Organisation Mondiale De La Santé Neurological Disorders Report Web

User Manual: Pdf Organisation mondiale de la Santé Solutions de radiologie intelligentes, connectÃ©es et intÃ©grÃ©es au RSNA 2016

Open the PDF directly: View PDF .
Page Count: 232

Download
Open PDF In Browser	View PDF

NEUROLOGICAL
DISORDERS
public health challenges

WHO Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
Neurological disorders : public health challenges.
1.Nervous system diseases. 2.Public health. 3.Cost of illness. I.World Health Organization.
ISBN 92 4 156336 2
(NLM classiﬁcation: WL 140)
ISBN 978 92 4 156336 9

© World Health Organization 2006
All rights reserved. Publications of the World Health Organization can be obtained from WHO Press,
World Health Organization, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland (tel.: +41 22 791 3264; fax:
+41 22 791 4857; e-mail: bookorders@who.int). Requests for permission to reproduce or translate
WHO publications – whether for sale or for noncommercial distribution – should be addressed to WHO
Press, at the above address (fax: +41 22 791 4806; e-mail: permissions@who.int).
The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the
expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal
status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its
frontiers or boundaries. Dotted lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may
not yet be full agreement.
The mention of speciﬁc companies or of certain manufacturers’ products does not imply that they
are endorsed or recommended by the World Health Organization in preference to others of a similar
nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are
distinguished by initial capital letters.
All reasonable precautions have been taken by the World Health Organization to verify the information
contained in this publication. However, the published material is being distributed without warranty of
any kind, either expressed or implied. The responsibility for the interpretation and use of the material
lies with the reader. In no event shall the World Health Organization be liable for damages arising from
its use.
Printed in Switzerland

iii

contents
Foreword
Preface
Acknowledgements
Abbreviations
Introduction

v
vii
ix
xi
1

Chapter 1

Public health principles and neurological disorders

Chapter 2

Global burden of neurological disorders:
estimates and projections

Chapter 3

Neurological disorders: a public health approach
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.10

Dementia
Epilepsy
Headache disorders
Multiple sclerosis
Neuroinfections
Neurological disorders associated with malnutrition
Pain associated with neurological disorders
Parkinson’s disease
Stroke
Traumatic brain injuries

41
42
56
70
85
95
111
127
140
151
164

Chapter 4

Conclusions and recommendations

177

Annexes
Annex 1
List of WHO Member States by region and mortality stratum

183

Annex 2
Country income groups used for reporting estimates and projections

185

Annex 3
Global Burden of Disease cause categories, sequelae and case
deﬁnitions for neurological disorders

186

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
Annex 4
Table A.4.1 Burden of neurological disorders, in DALYs, by cause,
WHO region and mortality stratum, projections for 2005, 2015 and 2030
Table A.4.2 Burden of neurological disorders, in DALYs, by cause
and country income category, projections for 2005, 2015 and 2030
Table A.4.3 Deaths attributable to neurological disorders, by cause,
WHO region and mortality stratum, projections for 2005, 2015 and 2030
Table A.4.4 Deaths attributable to neurological disorders, by cause and
country income category, projections for 2005, 2015 and 2030
Table A.4.5 Burden of neurological disorders, in YLDs, by cause,
WHO region and mortality stratum, projections for 2005, 2015 and 2030
Table A.4.6 Burden of neurological disorders, in YLDs, by cause and
country income category, projections for 2005, 2015 and 2030
Table A.4.7 Prevalence (per 1 000) of neurological disorders, by cause,
WHO region and mortality stratum, projections for 2005, 2015 and 2030
Table A.4.8 Prevalence (per 1 000) of neurological disorders, by cause
and country income category, projections for 2005, 2015 and 2030
Annex 5
International nongovernmental organizations working
in neurological disorders

189
193
194
198
199
203
204
208

209

foreword

In the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th,
brain research belonged to many different areas that differed in methodology and targets: the morphological, the
physiological and the psychological. The latter used to
consider the brain as a black box where only the input
and output were known but not at all the neuronal components and the way they interact with each other.
At the beginning of the third millennium, due to prolonged ageing, neurodevelopmental disorders are growing and a much deeper
knowledge of the brain is necessary. Scientiﬁc and technological research,
from molecular to behavioural levels, have been carried out in many different
places but they have not been developed in a really interdisciplinary way.
Research should be based on the convergence of different interconnected
scientiﬁc sectors, not in isolation, as was the case in the past.
As this report demonstrates, the burden of neurological disorders is reaching a signiﬁcant proportion in countries with a growing percentage of the
population over 65 years old.
With this report go my best wishes that it be disseminated worldwide and
that it receive the deserved attention of the Global Health Community in all
the countries of the world.

Rita Levi-Montalcini
1986 Nobel Prize in Medicine

vii

preface

Within its remit to provide leadership on all matters concerning health, one of the core
functions of the World Health Organization (WHO) is to engage in partnerships where joint
action is needed. WHO plays an important role in bringing crucial health-related topics to
the agenda of policy-makers and health planners and in raising awareness of them among
health-care professionals and all who have an interest in health matters.
WHO’s Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse carries out this role for
the three different sets of issues for which it is responsible: mental disorders, substance
abuse and alcohol-related issues, and neurological disorders. Two recent publications
have focused attention on its work. The world health report 2001 – Mental health: new
understanding, new hope is an advocacy instrument to shed light on the public health aspects of mental disorders, and the report Neuroscience of psychoactive substance use and
dependence produced by the department in 2004 tackles the area of substance abuse and
alcohol. We realized a similar exercise is needed in the ﬁeld of neurological disorders.
The Global Burden of Disease study, the ongoing international collaborative project
between WHO, the World Bank and the Harvard School of Public Health, has produced evidence that pinpoints neurological disorders as one of the greatest threats to public health.
A clear message emerges that unless immediate action is taken globally, the neurological
burden is expected to become an even more serious and unmanageable problem in all
countries. There are several gaps in understanding the many issues related to neurological
disorders, but we already know enough about their nature and treatment to be able to
shape effective policy responses to some of the most prevalent among them.
To ﬁll the vast gap in the knowledge concerning the public health aspects of neurological disorders, this document Neurological disorders: public health challenges fulﬁls two
roles. On one hand, it provides comprehensive information to the policy-makers and on the
other hand, it can also be used as an awareness-raising tool. The document has unique
aspects that should be stressed. It is the result of a huge effort bringing together the most
signiﬁcant international nongovernmental organizations working in the areas of various
neurological disorders, both in a professional capacity and in caring for people affected
by the conditions. It is the fruit of healthy interaction and collaboration between these
organizations and WHO, with its network of country and regional ofﬁces: health experts on

viii

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
one hand working together with the extensive and competent world of professionals and
researchers on the other. Some of these organizations have also contributed ﬁnancially
to this endeavour. This exercise thus demonstrates that such collaboration is not only
possible but can also be very productive.
The document is distinctive in its presentation as it provides the public health perspective for neurological disorders in general and presents fresh and updated estimates
and predictions of the global burden borne by them. Separate sections discuss some of
the most important disorders in detail: dementia, epilepsy, headache disorders, multiple
sclerosis, neuroinfections, neurological disorders associated with malnutrition, pain associated with neurological disorders, Parkinson’s disease, stroke and traumatic brain
injuries.
The document makes a signiﬁcant contribution to the furthering of knowledge about
neurological disorders. We hope it will facilitate increased cooperation and innovation
and inspire commitment to preventing these debilitating disorders and providing the best
possible care for people who suffer from them.

Benedetto Saraceno
Director, Department of Mental Health
and Substance Abuse

1
acknowledgements
The following people, listed in alphabetical order, participated in the production of this document,
under the guidance and with the support of Catherine Le Galès-Camus (Assistant Director-General,
Noncommunicable Diseases and Mental Health, World Health Organization), to whom we express
our sincere gratitude.

PROJECT TEAM
WRITING GROUP
Johan A. Aarli, Tarun Dua, Aleksandar Janca, Anna Muscetta

MANAGEMENT GROUP
José Manoel Bertolote, Tarun Dua, Aleksandar Janca, Frances Kaskoutas-Norgan,
Anna Muscetta, Benedetto Saraceno, Shekhar Saxena, Rosa Seminario

EDITORIAL COMMITTEE
Johan A. Aarli, Giuliano Avanzini, José Manoel Bertolote, Hanneke de Boer, Harald Breivik,
Tarun Dua, Nori Graham, Aleksandar Janca, Jürg Kesselring, Colin Mathers, Anna Muscetta,
Leonid Prilipko, Benedetto Saraceno, Shekhar Saxena, Timothy J. Steiner

AUTHORS AND CONTRIBUTORS
INTRODUCTION
Tarun Dua, Aleksandar Janca, Anna Muscetta

CHAPTER 1. PUBLIC HEALTH PRINCIPLES
AND NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS
Tarun Dua, Aleksandar Janca, Rajendra Kale, Federico Montero, Anna Muscetta, Margie Peden

CHAPTER 2. GLOBAL BURDEN OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS:
ESTIMATES AND PROJECTIONS
Tarun Dua, Marco Garrido Cumbrera, Colin Mathers, Shekhar Saxena

CHAPTER 3. NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS:
A PUBLIC HEALTH APPROACH
3.1 Dementia
Amit Dias, Cleusa Ferri, Nori Graham (chair), Bernard Ineichen, Martin Prince,
Richard Uwakwe

3.2 Epilepsy
Giuliano Avanzini (co-chair), Ettore Beghi, Hanneke de Boer (co-chair), Jerome Engel Jr.,
Josemir W. Sander, Peter Wolf

3.3 Headache disorders
Lorenzo Gardella, Zaza Katsarava, David Kernick, Hilkka Kettinen, Shireen Qureshi,
Krishnamurthy Ravishankar, Valerie South, Timothy J. Steiner (chair), Lars Jacob Stovner

3.4 Multiple sclerosis
Ian Douglas, Jürg Kesselring (chair), Paul Rompani, Bhim S. Singhal, Alan Thompson

3.5 Neuroinfections
Reyna M. Duron, Hector Hugo Garcia, Ashraf Kurdi, Marco T. Medina (chair),
Luis C. Rodriguez

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
3.6 Neurological disorders associated with malnutrition
Amadou Gallo Diop (chair), Athanase Millogo, Isidore Obot, Ismael Thiam, Thorkild Tylleskar

3.7 Pain associated with neurological disorders
Michael Bond, Harald Breivik (chair), Troels S. Jensen, Willem Scholten, Olaitan Soyannwo,
Rolf-Detlef Treede

3.8 Parkinson’s disease
Mary Baker (chair), Oscar S. Gershanik

3.9 Stroke
Julien Bogousslavsky (chair), Ming Liu, J. Moncayo, B. Norrving, A. Tsiskaridze,
T. Yamaguchi, F. Yatsu

3.10 Traumatic brain injuries
Armando Basso (chair), Ignacio Previgliano, Franco Servadei

CHAPTER 4. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
José Manoel Bertolote, Tarun Dua, Aleksandar Janca, Anna Muscetta,
Benedetto Saraceno, Shekhar Saxena

EXTERNAL REVIEWERS
Mario A. Battaglia, Donna Bergen, Gretchen Birbeck, Carol Brayne, Vijay Chandra, Amit Dias,
M. Gourie-Devi, Rajendra Kale, Maria Lucia Lebrao, Itzhak Levav, Girish Modi, Theodore Munsat,
Donald Silberberg (whole document); Daniel O’Connor, Carlos Lima (Dementia); Satish
Jain, Bryan Kies (Epilepsy); Anne MacGregor, Fumihiko Sakai (Headache disorders); Chris
H. Polman, Ernie Willoughby (Multiple sclerosis); Peter G. E. Kennedy (Neuroinfections);
Redda Tekle Haimanot (Neurological disorders associated with malnutrition); Ralf Baron,
Maija Haanpää (Pain associated with neurological disorders); Zvezdan Pirtosek, Bhim S. Singhal,
Helio Teive (Parkinson’s disease); Vladimir Hachinski, David Russell (Stroke); Vladan Bajtajic,
Jacques Brotchi, Jeremy Ganz, Haldor Slettebø (Traumatic brain injuries)

PEER REVIEWERS IN WHO
Regional Ofﬁce for Africa: Thérèse Agossou
Regional Ofﬁce for the Americas: José Miguel Caldas De Almeida, Itzhak Levav
Regional Ofﬁce for South-East Asia: Vijay Chandra
Regional Ofﬁce for Europe: Matthijs Muijen
Regional Ofﬁce for the Eastern Mediterranean: R. Srinivasa Murthy, Mohammad Taghi Yasamy
Regional Ofﬁce for the Western Paciﬁc: Xiandong Wang
Headquarters: Bruno de Benoist, Siobhan Crowley, Denis Daumerie, Dirk Engels,
Jean Georges Jannin, Daniel Olivier Lavanchy, Dermot Maher, Kamini Mendis, Shanthi Mendis,
François Meslin, William Perea, Pascal Ringwald, Oliver Rosenbauer, Michael J. Ryan,
Perez Simarro, Jos Vandelaer, Marco Vitoria

PRODUCTION TEAM
Production coordination: Caroline Allsopp
Editing: Barbara Campanini
Design and layout: Reda Sadki
Proofreading: Susan Kaplan
Indexing: David McAllister
Maps: Steve Ewart
Printing coordination: Raphaël Crettaz

abbreviations
1
AD
ADI
AED
AIDS
ART
BPSD
CNS
CRPS
CSF
CT
DALY
FAO
EEG
EMSP
EPDA
EUREPA
GBD
GDP
GNI
HAART
HIV
IBE
IASP
ICF
ICH
IHS
ILAE
MRI
MS
MSIF
PD
PET
RTA
SAH
SMR
TBI
TIA
UNESCO
UNICEF
UNFPA
VaD
WFN
WFNS
WHA
WHO
YLD
YLL

Alzheimer’s disease
Alzheimer’s Disease International
antiepileptic drug
acquired immunodeﬁciency syndrome
antiretroviral therapy
behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia
central nervous system
complex regional pain syndrome
cerebrospinal ﬂuid
computerized tomography
disability-adjusted life year
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
electroencephalography
European Multiple Sclerosis Platform
European Parkinson’s Disease Association
European Epilepsy Academy
Global Burden of Disease
gross domestic product
gross national income
highly active antiretroviral therapy
human immunodeﬁciency virus
International Bureau for Epilepsy
International Association for the Study of Pain
International Classiﬁcation of Functioning, Disability and Health
intracerebral haemorrhage
International Headache Society
International League Against Epilepsy
magnetic resonance imaging
multiple sclerosis
Multiple Sclerosis International Federation
Parkinson’s disease
positron emission tomography
road trafﬁc accident
subarachnoid haemorrhage
standardized mortality ratio
traumatic brain injury
transient ischaemic attack
United Nations Educational, Scientiﬁc and Cultural Organization
United Nations Children’s Fund
United Nations Population Fund
vascular dementia
World Federation of Neurology
World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies
World Headache Alliance
World Health Organization
years of healthy life lost as a result of disability
years of life lost because of premature mortality

xii

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

introduction
One of the key constitutional responsibilities of the World Health Organization (WHO) is to foster partnership and collaboration among scientiﬁc
and professional groups in order to contribute to the advancement of
global health. To help prioritize health needs and design evidence-based
health programmes globally, WHO initiates a large number of international projects and activities involving numerous governmental and nongovernmental organizations, health professionals and policy-makers.
The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study, a collaborative endeavour of the World
Health Organization (WHO), the World Bank and the Harvard School of Public Health,
drew the attention of the international health community to the burden of neurological
disorders and many other chronic conditions. This study found that the burden of neurological disorders was seriously underestimated by traditional epidemiological and health
statistical methods that take into account only mortality rates but not disability rates. The
GBD study showed that over the years the global health impact of neurological disorders
had been underestimated (1).
With awareness of the massive burden associated with neurological disorders came
the recognition that neurological services and resources were disproportionately scarce,
especially in low income and developing countries. Furthermore, a large body of evidence
shows that policy-makers and health-care providers may be unprepared to cope with the
predicted rise in the prevalence of neurological and other chronic disorders and the disability resulting from the extension of life expectancy and ageing of populations globally
(2, 3).
In response to the challenge posed by neurological disorders, WHO launched a number
of global public health projects, including the Global Initiative on Neurology and Public
Health whose purpose is to increase professional and public awareness of the frequency,
severity and costs of neurological disorders and to emphasize the need to provide neurological care at all levels including primary health care. This global initiative has revealed
a paucity of information on the burden of neurological disorders and a lack of policies,
programmes and resources for their management (4–6).

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
In response to these ﬁndings, WHO and the World Federation of Neurology (WFN)
recently collaborated in an international Survey of Country Resources for Neurological
Disorders involving 109 countries and covering over 90% of the world’s population. The
survey collected information from experts on several aspects of the provision of neurological care around the world, ranging from frequency of neurological disorders to the
availability of neurological services across countries and settings. The ﬁndings show that
resources are clearly inadequate for patients with neurological disorders in most parts
of the world; they highlight inequalities in the access to neurological care across different populations, especially in those living in low income countries and in the developing
regions of the world (7 ). The results of the survey, which include numerous tables, graphs
and commentaries, have been published in the WHO/WFN Atlas of Country Resources for
Neurological Disorders (8). The atlas is available at http://www.who.int/mental health/
neurology/ or on request from WHO.
This report takes the collaboration with nongovernmental organizations and the
Atlas Project one step further. It aims to inform governments, public health institutions,
nongovernmental organizations and others so as to help formulate public health policies
directed at neurological disorders and to guide informed advocacy. WHO has produced
this report in collaboration with several nongovernmental organizations, including (in
alphabetical order) Alzheimer’s Disease International, European Parkinson’s Disease Association, International Association for the Study of Pain, International Bureau for Epilepsy,
International Headache Society, International League Against Epilepsy, Multiple Sclerosis
International Federation, World Federation of Neurology, World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies and World Headache Alliance. It addresses the most important public health
aspects of the following neurological disorders: dementia, epilepsy, headache disorders,
multiple sclerosis, neuroinfections, neurological disorders associated with malnutrition,
pain associated with neurological disorders, Parkinson’s disease, stroke and traumatic
brain injuries. These common disorders were selected after discussion with several experts and nongovernmental organizations and represent a substantial component of the
global burden of neurological disorders.
The report is based on signiﬁcant contributions by many individuals and organizations
spanning all continents. Their names are indicated in the Acknowledgements section, and
their input is acknowledged with thanks.

introduction

OUTLINE OF THE REPORT

Chapter 1

provides an overview of basic public health concepts and
general principles as they apply to neurological disorders,
including epidemiology and burden, health promotion, disease prevention, health policy,
service provision and delivery of care, disability and rehabilitation, stigma, and education and training. Public health is deﬁned as the science and practice of protecting and
improving the health of the population through prevention, promotion, health education,
and management of communicable and noncommunicable diseases including neurological
disorders. In other words, public health is viewed as a comprehensive approach concerned
with the health of the community as a whole rather than with medical health care that
deals primarily with treatment of individuals. The focus of public health interventions
could be primary, secondary or tertiary prevention. The above-mentioned concepts are
illustrated by examples from the ﬁeld of neurological disorders. Public health aspects of
individual neurological disorders covered by the report are discussed in greater detail in
Chapter 3.

