural women to screening was found to be a lack of awareness regarding the screening program. Therefore, increasing awareness about the importance of screening is crucial for improving adherence rates among rural women in Kazakhstan.

The mortality burden related to COVID-19 in 2020 and 2021 - years of life lost and excess mortality in 13 countries and sub-national regions in Southern and Eastern Europe, and Central Asia

Introduction

Between 2021 and 2023, a project was funded in order to explore the mortality burden (YLL-Years of Life Lost, excess mortality) of COVID-19 in Southern and Eastern Europe, and Central Asia.

Methods

For each national or sub-national region, data on COVID-19 deaths and population data were collected for the period March 2020 to December 2021. Unstandardized and age-standardised YLL rates were calculated according to standard burden of disease methodology. In addition, all-cause mortality data for the period 2015-2019 were collected and used as a baseline to estimate excess mortality in each national or sub-national region in the years 2020 and 2021.

Results

On average, 15-30 years of life were lost per death in the various countries and regions. Generally, YLL rates per 100,000 were higher in countries and regions in Southern and Eastern Europe compared to Central Asia. However, there were differences in how countries and regions defined and counted COVID-19 deaths. In most countries and sub-national regions, YLL rates per 100,000 (both age-standardised and unstandardized) were higher in 2021 compared to 2020, and higher amongst men compared to women. Some countries showed high excess mortality rates, suggesting under-diagnosis or under-reporting of COVID-19 deaths, and/or relatively large numbers of deaths due to indirect effects of the pandemic.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that the COVID-19 mortality burden was greater in many countries and regions in Southern and Eastern Europe compared to Central Asia. However, heterogeneity in the data (differences in the definitions and counting of COVID-19 deaths) may have influenced our results. Understanding possible reasons for the differences was difficult, as many factors are likely to play a role (e.g., differences in the extent of public health and social measures to control the spread of COVID-19, differences in testing strategies and/or vaccination rates). Future cross-country analyses should try to develop structured approaches in an attempt to understand the relative importance of such factors. Furthermore, in order to improve the robustness and comparability of burden of disease indicators, efforts should be made to harmonise case definitions and reporting for COVID-19 deaths across countries.

Outpatient Health Service Utilization Among Adults with Diabetes, Hypertension and Cardiovascular Disease During the COVID-19 Pandemic - Results of Population-Based Surveys in Germany from 2019 to 2021

Purpose

Fear of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and lockdown measures may have an impact on health care utilization particularly for people with chronic diseases. We investigated changes in outpatient utilization behavior in pandemic phases among people with selected chronic diseases in Germany.

Methods

The nationwide population-based telephone surveys German Health Update (GEDA) 2019/2020 (April 2019 to September 2020) and GEDA 2021 (July to December 2021) covered 4 out of 7 pandemic phases from the pre-pandemic to the 4th pandemic wave. Data on hypertension, diabetes and major cardiovascular diseases (CVD) in the past 12 months and visiting a general practitioner (GP) or a specialist (excluding dentist) in the past 4 weeks was collected using a standardized questionnaire. Proportions and odds ratios were derived from logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, education and federal states.

Results

Among 27,967 participants aged ≥16 years, 8,449, 2,497 and 1,136 individuals had hypertension, diabetes and major CVD. Participants with these chronic diseases visited a GP or specialist significantly more often than the overall study population, irrespective of pandemic phases. Compared to the pre-pandemic phase, a significant reduction in specialist-visiting was found in the first pandemic wave among people with hypertension (34.3% vs 24.1%), diabetes (39.5% vs 25.5%) and major CVD (41.9% vs 25.6%). GP-visiting was lower only among people with hypertension (53.0% vs 46.0%). No difference in GP or specialist visiting was found in the 4th pandemic wave compared to the pre-pandemic phase.

Conclusion

The observed decrease particularly in specialist utilization among people with the selected chronic diseases at the beginning of the pandemic was not observed for the second half of 2021 despite the ongoing pandemic. Further studies are required to examine whether the temporary changes in the utilization of ambulatory health care have affected the disease management of people with chronic diseases.

