Search

Background: Rare diseases, also referred to as orphan diseases, are characterised by their low prevalence with majority of them are chronically debilitating and life threatening. Given the low prevalence and the widely dispersed but very small patient base for each disease, there may often be a disproportion in the availability of treatments and resources to manage patients, spur research and train experts. This is especially true in Southeast Asian countries that are currently in the process of implementing or revising their universal health coverage schemes. This paper aims to examine the status of rare disease management in Southeast Asian countries. It will serve as the basis for a more active discussion on how countries in the region can address an under-recognised rare disease burden and enhance national and regional capacities.Methods: The study consists of literature reviews and key stakeholders interviews in six focus countries, including the Philippines, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, and Thailand and five countries as best practice, comprising of France, Canada, Australia, Taiwan, and South Korea. Rare disease management initiatives across each country were examined based on the World Health Organization's framework for action in strengthening health systems.Results: The results suggest rare disease management remains challenging across Southeast Asia, as many of the focus countries face fundamental issues from basic healthcare systems to funding. Nonetheless, there are substantial improvement opportunities, including leveraging best practices from around the world and organising a multi-stakeholder and regional approach and strategy.Conclusions: Southeast Asian countries have made significant progress in the management of rare disease, but there remain key areas for substantial development opportunities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Asia-Pacific region is home to nearly half of the world's population. The region has seen a recent rapid increase in the prevalence of obesity, type-2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. The present systematic review summarizes the recent prevalence and trends of Metabolic Syndrome (MetS) among adults in countries of the Asia-Pacific Region.Methods: Data on MetS in Asia-Pacific countries were obtained using a stepwise process by searching the online Medline database using MeSH terms 'Metabolic Syndrome X' and 'Epidemiology/EP'. For the purpose of describing prevalence data for the individual countries, studies that were most recent, nationally representative or with the largest sample size were included. When evaluating secular trends in prevalence in a country we only considered studies that evaluated the temporal change in prevalence between similar populations, prospective studies based on the same population or National surveys conducted during different time periods.Results: This literature search yielded a total of 757 articles, and five additional article were identified by screening of reference lists. From this total, 18 studies were eligible to be included in the final analysis. Of the 51 Asia-Pacific countries (WHO) we only located data for 15. There was wide between country variation in prevalence of MetS. A national survey from Philippines conducted in 2003 revealed the lowest reported prevalence of 11.9% according to NCEP ATP III criteria. In contrast, the highest recorded prevalence in the region (49.0%) came from a study conducted in urban Pakistan (Karachchi, 2004). Most studies reported a higher prevalence of MetS in females and urban residents. Data on secular trends were available for China, South Korea and Taiwan. An increase in the prevalence of MetS was observed in all three countries.Conclusion: Despite differences in methodology, diagnostic criteria and age of subjects studied, the Asia-Pacific region is facing a significant epidemic of MetS. In most countries nearly 1/5th of the adult population or more were affected by MetS with a secular increase in prevalence. Strategies aimed at primary prevention are required to ameliorate a further increase in the epidemic and for the reduction of the morbidity and mortality associated with MetS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Regulations on forgoing life-sustaining treatment (LST) have developed in Asian countries including Japan, Korea and Taiwan. However, other countries are relatively unaware of these due to the language barrier. This article aims to describe and compare the relevant regulatory frameworks, using the (more familiar) situation in England as a point of reference. We undertook literature reviews to ascertain the legal and regulatory positions on forgoing LST in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and England.Main Text: Findings from a literature review are first presented to describe the development of the regulatory frameworks surrounding the option of forgoing LST in each country. Based on the findings from the four countries, we suggest five ethically important points, reflection on which should help to inform the further development of regulatory frameworks concerning end-of-life care in these countries and beyond. There should be reflection on: (1) the definition of - and reasons for defining - the 'terminal stage' and associated criteria for making such judgements; Korea and Taiwan limit forgoing LST to patients in this stage, but there are risks associated with defining this too narrowly or broadly; (2) foregoing LST for patients who are not in this stage, as is allowed in Japan and England, because here too there are areas of controversy, including (in England) whether the law in this area does enough to respect the autonomy of (now) incapacitated patients; (3) whether 'foregoing' LST should encompass withholding and withdrawing treatment; this is also an ethically disputed area, particularly in the Asian countries we examine; (4) the family's role in end-of-life decision-making, particularly as, compared with England, the three Asian countries traditionally place a greater emphasis on families and communities than on individuals; and (5) decision-making with and for those incapacitated patients who lack families, surrogate decision-makers or ADs.Conclusion: Comparison of, and reflection on, the different legal positions that obtain in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and England should prove informative and we particularly invite reflection on five areas, in the hope the ensuing discussions will help to establish better end-of-life regulatory frameworks in these countries and elsewhere. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]