Author
Listed:
- Mohsen Abbasi-Kangevari
- Naser Ahmadi
- Nima Fattahi
- Negar Rezaei
- Mohammad-Reza Malekpour
- Seyyed-Hadi Ghamari
- Sahar Saeedi Moghaddam
- Sina Azadnajafabad
- Zahra Esfahani
- Ali-Asghar Kolahi
- Shahin Roshani
- Sahba Rezazadeh-Khadem
- Fateme Gorgani
- Seyyed Nima Naleini
- Shohreh Naderimagham
- Bagher Larijani
- Farshad Farzadfar
Abstract
Background: Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) affects four million people worldwide annually and has an estimated lifetime prevalence of 5−10% in the general population. Worldwide, there are significant heterogeneities in coping approaches of healthcare systems with PUD in prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up. Quantifying and benchmarking health systems’ performance is crucial yet challenging to provide a clearer picture of the potential global inequities in the quality of care. Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the health-system quality-of-care and inequities for PUD among age groups and sexes worldwide. Methods: Data were derived from the Global Burden of Disease Study 1990–2019. Principal-Component-Analysis was used to combine age-standardized mortality-to-incidence-ratio, disability-adjusted-life-years-to-prevalence-ratio, prevalence-to-incidence-ratio, and years-of-life-lost-to-years-lived-with-disability-into a single proxy named Quality-of-Care-Index (QCI). QCI was used to compare the quality of care among countries. QCI’s validity was investigated via correlation with the cause-specific Healthcare-Access-and-Quality-index, which was acceptable. Inequities were presented among age groups and sexes. Gender Disparity Ratio was obtained by dividing the score of women by that of men. Results: Global QCI was 72.6 in 1990, which increased by 14.6% to 83.2 in 2019. High-income-Asia-pacific had the highest QCI, while Central Latin America had the lowest. QCI of high-SDI countries was 82.9 in 1990, which increased to 92.9 in 2019. The QCI of low-SDI countries was 65.0 in 1990, which increased to 76.9 in 2019. There was heterogeneity among the QCI-level of countries with the same SDI level. QCI typically decreased as people aged; however, this gap was more significant among low-SDI countries. The global Gender Disparity Ratio was close to one and ranged from 0.97 to 1.03 in 100 of 204 countries. Conclusion: QCI of PUD improved dramatically during 1990–2019 worldwide. There are still significant heterogeneities among countries on different and similar SDI levels.
Suggested Citation
Mohsen Abbasi-Kangevari & Naser Ahmadi & Nima Fattahi & Negar Rezaei & Mohammad-Reza Malekpour & Seyyed-Hadi Ghamari & Sahar Saeedi Moghaddam & Sina Azadnajafabad & Zahra Esfahani & Ali-Asghar Kolahi , 2022.
"Quality of care of peptic ulcer disease worldwide: A systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 1990–2019,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(8), pages 1-15, August.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0271284
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0271284
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0271284. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.