The Burden of Disease due to COVID-19 (BoCO-19): A study protocol for a secondary analysis of surveillance data in Southern and Eastern Europe, and Central Asia

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has had an extensive impact on public health worldwide. However, in many countries burden of disease indicators for COVID-19 have not yet been calculated or used for monitoring. The present study protocol describes an approach developed in the project "The Burden of Disease due to COVID-19. Towards a harmonization of population health metrics for the surveillance of dynamic outbreaks" (BoCO-19). The process of data collection and aggregation across 14 different countries and sub-national regions in Southern and Eastern Europe and Central Asia is described, as well as the methodological approaches used.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study implemented in BoCO-19 is a secondary data analysis, using information from national surveillance systems as part of mandatory reporting on notifiable diseases. A customized data collection template is used to gather aggregated data on population size as well as COVID-19 cases and deaths. Years of life lost (YLL), as one component of the number of Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALY), are calculated as described in a recently proposed COVID-19 disease model (the 'Burden-EU' model) for the calculation of DALY. All-cause mortality data are collected for excess mortality sensitivity analyses. For the calculation of Years lived with disability (YLD), the Burden-EU model is adapted based on recent evidence. Because Covid-19 cases vary in terms of disease severity, the possibility and suitability of applying a uniform severity distribution of cases across all countries and sub-national regions will be explored. An approach recently developed for the Global Burden of Disease Study, that considers post-acute consequences of COVID-19, is likely to be adopted. Findings will be compared to explore the quality and usability of the existing data, to identify trends across age-groups and sexes and to formulate recommendations concerning potential improvements in data availability and quality.

DISCUSSION

BoCO-19 serves as a collaborative platform in order to build international capacity for the calculation of burden of disease indicators, and to support national experts in the analysis and interpretation of country-specific data, including their strengths and weaknesses. Challenges include inherent differences in data collection and reporting systems between countries, as well as assumptions that have to be made during the calculation process.

Exploring HPV vaccine knowledge, attitudes, barriers and information sources among parents, health professionals and teachers in Kazakhstan: a mixed-methods study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a prevalent sexually transmitted infection linked to certain types of malignant neoplasms, notably cervical cancer (CC). In Kazakhstan, a high prevalence of high oncogenic HPV types (HR-HPV) has been observed, and CC ranks as the second most common malignancy among women with a crude incidence rate of 18.3 cases per 100 000 women. The HPV vaccine, developed as the primary prevention measure against HPV infection, including the most prevalent HR-HPV, received approval from the WHO in 2009. In 2014, Kazakhstan initiated HPV vaccination as a pilot project in four sub-national regions; however, it was later in 2017 discontinued due to widespread parental refusal influenced by negative media reports. This study aims to examine knowledge, attitudes, information sources, barriers to HPV vaccination and factors associated with HPV vaccination hesitancy among different target groups in Kazakhstan prior to the HPV vaccine re-launch announced by the Ministry of Health.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This mixed-method-designed research comprises quantitative and qualitative components. Data on HPV awareness, attitudes towards HPV vaccination and sources of information will be collected through an online survey administered by parents and legal guardians, health professionals, and schoolteachers in the Republic of Kazakhstan between January 2023 and January 2024. Additionally, qualitative data on Kazakhstani parental beliefs and attitudes toward HPV vaccination will be collected through online focus group discussions.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION OF RESULTS

The study has been approved by the local ethics committee at the Kazakhstan Medical University "Higher School of Public Health" (KMU "KSPH") (No. 138 of 31.05.2021). The results will be reported in publications, at conferences among researchers and healthcare and school education professionals in Kazakhstan, and internationally.

Cross-national data on informal caregivers of older people with long-term care needs in the European population: time for a more coordinated and comparable approach

To promote long-term care policies for older adults, accurate mapping of the often invisible and insufficiently recognized role of their informal caregivers is needed. This paper measures the prevalence of informal caregivers in the European population, illustrates current difficulties in gathering unequivocal information on this topic and deals with the scientific and policy implications of the problem. Using the European Health Interview Survey (EHIS), the European Quality of Life Survey (EQLS) and the Study on Health and Ageing in Europe (SHARE), the current difficulties in gathering unequivocal information on this topic are illustrated. In most countries, the share of informal caregivers varies, sometimes markedly, among the three surveys. As for the sex of caregivers, while confirming the well-known higher prevalence of caregivers among women than among men, large variations emerge across the three surveys in most countries in respect of the two sexes. The takeaway message of the paper is that it is urgent to promote international concerted action in gathering comprehensive informal caregiving information and/or exploring in greater depth the different intercultural understandings of informal care itself.

