| Literature DB >> 28119387 |
Chris Kypridemos1, Maria Guzman-Castillo1, Lirije Hyseni1, Graeme L Hickey2, Piotr Bandosz1,3, Iain Buchan4, Simon Capewell1, Martin O'Flaherty1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the impact and equity of existing and potential UK salt reduction policies on primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and gastric cancer (GCa) in England.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiovascular disease; Gastric Cancer; Microsimulation; Public health policy; Salt
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28119387 PMCID: PMC5278253 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013791
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 2.692
Figure 1Modelled trends of median salt consumption in English population aged 30–84 under the four simulated scenarios. Error bars represent IQRs.
IMPACTNCD key assumptions
| Population module | Migration is not considered. |
| Social mobility is not considered. | |
| QIMD is a marker of relative area deprivation with several versions since 2003. We considered all version of QIMD identical. | |
| We assume all salt that is consumed is excreted from urine and all urine sodium comes from salt consumption. | |
| We assume that the surveys used are truly representative of the population. | |
| We assume that the decline in salt consumption observed since 2003 was fully attributable to the implemented policy. | |
| Disease module | We assume multiplicative risk effects. |
| We assume log-linear dose–response for the continuous risk factors. | |
| We assume that the effects of the risk factors on incidence and mortality are equal and risk factors are not modifying survival. | |
| We assume 5-year mean lag time for CVD and 8-year for GCa (except for the cumulative effect of smoking on GCa where lag was assumed similar to CVD one). | |
| We assume 100% risk reversibility. | |
| We assume that trends in disease incidence are attributable only to trends of the relevant modelled risk factors. | |
| Only well-accepted associations between upstream and downstream risk factors that have been observed in longitudinal studies are considered. However, the magnitudes of the associations are extracted from a series of nationally representative cross-sectional surveys (Health Survey for England). | |
| For GCa, we assume that survival of 10 years after diagnosis equals remission. |
CVD, cardiovascular disease; GCa, gastric cancer; QIMD, quantile group of Index of Multiple Deprivation.
Effectiveness of current policy compared with the ‘no intervention’ scenario by quantile group of Index of Multiple Deprivation (QIMD)
| CPP absolute reduction in thousands | CPP relative percentage reduction | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| QIMD | CVD | GCa | CVD | GCa |
| 1 (least deprived) | 9.7 (4.6 to 16.2) | 1.0 (−0.1 to 2.1) | 4.1% (1.9% to 6.5%) | 7.3% (−0.9% to 15.3%) |
| 2 | 11.7 (5.5 to 18.8) | 1.1 (0.0 to 2.3) | 4.4% (2.3% to 6.8%) | 7.8% (0.0% to 16.1%) |
| 3 | 11.3 (5.3 to 17.8) | 1.0 (−0.2 to 2.0) | 4.3% (2.2% to 6.4%) | 6.9% (−1.3% to 14.7%) |
| 4 | 10.8 (5.0 to 17.5) | 0.8 (−0.1 to 1.9) | 4.3% (2.1% to 6.7%) | 6.5% (−1.0% to 15.6%) |
| 5 (most deprived) | 9.2 (3.8 to 15.5) | 0.9 (−0.2 to 2.0) | 3.9% (1.6% to 6.0%) | 7.2% (−2.1% to 15.6%) |
| Slope (crude) | −0.7 (95% CI −1.6 to 0.2) | −0.4 (95% CI −0.6 to −0.2) | −2.9% (95% CI −6.1% to 0.4%) | −1.6% (95% CI −2.8% to −0.3%) |
| Slope (directly age and sex-standardised) | 4.7 (95% CI 3.8 to 5.7) | 0.2 (95% CI 0.0 to 0.3) | −0.1% (95% CI −0.5% to 0.2%) | −1.5% (95% CI −2.7% to −0.2%) |
Absolute and relative median reductions of cases prevented or postponed (CPP) are presented for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and gastric cancer (GCa).
The slope for absolute and relative reduction represents the absolute and relative equity slope index, respectively.
Brackets contain IQRs for the estimated CPP and 95% CIs for the slopes.
Additional cases and deaths that can be potentially prevented or postponed (CPP, DPP) from the addition of structural policies to current policy, and under the ‘ideal scenario’
| Cardiovascular disease | Gastric cancer | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scenario | CPP in thousands | DPP in thousands | CPP in thousands | DPP in thousands |
| Feasible | 18.7 (8.0 to 29.5; Ps=90%) | 3.6 (−0.4 to 8.1; Ps=72%) | 1.2 (−0.2 to 3.0; Ps=72%) | 0.7 (−0.9 to 2.3; Ps=63%) |
| Ideal | 73.2 (53.9 to 94.3; Ps=100%) | 11.0 (6.5 to 16.1; Ps=95%) | 6.3 (3.4 to 9.6; Ps=94%) | 3.1 (1.1 to 5.1; Ps=86%) |
Compared with the current policy projections for 2015 to 2030.
