Missed opportunities for diagnosis and treatment of diabetes, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia in a Mexican American population, Cameron County Hispanic Cohort, 2003-2008.

INTRODUCTION: Diabetes, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia are common chronic diseases among Hispanics, a group projected to comprise 30% of the US population by 2050. Mexican Americans are the largest ethnically distinct subgroup among Hispanics. We assessed the prevalence of and risk factors for undiagnosed and untreated diabetes, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia among Mexican Americans in Cameron County, Texas. METHODS: We analyzed cross-sectional baseline data collected from 2003 to 2008 in the Cameron County Hispanic Cohort, a randomly selected, community-recruited cohort of 2,000 Mexican American adults aged 18 or older, to assess prevalence of diabetes, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia; to assess the extent to which these diseases had been previously diagnosed based on self-report; and to determine whether participants who self-reported having these diseases were receiving treatment. We also assessed social and economic factors associated with prevalence, diagnosis, and treatment. RESULTS: Approximately 70% of participants had 1 or more of the 3 chronic diseases studied. Of these, at least half had had 1 of these 3 diagnosed, and at least half of those who had had a disease diagnosed were not being treated. Having insurance coverage was positively associated with having the 3 diseases diagnosed and treated, as were higher income and education level. CONCLUSIONS: Although having insurance coverage is associated with receiving treatment, important social and cultural barriers remain. Failure to provide widespread preventive medicine at the primary care level will have costly consequences.

Determinants of third dose of diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP) completion among children who received DTP1 at rural immunization centres in Pakistan: a cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: In Pakistan, a high proportion of children fail to complete third dose of diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP3) after having received the first dose (DTP1). A cohort study was conducted to identify the factors predicting three doses of diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP3) completion among children who have received DTP1 at six centres of Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) in rural Pakistan. METHOD: We analyzed a cohort of mother-child pairs enrolled at DTP1 between November 2005 and May 2006 in the standard care group of a larger randomized controlled trial. Data were collected from mothers on a structured questionnaire at enrollment, and each child was followed up at clinic visits for 90 days to record dates of DTP2 and DTP3. Multivariable log-binomial regression analysis was performed to identify the independent predictors of DTP3 completion. RESULTS: Only 39% (149/378) of enrolled children completed DTP3 during the follow-up period. After adjusting for the centre of enrollment in multivariable analysis, DTP3 completion was higher among children who were < or =60 days old at enrolment [adjusted risk ratio (Adj. RR) 1.39, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06-1.82], who were living in a household with monthly household income >Rs. 3000 (US$ 50) (Adj. RR 1.76, 95% CI: 1.16-2.65), and who were living < or =10 min away from EPI centre (Adj. RR 1.31, 95% CI: 1.04-1.66). CONCLUSIONS: Interventions targeting childhood immunization dropouts should focus on bringing more children to EPI centres on-time for initial immunization. Relocation of existing EPI centres and creation of new EPI centres at appropriate locations may decrease the travel time to the EPI centres and result in fewer immunization dropouts.

Update on statistical power and sample size assessments for cost-effectiveness studies.

Traditionally, competing healthcare interventions have been compared on their efficacy or effectiveness through clinical trials or epidemiological studies. Computation of sample size and/or statistical power for a proposed study to assess the relative effectiveness of two treatments is central to planning a good study. Economic evaluation studies focus on an additional dimension by comparing these interventions with respect to their cost. With rising healthcare costs and constrained budgets, these studies are increasingly being performed to ascertain which interventions can deliver additional health benefits at a reasonable cost. The design of a cost-effectiveness study for two competing treatments will require assessments of statistical power and sample size in demonstrating both effectiveness and/or cost-effectiveness. If the level of effectiveness of one treatment is known from a clinical trial, the next step is to assess its cost-effectiveness. In other circumstances, an investigator may wish to design a study that simultaneously assesses both effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Statistical methodologies that have been proposed to address these issues are reviewed.