Health of people with selected citizenships: results of the study GEDA Fokus

Background

The health situation of people with a history of migration is influenced by a variety of factors. This article provides an overview of the health of people with selected citizenships using various indicators.

Methods

The analyses are based on the survey 'German Health Update: Fokus (GEDA Fokus)', which was conducted from November 2021 to May 2022 among people with Croatian, Italian, Polish, Syrian and Turkish citizenship. The prevalence for each health outcome is presented and differentiated by sociodemographic and migration-related characteristics. Poisson regressions were performed to identify relevant factors influencing health situation.

Results

Self-assessed general health, the presence of depressive symptoms, prevalence of current smoking and the utilisation of general and specialist healthcare differed according to various factors considered here. In addition to sociodemographic determinants, the sense of belonging to society in Germany and self-reported experiences of discrimination were particularly associated with health outcomes.

Conclusions

This article highlights the heterogeneity of the health situation of people with a history of migration and points to the need for further analyses to identify the reasons for health inequalities.

Informal caregivers in Germany - who are they and which risks and resources do they have?

Background

The aim of this study is to describe the social characteristics, the health and living situation and the prevalence of behavioral risk factors of adult informal caregivers compared to non-caregivers in Germany.

Methods

We used data from the German Health Update (GEDA 2019/2020-EHIS survey) which is a cross-sectional population-based health interview survey conducted between 04/2019 and 09/2020. The sample comprised 22,646 adults living in private households. Three mutually exclusive groups of providing informal care or assistance were differentiated: intense caregivers (informal care ≥10 h/week), less-intense caregivers (informal care<10 h/week) and non-caregivers. For the three groups weighted prevalences of social characteristics, health status (self-perceived health, health-related activity limitations, chronic diseases, low back disorder or other chronic back defect, depressive symptoms), behavioral risk factors (at-risk drinking, current smoking, insufficient physical activity, non-daily fruit and vegetable consumption, obesity) and social risk factors (single household, low social support) were calculated and stratified by gender. Separate regression analyses adjusted for age-group were conducted to identify significant differences between intense and less-intense caregivers vs. non-caregivers, respectively.

Results

Overall, 6.5% were intense caregivers, 15.2% less-intense caregivers and 78.3% non-caregivers. Women provided care more often (23.9%) than men (19.3%). Informal care was most frequently provided in the age group of 45 to 64 years. Intense caregivers reported worse health status, were more often current smokers, physical inactive, obese and lived less often alone than non-caregivers. However, in age-group adjusted regression analyses only few significant differences were seen: Female and male intense caregivers had more often a low back disorder and lived less often alone compared to non-caregivers. In addition, male intense care-givers reported more often worse self-perceived health, health-related activity limitation, and the presence of chronic diseases. In contrast, less-intense caregivers and non-caregivers differed in favor of the less-intense caregivers.

Discussion

A substantial proportion of the adult German population provides informal care regularly, especially women. Intense caregivers are a vulnerable group for negative health outcomes, especially men. In particular measures to prevent low back disorder should be provided. As the necessity of providing informal care will probably increase in the future, this will be important for the society and public health.

Busch M, Haller S, Hapke U, Neuhauser H, Reitzle L, Scheidt-Nave C, Schlotmann A, Steppuhn H, Thom J, Ziese T, Rommel A. The Burden of Disease in Germany at the National and Regional Level

BACKGROUND

.Summary measures such as disability-adjusted life years (DALY) are becoming increasingly important for the standardized assessment of the burden of disease due to death and disability. The BURDEN 2020 pilot project was designed as an independent burden-of-disease study for Germany, which was based on nationwide data, but which also yielded regional estimates.

METHODS

DALY is defined as the sum of years of life lost due to death (YLL) and years lived with disability (YLD). YLL is the difference between the age at death due to disease and the remaining life expectancy at this age, while YLD quantifies the number of years individuals have spent with health impairments. Data are derived mainly from causes of death statistics, population health surveys, and claims data from health insurers.

RESULTS

In 2017, there were approximately 12 million DALY in Germany, or 14 584 DALY per 100 000 inhabitants. Conditions which caused the greatest number of DALY were coronary heart disease (2321 DALY), low back pain (1735 DALY), and lung cancer (1197 DALY). Headache and dementia accounted for a greater disease burden in women than in men, while lung cancer and alcohol use disorders accounted for a greater disease burden in men than in women. Pain disorders and alcohol use disorders were the leading causes of DALY among young adults of both sexes. The disease burden rose with age for some diseases, including cardiovascular diseases, dementia, and diabetes mellitus. For some diseases and conditions, the disease burden varied by geographical region.