Each chapter contains a numerical list of references to works
that are cited in the text. A second list, arranged alphabetically,
suggests reading material that is recommended to give an overview
of the subject matter of the section or chapter; some of the key
references may be repeated in the reading list.

Chapter 2

contains a series of tables and graphs that provide projected estimates of the global burden of neurological
disorders for 2005, 2015 and 2030. The illustrations are accompanied by a summary
of the GBD methodology, observations on its limitations and brief commentaries on the
ﬁndings of the GBD study. The results are presented according to WHO regions, epidemiological subregions and World Bank income categories. Annex 1 lists WHO Member States
and Annex 2 presents countries according to World Bank categories. Annex 3 provides
the list of GBD cause categories, sequelae and case deﬁnitions used for calculation of
estimates for neurological disorders. Annex 4 contains the GBD estimates for neurological
disorders for 2005, 2015 and 2030.

Chapter 3

consists of 10 sections that focus on the public heath
aspects of the speciﬁc neurological disorders covered
by the report. Although notable differences exist between relevant public health issues
for each neurological disorder, most sections cover the following topics: diagnosis and
classiﬁcation; etiology and risk factors; course and outcome; magnitude (prevalence,
incidence, distribution by age and sex, global and regional distribution); disability and
mortality; burden on patients’ families and communities; treatment, management and
rehabilitation; delivery and cost of care; gaps in treatment and other services; policies;

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
research; and education and training. Accompanying tables, graphs, boxes and other
graphic material illustrate speciﬁc points made in the text. Details of relevant nongovernmental organizations, including their objectives, are given in Annex 5.

Chapter 4

gives the conclusions and recommendations of the report, which are based on the following ﬁndings. Neurological disorders are a signiﬁcant and increasing public health problem. Many of them can
be either prevented or treated at a relatively low cost. Resources for neurological disorders
are grossly inadequate in most parts of the world. Signiﬁcant inequalities in provision of
neurological treatment and care exist between developing and developed countries. Stigma and discrimination against people with neurological disorders are ubiquitous and need
to be eliminated through public education and global campaigns. Dignity of people with
neurological disorders needs to be preserved and their quality of life improved. Long-term
treatment and care of patients with chronic neurological disorders and conditions should
be incorporated into primary care. Public health aspects of neurological disorders should
be incorporated into undergraduate and postgraduate teaching and training curricula in
neurology. More research on neurological disorders is needed and it should be facilitated
through better funding, multidisciplinary approaches and international collaboration.

REFERENCES
1. Murray CJL, Lopez AD, eds. The global burden of disease: a comprehensive assessment of mortality
and disability from diseases, injuries and risk factors in 1990 and projected to 2020. Cambridge, MA,
Harvard School of Public Health on behalf of the World Health Organization and the World Bank,
1996 (Global Burden of Disease and Injury Series, Vol. I).
2. Sartorius N. Rehabilitation and quality of life. Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 1992, 43:1180–
1181.
3. Gwatkin DR, Guillot M, Heuveline P. The burden of disease among the global poor. Lancet, 1999,
354:586–589.
4. Janca A, Prilipko L, Costa e Silva JA. The World Health Organization’s global initiative on neurology
and public health. Journal of the Neurological Sciences, 1997, 145:1–2.
5. Janca A, Prilipko L, Costa e Silva JA. The World Health Organization’s work on public health
aspects of neurology. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 1997, 63(Suppl 1):S6–7.
6. Janca A, Prilipko L, Saraceno B. A World Health Organization perspective on neurology and
neuroscience. Archives of Neurology, 2000, 57:1786–1788.
7. Janca A et al. WHO/WFN survey on neurological services: a world-wide perspective. Journal of the
Neurological Sciences, 2006, 247:29–34.
8. Atlas: Country resources for neurological disorders 2004. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2004.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

CHAPTER 1

public health

principles
and

neurological disorders
in this chapter
8 Principles of public health
9 Epidemiology and burden
9 Health promotion and disease prevention

This chapter explains brieﬂy the principles of
public health, epidemiology and the burden of
disease, and the ways in which health promoService provision and delivery of care
tion and disease prevention are achieved. It
Disability and rehabilitation
looks at risks to health and prevention stratStigma
egies, and explains what health policy means.
It then describes the goals and functions of
Education and training
health systems and in particular considers
Conclusions
service provision for neurological disorders.
As many neurological disorders result in considerable morbidity, special attention
is paid to disability and rehabilitation. The all-important part played by stigma in
neurological disorders is assessed and, ﬁnally, education and training in neurology
are discussed.

12 Health policy
14
16
20
22
23

Many distinctions can be made between the practice of public
health and that of clinical neurology. Public health professionals
approach neurology more broadly than neurologists by monitoring neurological disorders and related health concerns of entire
communities and promoting healthy practices and behaviours
among them to ensure that populations stay healthy. Public health
specialists focus on health and disease of entire populations
rather than on individual patients, whereas neurologists usually

treat one patient at a time for a speciﬁc neurological
condition. These two approaches could be seen as
being almost at the opposite ends of the health-care
spectrum. What this chapter aims to do is to help
build bridges between these two approaches and
serve as a useful guide to the chapter that follows
— on the public health aspects of speciﬁc neurological disorders.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

PRINCIPLES OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Public health is the science and art of disease prevention, prolonging life and promoting health
and well-being through organized community effort for the sanitation of the environment, the
control of communicable diseases, the organization of medical and nursing services for the early
diagnosis and prevention of disease, the education of the individual in personal health and the
development of the social machinery to ensure for everyone a standard of living adequate for the
maintenance or improvement of health (1). The goal of public health is to fulﬁl every society’s
ambition to create conditions in which all people can be healthy. Public health addresses the health
of the population as a whole rather than the treatment of individuals. WHO deﬁnes health as “a
state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease
or inﬁrmity” (2). “Healthy people in healthy communities” is the ultimate goal of all public health
interventions, which are aimed at promoting physical and mental health and preventing disease,
injury and disability (3). Public health is particularly concerned with threats to the overall health
of the community. As interventions are aimed primarily at prevention, monitoring the health of the
community through surveillance of cases assumes great importance as does the promotion of a
healthy lifestyle and healthy behaviour. In many cases, however, treating a disease can be vital
to preventing it in other people, such as during an outbreak of a communicable disease. Another
way of describing public health is “collective action for sustained population-wide health improvement” (4). This deﬁnition highlights the focus on actions and interventions that need collaborative
actions, sustainability (i.e. the need to embed policies within supportive systems) and the goals of
public health (population-wide health improvement and the reduction of health inequalities).
Since the 1980s, the focus of public health interventions has broadened towards population-level
issues such as inequity, poverty and education and has moved away from advocating for change in
the behaviour of individuals. The health of people is affected by many elements ranging from genetics
to socioeconomic factors such as where they live, their income, education and social relationships.
These are the social determinants of health, and they pervade every society in the world. Predictably,
poor people have more health problems and worse health than the better-off sections of populations
(5). Today public health seeks to correct these inequalities by advocating policies and initiatives that
aim to improve the health of populations in an equitable manner.
The extension of life expectancy and the ageing of populations globally are predicted to increase
the prevalence of many noncommunicable, chronic, progressive conditions including neurological
disorders. The increasing capacity of modern medicine to prevent death has also increased the
frequency and severity of impairment attributable to neurological disorders. This has raised the
issue of restoring or creating a life of acceptable quality for people who suffer from the sequelae
of neurological disorders.
Public health plays an important role in both the developed and developing parts of the world
through either the local health systems or the national and international nongovernmental organizations. Though all developed and most developing countries have their own government health
agencies such as ministries or departments of health to respond to domestic health issues, a
discrepancy exists between governments’ public health initiatives and access to health care in
the developed and developing world. Many public health infrastructures are non-existent or are
being formed in the developing world. Often, trained health workers lack the ﬁnancial resources
to provide even basic medical care and prevent disease. As a result, much of the morbidity and
mortality in the developing world results from and contributes to extreme poverty.
Though most governments recognize the importance of public health programmes in reducing
disease and disability, public health generally receives much less government funding compared
with other areas of medicine. In recent years, large public health initiatives and vaccination programmes have made great progress in eradicating or reducing the incidence of a number of
communicable diseases such as smallpox and poliomyelitis. One of the most important public

public health principles and neurological disorders
health issues facing the world nowadays is HIV/AIDS. Tuberculosis is also re-emerging and is a
major concern because of the rise of HIV/AIDS-related infections and the development of strains
resistant to standard antibiotics.
As the rate of communicable diseases in the developed world decreased throughout the 20th
century, public health began to put more focus on chronic diseases such as cancer, heart disease
and mental and neurological disorders. Much ill-health is preventable through simple, non-medical
methods: for example, improving the quality of roads and enforcing regulations about speed and
protective measures such as helmet use help to reduce disability as a result of head injuries.
To increase the awareness of professionals and people in general about the public health
aspects of neurological disorders, and to emphasize the need for the prevention of these disorders and the necessity to provide neurological care at all levels including primary health care,
WHO launched a number of international public health projects including the Global Initiative on
Neurology and Public Health. The outcome of this large collaborative endeavour, which involved
many health professionals from all parts the world, clearly indicated that there was a paucity of
information about the prevalence and burden of neurological disorders and a lack of policies,
programmes and resources for their treatment and management (6–8).

EPIDEMIOLOGY AND BURDEN
In general, health statistics focus primarily on quantifying the health status of populations and
suffer from several limitations that reduce their practical value to policy-makers. The statistical
information is partial and fragmented and in many countries even the most basic data (e.g. the annual number of deaths from particular causes) are not available. Further, the simple “head count”
approach does not allow policy-makers to compare the relative cost–effectiveness of different
interventions, for example the treatment of conditions such as acute stroke versus the long-term
care of patients with chronic disorders such as Parkinson’s disease or multiple sclerosis. At a
time when people’s expectations of health services are growing and funds are constrained, such
information is essential for the rational allocation of resources.
To address these limitations, a large collaborative project called the Global Burden of Disease
(GBD) Study was undertaken by WHO, the World Bank and the Harvard School of Public Health (9).
The objectives of this unique international undertaking were as follows: to incorporate nonfatal
conditions in the assessments of health status; to disentangle epidemiology from advocacy and
produce objective, independent and demographically plausible assessments and projections of the
burden of health conditions and diseases; and to measure disease and injury burden by developing a novel method that can also be used to assess the cost–effectiveness of interventions, in
terms of the cost per unit of disease burden averted. The GBD study developed an internationally
standardized and nowadays widely accepted single measurement index: the disability-adjusted
life year (DALY). For neurological disorders, perhaps the most important dimension of the GBD
study is the attention given to the total morbidity of populations by quantifying the contribution
of nonfatal, chronic disorders to the reduction of health status. The GBD study is discussed in
detail in Chapter 2, with its methodology and limitations and projected estimates for neurological
disorders for 2005, 2015 and 2030.

HEALTH PROMOTION AND DISEASE PREVENTION
Health promotion
Historically, the concepts of health promotion and disease prevention have been closely related.
According to WHO, health promotion is a process of enabling people to increase control over their
health and improve it. It refers to any activity destined to help people to change their lifestyle and
move towards a state of optimal health. Health promotion can be facilitated through a combination

Figure

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
of efforts aimed at raising awareness, changing behaviours, and creating environments that support good health practices, healthy public policies and community development (10). The nature
and scope of health promotion is illustrated in Figure 1.1.
Successful health promotion demands a coordinated
action
by governments, the health sector and other
1.1 Nature and scope of health promotion
social and economic sectors, nongovernmental and
voluntary organizations, local authorities, industry and
the media. A list of required health promotion strategies
across sectors and settings is contained in the Bangkok
Health education
Charter for Health Promotion in a Globalized World (11)
Healthy
(see Box 1.1). For neurological disorders, health promopublic
policy
tion is particularly important. In the case of traumatic
brain injuries, development of policies in countries to
prevent road trafﬁc accidents and legislation to wear
helmets are examples of health promotion strategies.
Interventions
Community
(disease prevention)

development

Disease prevention

The concept of disease prevention is more speciﬁc and
comprises primary, secondary and tertiary prevention
Health promotion
(12). Primary prevention is deﬁned as preventing the
disease or stopping individuals from becoming at high
risk. Universal and selective preventive interventions
are included in primary prevention. Universal primary prevention targets the general public or
a whole population group without an identiﬁed speciﬁc risk (e.g. iodine supplementation programmes to prevent neurological and other disorders caused by iodine deﬁciency). Selective
primary prevention targets individuals or subgroups of the population whose risk of developing
disease is signiﬁcantly higher than average, as evidenced by biological, psychological or social
risk factors (e.g. prevention of stroke through adequate management of hypertension, diabetes
and hypercholesterolemia). Secondary prevention aims at decreasing the severity of disease or
reducing risk level or halting progression of disease through early detection and treatment of
diagnosable cases (e.g. ensuring drug compliance in the treatment of epilepsy). Tertiary prevention includes interventions that reduce premature death and disability, enhance rehabilitation and
prevent relapses and recurrence of the illness. Rehabilitation may mitigate the effects of disease
and thereby prevent it from resulting in impaired social and occupational functioning; it is an
important public health intervention that has long been neglected by decision-makers. Moreover,
rehabilitation is an essential aspect of any public health strategy for chronic diseases, including a
number of neurological disorders and conditions such as multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease
and the consequences of stroke or traumatic brain injury. Box 1.2 describes some examples
illustrating the role of primary, secondary and tertiary preventive strategies for the neurological
disorders discussed in this document.

Box 1.1 Bangkok Charter for Health Promotion in a Globalized World
To make advances in implementing health promotion strategies, all sectors and settings must act to:
■ advocate for health based on human rights and solidarity;
■ invest in sustainable policies, actions and infrastructure
to address the determinants of health;
■ build capacity for policy development, leadership, health
promotion practice, knowledge transfer and research,
and health literacy;

■ regulate and legislate to ensure a high level of protection from harm and enable equal opportunities for
health and well-being for all people;
■ establish partnerships and build alliances with public,
private, nongovernmental and international organizations and civil society to create sustainable actions.
Source: (11).

public health principles and neurological disorders

Health risks
Focusing on risks to health is a key to preventing any disease or injury. Many factors are relevant
in prioritizing strategies to reduce risks to health. These include the extent of the threat posed
by different risk factors, the availability of cost-effective interventions, and societal values and
preferences. Risk assessment and estimates of the burden of disease resulting from different risk
factors may be altered by many different strategies (13).
The chain of events leading to an adverse health outcome includes proximal (or direct) causes
and distal causes that are further back in the causal chain and act through a number of intermediary causal factors. It is therefore essential that the whole of the causal chain is considered in the
assessment of risks to health. Trade-offs also exist between assessments of proximal and distal
causes. As one moves further away from the direct causes of disease, there can be a decrease in
causal certainty and diagnostic consistency, which is often accompanied by an increase in complexity of treatment. Distal causes, however, are likely to have an amplifying effect in that they can
affect many different sets of proximal causes and so can potentially make large differences (14).

Prevention strategies
Prevention strategies and interventions designed to reduce or prevent a particular disease are of two
types. In population or mass approaches, a whole population is asked to be involved in modifying
their behaviour in some way (e.g. being immunized against poliomyelitis). In targeted or high-risk
approaches, only high-risk individuals are involved, which necessitates some form of screening to
identify those who are at high risk (e.g. HIV testing) (13).
The distribution and determinants of risks in a population have major implications for strategies
of prevention. A large number of people exposed to a small risk may generate many more cases
than a small number exposed to a high risk. Thus, a preventive strategy focusing on high-risk
individuals will deal only with the margin of the problem and will not have any impact on the considerable amount of disease occurring in the large proportion of people who are at moderate risk.

Box 1.2 Examples of preventive strategies for neurological disorders
PRIMARY PREVENTION
(Measures to prevent the onset of disease or avoid a targeted condition)
■ Use of vaccine against poliomyelitis within the Global
Polio Eradication Initiative has led to elimination of indigenous polioviruses from all but four countries.
■ Measures to control blood pressure, cholesterol levels and diabetes mellitus, to reduce tobacco use, and
to promote overall healthy eating patterns and physical
activity are advocated for primary prevention of stroke.
In Japan, government-led health education campaigns
and increased treatment of high blood pressure have reduced blood pressure levels in the populations: stroke
rates have fallen by more than 70%.
■ Wearing a helmet is the single most effective way to reduce head injuries and fatalities resulting from motorcycle and cycle crashes. For example, wearing a helmet
has been shown to decrease the risk and severity of injuries among motorcyclists by about 70%, the likelihood
of death by almost 40%, and to substantially reduce the
costs of health care associated with such crashes.
SECONDARY PREVENTION
(Early and accurate diagnosis, appropriate treatment, management of risk factors, compliance)

■ Medical treatment of epilepsy with ﬁrst-line antiepileptic drugs can render up to 70% of patients seizure-free
when adequately treated.
■ Management of patients with stroke by an organized unit
signiﬁcantly reduces mortality and disability in comparison with standard care on a general medical ward.
TERTIARY PREVENTION
(Rehabilitation, palliative care, treatment of complications,
patient and caregiver education, self-support groups, reduction of stigma and discrimination, social integration)
■ Interventions targeting stress and depression among
carers of patients with dementia, including training,
counselling and support for caregivers, have shown
positive results for the management of dementia.
■ The strategy of community-based rehabilitation has
been implemented in many low-income countries
around the world; where it is practised, it has successfully inﬂuenced the quality of life and participation of
persons with disabilities in their societies.
■ Methods to reduce stigma related to epilepsy in an
African community successfully changed attitudes to
epilepsy: traditional beliefs were weakened, fears were
diminished, and community acceptance of people with
epilepsy increased.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
In contrast, population-based strategies that seek to shift the whole distribution of risk factors
have the potential to control the incidence of a disorder in an entire population (14).
With targeted approaches, efforts are concentrated on those who are most at risk of contracting a disease (e.g. HIV-positive individuals). This has two beneﬁts: ﬁrst, it avoids the waste of the
mass approach and, second, people who are identiﬁed as being at high risk are more likely to
comply with behaviour change. However, such an approach could increase the costs because of
the need to identify the high-risk group of people most likely to beneﬁt. Which prevention approach
is the most cost effective in a particular setting will depend on the prevalence of high-risk people
in the population and the cost of identifying them compared with the cost of intervention.
Some areas of behavioural change beneﬁt from active government intervention through legislation
or ﬁnancial incentives. For example, road trafﬁc safety is one area where government action can
make a big difference in preventing traumatic brain injuries. This can be achieved through control
and legislation on alcohol and drug use, better roads, speed control, better motor vehicle design, and
requirements to use seatbelts and helmets (see Table 1.1).

