Top Banner

of 16

Towards a standardised methodology for measuring the burden of disability due to injury

Jan 19, 2015

ReportDownload

Education

jahaagsma

 

  • 1. WP5 In jury Disability Indicators T owards a standardised methodology for measuring the burden of disability due to injury Juanita HaagsmaDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC Safety 2010, September 23rd 2010 INTEGRIS Integration of European Injury Statistics FP7 project of the EU Injury Database

2. Priority setting

  • There are many threats to human health
  • Evidence-based health policy requiresfocusing on the most relevant ones
  • Injury indicators aim to support decision makers in establishing the priority of injury

3. Disability Adjusted Life Year (DALY)

  • Integration of different disease end-points
    • effects vary widely in severity and time scale (acute and chronic effects, mortality)
  • Comparison of different diseases
    • priority setting for intervention
  • Balancing of competing risks
    • positive and negative effects of interventions
  • Cost-effectiveness analyses
    • to compare various preventive and curative interventions

4. Theoretical example of the DALY 5. Years lived with disability (YLD)

  • To calculate the disability component of the DALY data are required on:
  • Incidence
  • Age distribution of the cases
  • Disability weights
  • Duration of the health state
  • Standarised methodology needed!

6. WP5 Injury Disability Indicators

  • Inventory of available methods to assess
  • the disability component of injury
  • Key questions
  • a) Which injury cases should be included?
  • b) How to distinguish cases by injury diagnoses?
  • c) How to link injury diagnosis to disability information?

INTEGRIS Integration of European Injury Statistics FP7 project of the EU Injury Database 7. Q1. Selection of injury cases

  • Hospital based incidence data
  • Patients treated at the ED
  • Patients admitted to hospital
  • Underestimation of consequences
  • of less severe injuries
  • (e.g. low ED density)
  • Representativeness?

8. Q2. Distinguish cases by injury diagnosis

  • Linkage of data to disability information
  • Homogeneous groupings
  • Age
  • Gender
  • Injury location
  • Injury type
  • Admission to hospital (yes/no)
  • Anatomical classification?
  • Comparison ICE, Barrell matrix and EUROCOST -> EUROCOST

9. Q3. Link diagnosis to disability information

  • Linkage of injury diagnosis to disability information
  • 1) the proportion of injury cases with lifelong consequences
  • 2) the disability weight of temporary and lifelong consequences

10. Deriving disability weights

  • Two distinct methods to render disability disability weights:
  • - Empirical approach using EQ-5D or other intrument
  • (UK burden of injury study, Polinder et al., etc.)
  • - Panel study approach
  • (Global Burden of Disease study, Dutch disability weights study, etc.)

11. Disability weight for each health state YLD YLD YLD YLD 12. Disability weight for each health state YLD YLD YLD 13. 87 Disability weights 14. Implementation

  • Implementation recommended by WP5

15. Application in Dutch disease ranking estimates

  • Incidence data
  • Hospitalized
  • ED treated
  • GP consultations
  • -> incidence same
  • -> higher ranking all injuries
  • -> home and leisure injuries in top 10

16.

  • Thank you for your attention!
  • [email_address]
  • www.rp7integris.eu