Kate Causey

BACKGROUND: Rehabilitation has often been seen as a disability-specific service needed by only few of the population. Despite its individual and societal benefits, rehabilitation has not been prioritised in countries and is under-resourced. We present global, regional, and country data for the number of people who would benefit from rehabilitation at least once during the course of their disabling illness or injury. METHODS: To estimate the need for rehabilitation, data from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019 were used to calculate the prevalence and years of life lived with disability (YLDs) of 25 diseases, impairments, or bespoke aggregations of sequelae that were selected as amenable to rehabilitation. All analyses were done at the country level and then aggregated to seven regions: World Bank high-income countries and the six WHO regions (ie, Africa, the Americas, Southeast Asia, Europe, Eastern Mediterranean, and Western Pacific). FINDINGS: Globally, in 2019, 2·41 billion (95% uncertainty interval 2·34-2·50) individuals had conditions that would benefit from rehabilitation, contributing to 310 million [235-392] YLDs. This number had increased by 63% from 1990 to 2019. Regionally, the Western Pacific had the highest need of rehabilitation services (610 million people [588-636] and 83 million YLDs [62-106]). The disease area that contributed most to prevalence was musculoskeletal disorders (1·71 billion people [1·68-1·80]), with low back pain being the most prevalent condition in 134 of the 204 countries analysed. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, this is the first study to produce a global estimate of the need for rehabilitation services and to show that at least one in every three people in the world needs rehabilitation at some point in the course of their illness or injury. This number counters the common view of rehabilitation as a service required by only few people. We argue that rehabilitation needs to be brought close to communities as an integral part of primary health care to reach more people in need. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

BACKGROUND: Air pollution is a major planetary health risk, with India estimated to have some of the worst levels globally. To inform action at subnational levels in India, we estimated the exposure to air pollution and its impact on deaths, disease burden, and life expectancy in every state of India in 2017. METHODS: , across the states of India using accessible data from multiple sources as part of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2017. The states were categorised into three Socio-demographic Index (SDI) levels as calculated by GBD 2017 on the basis of lag-distributed per-capita income, mean education in people aged 15 years or older, and total fertility rate in people younger than 25 years. We estimated deaths and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) attributable to air pollution exposure, on the basis of exposure-response relationships from the published literature, as assessed in GBD 2017; the proportion of total global air pollution DALYs in India; and what the life expectancy would have been in each state of India if air pollution levels had been less than the minimum level causing health loss. FINDINGS: . The proportion of population using solid fuels in India was 55·5% (54·8-56·2) in 2017, which exceeded 75% in the low SDI states of Bihar, Jharkhand, and Odisha. 1·24 million (1·09-1·39) deaths in India in 2017, which were 12·5% of the total deaths, were attributable to air pollution, including 0·67 million (0·55-0·79) from ambient particulate matter pollution and 0·48 million (0·39-0·58) from household air pollution. Of these deaths attributable to air pollution, 51·4% were in people younger than 70 years. India contributed 18·1% of the global population but had 26·2% of the global air pollution DALYs in 2017. The ambient particulate matter pollution DALY rate was highest in the north Indian states of Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Delhi, Punjab, and Rajasthan, spread across the three SDI state groups, and the household air pollution DALY rate was highest in the low SDI states of Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, and Assam in north and northeast India. We estimated that if the air pollution level in India were less than the minimum causing health loss, the average life expectancy in 2017 would have been higher by 1·7 years (1·6-1·9), with this increase exceeding 2 years in the north Indian states of Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, and Haryana. INTERPRETATION: India has disproportionately high mortality and disease burden due to air pollution. This burden is generally highest in the low SDI states of north India. Reducing the substantial avoidable deaths and disease burden from this major environmental risk is dependent on rapid deployment of effective multisectoral policies throughout India that are commensurate with the magnitude of air pollution in each state. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; and Indian Council of Medical Research, Department of Health Research, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India.

BACKGROUND: The association of air pollution with multiple adverse health outcomes is becoming well established, but its negative economic impact is less well appreciated. It is important to elucidate this impact for the states of India. METHODS: We estimated exposure to ambient particulate matter pollution, household air pollution, and ambient ozone pollution, and their attributable deaths and disability-adjusted life-years in every state of India as part of the Global Burden of Disease Study (GBD) 2019. We estimated the economic impact of air pollution as the cost of lost output due to premature deaths and morbidity attributable to air pollution for every state of India, using the cost-of-illness method. FINDINGS: 1·67 million (95% uncertainty interval 1·42-1·92) deaths were attributable to air pollution in India in 2019, accounting for 17·8% (15·8-19·5) of the total deaths in the country. The majority of these deaths were from ambient particulate matter pollution (0·98 million [0·77-1·19]) and household air pollution (0·61 million [0·39-0·86]). The death rate due to household air pollution decreased by 64·2% (52·2-74·2) from 1990 to 2019, while that due to ambient particulate matter pollution increased by 115·3% (28·3-344·4) and that due to ambient ozone pollution increased by 139·2% (96·5-195·8). Lost output from premature deaths and morbidity attributable to air pollution accounted for economic losses of US$28·8 billion (21·4-37·4) and $8·0 billion (5·9-10·3), respectively, in India in 2019. This total loss of $36·8 billion (27·4-47·7) was 1·36% of India's gross domestic product (GDP). The economic loss as a proportion of the state GDP varied 3·2 times between the states, ranging from 0·67% (0·47-0·91) to 2·15% (1·60-2·77), and was highest in the low per-capita GDP states of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, and Chhattisgarh. Delhi had the highest per-capita economic loss due to air pollution, followed by Haryana in 2019, with 5·4 times variation across all states. INTERPRETATION: The high burden of death and disease due to air pollution and its associated substantial adverse economic impact from loss of output could impede India's aspiration to be a $5 trillion economy by 2024. Successful reduction of air pollution in India through state-specific strategies would lead to substantial benefits for both the health of the population and the economy. FUNDING: UN Environment Programme; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; and Indian Council of Medical Research, Department of Health Research, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India.