Table 1.1 Beneﬁts of wearing a motorcycle helmet
Not wearing a helmet

Wearing a helmet

•
•
•
•

• decreases the risk and severity of injuries by about 72%
• decreases the likelihood of death by up to 39%, the
probability depending on the speed involved
• decreases the costs of health care associated with a crash

increases the risk of sustaining a head injury
increases the severity of head injuries
increases the time spent in hospital
increases the likelihood of dying from a head injury

Source: (15).

A different set of interventions can be used to achieve the same goal, and some interventions
will reduce the burden associated with multiple risk factors and diseases. For example, interventions to reduce blood pressure, cigarette smoking and cholesterol levels reduce cerebrovascular
and cardiovascular diseases and a number of others. The effect of using multiple interventions at
the same time might be more than would be expected by summing the beneﬁts of carrying out
the interventions singly. Risk reduction strategies are therefore generally based on a combination
of interventions. For example, a CVD Risk Management Package has been developed by WHO for
managing cardiovascular events (heart attacks and stroke). For cardiovascular disease prevention and control activities to achieve the greatest impact, a paradigm shift is required from the
“treatment of risk factors in isolation” to “comprehensive cardiovascular risk management”. The
risk management package facilitates this shift. It has been designed primarily for the management of cardiovascular risk in individuals found by opportunistic screening to have hypertension.
It could be adapted, however, to be used with diabetes or smoking as entry points. The package
is meant to be implemented in a range of health-care facilities in low and medium resource settings, in both developed and developing countries. For this reason it has been designed for three
scenarios that reﬂect the commonly encountered resource availability strata in such settings
(16). The minimum conditions that characterize the three scenarios, in terms of the skill level of
the health worker, the diagnostic and therapeutic facilities and the health services available, are
described in Table 1.2.

HEALTH POLICY
Health policy usually refers to formal statements or procedures within institutions and governments that deﬁne health priorities and actions aimed at improving people’s health. It can have a
number of other goals in addition to preventing illness and promoting population health. In choos-

public health principles and neurological disorders

Table 1.2 Characteristics of three scenarios in the WHO CVD Risk Management
Package
Resource availability

Scenario one

Scenario two

Scenario three

Human resources

Non physician health worker

Medical doctor or specially
trained nurse

Medical doctor with access to
full specialist care

Equipment

Stethoscope
Blood pressure measurement
device
Measuring tape or weighing
scale
Optional: test tubes, holder,
burner, solution or test strips
for checking urine glucose

Stethoscope
Blood pressure measurement
device
Measuring tape or weighing
scale
Test tubes, holder, burner,
solutions or test strips for
checking urine glucose and
albumin

Stethoscope
Blood pressure measurement
device
Measuring tape or weighing
scale
Electrocardiograph
Ophthalmoscope
Urine analysis: fasting blood,
sugar, electrolytes, creatinine,
cholesterol and lipoproteins

General drugs

Essential: thiazide diuretics
Optional: metformin (for reﬁll)

Thiazide diuretics
Beta blockers
Angiotensin converting
enzyme inhibitors
Calcium channel blockers
(sustained release
formulations)
(Reserpine and methyldopa if
the above antihypertensives
are unavailable)
Aspirin
Metformin (for reﬁll)

Other facilities

Referral facilities
Maintenance and calibration
of blood pressure measurement devices

Referral facilities
Maintenance and calibration
of equipment

Access to full specialist care
Maintenance and calibration
of equipment

Source: (16).

ing appropriate combinations of interventions, governments are also concerned with reducing
poverty and other inequalities, with questions of human rights, acceptance by the community
and political needs. They must also consider how different types of interventions can be incorporated into the health infrastructure available in the country, or how the infrastructure could be
expanded or adapted to accommodate the desired strategies. This section discusses only health
policy issues related to health promotion and disease prevention.
A health policy paradox shows that preventive interventions can achieve large overall health
gains for whole populations but might offer only small advantages to each individual. This leads to
a misperception of the beneﬁts of preventive advice and services by people who are apparently in
good health. In general, population-wide interventions have the greatest potential for prevention.
For instance, in reducing risks from high blood pressure and cholesterol, shifting the mean values
of whole populations will be more cost effective in avoiding future heart attacks and strokes than
screening programmes that aim to identify and treat only those people with deﬁned hypertension
or raised cholesterol levels. Often both approaches are combined in one successful strategy.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
A critical health policy issue, especially for developing and resource-poor countries, concerns
the appropriate balance between primary and secondary prevention and between population
and high-risk approaches to primary prevention. If the goal is to increase the proportion of the
population at low risk and to ensure that all groups beneﬁt, the strategy with the greatest potential
is the one directed at the whole population, not just at people with high levels of risk factors or
established disease. The ultimate goal of a health policy is the reduction of population risk; since
most of the population in most countries is not at the optimal risk level, it follows that the majority
of prevention and control resources should be directed towards the goal of reducing the entire
population’s risk. For example, policies for prevention of traumatic brain injuries such as wearing
of helmets need to be directed at the whole population. Thus, risk reduction through primary
prevention is clearly the preferred health policy approach, as it actually lowers future exposures
and the incidence of new disease episodes over time.
The choice may well be different, however, for different risks, depending to a large extent on
how common and how widely distributed is the risk and the availability and costs of effective
interventions. Large gains in health can be achieved through inexpensive treatments when primary
prevention measures have not been effective. An example is the treatment of epilepsy with a cheap
ﬁrst-line antiepileptic drug such as phenobarbital.
One risk factor can lead to many outcomes, and one outcome can be caused by many risk
factors. When two risks inﬂuence the same disease or injury outcomes, then the net effects may
be less or more than the sum of their separate effects. The size of these joint effects depends
principally on the amount of prevalence overlap and the biological results of joint exposures (13). For
example, in the case of neuroinfections such as HIV, one risk factor (i.e. HIV infection) leads to many
outcomes, as explained in Chapter 3.5. For some other neurological disorders, one outcome can
result from many risk factors: in the case of epilepsy, for example, from factors such as birth injury,
head trauma, central nervous system infections and infestations, as explained in Chapter 3.2.

SERVICE PROVISION AND DELIVERY OF CARE
Health systems
Health systems comprise all the organizations, institutions and resources that devote their efforts and activities to promote, restore and maintain population health. These activities include
formal health care such as the professional delivery of personal medical attention, actions by
traditional practitioners, home care and self-care, public health activities such as health promotion and disease prevention, and other health-enhancing interventions such as the improvement
of environmental safety.
Beyond the boundaries of this deﬁnition, health systems also include activities whose primary
purpose is something other than health — education, for example — if they have a secondary,
health-enhancing beneﬁt. Hence, while general education falls outside the deﬁnition of health
systems, health-related education is included. In this sense, every country has a health system, no
matter how fragmented or unsystematic it may seem to be.
The World Health Report 2000 outlines three overall goals of health systems: good health,
responsiveness to the expectations of the population, and fairness of ﬁnancial contribution (17 ).
All three goals matter in every country, and much improvement in how a health system performs
with respect to these responsibilities is possible at little cost. Even if we concentrate on the narrow
deﬁnition of reducing excess mortality and morbidity — the major battleground — the impact will
be slight unless activities are undertaken to strengthen health systems for delivery of personal
and public health interventions.
Progress towards the above goals depends crucially on how well systems carry out four vital
functions: service provision, resource generation, ﬁnancing and stewardship (17). The provision of

public health principles and neurological disorders
services is the most common function of a health-care system, and in fact the entire health system
is often identiﬁed and judged by its service delivery.
The provision of health services should be affordable, equitable, accessible, sustainable and
of good quality. Failure in any of these objectives adversely affects the care that is delivered.
Not much information is forthcoming from countries on these aspects of their health systems,
however. Based on available information, serious imbalances appear to exist in many countries in
terms of human and physical resources, technology and pharmaceuticals. Many countries have too
few qualiﬁed health personnel, while others have too many. Staff in health systems in many low
income countries are inadequately trained, poorly paid and work in obsolete facilities with chronic
shortages of equipment. One result is a “brain drain” of demoralized health professionals who go
abroad or move into private practice. The poorer sectors of society are most severely affected by
any constraints in the provision of health services.

Service delivery
Organization of services for delivery of neurological care has an important bearing on their effectiveness. Because of their different social, cultural, political and economic contexts, countries have
various forms of service organization and delivery strategies. The differing availability of ﬁnancial
and human resources also affects the organization of services. Certain key issues, however, need
to be taken into account for structuring services to provide effective care to people with neurological disorders. Depending upon the health system in the country, there is a variable mix of private
and public provision of neurological care.
The three traditional levels of service delivery are primary, secondary and tertiary care. Primary
care includes treatment and preventive and promotional interventions conducted by primary care
professionals. These vary from a general practitioner, nurse, other health-care staff and nonmedical staff to primary care workers based in rural areas. Primary care represents the point of
entry for most people seeking care and is the logical setting where neurological disorders should
begin to be addressed. Many potential beneﬁts exist for providing services through primary care.
Users of primary care are more likely to seek early help because of the wide availability of facilities,
their easy accessibility, cultural acceptability and reduced cost, thus leading to early detection of
neurological disorders and better clinical outcome.
Integration of neurological services into the primary care system needs to be a signiﬁcant
policy objective in both developing and developed countries. Providing neurological care through
primary care requires signiﬁcant investment in training primary care professionals to detect and
treat neurological disorders. Such training should meet the speciﬁc practical training needs of
different groups of primary care professionals such as doctors, nurses and community health
workers. Preferably, ongoing training is needed to provide subsequent support for reinforcing new
skills. In many countries, this has not been possible and thus suboptimal care is provided (18).
Primary care centres are limited in their ability to adequately diagnose and treat certain neurological disorders. For the management of severe cases and patients requiring access to diagnostic
and technological expertise, a secondary level of care is necessary. A number of neurological
services may be offered in district or regional hospitals that form part of the general health system.
Common facilities include inpatient beds in general medicine, specialist beds, emergency departments and outpatient clinics. The various types of services include consultation/liaison services,
diagnostic facilities such as electroencephalography (EEG) and computerized tomography (CT),
planned outpatient programmes, emergency care, inpatient care, intensive care, respite care,
referral facilities for primary care services, multidisciplinary neurological care and rehabilitation
programmes. These services require adequate numbers of general as well as specialist professionals who can also provide supervision and training in neurology to primary care staff.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
Tertiary care is the most specialized form of neurological diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation, and is often delivered in teaching hospitals. In some countries, there are also other public or
private facilities offering various types of neurological services in inpatient wards and outpatient
clinics. These facilities are not expected to deliver primary neurological care but act as secondary and tertiary referral services. They also serve as facilities for clinical research, collection of
epidemiological data, and the creation and distribution of health educational materials. Neurological specialist services require a large complement of trained specialist staff. Shortages of such
staff are a serious problem in low income countries, as are the lack of ﬁnancial resources and
infrastructure.
Very few countries have an optimal mix of primary, secondary and tertiary care. Even within
countries, signiﬁcant geographical disparities usually exist between regions. Little concerted effort has been made to use primary care as the principal vehicle of delivery of neurological services.
Some countries have good examples of intersectoral collaboration between nongovernmental
organizations, academic institutions, public sector health services and informal community-based
health services. At present, such activities are limited to small populations in urban areas; most
rural populations have no access to such services. Even in developed countries, more emphasis
is placed on providing specialist services than on approaches to integrate neurological services
into primary care.
Many neurological disorders run a chronic, relapsing or remitting course. Such disorders are
better managed by services that adopt a continuing care approach, emphasizing the long-term
nature of these neurological disorders and the need for ongoing care. The emphasis is on an integrated system of service delivery that attempts to respond to the needs of people with neurological
disorders. Integrated and coordinated systems of service delivery need to be developed where
services based in primary, secondary and tertiary care complement each other. In order to address
the needs of persons with neurological disorders for health care and social support, a clear referral
and linkage system needs to be in place. The key principles for organizing such services include
accessibility, comprehensiveness, coordination and continuity of care, effectiveness, and equity
within the local social, economic and cultural contexts.

DISABILITY AND REHABILITATION
Disability
Many neurological disorders and conditions affect an individual’s functioning and result in disabilities
or limit activities and restrict participation. According to the International Classiﬁcation of Functioning,
Disability and Health (ICF), the medical model views disability as a problem of the person, directly
caused by disease, trauma or other health condition that requires medical care provided in the form
of individual treatment by professionals (19). Management of the disability is aimed at cure or the
individual’s adjustment and behaviour change. The social model of disability sees the issue mainly
as a socially created problem and a matter related to the full integration of individuals into society.
According to the social model, disability is not an attribute of the individual, but rather a complex collection of conditions, many of which are created by the social environment: the approach to disability
requires social action and is a responsibility of society.

Rehabilitation
WHO deﬁnes rehabilitation as an active process by which those affected by injury or disease
achieve a full recovery or, if a full recovery is not possible, realize their optimal physical, mental
and social potential and are integrated into their most appropriate environment (19). Rehabilitation
is one of the key components of the primary health-care strategy, along with promotion, prevention and treatment. While promotion and prevention primarily target risk factors of disease and

public health principles and neurological disorders

treatment targets ill-health, rehabilitation targets human functioning. As with other key health
strategies, it is of varying importance and is relevant to all other medical specialities and health
professions. Though rooted in the health sector, rehabilitation is also relevant to other sectors
including education, labour and social affairs. For example, building of ramps and other facilities to
improve access by disabled people falls beyond the purview of the health sector but is nevertheless very important for the comprehensive management of a person with a disability.
As a health-care strategy, rehabilitation aims to enable people who experience or are at risk
of disability to achieve optimal functioning, autonomy and self-determination in the interaction
with the larger physical, social and economic environment. It is based on the integrative model of
human functioning, disability and health, which understands human functioning and disability both
as an experience in relation to health conditions and impairments and as a result of interaction
with the environment.
Rehabilitation involves a coordinated and iterative problem-solving process along the continuum
of care from the acute hospital to the community. It is based on four key approaches integrating a
wide spectrum of interventions: 1) biomedical and engineering approaches; 2) approaches that build
on and strengthen the resources of the person; 3) approaches that provide for a facilitating environment; and 4) approaches that provide guidance across services, sectors and payers. Speciﬁc
rehabilitation interventions include those related to physical medicine, pharmacology and nutrition,
psychology and behaviour, education and counselling, occupational and vocational advice, social
and supportive services, architecture and engineering and other interventions.
Rehabilitation services are like a bridge between isolation and exclusion — often the ﬁrst
step towards achieving fundamental rights. Health is a fundamental right, and rehabilitation is a
powerful tool to provide personal empowerment.

Rehabilitation strategy
Because of the complexity of rehabilitation based on the above-mentioned integrative model, rehabilitation services and interventions applying the rehabilitation strategy need to be coordinated
along the continuum of care across specialized and non-specialized services, sectors and payers.
Figure 1.2 illustrates the iterative problem-solving process sometimes called Rehab-CYCLE (20).
The Rehab-CYCLE involves four steps: assess, assign, intervene and evaluate. The process is
applied on two levels. The ﬁrst refers to the guidance along the continuum of care and the second
to the provision of a speciﬁc service.
From the guidance perspective, the assessment step inFigure 1.2 The Rehab-CYCLE
cludes the identiﬁcation of the person’s problems and needs,
the valuation of rehabilitation potential and prognosis and the
Assessment
deﬁnition of long-term service and goals of the intervention
programme. The assignment step refers to the assignment to
a service and an intervention programme. From the guidance
perspective, the intervention step is not further speciﬁed. The
Evaluation
evaluation step refers to service and the achievement of the
intervention goal.
From the service perspective, the assessment step includes
the identiﬁcation of a person’s problems, the review and poIntervention
tential modiﬁcation of the service or goals of the intervention
programme and the deﬁnition of the ﬁrst Rehab-CYCLE goals
and intervention targets. The assignment step refers to the assignment of health professionals and interventions to the intervention targets. The intervention
step refers to the speciﬁcation of the intervention techniques, the deﬁnition of indicator measures
to follow the progress of the intervention, and the deﬁnition of target values to be achieved within a

Assignment

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
predetermined time period. The evaluation step refers to the evaluation of the achievement of the
goal with respect to the speciﬁed target values of the indicator measures, the Rehab-CYCLE goals
and ultimately the goals of the intervention programme. It also includes the decision regarding the
need for another intervention cycle based on a reassessment.