CONCLUSION

The results indicate a need for age- and sex-specific prevention and for differing interventions according to geographic region. Burden of disease studies yield comprehensive population health surveillance data and are a useful aid to decision-making in health policy.

Burden of disease assessment for Germany and its regions – results from the BURDEN 2020 study

Background

Epidemiological measures such as incidence, prevalence, or deaths are essential for monitoring population health. However, evaluating them in isolation cannot adequately compare and assess the relative importance of different diseases. Assessments of the burden of disease (BoD) are therefore of growing importance in supporting health policy decisions. Using disability-adjusted life years (DALY) as a summary measure of population health, BoD integrates morbidity and mortality in a transparent approach.

Methods

Within BoD methodology, deviations in the health of the population from an ‘ideal’ health status is quantified in the unit of life years. DALY are the sum of years of life lost due to death (YLL) and years lived with disability (YLD). While YLL describe the gap between age at death and statistical life expectancy, the indicator YLD quantifies years lived with a disability or disease. Calculations were based on different primary and secondary data sources for Germany, especially cause-of-death statistics, epidemiological survey data, and statutory health insurance data.

Results

In Germany, there were about 12 million DALY in 2017, the equivalent of 14,584 DALY per 100,000 population. Coronary heart disease contributes the most to the overall burden of disease, followed by lower back pain and lung cancer. In women, headache disorders and dementias account for more DALY as compared to men. Men have a higher burden of disease from lung cancer or alcohol use disorders. Pain disorders and alcohol use disorders lead the DALY rankings for both sexes in younger adulthood. The burden due to cardiovascular disease, COPD, and diabetes mellitus increases with age and also varies by region.

Conclusions

The results suggest age- and gender-specific prevention as well as regional health care needs. BoD studies therefore provide comprehensive data for population health surveillance and can support health policy decisions.

Key messages

• The importance of specific diseases as measured by DALY differs greatly by age and gender, highlighting the need for targeted prevention measures.

• Regional patterns emerge for cardiovascular disease, COPD, and depressive disorders, among others, which may indicate health care needs.

Health situation in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic. Developments over time for selected indicators of GEDA 2019/2020 - An update

The spread of the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 in 2020 and the containment measures associated therewith have changed many aspects of daily life. An impact on health even beyond infections itself is assumed as well. The health situation of the population in the first phase of the pandemic was thus analysed using data from the German Health Update (GEDA 2019/2020-EHIS). By continuing the survey, the analyses for 2020 are completed (n=26,507 participants), whereby the focus is now on the third phase of the pandemic (second wave of infection, gradual reintroduction of containment measures). The health indicators are presented on a monthly basis. As in the first phase of the pandemic, no pandemic-related changes were observed for tobacco smoking/ second-hand smoke exposure and for received/lack of/provided support. In contrast to the first phase of the pandemic, declines in utilisation of medical services and depressive symptoms are not observed in the third phase. The increase in body weight/body mass index after the first phase of the pandemic did not continue. The survey period allows for a comparison of the periods before and as of the pandemic situation. A decrease in the medical services utilisation and depressive symptoms as well as an increase in the body weight/body mass index is observed in the period from March 2020 to January 2021 compared to the pre-pandemic period from April 2019 to March 2020.

Survey of sex/gender diversity in the GEDA 2019/2020-EHIS study - objectives, procedure and experiences

Sex/gender diversity is increasingly recognised by society and should be taken into account more in population-representative studies, as they are important data sources for targeting health promotion, prevention and care. In 2019, the Robert Koch Institute started a population-representative health survey with the study Health in Germany Update (GEDA 2019/2020-EHIS) with a modified, two-stage measures of sex/gender. The survey covered sex registered at birth and gender identity with an open response option. This article describes the aims, the procedure and the experiences with the operationalisation of sex/gender and the results. Out of 23,001 respondents, 22,826 persons are classified as cisgender, 113 persons as transgender and 29 persons as gender-diverse. 33 respondents were counted as having missing values. A survey of interviewers showed that the two-stage measures of sex/gender had a high level of acceptance overall and that there were only a few interview drop-outs. On the basis of previous experience, the modified query can be used for further surveys, but should also be adapted in perspective. For this purpose, participatory studies are desirable that focus on how the acceptance of measures of sex/gender can be further improved and how hurtful experiences in the context of the questions asked can be avoided.

