Global and regional levels and trends of child and adolescent morbidity from 2000 to 2016: an analysis of years lost due to disability (YLDs).

INTRODUCTION: Non-fatal health loss makes a substantial contribution to the total disease burden among children and adolescents. An analysis of these morbidity patterns is essential to plan interventions that improve the health and well-being of children and adolescents. Our objective was to describe current levels and trends in the non-fatal disease burden from 2000 to 2016 among children and adolescents aged 0-19 years. METHODS: We used years lost due to disability (YLD) estimates in WHO's Global Health Estimates to describe the non-fatal disease burden from 2000 to 2016 for the age groups 0-27 days, 28 days-11 months, 1-4 years, 5-9 years, 10-14 years and 15-19 years globally and by modified WHO region. To describe causes of YLDs, we used 18 broad cause groups and 54 specific cause categories. RESULTS: In 2016, the total number of YLDs globally among those aged 0-19 years was about 130 million, or 51 per 1000 population, ranging from 30 among neonates aged 0-27 days to 67 among older adolescents aged 15-19 years. Global progress since 2000 in reducing the non-fatal disease burden has been limited (53 per 1000 in 2000 for children and adolescents aged 0-19 years). The most important causes of YLDs included iron-deficiency anaemia and skin diseases for both sexes, across age groups and regions. For young children under 5 years of age, congenital anomalies, protein-energy malnutrition and diarrhoeal diseases were important causes of YLDs, while childhood behavioural disorders, asthma, anxiety disorders and depressive disorders were important causes for older children and adolescents. We found important variations between sexes and between regions, particularly among adolescents, that need to be addressed context-specifically. CONCLUSION: The disappointingly slow progress in reducing the global non-fatal disease burden among children and adolescents contrasts starkly with the major reductions in mortality over the first 17 years of this century. More effective action is needed to reduce the non-fatal disease burden among children and adolescents, with interventions tailored for each age group, sex and world region.

Integrated community case management of childhood illness in low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: The leading causes of mortality globally in children younger than five years of age (under-fives), and particularly in the regions of sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and Southern Asia, in 2018 were infectious diseases, including pneumonia (15%), diarrhoea (8%), malaria (5%) and newborn sepsis (7%) (UNICEF 2019). Nutrition-related factors contributed to 45% of under-five deaths (UNICEF 2019). World Health Organization (WHO) and United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), in collaboration with other development partners, have developed an approach - now known as integrated community case management (iCCM) - to bring treatment services for children 'closer to home'. The iCCM approach provides integrated case management services for two or more illnesses - including diarrhoea, pneumonia, malaria, severe acute malnutrition or neonatal sepsis - among under-fives at community level (i.e. outside of healthcare facilities) by lay health workers where there is limited access to health facility-based case management services (WHO/UNICEF 2012). OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of the integrated community case management (iCCM) strategy on coverage of appropriate treatment for childhood illness by an appropriate provider, quality of care, case load or severity of illness at health facilities, mortality, adverse events and coverage of careseeking for children younger than five years of age in low- and middle-income countries. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL on 7 November 2019, Virtual Health Library on 8 November 2019, and Popline on 5 December 2018, three other databases on 22 March 2019 and two trial registers on 8 November 2019. We performed reference checking, and citation searching, and contacted study authors to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs, controlled before-after studies (CBAs), interrupted time series (ITS) studies and repeated measures studies comparing generic WHO/UNICEF iCCM (or local adaptation thereof) for at least two iCCM diseases with usual facility services (facility treatment services) with or without single disease community case management (CCM). We included studies reporting on coverage of appropriate treatment for childhood illness by an appropriate provider, quality of care, case load or severity of illness at health facilities, mortality, adverse events and coverage of careseeking for under-fives in low- and middle-income countries. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently screened abstracts, screened full texts and extracted data using a standardised data collection form adapted from the EPOC Good Practice Data Collection Form. We resolved any disagreements through discussion or, if required, we consulted a third review author not involved in the original screening. We contacted study authors for clarification or additional details when necessary. We reported risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and hazard ratios (HR) for time to event outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CI), adjusted for clustering, where possible. We used estimates of effect from the primary analysis reported by the investigators, where possible. We analysed the effects of randomized trials and other study types separately. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven studies, of which three were cluster RCTs and four were CBAs. Six of the seven studies were in SSA and one study was in Southern Asia. The iCCM components and inputs were fairly consistent across the seven studies with notable variation for the training and deployment component (e.g. on payment of iCCM providers) and the system component (e.g. on improving information systems). When compared to usual facility services, we are uncertain of the effect of iCCM on coverage of appropriate treatment from an appropriate provider for any iCCM illness (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.19; 2 CBA studies, 5898 children; very low-certainty evidence). iCCM may have little to no effect on neonatal mortality (HR 1.01, 95% 0.73 to 1.28; 2 trials, 65,209 children; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of iCCM on infant mortality (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.26; 2 trials, 60,480 children; very low-certainty evidence) and under-five mortality (HR 1.18, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.37; 1 trial, 4729 children; very low-certainty evidence). iCCM probably increases coverage of careseeking to an appropriate provider for any iCCM illness by 68% (RR 1.68, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.27; 2 trials, 9853 children; moderate-certainty evidence). None of the studies reported quality of care, severity of illness or adverse events for this comparison. When compared to usual facility services plus CCM for malaria, we are uncertain of the effect of iCCM on coverage of appropriate treatment from an appropriate provider for any iCCM illness (very low-certainty evidence) and iCCM may have little or no effect on careseeking to an appropriate provider for any iCCM illness (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.17; 1 trial, 811 children; low-certainty evidence). None of the studies reported quality of care, case load or severity of illness at health facilities, mortality or adverse events for this comparison. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: iCCM probably increases coverage of careseeking to an appropriate provider for any iCCM illness. However, the evidence presented here underscores the importance of moving beyond training and deployment to valuing iCCM providers, strengthening health systems and engaging community systems.