Rehabilitation of neurological disorders
Rehabilitation should start as soon as possible after the diagnosis of a neurological disorder or
condition and should focus on the community rehabilitation perspective. The type and provision of
services is largely dependent on the individual health-care system. Therefore no generally agreed
principles currently exist regarding the provision of rehabilitation and related services.
Rehabilitation is often exclusively associated with well-established and coordinated multidisciplinary efforts by specialized rehabilitation services. While availability and access to these
specialized inpatient or outpatient services are at the core of successful rehabilitation, a need also
exists for rehabilitation service provision, from the acute settings through the district hospital and
the community, often by health professionals not specialized in rehabilitation but working closely
with the rehabilitation professionals. It is important to recognize that rehabilitation efforts in the
community can be delivered by professionals outside the health sector, ideally in collaboration with
rehabilitation professionals.
Rehabilitation services are limited or nonexistent in many developing countries for people with
disabilities attributable to neurological disorders or other causes. This means that many individuals
with disabilities will depend totally on other people, usually family members, for help with daily
activities, and this situation enhances poverty. Impoverished communities throughout the world
are affected by a disproportionate number of disabilities and, in turn, people with disabilities
become more vulnerable to poverty because of a lack of access to, or availability of, health care,
social care and rehabilitation services. When rehabilitation services are available, the lack of human resources limits considerably the transfer of knowledge from specialized centres to district
and community settings.
To address this situation, a community-based rehabilitation strategy has been introduced by
WHO as a complement to existing rehabilitation models and to look beyond the medical needs. The
strategy of community-based rehabilitation has been implemented in many low income countries
around the world and has successfully inﬂuenced the quality of life and participation of persons
with disabilities in societies where it is in practice.
The philosophy of rehabilitation emphasizes patient education and self-management and is well
suited for a number of neurological conditions. The basis for successful neurorehabilitation is the
in-depth understanding and sound measurement of functioning and the application of effective
interventions, intervention programmes and services. A wide range of rehabilitation interventions,
intervention programmes and services has been shown to contribute effectively to the optimal
functioning of people with neurological conditions.
Effective neurorehabilitation is based on the involvement of expert and multidisciplinary assessment, realistic and goal-oriented programmes, and evaluation of the impact on the patient’s
rehabilitation achievements; evaluation using scientiﬁcally sound and clinically appropriate out-

Box 1.3 Case-study: Giovanni
Giovanni is a 20-year-old man who was beaten by a mob
two years ago after a football game and suffered traumatic
brain injury. He was slow to recover with severe physical
limitations, fully conscious but with severe communication
problems. He needs an assistive communication device
which is not provided by the health system and is not possible for his family to purchase, so his family made a basic
communication table he uses to spell out words by point-

ing letter by letter with a ﬁnger, the only part of his body he
controls partially. Giovanni is totally dependent in all daily
activities and needs assistance 24 hours a day. He has a
standard wheelchair (though he requires an electrical one);
he has no way of leaving his house to access community
facilities, he cannot return to his previous job, and he has
no relocation option in view.

public health principles and neurological disorders
come measures should also incorporate the patient’s and the family’s perspectives. There are a
number of complexities in the process of neurorehabilitation, as patients can present with diverse
sequelae, including the following:
■ Physical functioning limitations can be evident in many ways — such as paralysis of the left
or right side of the body, or both sides — which limit severely the person’s capacity for many
daily living activities, as well as mobility in the community and, eventually, the capacity to
return to work or school. Patients can also present with rigidity, uncoordinated movements,
and/or weakness. This is evident in the case-studies of Giovanni and Juan given below in
Box 1.3 and Box 1.4, respectively. In developing countries, people with disabilities have very
limited access not only to rehabilitation services but also to appropriate assistive technology,
such as adequate wheelchairs: persons with head injury who require wheelchairs for adequate
positioning and mobility may be severely impaired in their possibility to leave their house and
participate in community activities, access educational facilities, or work.
■ Cognitive impairments can manifest in the form of memory and attention problems, mild to
severe intellectual deﬁciency, lack of perseverance and a limited ability to learn, all of which
can make it impossible to return to work, may affect emotional stability, and limit performance
at work or at home. All of these problems will affect the person’s emotional status, as well as
that of the family and friends. It can also mean social isolation in the long term, aggravating
depression.
■ Behavioural problems such as poor impulse control, uncontrolled anger and sexual impulses,
lack of insight and perseverance, and the impossibility to learn from past errors are only some
of the behavioural sequelae that affect the person’s capacity to get involved and be accepted
socially, and further limit the possibility of returning to educational or vocational services.
Behavioural problems can also become evident when the person affected realizes the severity
of his or her limitations, and the fact that they may be permanent.
■ Communication impairments in the form of speech problems, poor vocalization or stomas,
in combination with lack of access to augmentative or alternative communication devices in
developing countries, as in Giovanni’s case (Box 1.3), are a sure means of social isolation.
■ Basic daily living activities are affected by functional and cognitive limitations. For a man like
Giovanni (Box 1.3), such things as getting dressed or getting a spoonful of food to his mouth
can be impossible.
■ Psychosocial limitations, such as limited access to education, the impossibility to return to
vocational status or be relocated vocationally, are consequences of previously mentioned limitations, all of which further impact on the behavioural, physical and cognitive aspects of the
person affected by a neurological disorder that causes disability.

Costs of rehabilitation services
The National Head and Spinal Cord Injury Survey (21) divided costs into direct and indirect. Direct
costs were associated with the monetary values of real goods and services that were provided
for health care, while indirect costs were the monetary loss incurred by society because of interrupted productivity by the injured person. In 1974, the total cost for all head injuries studied was

Box 1.4 Case-study: Juan
Juan is a 32-year-old man, a former alcohol and drug addict
who sustained a car accident eight years ago. He recovered well from his physical limitations, except for a total
paralysis of his right arm and uncoordinated movements of
his left arm and legs. He was depressed for years, refusing medical treatment for his former addiction problem. He
could not return to his former job as an agricultural labourer

and was supported by his mother, who had to ﬁnd a job to
maintain them both. Finally, on his own, Juan adapted his
tools to be able to function as a shoe-shiner in a park. At
his last appointment, he was newly wed and attended with
his wife and child. He was ﬁnally happy with himself and
his life, although conscious of his deﬁcits.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
US$ 2384 million, of which 29% was related to the direct costs of care and 71% to indirect costs.
The largest annual cost was found to be in the 25–44-year age group, where the loss incurred
due to productivity was maximal. Payments for indirect costs are by far the greatest share, and
legal charges are only slightly less than the cost for the entire medical, hospital and rehabilitation
services provided.

STIGMA
Stigma has been deﬁned as a deeply discrediting attribute that reduces a person to one who is in
some way tainted and can therefore be denigrated. It is a pervasive problem that affects health
globally, threatening an individual’s psychological and physical well-being. It prevents individuals
from coming forward for diagnosis and impairs their ability to access care or participate in research
studies designed to ﬁnd solutions.
Stigmatization of certain diseases and conditions is a universal phenomenon that can be seen
across all countries, societies and populations. It refers to the relation between “the differentness
of an individual and the devaluation society places on that particular differentness”. For stigmatization to be consistently effective, however, the stigmatized person must acquiesce to society’s
devaluation. When people with “differentness” internalize society’s devaluation, they do not feel
empowered to change the situation and the negative stereotypes become an accepted part of their
concept of the disorder. The labelling, stereotyping, separation from others and consequent loss
of status highlight the role of power relations in the social construction of stigma (22).
People differentiate and label socially important human differences according to certain patterns that include: negative stereotypes, for example that people with epilepsy or other brain
disease are a danger to others; and pejorative labelling, including terms such as “crippled”, “disabled” and “epileptic”.
In neurology, stigma primarily refers to a mark or characteristic indicative of a history of
neurological disorder or condition and the consequent physical or mental abnormality. For most
chronic neurological disorders, the stigma is associated with the disability rather than the disorder
per se. Important exceptions are epilepsy and dementia: stigma plays an important role in forming
the social prognosis of people with these disorders. The amount of stigma associated with chronic
neurological illness is determined by two separate and distinct components: the attribution of
responsibility for the stigmatizing illness and the degree to which it creates discomfort in social
interactions. An additional perspective is the socially structured one, which indicates that stigma
is part of chronic illness because individuals who are chronically ill have less “social value” than
healthy individuals. Some additional aspects and dimensions of stigma are given in Box 1.5.
Stigma leads to direct and indirect discriminatory behaviour and factual choices by others
that can substantially reduce the opportunities for people who are stigmatized. Whatever the
mechanisms involved, stigma is an important public health problem. Stigma increases the toll of
illness for many people with brain disorders and their families; it is a cause of disease, as people

Box 1.5 Dimensions of stigma
Concealability

The extent to which the condition becomes obvious or can be hidden from others.

Course of the mark

The way the condition changes over time and its ultimate outcome.

Disruptiveness

The degree of strain and difﬁculty stigma adds to interpersonal relationships.

Aesthetics

How much the attribute makes the character repellant or upsetting to others.

Origin

Who was responsible for the acquired stigmatizing condition and how.

Peril

Perceived dangers, both real and symbolic, of the stigmatizing condition to others.

Source: (23).

public health principles and neurological disorders
who are stigmatized have high exposure to health risks and low access to protective factors and
treatment.
Sometimes coping with stigma surrounding the disorder is more difﬁcult than living with any
limitations imposed by the disorder itself. Stigmatized individuals are often rejected by neighbours
and the community, and as a result suffer loneliness and depression. The psychological effect of
stigma is a general feeling of unease or of “not ﬁtting in”, loss of conﬁdence, increasing self-doubt
leading to depreciated self-esteem, and a general alienation from the society. Moreover, stigmatization is frequently irreversible so that, even when the behaviour or physical attributes disappear,
individuals continue to be stigmatized by others and by their own self-perception.
People with some neurological disorders (e.g. epilepsy) and their families may also be subjected to other forms of social sanction, such as being excluded from community activities or
from societal opportunities such as education or work. One of the most damaging results of stigmatization is that affected individuals or those responsible for their care may not seek treatment,
hoping to avoid the negative social consequences of diagnosis. This leads in turn to delayed or
lost opportunities for treatment and recovery. Underreporting of stigmatizing conditions can also
reduce efforts to develop appropriate strategies for their prevention and treatment.
Epilepsy carries a particularly severe stigma because of misconceptions, myths and stereotypes related to the illness. In some communities, children who do not receive treatment for this
disorder are removed from school. Lacking basic education, they may not be able to support
themselves as adults. In some African countries, people believe that saliva can spread epilepsy
or that the “epileptic spirit” can be transferred to anyone who witnesses a seizure. These misconceptions cause people to retreat in fear from someone having a seizure, leaving that person
unprotected from open ﬁres and other dangers they might encounter in cramped living conditions.
Recent research has shown that the stigma people with epilepsy feel contributes to increased
rates of psychopathology, fewer social interactions, reduced social capital, and lower quality of
life in both developed and developing countries (22).
Efforts are needed to reduce stigma but, more importantly, to tackle the discriminatory attitudes
and prejudicial behaviour that give rise to it. Fighting stigma and discrimination requires a multilevel
approach involving education of health professionals and public information campaigns to educate
and inform the community about neurological disorders in order to avoid common myths and
promote positive attitudes. Methods to reduce stigma related to epilepsy in an African community
by a parallel operation of public education and comprehensive treatment programmes successfully
changed attitudes: traditional beliefs about epilepsy were weakened, fears were diminished, and
community acceptance of people with epilepsy increased (24).
The provision of services in the community and the implementation of legislation to protect
the rights of the patients are also important issues. Legislation represents an important means of
dealing with the problems and challenges caused by stigmatization. Governments can reinforce
efforts with laws that protect people with brain disorders and their families from abusive practices
and prevent discrimination in education, employment, housing and other opportunities. Legislation
can help, but ample evidence exists to show that this alone is not enough.
The emphasis on the issue of prejudice and discrimination also links to another concept where
the need is to focus less on the person who is stigmatized and more on those who do the stigmatizing. The role of the media in perpetrating misconceptions also needs to be taken into account.
Stigmatization and rejection can be reduced by providing factual information on the causes and
treatment of brain disorder; by talking openly and respectfully about the disorder and its effects;
and by providing and protecting access to appropriate health care.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

EDUCATION AND TRAINING
Education in neurology contains important aspects of quality assurance and continuing improvement in the delivery of the best care to people with neurological disorders. Training in neurology
does not refer only to postgraduate specialization but also the component of training offered to
undergraduates, general physicians and primary health-care workers. To reduce the global burden
of neurological disorders, an adequate focus is needed on training, especially of primary health
workers in countries where neurologists are few or nonexistent.

Training of primary care providers
As front line caregivers in many resource-poor countries, primary care providers need to receive
basic training and regular continuing education in basic diagnostic skills and in treatment and
rehabilitation protocols. Such training should cover general skills (such as interviewing the patient
and recording the information), diagnosis and management of speciﬁc disorders (including the use
of medications and monitoring of side-effects) and referral guidelines. Training manuals tailored
to the needs of speciﬁc countries or regions must be developed. Primary care providers need to
be trained to recognize the need for referral to more specialized treatment rather than trying to
make a diagnosis.
Training of nurses is particularly important globally. In low income countries, where few physicians exist, nurses may be involved in making diagnostic and treatment decisions. They are also
an important source of advice on promoting health and preventing disease, such as providing
information on diet and immunization.

Training of physicians
The points to be taken into consideration in relation to education in neurology for physicians
include:
■ core curricula (undergraduate, postgraduate and others);
■ continuous medical education;
■ accreditation of training courses;
■ open facilities and international exchange programmes;
■ use of innovative teaching methods;
■ training in the public health aspects of neurology.
Teaching of neurology at undergraduate level is important because 20–30% of the population
are susceptible to neurological disorders (25). The postgraduate period of training is the most
active and important for the development of a fully accredited neurologist. The following issues
need consideration: mode of entry, core training programmes, evaluation of the training institutions, access to current literature, rotation of trainees between departments, and evaluation of the
trainees during training and by a ﬁnal examination. The central idea is to build both the curriculum
and an examination system that ensure the achievement of professional competence and social
values and not merely the retention and recall of information.
Neurological curricula vary considerably across countries. This is not necessarily undesirable
because the curriculum must take into account local differences in the prevalence of neurological disorders. Some standardization in the core neurological teaching and training curricula and
methods of demonstrating competency is desirable, however. The core curriculum should be
designed to cover the practical aspects of neurological disorders and the range of educational
settings should include all health resources in the community. The core curriculum also needs to
reﬂect national health priorities and the availability of affordable resources.
Continuous medical education is an important way of updating the knowledge of specialists on
an ongoing basis and providing specialist courses to primary care physicians. Specialist neurolo-

public health principles and neurological disorders
gists could be involved in training of primary care doctors, especially in those countries where few
specialists in neurology exist. Regional and international neurological societies and organizations
have an important role to play in providing training programmes: the emphasis should be on active
problem-based learning. Guidelines for continuous medical education need to be set up to ensure
that educational events and materials meet a high educational standard, remain free of the inﬂuence of the pharmaceutical industry and go through a peer review system. Linkage of continuous
medical education programmes to promotion or other incentives could be a strategy for increasing
the number of people attending such courses.
Neurologists play an increasingly important part in providing advice to government and advocating better resources for people with neurological disorders. Therefore training in public
health, service delivery and economic aspects of neurological care need to be stressed in their
curricula.
Most postgraduate neurology training programmes, especially those in developed countries, are
resource intensive and lengthy — usually taking about six years to complete. Whether adequate
specialist training in neurology might be undergone in less time in certain countries or regions
would be a useful subject for study. The use of modern technology facilities and strategies such as
distance-learning courses and telemedicine could be one way of decreasing the cost of training.
An important issue, as for other human health-care resources, is the “brain drain”, where
graduates sent abroad for training do not return to practise in their countries of origin. This public
health challenge still needs to be faced with innovative means.

CONCLUSIONS
Public health is the science and practice of protecting and improving the population’s health
through prevention, promotion, health education, control of communicable and noncommunicable
diseases and monitoring of environmental hazards. It is a comprehensive approach that is concerned with the health of the community as a whole. Public health is community health: “Health
care is vital to all of us some of the time, but public health is vital to all of us all of the time” (3).
The mission of public health is to fulﬁl society’s interest in assuring conditions in which people
can be healthy. The three core public health functions are:
■ the assessment and monitoring of the health of communities and populations at risk to identify
health problems and priorities;
■ the formulation of public policies designed to solve identiﬁed local and national health problems
and priorities;
■ ensuring that all populations have access to appropriate and cost-effective care, including
health promotion and disease prevention services, and evaluation of the effectiveness of that
care.
Public health comprises many professional disciplines such as medicine, nutrition, social work,
environmental sciences, health education, health services administration and the behavioural
sciences. In other words, public health activities focus on entire populations rather than on individual patients. Specialist neurologists usually treat individual patients for a speciﬁc neurological
disorder or condition; public health professionals approach neurology more broadly by monitoring
neurological disorders and related health concerns in entire communities and promoting healthy
practices and behaviours so as to ensure that populations stay healthy. Although these approaches
could be seen as two sides of the same coin, it is hoped that this chapter contributes to the
process of building the bridges between public health and neurology and thus serves as a useful
guide for the chapters to come.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