The burden of injury in Central, Eastern, and Western European sub-region: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease 2019 Study

BACKGROUND

Injury remains a major concern to public health in the European region. Previous iterations of the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study showed wide variation in injury death and disability adjusted life year (DALY) rates across Europe, indicating injury inequality gaps between sub-regions and countries. The objectives of this study were to: 1) compare GBD 2019 estimates on injury mortality and DALYs across European sub-regions and countries by cause-of-injury category and sex; 2) examine changes in injury DALY rates over a 20 year-period by cause-of-injury category, sub-region and country; and 3) assess inequalities in injury mortality and DALY rates across the countries.

METHODS

We performed a secondary database descriptive study using the GBD 2019 results on injuries in 44 European countries from 2000 to 2019. Inequality in DALY rates between these countries was assessed by calculating the DALY rate ratio between the highest-ranking country and lowest-ranking country in each year.

RESULTS

In 2019, in Eastern Europe 80 [95% uncertainty interval (UI): 71 to 89] people per 100,000 died from injuries; twice as high compared to Central Europe (38 injury deaths per 100,000; 95% UI 34 to 42) and three times as high compared to Western Europe (27 injury deaths per 100,000; 95%UI 25 to 28). The injury DALY rates showed less pronounced differences between Eastern (5129 DALYs per 100,000; 95% UI: 4547 to 5864), Central (2940 DALYs per 100,000; 95% UI: 2452 to 3546) and Western Europe (1782 DALYs per 100,000; 95% UI: 1523 to 2115). Injury DALY rate was lowest in Italy (1489 DALYs per 100,000) and highest in Ukraine (5553 DALYs per 100,000). The difference in injury DALY rates by country was larger for males compared to females. The DALY rate ratio was highest in 2005, with DALY rate in the lowest-ranking country (Russian Federation) 6.0 times higher compared to the highest-ranking country (Malta). After 2005, the DALY rate ratio between the lowest- and the highest-ranking country gradually decreased to 3.7 in 2019.

CONCLUSIONS

Injury mortality and DALY rates were highest in Eastern Europe and lowest in Western Europe, although differences in injury DALY rates declined rapidly, particularly in the past decade. The injury DALY rate ratio of highest- and lowest-ranking country declined from 2005 onwards, indicating declining inequalities in injuries between European countries.

Results and Strategies for a Diversity-Oriented Public Health Monitoring in Germany

Germany is a country of immigration; 27% of the population are people with a migration background (PMB). As other countries, Germany faces difficulties in adequately including hard-to-survey populations like PMB into national public health monitoring. The IMIRA project was initiated to develop strategies to adequately include PMB into public health monitoring and to represent diversity in public health reporting. Here, we aim to synthesize the lessons learned for diversity-oriented public health monitoring and reporting in Germany. We also aim to derive recommendations for further research on migration and health. We conducted two feasibility studies (interview and examination surveys) to improve the inclusion of PMB. Study materials were developed in focus groups with PMB. A systematic review investigated the usability of the concept of acculturation. A scoping review was conducted on discrimination as a health determinant. Furthermore, core indicators were defined for public health reporting on PMB. The translated questionnaires were well accepted among the different migrant groups. Home visits increased the participation of hard-to-survey populations. In examination surveys, multilingual explanation videos and video-interpretation services were effective. Instead of using the concept of acculturation, we derived several dimensions to capture the effects of migration status on health, which were more differentiated. We also developed an instrument to measure subjectively perceived discrimination. For future public health reporting, a set of 25 core indicators was defined to report on the health of PMB. A diversity-oriented public health monitoring should include the following: (1) multilingual, diversity-sensitive materials, and tools; (2) different modes of administration; (3) diversity-sensitive concepts; (4) increase the participation of PMB; and (5) continuous public health reporting, including constant reflection and development of concepts and methods.