BackgroundAir pollution is an important public health concern in China, with high levels of exposure to both ambient and household air pollution. To inform action at provincial levels in China, we estimated the exposure to air pollution and its effect on deaths, disease burden, and loss of life expectancy across all provinces in China from 1990 to 2017.MethodsIn all 33 provinces, autonomous regions, municipalities, and special administrative regions in China, we estimated exposure to air pollution, including ambient particulate matter pollution (defined as the annual gridded concentration of PM2·5), household air pollution (defined as the percentage of households using solid cooking fuels and the corresponding exposure to PM2·5), and ozone pollution (defined as average gridded ozone concentrations). We used the methods of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2017 to estimate deaths and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) attributable to air pollution, and what the life expectancy would have been if air pollution levels had been less than the minimum level causing health loss.FindingsThe average annual population-weighted PM2·5 exposure in China was 52·7 μg/m3 (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 41·0–62·8) in 2017, which is 9% lower than in 1990 (57·8 μg/m3, 45·0–67·0). We estimated that 1·24 million (95% UI 1·08–1·40) deaths in China were attributable to air pollution in 2017, including 851 660 (712 002–990 271) from ambient PM2·5 pollution, 271 089 (209 882–346 561) from household air pollution from solid fuels, and 178 187 (67 650–286 229) from ambient ozone pollution. The age-standardised DALY rate attributable to air pollution was 1513·1 per 100 000 in China in 2017, and was higher in males (1839·8 per 100 000) than in females (1198·3 per 100 000). The age-standardised death rate attributable to air pollution decreased by 60·6% (55·7–63·7) for China overall between 1990 and 2017, driven by an 85·4% (83·2–87·3) decline in household air pollution and a 12·0% (1·4–22·1) decline in ambient PM2·5 pollution. 40·0% of DALYs for COPD were attributable to air pollution, as were 35·6% of DALYs for lower respiratory infections, 26·1% for diabetes, 25·8% for lung cancer, 19·5% for ischaemic heart disease, and 12·8% for stroke. We estimated that if the air pollution level in China was below the minimum causing health loss, the average life expectancy would have been 1·25 years greater. The DALY rate per 100 000 attributable to air pollution varied across provinces, ranging from 482·3 (371·1–604·1) in Hong Kong to 1725·6 (720·4–2653·1) in Xinjiang for ambient pollution, and from 18·7 (9·1–34·0) in Shanghai to 1804·5 (1339·5–2270·1) in Tibet for household pollution. Although the overall mortality attributable to air pollution decreased in China between 1990 and 2017, 12 provinces showed an increasing trend during the past 27 years.InterpretationPollution from ambient PM2·5 and household burning of solid fuels decreased markedly in recent years in China, after extensive efforts to control emissions. However, PM2·5 concentrations still exceed the WHO Air Quality Guideline for the entire population of China, with 81% living in regions exceeding the WHO Interim Target 1, and air pollution remains an important risk factor. Sustainable development policies should be implemented and enforced to reduce the impact of air pollution on long-term economic development and population health.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation; and China National Key Research and Development Program.

We use COVID-19 case and mortality data from 1 February 2020 to 21 September 2020 and a deterministic SEIR (susceptible, exposed, infectious and recovered) compartmental framework to model possible trajectories of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections and the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions in the United States at the state level from 22 September 2020 through 28 February 2021. Using this SEIR model, and projections of critical driving covariates (pneumonia seasonality, mobility, testing rates and mask use per capita), we assessed scenarios of social distancing mandates and levels of mask use. Projections of current non-pharmaceutical intervention strategies by state-with social distancing mandates reinstated when a threshold of 8 deaths per million population is exceeded (reference scenario)-suggest that, cumulatively, 511,373 (469,578-578,347) lives could be lost to COVID-19 across the United States by 28 February 2021. We find that achieving universal mask use (95% mask use in public) could be sufficient to ameliorate the worst effects of epidemic resurgences in many states. Universal mask use could save an additional 129,574 (85,284-170,867) lives from September 22, 2020 through the end of February 2021, or an additional 95,814 (60,731-133,077) lives assuming a lesser adoption of mask wearing (85%), when compared to the reference scenario.