REFERENCES
1. Winslow CEA. The untilled ﬁeld of public health. Modern Medicine, 1920, 2:183–191.
2. Preamble to the Constitution of the World Health Organization as adopted by the International
Health Conference, 1946. In: Basic documents, 45th ed. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2005
(http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hist/ofﬁcial_records/constitution.pdf, accessed 2 October 2006).
3. Breslow L et al. Encyclopedia of public health. New York, Macmillan Reference, 2002.
4. Beaglehole R et al. Public health in the new era: improving health through collective action. Lancet,
2004; 363:2084–2086.
5. Wilkinson R, Marmot M, eds. The solid facts: social determinants of health. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2003.
6. Janca A, Prilipko L, Costa e Silva JA. The World Health Organization’s global initiative on neurology
and public health. Journal of the Neurological Sciences, 1997; 145:1–2.
7. Janca A, Prilipko L, Costa e Silva JA. The World Health Organization’s work on public health
aspects of neurology. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 1997; 63(Suppl. 1):
S6–S7.
8. Janca A, Prilipko L, Saraceno B. A World Health Organization perspective on neurology and
neuroscience. Archives of Neurology, 2000; 57:1786–1788.
9. Murray CJL, Lopez AD, eds. The global burden of disease: a comprehensive assessment of mortality
and disability from diseases, injuries and risk factors in 1990 and projected to 2020. Cambridge, MA,
Harvard School of Public Health on behalf of the World Health Organization and the World Bank,
1996 (Global Burden of Disease and Injury Series, Vol. I).
10. Tannahill A. What is health promotion? Health Education Journal, 1985; 44:167–168.
11. The Bangkok Charter for Health Promotion in a Globalized World. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2005.
12. Leavell HR, Clark EG. Preventive medicine for the doctor in his community: an epidemiological
approach, 3rd ed. New York, McGraw Hill, 1965.
13. The world health report 2002 – Reducing risks, promoting healthy life. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2002.
14. Rose G. The strategy of preventive medicine. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1992.
15. Liu B et al. Helmets for preventing injury in motorcycle riders. The Cochrane Database of Systematic
Reviews, 2005, Issue 4.
16. WHO CVD-risk management package for low- and medium-resource settings. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2002.
17. The world health report 2000 – Health systems: improving performance. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2000.
18. Institute of Medicine. Neurological, psychiatric, and developmental disorders. Meeting the challenge
in the developing world. Washington, DC, National Academy Press, 2001.
19. International classiﬁcation of functioning, disability and health. Geneva, World Health Organization,
2001.
20. Stucki G, Ewert T, Cieza A. Value and application of the ICF in rehabilitation medicine. Disability and
Rehabilitation, 2002, 24:932–938.
21. Kalsbeek WD et al. The National Head and Spinal Cord Injury Survey: major ﬁndings. Journal of
Neurosurgery, 1980; 53 (Suppl.):S19–31.
22. Jacoby A, Snape D, Baker GA. Epilepsy and social identity: the stigma of a chronic neurological
disorder. Lancet Neurology, 2005; 4:171–178.
23. Jones EE et al. Social stigma: the psychology of marked relationships. New York, Freeman, 1984.
24. Jilek-Aall L et al. Psychosocial study of epilepsy in Africa. Social Science and Medicine, 1997;
45:783–795.
25. European Federation of Neurological Societies. The Education Committee of EFNS: activities and
work in progress. European Journal of Neurology, 2003; 10:205–211.

public health principles and neurological disorders

RECOMMENDED READING
■ Bergen DC. Preventable neurological diseases worldwide. Neuroepidemiology, 1998, 17:67–73.
■ Bergen DC, Silberberg D. Nervous system disorders: a global epidemic. Archives of Neurology, 2002;
59:1194–1196.
■ Hewer RL. The economic impact of neurological illness on the health and wealth of the nation and of
individuals. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 1997, 63(Suppl. 1):19–23.
■ Institute of Medicine. Neurological, psychiatric, and developmental disorders. Meeting the challenge in
the developing world. Washington, DC, National Academy Press, 2001.
■ Menken M, Munsat TL, Toole JF. The Global Burden of Disease study: implications for neurology.
Archives of Neurology, 2002; 57:418–420.
■ Singhal BS. Neurology in developing countries. A population perspective. Archives of Neurology, 1998;
55:1019–1021.
■ Werner D. Disabled village children: a guide for health workers, rehabilitation workers and families.
Berkeley, CA, The Hesperian Foundation, 1987.
■ International classiﬁcation of functioning, disability and health. Geneva, World Health Organization,
2001.
■ Primary prevention of mental, neurological and psychosocial disorders. Geneva, World Health Organization, 1998.
■ The Bangkok Charter for Health Promotion in a Globalized World. Geneva, World Health Organization,
2005.
■ The world health report 2000 – Health systems: improving performance. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2000.
■ The world health report 2002 – Reducing risks, promoting healthy life. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2002.
■ WHO CVD-risk management package for low- and medium-resource settings. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2002.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

CHAPTER 2

global burden of

neurological
disorders
estimates and projections
in this chapter

Ever-increasing demand for health services
forces health planners to make choices about
29 Estimates and projections for neurological disorders
resource allocation. Information on relative
burden of various health conditions and risks
30 Data presentation
to health is an important element in strategic
37 Conclusions
health planning. What is needed to provide
this information is a framework for integrating, validating, analysing, and disseminating the fragmentary, and at times contradictory, data that are available on a population’s health, along with some understanding of how that population’s health is changing over time.

27 GBD studies and their key results

The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) approach is one of the most
widely used frameworks for information on summary measures
of population health across disease and risk categories. The GBD
framework is based on the use of a common metric to summarize
the disease burden from diagnostic categories of the International
Classiﬁcation of Diseases and the major risk factors that cause
those health outcomes.

GBD STUDIES AND THEIR KEY RESULTS
In 1993, the World Bank, WHO and the Harvard School of Public
Health carried out a study to assess the global burden of disease
for the year 1990. The methods and ﬁndings of the 1990 GBD
study have been widely published (1–3). To prepare internally
consistent estimates of incidence, prevalence, duration and mortality for almost 500 sequelae of the diseases and injuries under
consideration, a mathematical model, DisMod, was developed

(4). The main purpose was to convert partial, often
nonspeciﬁc, data on disease and injury occurrence
into a consistent description of the basic epidemiological parameters.
Many conditions including neuropsychiatric disorders and injuries cause considerable ill-health but no
or few direct deaths. Therefore separate measures
of survival and of health status among survivors
needed to be combined to provide a single, holistic
measure of overall population health. To assess the
burden of disease, the 1990 GBD study used a timebased metric that measures both premature mortality (years of life lost because of premature mortality
or YLL) and disability (years of healthy life lost as a
result of disability or YLD, weighted by the severity
of the disability). The sum of these two components,

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), provides a measure of the future stream of healthy life (years
expected to be lived in full health) lost as a result of the incidence of speciﬁc diseases and injuries
(2). One DALY can be thought of as one lost year of healthy life and the burden of disease as a
measure of the gap between current health status and an ideal situation where everyone lives into
old age free from disease and disability.
The results of the 1990 GBD study conﬁrmed that noncommunicable diseases and injuries
were a signiﬁcant cause of health burden in all regions of the world. Neuropsychiatric disorders
and injuries in particular were major causes of lost years of healthy life as measured by DALYs,
and were signiﬁcantly underestimated when measured by mortality alone (2).
The 1990 GBD study represented a major advance in the quantiﬁcation of the impact of diseases, injuries and risk factors on population health globally and by region. Government and
nongovernmental agencies alike have used these results to argue for more strategic allocations of
health resources to disease prevention and control programmes that are likely to yield the greatest
gains in terms of population health. Following publication of the initial results of the GBD study,
several national applications of its methods were used, which led to substantially more data in
the area of descriptive epidemiology of diseases and injuries.
As a follow-up to the 1990 GBD study, WHO undertook a new global assessment of the burden
of disease for the year 2000 and subsequent years in 2002. The GBD 2000 study drew on a
wide range of data sources to develop internally consistent estimates of incidence, health state
prevalence, severity and duration, and mortality for over 130 major causes, for 14 epidemiological
subregions of the world (5).

Projections of global mortality and burden of disease
In order to address the need for updated projections of mortality and burden of disease by region
and cause, updated projections of future trends for mortality and burden of disease between 2002
and 2030 have also been prepared by WHO (6). These have been based on methods similar to
those used in the original GBD 1990 study, but use the latest available estimates for 2002 and the
latest available projections for HIV/AIDS, income, human capital and other inputs (7 ). Relatively
simple models were used to project future health trends under various scenarios, based largely on
projections of economic and social development, and using the historically observed relationships
of these with cause-speciﬁc mortality rates.
Rather than attempt to model the effects of the many separate direct determinants or risk
factors for diseases from the limited data that are available, the GBD methodology considered a
certain number of socioeconomic variables including: average income per capita, measured as
gross domestic product (GDP) per capita; average number of years of schooling in adults, referred
to as “human capital”; and time, a proxy measure for the impact of technological change on
health status. This latter variable captures the effects of accumulating knowledge and technological development, allowing the implementation of more cost-effective health interventions, both
preventive and curative, at constant levels of income and human capital. These socioeconomic
variables show clear historical relationships with mortality rates, and may be regarded as indirect,
or distal, determinants of health. In addition, a fourth variable, tobacco use, was included in the
projections for cancer, cardiovascular diseases and chronic respiratory diseases, because of its
overwhelming importance in determining trends for these causes.
Projections were carried out at country level, but aggregated into regional or income groups
for presentation of results. Baseline estimates at country level for 2002 were derived from the
GBD analyses published in The world health report 2004 (8). Mortality estimates were based on
analysis of latest available national information on levels of mortality and cause distributions as at
late 2003. Incidence, prevalence, duration and severity estimates for conditions were based on the
GBD analyses for the relevant epidemiological subregion, together with national and sub-national

global burden of neurological disorders: estimates and projections
level information available to WHO. These baseline estimates represent the best estimates of WHO,
based on the evidence available in mid-2004, and have been computed using standard categories
and methods to maximize cross-national comparability.

Limitations of the Global Burden of Disease framework
By their very nature, projections of the future are highly uncertain and need to be interpreted with
caution. Three limitations are brieﬂy discussed: uncertainties in the baseline data on levels and
trends in cause-speciﬁc mortality, the “business as usual” assumptions, and the use of a relatively
simple model based largely on projections of economic and social development (9).
For regions with limited death registration data, such as the Eastern Mediterranean Region,
sub-Saharan Africa and parts of Asia and the Paciﬁc, there is considerable uncertainty in estimates of deaths by cause associated with the use of partial information on levels of mortality
from sources such as the Demographic and Health Surveys, and from the use of cause-speciﬁc
mortality estimates for causes such as HIV/AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis and vaccine-preventable
diseases. The GBD analyses have attempted to use all available sources of information, together
with an explicit emphasis on internal consistency, to develop consistent and comprehensive estimates of deaths and disease burden by cause, age, sex and region.
The projections of burden are not intended as forecasts of what will happen in the future but
as projections of current and past trends, based on certain explicit assumptions and on observed
historical relationships between development and mortality levels and patterns. The methods used
base the disease burden projections largely on broad mortality projections driven to a large extent
by World Bank projections of future growth in income per capita in different regions of the world.
As a result, it is important to interpret the projections with a degree of caution commensurate with
their uncertainty, and to remember that they represent a view of the future explicitly resulting from
the baseline data, choice of models and the assumptions made. Uncertainty in projections has
been addressed not through an attempt to estimate uncertainty ranges, but through preparation
of pessimistic and optimistic projections under alternative sets of input assumptions.
The results depend strongly on the assumption that future mortality trends in poor countries
will have the same relationship to economic and social development as has occurred in higher
income countries in the recent past. If this assumption is not correct, then the projections for low
income countries will be over-optimistic in the rate of decline of communicable and noncommunicable diseases. The projections have also not taken explicit account of trends in major risk factors
apart from tobacco smoking and, to a limited extent, overweight and obesity. If broad trends in risk
factors are towards worsening of risk exposures with development, rather than the improvements
observed in recent decades in many high income countries, then again the projections for low and
middle income countries presented here will be too optimistic.

ESTIMATES AND PROJECTIONS
FOR NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS
This document presents the GBD estimates for neurological disorders from the projected estimates for 2005, 2015 and 2030. The complete set of tables is contained in Annex 4.

Cause categories
The cause categories used in the GBD study have four levels of disaggregation and include 135
speciﬁc diseases and injuries. At the ﬁrst level, overall mortality is divided into three broad groups
of causes: Group I consists of communicable diseases, maternal causes, conditions arising in
the perinatal period and nutritional deﬁciencies; Group II encompasses the noncommunicable
diseases (including neuropsychiatric conditions); and Group III comprises intentional and unintentional injuries. Deaths and health states are categorically attributed to one underlying cause using

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
the rules and conventions of the International Classiﬁcation of Diseases. In some cases these rules
are ambiguous, in which event the GBD 2000 followed the conventions used in the GBD 1990. It
also lists the sequelae analysed for each cause category and provides relevant case deﬁnitions.

Methodology
For the purpose of calculation of estimates of the global burden of disease, the neurological
disorders are included from two categories: neurological disorders within the neuropsychiatric
category, and neurological disorders from other categories. Neurological disorders within the
neuropsychiatric category refer to the cause category listed in Group II under neuropsychiatric
disorders and include epilepsy, Alzheimer and other dementias, Parkinson’s disease, multiple
sclerosis and migraine. Neurological disorders from other categories include diseases and injuries
which have neurological sequelae and are listed elsewhere in cause category Groups I, II and III
(10). The complete list used for calculation of GBD estimates for neurological disorders is given in
Annex 3. Among the various neurological disorders discussed in this report, please note that for
headache disorders, GBD includes migraine only (see Chapter 3.3). Also, GBD does not describe
separately the burden associated with pain (see Chapter 3.7). There are also some diseases and
injuries, which have neurological sequelae that have not been separately identiﬁed by the GBD
study, and are not presented in this report; these include tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS, measles, low
birth weight, birth asphyxia and birth trauma. The burden estimates for these conditions include
the impact of neurological and other sequelae which are not separately estimated.

DATA PRESENTATION
This chapter summarizes data with the important ﬁndings presented as charts and maps for
DALYs, deaths, YLDs and prevalence as estimated for neurological disorders in the GBD study. The
complete set of tables is given in Annex 4. The data are presented for the following variables.
DALYs

Absolute numbers
Percentage of total DALYs
DALYs per 100 000 population

Deaths

Absolute numbers
Percentage of total deaths
Deaths per 100 000 population

YLDs

Absolute numbers
Percentage of total YLDs
YLDs per 100 000 population

Point prevalence

Total number of cases with different neurological disorders
Prevalence per 1000 population of individual neurological disorders

Please note that prevalence and YLDs are available for the neurological cause – sequela combinations. These data are therefore provided for all neurological disorders within the neuropsychiatric category, cerebrovascular disease, combined for neuroinfections and neurological sequelae of infections
(poliomyelitis, tetanus, meningitis, Japanese encephalitis, syphilis, pertussis, diphtheria, malaria),
neurological sequelae associated with nutritional deﬁciencies and neuropathies (protein–energy
malnutrition, iodine deﬁciency, leprosy, and diabetes mellitus), and neurological sequelae associated
with injuries (road trafﬁc accidents, poisonings, falls, ﬁres, drownings, other unintentional injuries,
self-inﬂicted injuries, violence, war, and other intentional injuries) (see Table 2.1).
While YLDs are separately estimated for each sequela, death (and hence YLLs and DALYs)
are only estimated at the cause level, and for many causes it is not possible to describe sequelaspeciﬁc deaths. The tables for DALYs and deaths therefore only describe data for neurological
cause categories (Table 2.2).

global burden of neurological disorders: estimates and projections

Table 2.1 Neurological disorder groupings used for YLDs and prevalence data
Neurological disorders in neuropsychiatric category

Disorders/injuries with neurological sequelae in other
categories

Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine

Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional deﬁciencies and neuropathies
Neurological injuries

Table 2.2 Neurological disorder groupings used for DALYs and deaths data
Neurological disorders in neuropsychiatric category

Disorders/injuries with neurological sequelae in other
categories

Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine

Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis

Regional and income categories
Projections of mortality and burden of disease are summarized according to two groupings of
countries, as follows.
■ WHO regions. WHO Member States are grouped into six regions (Africa, the Americas,
South-East Asia, Europe, Eastern Mediterranean and Western Paciﬁc, see http://www.who.
int/about/regions/en/index.html). WHO regions are organizational groupings and, while they
are largely based on geographical terms, are not synonymous with geographical areas. For
further disaggregation of the global burden of disease, the regions have been further divided
into 14 epidemiological subregions, based on levels of child (under ﬁve years of age) and adult
(aged 15–59 years) mortality for WHO Member States (Table 2.3). When these mortality strata
are applied to the six WHO regions, they produce 14 mortality subregions. These are listed in
Annex 1, together with the WHO Member States in each group.

Table 2.3 Deﬁnitions of mortality strata used to deﬁne subregions
Mortality stratum

Child mortality

Adult mortality

Very low

B
C
D
E

Low
Low
High
High

Low
High
High
Very high

■ Income categories. The income categories are based on World Bank estimates of gross
national income (GNI) per capita in 2001 (11). Each country is classiﬁed as low income (GNI
US$ 745 or less), lower middle income (GNI US$ 746–2975), upper middle income (GNI US$
2976–9205), and high income (GNI $ 9206 or more). Annex 2 lists countries according to the
World Bank income categories.
The following tables and text describe the estimates for DALYs, deaths and YLDs for neurological disorders as estimated and projected for 2005, 2015 and 2030.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
Estimates of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs)
Neurological disorders included in the neuropsychiatric category contribute to 2% of the global
burden of disease, while cerebrovascular disease and some of the neuroinfections (poliomyelitis,
tetanus, meningitis and Japanese encephalitis) contribute to 4.3% of the global burden of disease
in 2005. Thus neurological disorders constitute 6.3% of the global burden of disease (see Table
2.4). The term “neurological disorders” henceforth used in this chapter includes those conditions
in the neuropsychiatric category as well as in other categories. Figure 2.1 presents selected
diseases as a percentage of total DALYs, in order to compare the burden constituted by them with
that of neurological disorders. For example, HIV/AIDS and malignant neoplasm each constitute
slightly over 5% of total burden.
Table 2.4 presents the total number of DALYs in thousands associated with neurological disorders and as percentage of total DALYs for 2005, 2015 and 2030. Neurological disorders contribute
to 92 million DALYs in 2005 projected to increase to 103 million in 2030 (approximately a 12%
increase). While Alzheimer and other dementias are projected to show a 66% increase from 2005
to 2030, there is an estimated 57% decrease in DALYs associated with poliomyelitis, tetanus,
meningitis and Japanese encephalitis combined.