Burden 2020: The German Burden of Disease Study Informative, comprehensive, appealing and digital: Providing health data to users. Accessibility of scientific results in the burden context

The aim of the BURDEN 2020 project is to calculate the Burden of Disease for Germany at the national and regional level. Based on the methods of the Global Burden of Disease study, the results will assess the impact of diseases on population health thus providing a freely accessible information basis for policy making and health care planning. How can the transfer from science to society take place on a low-threshold basis? We will talk about our strategy reaching out to decision-makers within health care planning in Germany and Europe. In addition, it will be examined how we wanted our results to be accessible, which possibilities of publication we choose beyond scientific articles and what options we had when talking about research marketing. We will also have a closer look on our demands for data visualization and transparency. In an ongoing process, two things were at stake: how do we define our target groups and how we address them. It has been proven to be a good strategy to continuously build up (international) networks, to share our knowledge and implement feedback. When publishing scientific results, it has turned out to be helpful for the project to approach a well-known bi-lingual journal with a wide range of coverage. We aimed to present the pilot project online with an appealing data visualization and graphic formats. This type of presentation made it easier to approach members of the press. Also, the inclusion of current topics such as COVID-19 helped to increase the media response. There are plans to include the use of the data in media formats such as webinars. Burden of Disease assessments can be challenging in implementation and communication. Before the start, the use of the metrics for Germany had to be thoroughly explained to national stakeholders. Within the project, we had to discuss how our data should be communicated to the public, to explain strength and weaknesses, and to produce publication formats that suit different target groups.

Utilisation of outpatient medical services in Germany - Results from GEDA 2019/2020-EHIS

Outpatient health care provision plays an important role in the identification and treatment of health problems. Data are needed on the utilisation of health care services and their determinants to enable health policy decision-making and needs-based care provision. The analyses set out in this article are based on current data on the utilisation of outpatient health care services. The data stem from the German Health Update (GEDA 2019/2020-EHIS), a nationwide cross-sectional survey of the resident population in Germany that is undertaken as part of the health monitoring conducted at the Robert Koch Institute. Around 80% of the population aged 18 or over were treated at least once within twelve months by a general practitioner, 60% by a specialist, and 10% received psychiatric or psychotherapeutic treatment. Less than half of those eligible had had a stool test during the past two years, and just over half had had a colonoscopy in the past ten years. Around 80% of women and 70% of men had had their blood pressure checked within the last year, and 60% had had their blood cholesterol or blood sugar levels monitored. Over 50% reported that they had taken medically prescribed drugs in the past two weeks. In general, most of the indicators under study suggest that utilisation increases with age and that utilisation is higher among women than men, with the exception of psychiatric and psychotherapeutic services, among others.

Recommendations to plan a national burden of disease study

Background

The InfAct (Information for Action) project is a European Commission Joint Action on Health Information which has promoted the potential role of burden of disease (BoD) approaches to improve the current European Union-Health Information System (EU-HIS). It has done so by raising awareness of the concept, the methods used to calculate estimates and their potential implications and uses in policymaking. The BoD approach is a systematic and scientific effort to quantify and compare the magnitude of health loss due to different diseases, injuries, and risk factors with estimates produced by demographic characteristics and geographies for specific points in time. Not all countries have the resources to undertake such work, and may therefore start with a more restricted objective, e.g., a limited number of diseases, or the use of simple measures of population health such as disease prevalence or life expectancy. The main objective to develop these recommendations was to facilitate those countries planning to start a national burden of disease study.

Results

These recommendations could be considered as minimum requirements for those countries planning to start a BoD study and includes following elements: (1) Define the objectives of a burden of disease study within the context of your country, (2) Identify, communicate and secure the benefits of performing national burden of disease studies, (3) Secure access to the minimum required data sources, (4) Ensure the minimum required capacity and capability is available to carry out burden of disease study, (5) Establish a clear governance structure for the burden of disease study and stakeholder engagement/involvement, (6) Choose the appropriate methodological approaches and (7) Knowledge translation. These were guided by the results from our survey performed to identify the needs of European countries for BoD studies, a narrative overview from four European countries (Belgium, Germany, The Netherlands and Scotland) and the summary of a comparative study of country health profiles with national health statistics.

Conclusions

These recommendations as minimum requirements would facilitate efforts by those European countries who intend to perform national BoD studies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13690-021-00652-x.

The Excess Costs of Depression and the Influence of Sociodemographic and Socioeconomic Factors: Results from the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Adults (DEGS)

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to estimate excess costs of depression in Germany and to examine the influence of sociodemographic and socioeconomic determinants.

