Background Ending the global tobacco epidemic is a defining challenge in global health. Timely and comprehensive estimates of the prevalence of smoking tobacco use and attributable disease burden are needed to guide tobacco control efforts nationally and globally. MethodsWe estimated the prevalence of smoking tobacco use and attributable disease burden for 204 countries and territories, by age and sex, from 1990 to 2019 as part of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study. We modelled multiple smoking-related indicators from 3625 nationally representative surveys. We completed systematic reviews and did Bayesian meta-regressions for 36 causally linked health outcomes to estimate non-linear dose-response risk curves for current and former smokers. We used a direct estimation approach to estimate attributable burden, providing more comprehensive estimates of the health effects of smoking than previously available. Findings Globally in 2019, 1•14 billion (95% uncertainty interval 1•13-1•16) individuals were current smokers, who consumed 7•41 trillion (7•11-7•74) cigarette-equivalents of tobacco in 2019. Although prevalence of smoking had decreased significantly since 1990 among both males (27•5% [26•5-28•5] reduction) and females (37•7% [35•4-39•9] reduction) aged 15 years and older, population growth has led to a significant increase in the total number of smokers from 0•99 billion (0•98-1•00) in 1990. Globally in 2019, smoking tobacco use accounted for 7•69 million (7•16-8•20) deaths and 200 million (185-214) disability-adjusted life-years, and was the leading risk factor for death among males (20•2% [19•3-21•1] of male deaths). 6•68 million [86•9%] of 7•69 million deaths attributable to smoking tobacco use were among current smokers. Interpretation In the absence of intervention, the annual toll of 7•69 million deaths and 200 million disability-adjusted life-years attributable to smoking will increase over the coming decades. Substantial progress in reducing the prevalence of smoking tobacco use has been observed in countries from all regions and at all stages of development, but a large implementation gap remains for tobacco control. Countries have a clear and urgent opportunity to pass strong, evidencebased policies to accelerate reductions in the prevalence of smoking and reap massive health benefits for their citizens. Funding Bloomberg Philanthropies and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Substantial global effort has been devoted to curtailing the tobacco epidemic over the past two decades, especially after the adoption of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control1 by the World Health Organization in 2003. In 2015, in recognition of the burden resulting from tobacco use, strengthened tobacco control was included as a global development target in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development2. Here we show that comprehensive tobacco control policies—including smoking bans, health warnings, advertising bans and tobacco taxes—are effective in reducing smoking prevalence; amplified positive effects are seen when these policies are implemented simultaneously within a given country. We find that if all 155 countries included in our counterfactual analysis had adopted smoking bans, health warnings and advertising bans at the strictest level and raised cigarette prices to at least 7.73 international dollars in 2009, there would have been about 100 million fewer smokers in the world in 2017. These findings highlight the urgent need for countries to move toward an accelerated implementation of a set of strong tobacco control practices, thus curbing the burden of smoking-attributable diseases and deaths.

IntroductionAs non-communicable disease (NCD) burden rises worldwide, community-based programmes are a promising strategy to bridge gaps in NCD care. The HealthRise programme sought to improve hypertension and diabetes management for underserved communities in nine sites across Brazil, India, South Africa and the USA between 2016 and 2018. This study presents findings from the programme’s endline evaluation.MethodsThe evaluation utilises a mixed-methods quasi-experimental design. Process indicators assess programme implementation; quantitative data examine patients’ biometric measures and qualitative data characterise programme successes and challenges. Programme impact was assessed using the percentage of patients meeting blood pressure and A1c treatment targets and tracking changes in these measures over time.ResultsAlmost 60 000 screenings, most of them in India, resulted in 1464 new hypertension and 295 new diabetes cases across sites. In Brazil, patients exhibited statistically significant reductions in blood pressure and A1c. In Shimla, India, and in South Africa, country with the shortest implementation period, there were no differences between patients served by facilities in HealthRise areas relative to comparison areas. Among participating patients with diabetes in Hennepin and Ramsey counties and hypertension patients in Hennepin County, the percentage of HealthRise patients meeting treatment targets at endline was significantly higher relative to comparison group patients. Qualitative analysis identified linking different providers, services, communities and information systems as positive HealthRise attributes. Gaps in health system capacities and sociodemographic factors, including poverty, low levels of health education and limited access to nutritious food, are remaining challenges.ConclusionsFindings from Brazil and the USA indicate that the HealthRise model has the potential to improve patient outcomes. Short implementation periods and strong emphasis on screening may have contributed to the lack of detectable differences in other sites. Community-based care cannot deliver its full potential if sociodemographic and health system barriers are not addressed in tandem.