Table 2.4 Number of DALYs for neurological disorders and as percentage of global
DALYs projected for 2005, 2015 and 2030
Cause category

2005

Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

2015

2030

No. of
DALYs
(000)

Percentage
of total
DALYs

No. of
DALYs
(000)

Percentage
of total
DALYs

No. of
DALYs
(000)

Percentage
of total
DALYs

7 308
11 078
1 617
1 510
7 660
50 785
115
6 423
5 337
561
92 392

0.50
0.75
0.11
0.10
0.52
3.46
0.01
0.44
0.36
0.04
6.29

7 419
13 540
1 762
1 586
7 736
53 815
47
4 871
3 528
304
94 608

0.50
0.91
0.12
0.11
0.52
3.63
0.00
0.33
0.24
0.02
6.39

7 442
18 394
2 015
1 648
7 596
60 864
13
3 174
2 039
150
103 335

0.49
1.20
0.13
0.11
0.50
3.99
0.00
0.21
0.13
0.01
6.77

Figure 2.1 Percentage of total DALYs for selected diseasesa and neurological
disordersb
7
6

% of total DALYs

5
4
3
2
1
0

Neurological
disorders

Tuberculosis

HIV/AIDS

a GBD cause categories
b Neuropsychiatric plus other categories

Malignant
neoplasms

Ischaemic heart
disease

Respiratory
disease

Digestive
diseases

global burden of neurological disorders: estimates and projections

Among neurological disorders, more than half of the burden in DALYs is contributed by cerebrovascular disease, 12% by Alzheimer and other dementias and 8% each by epilepsy and migraine
(see Figure 2.2).
Neurological disorders contribute to 10.9%, 6.7%, 8.7% and 4.5% of the global burden of
disease in high, upper middle, lower middle and low income countries, respectively, in 2005 (see
Figure 2.3). The higher burden in the lower middle category reﬂects the double burden of communicable diseases and noncommunicable diseases. DALYs per 100 000 population for neurological
disorders are highest for lower middle and low income countries (1514 and 1448, respectively) as
estimated for 2005 (see Table 2.5).

Table 2.5 DALYs per 100 000 population for neurological disorders globally and by
World Bank income category, 2005
Cause category

Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

World
(100 000
population)

Income category
Low

Lower middle

Upper middle

High

113.4
172
25.1
23.4
118.9
788.4
1.8
99.7
82.9
8.7
1 434.3

158.3
90.7
15.1
20.1
114
662.5
2.6
228.6
143.2
13
1 448.1

80
150.7
19.7
23.3
106.8
1 061.2
1.6
10.8
51.2
9
1 514.3

139.2
166.9
17.5
24.9
147.1
612.2
0.9
1.3
39.7
0.4
1 150.1

51.3
457.3
70.8
32.5
146.3
592
0.6
0.1
10.7
0.6
1 362.2

As shown in Table 2.6, neurological disorders contribute most to the global burden of disease in
the European Region (11.2%) and the Western Paciﬁc Region (10%) compared with 2.9% in the
African Region in 2005. DALYs per 100 000 population as estimated for 2005 are highest for Eur-C
epidemiological subregion (2920) and lowest for Emr-B (751) (see Figure 2.4).

Figure 2.2 DALYs for individual neurological
disorders as percentage of total
neurological disorders

Figure 2.3 Neurological disorders as percentage
of total DALYs for 2005, 2015 and 2030
across World Bank income category
14

2005

Cerebrovascular
disease 55.0%

Migraine
8.3%
Epilepsy 7.9%
Tetanus 7.0%

% of total DALYs

Alzheimer
and other
dementias
12.0%

Poliomyelitis 0.1%
Japanese encephalitis 0.6%
Multiple sclerosis 1.6%
Parkinson's disease 1.8%
Meningitis 5.8%

2015

2030

12
10
8
6
4
2
0

Low

Lower middle

Upper middle

Income category

High

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

Figure 2.4 DALYs per 100 000 population associated with neurological
disorders by WHO region and mortality stratum, 2005

Region

Mortality DALYS per 100 000
stratum
population
for neurological
disorders

Africa (AFR)

Afr-D
Afr-E

1 536.73
1 361.41

Americas
(AMR)

Amr-A
Amr-B
Amr-D

1 214.18
1 135.56
1 251.09

South-East
Asia (SEAR)

Sear-B
Sear-D

750.50
1 480.39

Europe (EUR)

Eur-A
Eur-B
Eur-C

1 463.53
1 665.33
2 920.22

Eastern
Mediterranean
(EMR)

Emr-B
Emr-D

1 089.68
1 377.09

Western
Paciﬁc (WPR)

Wpr-A
Wpr-B

1 543.28
1 470.80

<1000
1000–1200
1200.1–1400
1400.1–1600
>1600

The designations employed and the presentation of material on this map do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the
World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers
or boundaries. Dashed lines represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement.

WHO 06.154

Table 2.6 Neurological disorders as percentage of total DALYs by WHO region, 2005
Cause category

World
(%)

WHO region
AFR
(%)

AMR
(%)

SEAR
(%)

EUR
(%)

EMR
(%)

WPR
(%)

Epilepsy

0.50

0.46

0.73

0.46

0.40

0.54

0.44

Alzheimer and other dementias

0.75

0.10

1.47

0.26

2.04

0.42

1.32

Parkinson’s disease

0.11

0.02

0.22

0.07

0.30

0.06

0.15

Multiple sclerosis

0.10

0.03

0.17

0.08

0.20

0.09

0.15

Migraine

0.52

0.13

0.97

0.41

0.80

0.51

0.73

Cerebrovascular disease

3.46

1.11

3.10

1.93

7.23

2.69

6.81

Poliomyelitis

0.01

0.00

0.01

0.00

0.01

Tetanus

0.44

0.77

0.01

0.81

0.00

0.54

0.10

Meningitis

0.36

0.24

0.39

0.81

0.24

0.43

0.24

Japanese encephalitis

0.04

0.00

0.05

0.00

0.06

0.09

Total

6.29

2.86

7.06

4.90

11.23

5.34

10.04

global burden of neurological disorders: estimates and projections

Estimates of deaths
Neurological disorders are an important cause of mortality and constitute 12% of total deaths
globally (see Table 2.7). Within these, cerebrovascular diseases are responsible for 85% of the
deaths due to neurological disorders (see Figure 2.5). Neurological disorders constitute 16.8%
of the total deaths in lower middle income countries compared with 13.2% of the total deaths
in high income countries (Figure 2.6). Among the neurological disorders, Alzheimer and other
dementias are estimated to constitute 2.84% of the total deaths in high income countries in 2005.
Cerebrovascular disease constitute 15.8%, 9.6%, 9.5% and 6.4% of the total deaths in lower
middle, upper middle, high and low income countries respectively (Table 2.8).

Table 2.7 Deaths attributable to neurological disorders as percentage
of total deaths, 2005, 2015 and 2030
Cause category

2005
(%)

2015
(%)

Epilepsy

0.22

0.21

0.19

Alzheimer and other dementias

0.73

0.81

0.92

Parkinson’s disease

0.18

0.20

0.23

Multiple sclerosis

0.03

0.02

Migraine

0.00

Cerebrovascular disease

9.90

10.19

10.63

Poliomyelitis

0.00

Tetanus

0.33

0.23

0.13

Meningitis

0.26

0.17

0.10

Japanese encephalitis
Total

2030
(%)

0.02

0.01

11.67

11.84

12.22

Figure 2.5 Deaths from selected neurological
disorders as percentage of total
neurological disorders

Figure 2.6 Neurological disorders as percentage
of total deaths for 2005, 2015 and 2030
across World Bank income category
18

Cerebrovascular
disease
85%

Meningitis 2.24%

2030

12
10
8
6
4
2

Multiple
sclerosis 0.24%
Parkinson's
disease 1.55%
Epilepsy 1.86%

2015

% of total deaths

Japanese
encephalitis 0.17%

2005

0
Low

Lower middle

Upper middle

Income category
Alzheimer and other
dementias 6.28%
Tetanus 2.83%

High

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

Table 2.8 Deaths attributable to neurological disorders as percentage of total deaths by
World Bank income category, 2005
Cause category

World
(%)

Income category
Low
(%)

Lower middle Upper middle
(%)
(%)

High
(%)

Epilepsy

0.22

0.28

0.17

0.20

0.11

Alzheimer and other dementias

0.73

0.41

0.34

0.46

2.84

Parkinson’s disease

0.18

0.06

0.18

0.15

0.60

Multiple sclerosis

0.03

0.01

0.02

0.05

0.10

Migraine

0.00

Cerebrovascular disease

9.90

6.41

15.81

9.64

9.48

Poliomyelitis

0.00

0.01

Tetanus

0.33

0.64

0.04

0.01

0.00

Meningitis

0.26

0.39

0.18

0.16

0.04

Japanese encephalitis
Total

0.02

0.03

0.01

0.00

11.67

8.23

16.77

10.67

13.18

Table 2.9 YLDs per 100 000 population associated with neurological disorders and
other diseases and injuries with neurological sequelae and as percentage
of total YLDs projected for 2005, 2015 and 2030
Cause category/sequelae

2005
YLDs
(100 000
population)

Epilepsy

2015

Percentage
of total
YLDs

YLDs
(100 000
population)

2030

Percentage
of total
YLDs

YLDs
(100 000
population)

Percentage
of total
YLDs

64.7

0.73

60.9

0.73

55.6

0.71

147.4

1.66

165.4

1.98

203.9

2.60

17.7

0.20

17.3

0.21

17.1

0.22

0.23

19.3

0.23

18.4

0.23

Migraine

118.9

1.34

108.9

1.31

1.22

Cerebrovascular disease

176.8

2.00

174.9

2.10

177.8

2.27

98.4

1.11

71.8

0.86

45.6

0.58

194.9

2.20

174.3

2.09

133.9

1.71

Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis

Neuroinfections
Nutritional deﬁciencies and
neuropathies
Neurological injuries
Total

425.4

4.80

393.5

4.72

360.8

4.60

1264.2

14.27

1186.3

14.23

1109.1

14.14

Estimates of years of healthy life lost as a result
of disability (YLDs)
Table 2.9 describes the estimates for YLDs per 100 000 population associated with neurological
disorders and other diseases and injuries with neurological sequelae and as percentage of totals
projected for 2005, 2015 and 2030 in the world. The number of YLDs per 100 000 population

global burden of neurological disorders: estimates and projections

associated with neurological disorders and other diseases and injuries with neurological sequelae
is projected to decline from 1264 in 2005 to 1109 in 2030. This decline is expected to be attributable to a decrease in YLDs associated with cerebrovascular disease, neuroinfections, nutritional
deﬁciencies and neuropathies, and neurological injuries. YLDs associated with Alzheimer and other
dementias, however, are projected to increase by 38%. When expressed as a percentage of the
total, YLDs associated with neurological disorders and other diseases and injuries with neurological
sequelae comprise 14% of the total in 2005 and are projected to remain the same by 2030.
Figure 2.7 presents the top ﬁve categories of YLDs per 100 000 population globally and for
World Bank income categories. YLDs per 100 000 population for neuroinfections, and the nutritional
deﬁciencies and neuropathies category are highest for low income countries, while for neurological
injuries, epilepsy and migraine, they are highest in upper middle income countries. For Alzheimer
and other dementias, they are highest for high income countries. For cerebrovascular disease,
YLDs are similar in lower middle and high income countries, demonstrating the epidemiological
transition taking place in the lower middle income group of countries. Figure 2.8 demonstrates that
almost half of the burden in terms of YLDs attributable to neurological disorders is in low income
countries followed by lower middle income countries (31.7%). The higher burden is also a reﬂection
of a higher percentage of population in low and lower middle income countries.

CONCLUSIONS
Burden of disease analyses as presented above are useful for informing health policy. They help
in identifying not only the fatal but also the nonfatal outcomes for diseases that are especially
important for neurological disorders. The above analyses demonstrate that neurological disorders
cause a substantial burden because of noncommunicable conditions such as cerebrovascular
disease, Alzheimer and other dementias as well as communicable conditions such as meningitis
and Japanese encephalitis. As a group they cause a much higher burden than digestive diseases,
respiratory diseases and malignant neoplasms.
The GBD framework provides a common denominator that can be used to judge progress over
time within a single country or region or relative performance across countries and regions. It is
clearly demonstrated, by comparing 2005 data with the previous GBD study (2), that neurological
disorders continue to represent a signiﬁcant burden. The GBD framework, for all its limitations,

Figure 2.7 Top ﬁve causes of YLDs among
neurological disorders, by World Bank
income category, 2005

Figure 2.8 YLDs associated with neurological
disorders by World Bank income
category, 2005

No of YLDs per 100 000 population

600
13.7%
500
8.3%

400

46.3%
300
200
100
0
World

Low

Lower middle Upper middle

High

Income category
■ Epilepsy
■ Alzheimer and other dementias
■ Migraine
■ Cerebrovascular disease
■ Neuroinfections
■ Nutritional and neuropathies
■ Neurological injuries

31.7%
Income category
■ Low
■ Lower middle
■ Upper middle
■ High

World population (%)
41.9
35.2
8.2
14.7

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
is a useful approach for projecting future trends of mortality and burden of disease, which help
in planning the strategy for control and prevention of diseases. A clear message emerges from
the projections discussed in this chapter that — unless immediate action is taken globally — the
neurological burden will continue to remain a serious threat to public health.
The double burden of communicable and noncommunicable neurological disorders in low and
middle income countries needs to be kept in mind when formulating the policy for neurological
disorders in these countries. In absolute terms, since most of the burden attributable to neurological disorders is in low and lower middle income countries, international efforts need to
concentrate on these countries for maximum impact. Also the burden is particularly devastating
in poor populations. Some of the impact on poor people includes the loss of gainful employment,
with the attendant loss of family income; the requirement for caregiving, with further potential loss
of wages; the cost of medications; and the need for other medical services.
The above analysis is useful in identifying priorities for global, regional and national attention.
Some form of priority setting is necessary as there are more claims on resources than there are
resources available. Traditionally, the allocation of resources in health organizations tends to be
conducted on the basis of historical patterns, which often do not take into account recent changes
in epidemiology and relative burden as well as recent information on the effectiveness of interventions. This can lead to suboptimal use of the limited resources. Economic evaluations consider
marginal costs and beneﬁts and use outcome measures such as DALYs to inform decisions.
For example, phenobarbital is by far the most cost-effective intervention for managing epilepsy
and therefore needs to be recommended for widespread use in public health campaigns against
epilepsy in low and middle income countries. A population-level analysis of cost-effectiveness
of ﬁrst-line antiepileptic drug treatment is illustrated in the discussion on epilepsy (Chapter 3.2).
Aspirin is the most cost-effective intervention both for treating acute stroke and for preventing
a recurrence. It is easily available in developing countries, even in rural areas (12). The diseasespeciﬁc sections discuss in detail the various public health issues associated with neurological
disorders. This chapter strengthens the evidence provided earlier that increased resources are
needed to improve services for people with neurological disorders. It is also hoped that analyses
such as the above will be adopted as an essential component of decision-making and will be
adapted to planning processes at global, regional and national levels, so as to utilize the available
resources more efﬁciently.

global burden of neurological disorders: estimates and projections

REFERENCES
1. Murray CJL, Lopez AD, Jamison DT. The global burden of disease in 1990: summary results, sensitivity
analyses, and future directions. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 1994, 72:495–508.
2. Murray CJL, Lopez AD, eds. The global burden of disease: a comprehensive assessment of mortality and
disability from diseases, injuries and risk factors in 1990 and projected to 2020. Cambridge, MA, Harvard
School of Public Health on behalf of the World Health Organization and The World Bank, 1996 (Global Burden
of Disease and Injury Series, Vol. I).
3. Lopez AD, Murray CJL. The global burden of disease, 1990–2020. Nature Medicine, 1998, 4:1241–1243.
4. Barendregt JJ et al. A generic model for the assessment of disease epidemiology: the computational basis of
DisMod II. Population Health Metrics, 2003, 1:e4.
5. Mathers CD et al. Global burden of disease in 2002: data sources, methods and results. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2004 (GPE Discussion Paper No. 54, rev. February 2004).
6. Mathers CD, Loncar D. Updated projections of global mortality and burden of disease, 2002–2030: data
sources, methods and results. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2005 (Evidence and Information for Policy
Working Paper).
7. Murray CJL, Lopez AD. Alternative projections of mortality and disability by cause, 1990–2020: Global
Burden of Disease Study. Lancet, 1997, 349:1498–1504.
8. The world health report 2004 – Changing history. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2004.
9. Mathers CD et al. Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses for burden of disease and risk factor estimates. In:
Lopez AD et al., eds. Global burden of disease and risk factors. Washington, DC, The World Bank and Oxford
University Press, 2006.
10. Mathers CD et al. Deaths and disease burden by cause: global burden of disease estimates for 2001 by World
Bank country groups. Washington, DC, World Health Organization/World Bank/Fogarty International Center,
United States National Institutes of Health, 2004 (Disease Control Priorities in Developing Countries (DCPP)
Working Papers Series, No. 18; http://www.ﬁc.nih.gov/dcpp/wps.html, accessed 25 July 2005).
11. World development indicators. Washington, DC, The World Bank, 2003.
12. Chandra V et al. Neurological disorders. In: Jamison DT et al., eds. Disease control priorities in developing
countries, 2nd ed. Washington, DC, The World Bank and Oxford University Press, 2006.

RECOMMENDED READING
■ Jamison DT et al., eds. Disease control priorities in developing countries, 2nd ed. Washington, DC, The World
Bank and Oxford University Press, 2006.
■ Lopez AD et al., eds. Global burden of disease and risk factors. Washington, DC, The World Bank and Oxford
University Press, 2006.
■ Mathers CD et al. Global burden of disease in 2002: data sources, methods and results. Geneva, World
Health Organization, 2004 (GPE Discussion Paper No. 54, rev. February 2004).
■ Mathers CD et al. Deaths and disease burden by cause: global burden of disease estimates for 2001 by
World Bank country groups. Washington, DC, World Health Organization/World Bank/Fogarty International
Center, United States National Institutes of Health, 2004 (Disease Control Priorities in Developing Countries
(DCPP) Working Papers Series, No. 18; http://www.ﬁc.nih.gov/dcpp/wps.html, accessed 25 July 2005).
■ Mathers CD, Loncar D. Updated projections of global mortality and burden of disease, 2002–2030: data
sources, methods and results. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2005 (Evidence and Information for
Policy Working Paper).
■ Murray CJL, Lopez AD, eds. The global burden of disease: a comprehensive assessment of mortality and
disability from diseases, injuries and risk factors in 1990 and projected to 2020. Cambridge, MA, Harvard
School of Public Health on behalf of the World Health Organization and The World Bank, 1996 (Global
Burden of Disease and Injury Series, Vol. I).