Brackets contain the respective IQRs and the probability of superiority (Ps).
Additional effectiveness of structural policies compared with the ‘current policy’ scenario by quantile group of Index of Multiple Deprivation (QIMD)
| ‘Feasible’ scenario | CPP absolute reduction in thousands | CPP relative percentage reduction | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| QIMD | CVD | GCa | CVD | GCa |
| 1 (least deprived) | 2.7 (−1.0 to 6.4) | 0.3 (−0.7 to 1.1) | 1.6% (−0.5% to 3.6%) | 2.6% (−6.2% to 10.3%) |
| 2 | 2.4 (−1.2 to 6.6) | 0.2 (−0.7 to 1.2) | 1.3% (−0.7% to 3.6%) | 2.4% (−6.6% to 10.4%) |
| 3 | 2.8 (−1.0 to 6.8) | 0.2 (−0.7 to 1.2) | 1.5% (−0.7% to 3.6%) | 2.4% (−7.0% to 10.2%) |
| 4 | 2.8 (−1.3 to 7.0) | 0.2 (−0.7 to 1.0) | 1.6% (−0.7% to 3.9%) | 2.2% (−7.5% to 11.2%) |
| 5 (most deprived) | 3.3 (−0.9 to 7.3) | 0.3 (−0.7 to 1.2) | 1.8% (−0.6% to 4.0%) | 2.7% (−7.7% to 11.6%) |
| Slope | 0.6 (95% CI 0.0 to 1.1) | 0.0 (95% CI −0.1 to 0.2) | 0.2% (95% CI −0.1% to 0.5%) | 0.3% (95% CI −1.1% to 1.6%) |
| Slope (directly age and sex-standardised) | 1.7 (95% CI 1.1 to 2.3) | 0.1 (95% CI 0.0 to 0.2) | 0.1% (95% CI −0.2% to 0.4%) | −0.2% (95% CI −1.6% to 1.1%) |
Absolute and relative reductions of cases prevented or postponed (CPP) are presented for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and gastric cancer (GCa).
The slope for absolute and relative reduction represents the absolute and relative equity slope index, respectively.
Brackets contain IQRs for the estimated CPP and 95% CIs for the slopes.
The additional effectiveness of ‘ideal’ compared with the ‘current policy’ scenario by quantile group of Index of Multiple Deprivation (QIMD)
| ‘Ideal’ scenario | CPP absolute reduction in thousands | CPP relative percentage reduction | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| QIMD | CVD | GCa | CVD | GCa |
| 1 (least deprived) | 7.7 (3.3 to 12.6) | 0.8 (−0.3 to 1.7) | 4.2% (2.0% to 6.5%) | 6.7% (−2.7% to 15.2%) |
| 2 | 8.2 (3.6 to 12.6) | 0.7 (−0.2 to 1.7) | 4.1% (1.9% to 6.2%) | 5.6% (−1.7% to 14.4%) |
| 3 | 8.9 (4.0 to 14.4) | 1.0 (−0.1 to 2.0) | 4.4% (2.1% to 6.9%) | 8.5% (−0.9% to 17.4%) |
| 4 | 8.6 (3.5 to 13.3) | 0.7 (−0.2 to 1.6) | 4.4% (1.9% to 6.7%) | 6.8% (−2.0% to 15.8%) |
| 5 (most deprived) | 9.7 (4.7 to 14.8) | 1.0 (0.1 to 1.9) | 4.9% (2.5% to 7.1%) | 9.3% (1.0% to 18.4%) |
| Slope | 2.1 (95% CI 1.4 to 2.8) | 0.3 (95% CI 0.1 to 0.4) | 0.8% (95% CI 0.5% to 1.2%) | 3.4% (95% CI 2.0% to 4.7%) |
| Slope (directly age and sex-standardised) | 5.7 (95% CI 5.0 to 6.3) | 0.6 (95% CI 0.4 to 0.7) | 0.7% (95% CI 0.3% to 1.0%) | 2.9% (95% CI 1.5% to 4.3%) |
Absolute and relative reductions of cases prevented or postponed (CPP) are presented for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and gastric cancer (GCa).
The slope for absolute and relative reduction represents the absolute and relative equity slope index, respectively.
Brackets contain IQRs for the estimated CPP and 95% CIs for the slopes.
Figure 2Number of deaths from cardiovascular disease and gastric cancer in England, by year and sex for ages 30–84. Office for National Statistics (ONS)-reported deaths (observed) versus IMPACTNCD-estimated. Observed deaths after 2010 were adjusted to account for changes in the ICD-10 version used by ONS since 2011.36 Error bars represent IQRs.