ObjectiveTo conduct a landscape assessment of public knowledge of cardiovascular disease risk factors and acute myocardial infarction symptoms, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and automated external defibrillator (AED) awareness and training in three underserved communities in Brazil.MethodsA cross-sectional, population-based survey of non-institutionalised adults age 30 or greater was conducted in three municipalities in Eastern Brazil. Data were analysed as survey-weighted percentages of the sampled populations.Results3035 surveys were completed. Overall, one-third of respondents was unable to identify at least one cardiovascular disease risk factor and 25% unable to identify at least one myocardial infarction symptom. A minority of respondents had received training in CPR or were able to identify an AED. Low levels of education and low socioeconomic status were consistent predictors of lower knowledge levels of cardiovascular disease risk factors, acute coronary syndrome symptoms and CPR and AED use.ConclusionsIn three municipalities in Eastern Brazil, overall public knowledge of cardiovascular disease risk factors and symptoms, as well as knowledge of appropriate CPR and AED use was low. Our findings indicate the need for interventions to improve public knowledge and response to acute cardiovascular events in Brazil as a first step towards improving health outcomes in this population. Significant heterogeneity in knowledge seen across sites and socioeconomic strata indicates a need to appropriately target such interventions.

No abstract

Background Community-based health interventions are increasingly viewed as models of care that can bridge healthcare gaps experienced by underserved communities in the United States (US). With this study, we sought to assess the impact of such interventions, as implemented through the US HealthRise program, on hypertension and diabetes among underserved communities in Hennepin, Ramsey, and Rice Counties, Minnesota. Methods and findings HealthRise patient data from June 2016 to October 2018 were assessed relative to comparison patients in a difference-in-difference analysis, quantifying program impact on reducing systolic blood pressure (SBP) and hemoglobin A1c, as well as meeting clinical targets (< 140 mmHg for hypertension, < 8% Al1c for diabetes), beyond routine care. For hypertension, HealthRise participation was associated with SBP reductions in Rice (6.9 mmHg [95% confidence interval: 0.9–12.9]) and higher clinical target achievement in Hennepin (27.3 percentage-points [9.8–44.9]) and Rice (17.1 percentage-points [0.9 to 33.3]). For diabetes, HealthRise was associated with A1c decreases in Ramsey (1.3 [0.4–2.2]). Qualitative data showed the value of home visits alongside clinic-based services; however, challenges remained, including community health worker retention and program sustainability. Conclusions HealthRise participation had positive effects on improving hypertension and diabetes outcomes at some sites. While community-based health programs can help bridge healthcare gaps, they alone cannot fully address structural inequalities experienced by many underserved communities.

Background Community-based health interventions are increasingly viewed as models of care that can bridge healthcare gaps experienced by underserved communities in the United States (US). With this study, we sought to assess the impact of such interventions, as implemented through the US HealthRise program, on hypertension and diabetes among underserved communities in Hennepin, Ramsey, and Rice Counties, Minnesota. Methods and findings HealthRise patient data from June 2016 to October 2018 were assessed relative to comparison patients in a difference-in-difference analysis, quantifying program impact on reducing systolic blood pressure (SBP) and hemoglobin A1c, as well as meeting clinical targets (< 140 mmHg for hypertension, < 8% Al1c for diabetes), beyond routine care. For hypertension, HealthRise participation was associated with SBP reductions in Rice (6.9 mmHg [95% confidence interval: 0.9-12.9]) and higher clinical target achievement in Hennepin (27.3 percentage-points [9.8-44.9]) and Rice (17.1 percentage-points [0.9 to 33.3]). For diabetes, HealthRise was associated with A1c decreases in Ramsey (1.3 [0.4-2.2]). Qualitative data showed the value of home visits alongside clinic-based services; however, challenges remained, including community health worker retention and program sustainability. Conclusions HealthRise participation had positive effects on improving hypertension and diabetes outcomes at some sites. While community-based health programs can help bridge healthcare gaps, they alone cannot fully address structural inequalities experienced by many underserved communities.