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

CHAPTER 3

neurological
disorders
a public health approach
in this chapter
42 3.1 Dementia
56 3.2 Epilepsy
70 3.3 Headache disorders
85 3.4 Multiple sclerosis

This chapter consists of 10 sections
that focus on the public health aspects
111 3.6 Neurological disorders associated with
of the common neurological disorders
malnutrition
as outlined in the box. Although nota127 3.7 Pain associated with neurological disorders
ble differences exist between relevant
public health issues for each neuro140 3.8 Parkinson’s disease
logical disorder, most sections cover
151 3.9 Stroke
the following topics: diagnosis and
classiﬁcation; etiology and risk fac164 3.10 Traumatic brain injuries
tors; course and outcome; magnitude
(prevalence, incidence, distribution
by age and sex, global and regional distribution); disability and mortality; burden
on patients’ families and communities; treatment, management and rehabilitation;
delivery and cost of care; gaps in treatment and other services; policies; research;
and education and training.
95 3.5 Neuroinfections

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

3.1 Dementia
43 Etiology and risk factors
43 Course and outcome

Dementia is a syndrome caused by disease of the
brain, usually of a chronic or progressive nature, in
Treatment and care
which there is disturbance of multiple higher cortical functions, including memory, thinking, orientaA public health framework
tion, comprehension, calculation, learning capacConclusions and recommendations
ity, language and judgement. Consciousness is not
Case-studies
clouded. Dementia mainly affects older people: only
2% of cases start before the age of 65 years. After
this the prevalence doubles with every ﬁve-year increment in age. Dementia
is one of the major causes of disability in later life.

44 Epidemiology and burden
46
50
52
54

There are very many underlying causes of dementia. Alzheimer’s disease (AD), characterized by
cortical amyloid plaques and neuroﬁbrillary tangles is the most common, accounting for one half to
three quarters of all cases. Vascular dementia (VaD) is diagnosed when the brain’s supply of oxygenated blood is repeatedly disrupted by strokes or other blood vessel pathology, leading to signiﬁcant
accumulated damage to brain tissue and function. The distinction between AD and VaD has been
called into question, given that mixed pathologies are very common. Perhaps vascular damage is
no more than a cofactor accelerating the onset of clinically signiﬁcant symptoms in people with AD.
There are a few rare causes of dementia that may be treated effectively by timely medical or surgical
intervention— these include hypercalcaemia, subdural haematoma, normal pressure hydrocephalus,
and deﬁciencies of thyroid hormone, vitamin B12 and folic acid. For the most part, altering the progressive course of the disorder is unfortunately not possible. Symptomatic treatments and support
can, however, transform the outcome for people with dementia and their caregivers.
Alzheimer and other dementias have been reliably identiﬁed in all countries, cultures and races
in which systematic research has been carried out, though levels of awareness vary enormously.
In India, for example, while the syndrome is widely recognized and named, it is not seen as a
medical condition. Indeed, it is often regarded as part of normal ageing (1).
For the purpose of making a diagnosis, clinicians focus in their assessments upon impairment
in memory and other cognitive functions, and loss of independent living skills. For carers and,
arguably, for people with dementia, it is the behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia
(BPSD) that are most relevant. Nearly all studies indicate that BPSD are an important cause of
caregiver strain. They are a common reason for institutionalization as the family’s coping reserves
become exhausted. Problem behaviours may include agitation, aggression, calling out repeatedly,
sleep disturbance (day–night reversal), wandering and apathy. Common psychological symptoms
include anxiety, depression, delusions and hallucinations. BPSD occur most commonly in the
middle stage of dementia (see also the section on Course and outcome, below). Despite their signiﬁcance, there has been relatively little research into BPSD across cultures. One might anticipate
that cultural and environmental factors could have a strong inﬂuence upon both the expression

neurological disorders: a public health approach
of BPSD and their perception by caregivers as problematic (2). Behavioural and psychological
symptoms appear to be just as common in dementia sufferers in developing countries (3). In
some respects the developing country caregivers were more disadvantaged. Given the generally
low levels of awareness about dementia as an organic brain condition, family members could not
understand their relative’s behaviour, and others tended to blame the carers for the distress and
disturbance of the person they were looking after.

ETIOLOGY AND RISK FACTORS
The main risk factor for most forms of dementia is advanced age, with prevalence roughly doubling
every ﬁve years over the age of 65 years. Onset before this age is very unusual and, in the case
of AD, often suggests a genetic cause. Single gene mutations at one of three loci (beta amyloid
precursor protein, presenilin1 and presenilin2) account for most of these cases. For late-onset
AD both environmental (lifestyle) and genetic factors are important. A common genetic polymorphism, the apolipoprotein E (apoE) gene e4 allele greatly increases risk of going on to suffer from
dementia; up to 25% of the population have one or two copies (4, 5). However, it is not uncommon
for one identical twin to suffer from dementia and the other not. This implies a strong inﬂuence
of the environment (6). Evidence from cross-sectional and case–control studies suggests associations between AD and limited education (7 ) and head injury (8, 9), which, however, are only
partly supported by longitudinal (follow-up) studies (10). Depression is a risk factor in short-term
longitudinal studies, but this may be because depression is an early presenting symptom rather
than a cause of dementia (11). Recent research suggests that vascular disease predisposes to AD
as well as to VaD (12). Smoking seems to increase the risk for AD as well as VaD (13). Long-term
follow-up studies show that high blood pressure (14, 15) and high cholesterol levels (15) in middle
age each increase the risk of going on to develop AD in later life.
Reports from epidemiological studies of protective effects of certain prescribed medication,
non-steroidal anti-inﬂammatory drugs, hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and cholesterollowering therapies are now being investigated in randomized controlled trials. The randomized
controlled trial of HRT in postmenopausal women indicated, against expectation, that it increased
rather than lowered the incidence of dementia.
Despite many investigations, far too little is still understood about the environmental and
lifestyle factors linked to AD and other dementias. It may be that the focus on research in developed countries has limited possibilities to identify risk factors. Prevalence and incidence of AD
seem to be much lower in some developing regions (see the section on Epidemiology and burden,
below). This may be because some environmental risk factors are much less prevalent in these
settings. For example, African men tend to be very healthy from a cardiovascular point of view with
low cholesterol, low blood pressure and low incidence of heart disease and stroke. Conversely,
some risk factors may only be apparent in developing countries, as they are too infrequent in the
developed economies for their effects to be detected; for example, anaemia has been identiﬁed
as a risk factor in India (16).

COURSE AND OUTCOME
Dementia is usually a progressive disease and can be cured only if a reversible condition is identiﬁed as a cause and treated effectively. This happens in a small number of cases in the developed
world, but could be more common in developing countries, where relevant underlying physical
conditions (including marked nutritional and hormonal deﬁciencies) are more common.
Dementia affects every person in a different way. Its impact can depend on what the individuals
were like before the disease: their personality, lifestyle, signiﬁcant relationships and physical health.
The problems linked to dementia can be best understood in three stages (see Box 3.1.1).

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
Times are given as guidelines only — sometimes people can deteriorate more quickly
and sometimes more slowly. Dementia reduces the lifespan of affected persons. In the
developed, high income countries, a person with dementia can expect to live for approximately 5–7 years after diagnosis. In low and middle income countries, diagnosis is
often much delayed, and survival in any case may be shorter. Again, of course, there is
much individual variation — some may live for longer, and some may live for shorter times
because of interacting health conditions.
Symptoms of dementia in early, middle and late stage of the disease are given in Box
3.1.1. It should be noted that not all persons with dementia will display all the symptoms.
Nevertheless, a summary of this kind can help caregivers to be aware of potential problems and can allow them to think about future care needs. At the same time, one must not
alarm people in the early stages of the disease by giving them too much information.

EPIDEMIOLOGY AND BURDEN
In 2005, Alzheimer’s Disease International commissioned a panel of experts to review
all available epidemiological data and reach a consensus estimate of prevalence in each
region and the numbers of people affected. Evidence from well-conducted, representative
epidemiological surveys was lacking in many regions. The panel estimated that, globally,
24.3 million people have dementia today, with 4.6 million new cases annually. Numbers
of people affected will double every 20 years to 81.1 million by 2040. Most people with
dementia live in developing countries: 60% in 2001 rising to an estimated 71% by 2040.
Rates of increase are not uniform; numbers in developed countries are forecast to increase
by 100% between 2001 and 2040, but by more than 300% in China, India and neighbouring countries in South-East Asia and the Western Paciﬁc. The detailed estimates contained

Box 3.1.1 Stages and symptoms of dementia (Alzheimer’s disease)

Early stage

Middle stage

Late stage

The early stage is often overlooked.
Relatives and friends (and sometimes
professionals as well) see it as “old
age”, just a normal part of the ageing
process. Because the onset of the
disease is gradual, it is difﬁcult to
be sure exactly when it begins. The
person may:
■ have problems talking properly
(language problems)
■ have signiﬁcant memory
loss — particularly for things that
have just happened
■ not know the time of day or the day
of the week
■ become lost in familiar places
■ have difﬁculty in making decisions
■ become inactive and unmotivated
■ show mood changes, depression
or anxiety
■ react unusually angrily or
aggressively on occasion
■ show a loss of interest in hobbies
and activities

As the disease progresses, limitations
become clearer and more restricting.
The person with dementia has
difﬁculty with day-to-day living and:
■ may become very forgetful,
especially of recent events and
people’s names
■ can no longer manage to live alone
without problems
■ is unable to cook, clean or shop
■ may become extremely dependent
on family members and caregivers
■ needs help with personal hygiene,
i.e. washing and dressing
■ has increased difﬁculty with
speech
■ shows problems with wandering
and other behaviour problems
such as repeated questioning and
calling out, clinging and disturbed
sleeping
■ becomes lost at home as well as
outside
■ may have hallucinations (seeing or
hearing things that are not there)

The late stage is one of nearly total
dependence and inactivity. Memory
disturbances are very serious and the
physical side of the disease becomes
more obvious. The person may:
■ have difﬁculty eating
■ be incapable of communicating
■ not recognize relatives, friends and
familiar objects
■ have difﬁculty understanding what
is going on around them
■ be unable to ﬁnd his or her way
around in the home
■ have difﬁculty walking
■ have difﬁculty swallowing
■ have bladder and bowel
incontinence
■ display inappropriate behaviour in
public
■ be conﬁned to a wheelchair or bed

neurological disorders: a public health approach
in this document (17) constitute the best available basis for policy-making, planning and allocation
of health and welfare resources.
There is a clear and general tendency for prevalence to be somewhat lower in developing
countries than in the industrialized world (18), strikingly so in some studies (19, 20). This trend
was supported by the consensus judgement of the expert panel convened by Alzheimer’s Disease
International, reviewing all available evidence (17 ). It does not seem to be explained merely by
differences in survival, as estimates of incidence are also much lower than those reported in
developed countries (21, 22). It may be that mild dementia is underdetected in developing countries because of difﬁculties in establishing the criterion of social and occupational impairment.
Differences in level of exposure to environmental risk factors might also have contributed. The
strikingly different patterns of mortality in early life might also be implicated; older people in very
poor countries are exceptional survivors — this characteristic may also confer protection against
AD and other dementias.
Long-term studies from Sweden and the United States of America suggest that the agespeciﬁc prevalence of dementia has not changed over the last 30 or 40 years (23). Whatever
the explanation for the current discrepancy between prevalence in developed and developing
countries, it seems probable that, as patterns of morbidity and mortality converge with those of
the richer countries, dementia prevalence levels will do likewise, leading to an increased burden
of dementia in poorer countries.
Studies in developed countries have consistently reported AD to be more prevalent than VaD.
Early surveys from South-East Asia provided an exception, though more recent work suggests
this situation has now reversed. This may be due to increasing longevity and better physical
health: AD, whose onset is in general later than that of VaD, increases as the number of very old
people increases, while better physical health reduces the number of stroke sufferers and thus
the number with VaD. This change also affects the sex distribution among dementia sufferers,
increasing the number of females and reducing the number of males.

Disability, burden and cost
Dementia is one of the main causes of disability in later life. In a wide consensus consultation for
the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) report, disability from dementia was accorded a higher weight
than that for almost any other condition, with the exception of spinal cord injury and terminal
cancer. Of course, older people are particularly likely to have multiple health conditions — chronic
physical diseases affecting different organ systems, coexisting with mental and cognitive disorders. Dementia, however, has a disproportionate impact on capacity for independent living,
yet its global public health signiﬁcance continues to be underappreciated and misunderstood.
According to the GBD estimates in The world health report 2003, dementia contributed 11.2%
of all years lived with disability among people aged 60 years and over: more than stroke (9.5%),
musculoskeletal disorders (8.9%), cardiovascular disease (5.0%) and all forms of cancer (2.4%).
However, the research papers (since 2002) devoted to these chronic disorders reveal a starkly
different ordering of priorities: cancer 23.5%, cardiovascular disease 17.6%, musculoskeletal
disorders 6.9%, stroke 3.1% and dementia 1.4%.
The economic costs of dementia are enormous. These can include the costs of “formal care”
(health care, social and community care, respite care and long-term residential or nursing-home
care) and “informal care” (unpaid care by family members, including their lost opportunity to earn
income).
In the United Kingdom, direct formal care costs alone have been estimated at US$ 8 billion, or
US$ 13 000 per patient. In the United States, costs have been estimated at US$ 100 billion per year,
with patients with severe dementia costing US$ 36 794 each (1998 prices) (23, 24). A more recent
estimate is of US$ 18 billion annually in the United States for informal costs alone. In developed

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
countries, costs tend to rise as dementia progresses. When people with dementia are cared for at
home, informal care costs may exceed direct formal care costs. As the disease progresses, and the
need for medical staff involvement increases, formal care costs will increase. Institutionalization is
generally the biggest single contributor to costs of care.
Very little work has been done on evaluating the economic costs of dementia in developing
countries. Shah et al. (25) list ﬁve reasons for this: the absence of trained health economists, the
low priority given to mental health, the poorly developed state of mental health services, the lack
of justiﬁcation for such services, and the absence of data sets. Given the inevitability that the
needs of frail older persons will come to dominate health and social care budgets in these regions,
more data are urgently needed.
Detailed studies of informal costs outside western Europe and North America are rare, but a
careful study of a sample of 42 AD patients in Denizli, Turkey, provides interesting data (26). Formal care for the elderly was rare: only 1% of old people in Turkey live in residential care. Families
therefore provide most of the care. The average annual cost of care (excluding hospitalization) was
US$ 4930 for severe cases and US$ 1766 for mild ones. Most costs increased with the severity
of the disease, though outpatient costs declined. Carers spent three hours a day looking after the
most severely affected patients.
The 10/66 Dementia Research Group also examined the economic impact of dementia in its
pilot study of 706 persons with dementia and their caregivers living in China, India, Latin America
and Nigeria (27 ). The key ﬁndings from this study are summarized in Box 3.1.2.

TREATMENT AND CARE
Early diagnosis is helpful so that the caregiver can be better equipped to deal with the disease
and to know what to expect. A diagnosis is the ﬁrst step towards planning for the future. There
is no simple test to make a diagnosis. The diagnosis of AD is made by taking a careful account
of the person’s problems from a close relative or friend, together with an examination of the
person’s physical and mental state. It is important to exclude other conditions or illnesses that
cause memory loss, including depression, alcohol problems and some physical illnesses with
organic brain effects.
Currently there are no treatments that cure dementia. There is, however, evidence that drugs
(cholinesterase inhibitors), in some cases but not all, temporarily decelerate the progressive cognitive decline that occurs in AD, and maybe in other forms of neurodegenerative dementia. These
drugs act on the symptoms but not on the disease itself; they make only a small contribution to
maintaining function. Evidence-based drug therapies are available for psychological symptoms
such as depression, anxiety, agitation, delusions and hallucinations that can occur in people
with dementia. There are modestly effective drugs (neuroleptics) available for the treatment of
associated behavioural problems such as agitation. All of these drugs should be used with caution (the doctrine being “start low, go slow”), particularly tricyclic antidepressants (because of
anticholinergic side-effects, therefore SSRI antidepressants — selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors — should always be preferred) and neuroleptics (because of anticholinergic side-effects,
sedation, and an increased risk of stroke and higher all-cause mortality).
It is important to recognize that non-drug interventions are often highly effective, and should
generally be the ﬁrst choice when managing behavioural problems. The ﬁrst step is to try to identify and treat the cause, which could be physical, psychological or environmental. Psychosocial
interventions, particularly the provision of information and support to carers, have been shown
to reduce the severe psychological distress often experienced by carers. Carers are also greatly
assisted by a network of community health and social services; self-help organizations, especially
Alzheimer associations, can also help them to ﬁnd appropriate help. Carers can be educated about

neurological disorders: a public health approach
dementia, countering lack of understanding and awareness about the nature of the problems
faced. They can also be trained to manage better most of the common behavioural symptoms,
in such a way that the frequency of the symptoms and/or the strain experienced by the carer is
reduced. Above all, the person with dementia and the family carers need to be supported over
the longer term. People with dementia need to be treated at all times with patience and respect
for their dignity and personhood; carers needs unconditional support and understanding — their
needs should also be determined and attended to.

Resources and prevention
Developing-country health services are generally ill-equipped to meet the needs of older persons.
Health care, even at the primary care level, is clinic-based; the older person must attend the clinic,
often involving a long journey and waiting time in the clinic, to receive care. Even if they can get to
the clinic the assessment and treatment that they receive are orientated towards acute rather than
chronic conditions. The perception is that the former are treatable, the latter intractable and not
within the realm of responsibility of health services. The 10/66 Dementia Research Group’s caregiver pilot study in 2004 indicated that people with dementia were using primary and secondary
care health services. Only 33% of people with dementia in India, 11% in China and South-East Asia
and 18% in Latin America had used no health services at all in the previous three months. In all
centres, particularly in India and Latin America, there was heavy use of private medical services.
One may speculate that this reﬂects the caregivers’ perception of the relative unresponsiveness
of the cheaper government medical services.
The gross disparities in resources within and between developed and developing countries are
leading to serious concerns regarding the ﬂouting of the central ethical principle of distributive
justice. New drug treatments are very expensive. Anticholinesterase therapies for AD are beyond
the reach of all but the richest families in most developing countries. The same would be true
for most SSRI antidepressants and “atypical” antipsychotic drugs, both of which are generally
favoured in the West for use in older patients over the older and cheaper tricyclic antidepressants
and “typical” antipsychotic drugs because of their better safety and side-effect proﬁles. The advent of a disease-modifying, as opposed to symptomatic, treatment for AD would introduce similar
ethical concerns regarding accessibility to those that have arisen in relation to the management of
HIV/AIDS in low income countries. Equity is also an important issue within developing countries.
Access to care is often entirely dependent upon means to pay. Quite apart from economic constraints, health-care resources are grossly unevenly distributed between rural and urban districts.
Most specialists, indeed most doctors, work in cities. Provision of even basic services to far-ﬂung
rural communities is an enormous challenge.