METHODS

Annual excess costs of depression per patient were estimated for the year 2019 by comparing survey data of individuals with and without self-reported medically diagnosed depression, representative for the German population aged 18-79 years. Differences between individuals with depression (n = 223) and without depression (n = 4540) were adjusted using entropy balancing. Excess costs were estimated using generalized linear model regression with a gamma distribution and log-link function. We estimated direct (inpatient, outpatient, medication) and indirect (sick leave, early retirement) excess costs. Subgroup analyses by social determinants were conducted for sex, age, socioeconomic status, first-generation or second-generation migrants, partnership, and social support.

RESULTS

Total annual excess costs of depression amounted to €5047 (95% confidence interval [CI] 3214-6880) per patient. Indirect excess costs amounted to €2835 (1566-4103) and were higher than direct excess costs (€2212 [1083-3341]). Outpatient (€498), inpatient (€1345), early retirement (€1686), and sick leave (€1149) excess costs were statistically significant, while medication (€370) excess costs were not. Regarding social determinants, total excess costs were highest in the younger age groups (€7955 for 18-29-year-olds, €9560 for 30-44-year-olds), whereas total excess costs were lowest for the oldest age group (€2168 for 65+) and first-generation or second-generation migrants (€1820).

CONCLUSIONS

Depression was associated with high excess costs that varied by social determinants. Considerable differences between the socioeconomic and sociodemographic subgroups need further clarification as they point to specific treatment barriers as well as varying treatment needs.

Utilisation of outpatient medical services by people with diagnosed diabetes during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany

People with diabetes regularly need outpatient medical care due to their disease and possible concomitant and secondary illnesses. Using data from the nationwide GEDA 2019/2020-EHIS survey conducted from April 2019 to September 2020, the present study examines developments in outpatient utilisation behaviour during the measures put in place to contain the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. During the observation period, people with diabetes had a significantly higher rate of utilisation of medical services provided by general practitioners (GPs) and specialists than the population as a whole. In the spring of 2020, when the restrictions were put in place, utilisation of specialist medical services by people with diabetes decreased temporarily by 46% compared to the 2019 reference period. In contrast, no relevant decline in the utilisation of medical services provided by GPs was observed, but this could be related to adaptations of care provision through telephone consultations for people with regularly requiring GP office visits. The issue examined here requires further observations in view of the renewed containment measures.

Utilization of preventive care among migrants and non-migrants in Germany: results from the representative cross-sectional study 'German health interview and examination survey for adults (DEGS1)'

BACKGROUND

In Germany, different health checks for adults are offered for primary and secondary prevention. Previous findings indicate that preventive care utilization varies according to social determinants, especially migration background. This study examined the extent to which migration background is associated with preventive care utilization, independent of factors like age and socioeconomic status and whether length of stay in Germany has a positive effect on the use of preventive care.

METHODS

The first wave of the 'German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Adults' (DEGS1) is a comprehensive data collection facilitating the description of the utilization of general health checks, dental check-ups, skin cancer screening, and cervical cancer screening among people aged 18-79 years with and without migration background. Migration background was differentiated in first-generation migrants having immigrated to Germany themselves or second-generation migrants born in Germany. First-generation migrants were further differentiated by length of stay in Germany, and second-generation migrants as having one or two parents who were born abroad. Multivariate binary logistic regression models with average marginal effects were calculated to analyse the associations between preventive care utilization and migration background.

RESULTS

The sample comprised 7987 participants, 1091 of whom had a migration background. Compared with non-migrants, women and men with migration background- particularly first-generation migrants with length of stay <=20 years in Germany - make less use of preventive care. This association was observed statistically independent from sociodemographic factors. For dental check-ups a significantly lower use was also found for first-generation migrants who have lived in Germany for more than 20 years and second-generation of migrants with two parents born abroad. Post-model predictions showed that the utilization rates of first-generation migrants are gradually converging to the average values for non-migrants.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest inequalities in realized access to preventive care for first-generation migrants particularly for those who have lived in Germany for 20 years or less. Barriers to the utilization of preventive care may be addressed by informing migrant communities about preventive health care services at an early stage after immigration using migrant-sensitive information strategies.

Corrigendum: Developments in the health situation in Germany during the initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic for selected indicators of GEDA 2019/2020-EHIS

[This corrects the article on p. 3-20 in vol. 5.].