Box 3.1.2 The 10/66 Dementia Research Group: key ﬁndings
From the development perspective, one of the key ﬁndings
from the study was that caregiving in the developing world
is associated with substantial economic disadvantage. A
high proportion of caregivers had to cut back on their paid
work in order to care. Many caregivers needed and obtained
additional support, and while this was often informal unpaid
care from friends and other family members, paid caregivers were also relatively common.
People with dementia were heavy users of health services, and associated direct costs were high. Compensatory ﬁnancial support was negligible; few older people in
developing countries receive government or occupational
pensions, and virtually none of the people with dementia in
the 10/66 study received disability pensions.

Caregivers were commonly in paid employment, and
almost none received any form of caring allowance. The
combination of reduced family incomes and increased
family expenditure on care is obviously particularly stressful in lower income countries where so many households
exist at or near subsistence level. While health-care services are cheaper in low income countries, in relative
terms families from the poorer countries spend a greater
proportion of their income on health care for the person
with dementia. They also appear to be more likely to use
the more expensive services of private doctors, in preference to government-funded primary care, presumably
because this fails to meet their needs.
Source: (1).

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
Future development of services for older people needs to be tailored to suit the health systems
context. “Health systems” here can be taken to include macroeconomic factors, social structures,
cultural values and norms, and existing health and welfare policy and provision.
Specialists — neurologists, psychiatrists, psychologists and geriatricians — are far too scarce
a resource to take on any substantial role in the ﬁrst-line care for people with dementia. The focus
must be upon primary care. Many developing countries have in place comprehensive communitybased primary care systems staffed by doctors, nurses and generic multipurpose health workers.
The need is for:
■ more training in the basic curriculum regarding diagnostic and needs-based assessments;
■ a paradigm shift beyond the current preoccupation with prevention and simple curative interventions to encompass long-term support and chronic disease management;
■ outreach care, assessing and managing patients in their own homes.
For many low income countries, the most cost-effective way to manage people with dementia
will be through supporting, educating and advising family caregivers. This may be supplemented
by home nursing or paid home-care workers; however, to date most of the growth in this area has
been that of untrained paid carers operating in the private sector. The direct and indirect costs
of care in this model therefore tend to fall upon the family. Some governmental input, whether
in terms of allowances for people with dementia and/or caregivers or subsidized care would be
desirable and equitable. The next level of care to be prioritized would be respite care, both in day
centres and (for longer periods) in residential or nursing homes. Such facilities (as envisaged in
Goa, for example) could act also as training resource centres for caregivers. Day care and residential respite care are more expensive than home care, but nevertheless basic to a community’s
needs, particularly for people with more advanced dementia.
Residential care for older people is unlikely to be a priority for government investment, when the
housing conditions of the general population remain poor, with homelessness, overcrowding and
poor sanitation. Nevertheless, even in some of the poorest developing countries (e.g. China and
India), nursing and residential care homes are opening up in the private sector to meet the demand
from the growing afﬂuent middle class. Good quality, well-regulated residential care has a role to
play in all societies, for those with no family support or whose family support capacity is exhausted,
both as temporary respite and for provision of longer-term care. Absence of regulation, staff training
and quality assurance is a serious concern in developed and developing countries alike.
Similarly, low income countries lack the economic and human capital to contemplate widespread introduction of more sophisticated services; specialist multidisciplinary staff and community services backed up with memory clinics and outpatient, inpatient and day care facilities.
Nevertheless, services comprising some of these elements are being established as demonstration projects. The ethics of health care require that governments take initial planning steps, now.
The one certainty is that “in the absence of clear strategies and policies, the old will absorb
increasing proportions of the resources devoted to health care in developing countries” (28). This
shift in resource expenditure is, of course, likely to occur regardless. At least, if policies are well
formulated, its consequences can be predicted and mitigated.
Prevention, where it can be achieved, is clearly the best option, with enormous potential
beneﬁts for the quality of life of the individual, the family and carers, and for society as a whole.
Primary preventive interventions can be highly cost effective, given the enormous costs associated
with the care and treatment of those with dementia (see the section on Disability, burden and
cost, above). The primary prevention of dementia is therefore a relatively neglected area. Evidence
from the developed world suggests that risk factors for vascular disease, including hypertension,
smoking, type II diabetes, and hypercholesterolaemia may all be risk factors for AD as well as
VaD. The epidemic of smoking in developing countries (with 13% of African teenagers currently

neurological disorders: a public health approach
smoking), and the high and rising prevalence of type II diabetes in South-East Asia (a forecast 57%
increase in prevalence between 2000 and 2010, compared with a 24% increase in Europe) should
therefore be particular causes of concern. It is as yet unclear whether the improvements in control
of hypertension, diet and exercise, and particularly the decline in smoking seen in developed
Western countries that has led to rapid declines in mortality from ischaemic heart disease and
stroke, will lead to a later decline in the age-speciﬁc incidence of AD and other dementias. Many
of these preventive measures are also likely to improve general health (29).

Delivery of care
All over the world the family remains the cornerstone of care for older people who have lost the capacity
for independent living, whether as a result of dementia or other mental disorder. However, stereotypes
abound and have the potential to mislead. Thus, in developed countries with their comprehensive
health and social care systems, the vital caring role of families, and their need for support, is often
overlooked. This is true for example in the United Kingdom, where despite nuclear family structures
and contrary to supposition, there is a strong tradition that persists today for local children to provide
support for their inﬁrm parents. Conversely, in developing countries the reliability and universality of
the family care system is often overestimated. Older people are among the most vulnerable groups in
the developing world, in part because of the continuing myths that surround their place in society (30).
It is often assumed that their welfare is assured by the existence of the extended family. Arguably, the
greatest obstacle to providing effective support and care for older persons is the lack of awareness
of the problem among policy-makers, health-care providers and the community. Mythologizing the
caring role of the family evidently carries the risk of perpetuating complacency.
The previously mentioned 10/66 Dementia Research Group’s multicentre pilot study was the
ﬁrst systematic, comprehensive assessment of care arrangements for people with dementia in
the developing world, and of the impacts upon their family caregivers (27 ). As in the EUROCARE
study with data from 14 European countries (31), most caregivers in developing countries were
older women caring for their husbands or younger women caring for a parent. Caring was associated with substantial psychological strain as evidenced by high rates of psychiatric morbidity and
high levels of caregiver strain. These parameters were again very similar to those reported in the
EUROCARE study. Some aspects, however, were radically different. People with dementia in developing countries typically live in large households, with extended families. Larger families were
associated with lower caregiver strain; however, this effect was small and applied only where the
principal caregiver was co-resident. Indeed, it seemed to operate in the opposite direction where
the caregiver was non-resident, perhaps because of the increased potential for family conﬂict.
In many developing countries, traditional family and kinship structures are widely perceived as
under threat from the social and economic changes that accompany economic development and
globalization (30). Some of the contributing factors include the following:
■ Changing attitudes towards older people.
■ The education of women and their increasing participation in the workforce (generally seen
as key positive development indicators); tending to reduce both their availability for caregiving
and their willingness to take on this additional role.
■ Migration. Populations are increasingly mobile as education, cheap travel and ﬂexible labour
markets induce young people to migrate to cities and abroad to seek work. In India, Venkoba
Rao has coined an acronym to describe this growing social phenomenon: PICA — parents in
India, children abroad. “Push factors” are also important. In the economic catastrophe of the
1980s, two million Ghanaians left the country in search of economic betterment; 63% of older
persons have lost the support of one or more of their children who have migrated to distant
places in Ghana or abroad. Older people are particularly vulnerable after displacement as a
result of war or natural disaster.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
■ Declining fertility in the course of the ﬁnal demographic transition. Its effects are perhaps most
evident in China, where the one-child family law leaves increasing numbers of older people,
particularly those with a daughter, bereft of family support.
■ In sub-Saharan Africa, changing patterns of morbidity and mortality are more relevant; the
ravages of the HIV/AIDS epidemic have “orphaned” parents as well as children, as bereaved
older persons are robbed of the expectation of economic and practical support into later life.

A PUBLIC HEALTH FRAMEWORK
At its 20th annual conference held in Kyoto, Japan, Alzheimer’s Disease International released a Kyoto
Declaration, benchmarking progress in ten key areas using a public health framework developed by
WHO (see Table 3.1.1). The framework addresses treatment gaps, policies, research and training and
identiﬁes three levels of attainment for countries with low, medium and high levels of resources, hence
suggesting a feasible, pragmatic series of actions and objectives for health systems at all levels of
development.

Table 3.1.1 Minimum actions required for dementia carea
Ten overall
recommendations

Scenario A
Low level of resources

Scenario B
Medium level of resources

1. Provide
treatment in
primary care

Recognize dementia care as a
component of primary health
care
Include the recognition and
treatment of dementia in
training curricula of all health
personnel
Provide refresher training to
primary care physicians (at least
50% coverage in ﬁve years)

Develop locally relevant training
materials
Provide refresher training to
primary care physicians (100%
coverage in ﬁve years)

Improve effectiveness of
management of dementia in
primary health care
Improve referral patterns

2. Make
appropriate
treatments
available

Increase availability of essential
drugs for the treatment of
dementia and associated
psychological and behavioural
symptoms
Develop and evaluate basic
educational and training
interventions for caregivers

Ensure availability of essential
drugs in all health-care settings
Make effective caregiver
interventions generally available

Provide easier access to newer
drugs (e.g. anticholinesterase
agents) under public or private
treatment plans

Initiate pilot projects on
integration of dementia care
with general health care
Provide community care
facilities (at least 50%
coverage with multidisciplinary
community teams, day care,
respite and inpatient units
for acute assessment and
treatment)
According to need, encourage
the development of residential
and nursing-home facilities,
including regulatory framework
and system for staff training
and accreditation

Develop alternative residential
facilities
Provide community care
facilities (100% coverage)
Give individualized care in the
community to people with
dementia

3. Give care in
Establish the principle that
the community people with dementia are best
assessed and treated in their
own homes
Develop and promote standard
needs assessments for use in
primary and secondary care
Initiate pilot projects on
development of multidisciplinary
community care teams, day
care and short-term respite
care
Move people with dementia out
of inappropriate institutional
settings

Scenario C
High level of resources

neurological disorders: a public health approach
Ten overall
recommendations

Scenario A
Low level of resources

Scenario B
Medium level of resources

Scenario C
High level of resources

4. Educate the
public

Promote public campaigns
against stigma and
discrimination
Support nongovernmental
organizations in public
education

Use the mass media to promote
awareness of dementia, foster
positive attitudes, and help
prevent cognitive impairment
and dementia

Launch public campaigns for
early help-seeking, recognition
and appropriate management of
dementia

5. Involve
communities,
families and
consumers

Support the formation of selfhelp groups
Fund schemes for
nongovernmental organizations

Ensure representation of
communities, families, and
consumers in policy-making,
service development and
implementation

Foster advocacy initiatives

6. Establish
national
policies,
programmes
and legislation

Revise legislation based on
current knowledge and human
rights considerations
Formulate dementia care
programmes and policies:
– Legal framework to support
and protect those with impaired
mental capacity
– Inclusion of people with
dementia in disability beneﬁt
schemes
– Inclusion of caregivers in
compensatory beneﬁt schemes
Establish health and social care
budgets for older persons

Implement dementia care
policies at national and
subnational levels
Establish health and social care
budgets for dementia care
Increase the budget for mental
health care

Ensure fairness in access to
primary and secondary health
care services, and to social
welfare programmes and
beneﬁts

7. Develop human Train primary health-care
resources
workers
Initiate higher professional
training programmes for
doctors and nurses in geriatric
psychiatry and medicine
Develop training and resource
centres

Create a network of national
training centres for physicians,
psychiatrists, nurses,
psychologists and social
workers

Train specialists in advanced
treatment skills

8. Link with other Initiate community, school and
sectors
workplace dementia awareness
programmes
Encourage the activities of
nongovernmental organizations

Strengthen community
programmes

Extend occupational health
services to people with early
dementia
Provide special facilities in the
workplace for caregivers of
people with dementia
Initiate evidence-based mental
health promotion programmes
in collaboration with other
sectors

9. Monitor
community
health

Include dementia in basic health Institute surveillance for early
information systems
dementia in the community
Survey high-risk population
groups

Develop advanced monitoring
systems
Monitor effectiveness of
preventive programmes

10. Support more
research

Conduct studies in primary
health-care settings on the
prevalence, course, outcome
and impact of dementia in the
community

Extend research on the causes
of dementia
Carry out research on service
delivery
Investigate evidence on the
prevention of dementia

Institute effectiveness and
cost–effectiveness studies for
community management of
dementia

Based on overall recommendations from The world health report 2001 (32).

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1

Dementia is a disease and not a part of normal ageing.

Dementia affects some 24 million people, most of them elderly, worldwide. Up to two
thirds live in low and middle income countries.

Awareness of dementia is very low in all world regions, a problem leading to
stigmatization and inefﬁcient help-seeking.

No cure is currently available for the most common causes of dementia, but much can
and should be done to improve the quality of life of people with dementia and their
carers.

Governments should be urged to take account of the needs of people with dementia, as
an integral part of a comprehensive programme of health and welfare services for older
people.

The priority should be to strengthen primary care services, through training and
reorientation from clinic-based acute treatment services to provision of outreach and
long-term support.

Governments, nongovernmental organizations working in the area of Alzheimer and other
dementias, professionals and carers need to work together to raise awareness, counter
stigma and improve the quality and coverage of care services.

neurological disorders: a public health approach

REFERENCES
1. Shaji KS et al. Caregivers of patients with Alzheimer’s disease: a qualitative study from the Indian 10/66
Dementia Research Network. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 2002, 18:1–6.
2. Shah A, Mukherjee S. Cross-cultural issues in measurement of BPSD. Aging and Mental Health, 2000,
4:244–252.
3. Ferri CP, Ames D, Prince M. Behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia in developing countries.
International Psychogeriatrics, 2004, 16:441–459.
4. Saunders AM et al. Association of apolipoprotein E allele e4 with late-onset familial and sporadic Alzheimer’s
disease. Neurology, 1993, 43:1467–1472.
5. Nalbantoglu J et al. Predictive value of apolipoprotein E genotyping in Alzheimer’s disease: results of an
autopsy series and an analysis of several combined studies. Annals of Neurology, 1994, 36:889–895.
6. Breitner JC et al. Alzheimer’s disease in the National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council
Registry of Aging Twin Veterans. III. Detection of cases, longitudinal results, and observations on twin
concordance. Archives of Neurology, 1995, 52:763–771.
7. Ott A et al. Prevalence of Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementia: association with education. The
Rotterdam study. BMJ, 1995, 310:970–973.
8. Mortimer JA et al. Head trauma as a risk factor for Alzheimer’s disease: a collaborative re-analysis of
case-control studies. EURODEM Risk Factors Research Group. International Journal of Epidemiology, 1991,
20(Suppl. 2):S28–S35.
9. Mayeux R. Synergistic effects of traumatic head injury and apolipoprotein-epsilon 4 in patients with
Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology, 1995, 45:555–557.
10. Stern Y et al. Inﬂuence of education and occupation on the incidence of Alzheimer’s disease. JAMA, 1994,
271:1004–1010.
11. Devanand DP et al. Depressed mood and the incidence of Alzheimer’s disease in the elderly living in the
community. Archives of General Psychiatry, 1996, 53:175–182.
12. Hofman A et al. Atherosclerosis, apolipoprotein E, and prevalence of dementia and Alzheimer’s disease in the
Rotterdam Study. Lancet, 1997, 349:151–154.
13. Ott A et al. Smoking and risk of dementia and Alzheimer’s disease in a population-based cohort study: the
Rotterdam Study. Lancet, 1998, 351:1841–1843.
14. Skoog I et al. 15-year longitudinal study of blood pressure and dementia. Lancet, 1996, 347:1141–1145.
15. Kivipelto M et al. Midlife vascular risk factors and Alzheimer’s disease in later life: longitudinal, population
based study. BMJ, 2001, 322:1447–1451.
16. Pandav RS et al. Hemoglobin levels and Alzheimer disease: an epidemiologic study in India. American
Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 2004, 12:523–526.
17. Ferri CP et al. Global prevalence of dementia: a Delphi consensus study. Lancet, 2005, 366:2112–2117.
18. Prince M. Methodological issues in population-based research into dementia in developing countries. A
position paper from the 10/66 Dementia Research Group. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 2000,
15:21–30.
19. Chandra V et al. Prevalence of Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias in rural India. The Indo-US study.
Neurology, 1998, 51:1000–1008.
20. Hendrie HC et al. Prevalence of Alzheimer’s disease and dementia in two communities: Nigerian Africans and
African Americans. American Journal of Psychiatry, 1995, 152:1485–1492.
21. Hendrie HC et al. Incidence of dementia and Alzheimer disease in 2 communities: Yoruba residing in Ibadan,
Nigeria, and African Americans residing in Indianapolis, Indiana. JAMA, 2001, 285:739–747.
22. Chandra V et al. Incidence of Alzheimer’s disease in a rural community in India: the Indo-US study.
Neurology, 2001, 57:985–989.
23. Prince M. Epidemiology of dementia. Vol. 3 Psychiatry. Abingdon, Medicine Publishing Company Ltd., 2004
(Part 12:11–13).
24. Sadik K, Wilcock G. The increasing burden of Alzheimer disease. Alzheimer Disease and Associated
Disorders, 2003, 17(Suppl. 3):S75–S79.
25. Shah A, Murthy S, Suh GK. Is mental health economics important in geriatric psychiatry in developing
countries? International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 2002, 17:758–764.
26. Zencir M et al. Cost of Alzheimer’s disease in a developing country setting. International Journal of Geriatric
Psychiatry, 2005, 20:616–622.
27. 10/66 Dementia Research Group. Care arrangements for people with dementia in developing countries.
International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 2004, 19:170–177.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
28. Kalache A. Ageing is a Third World problem too. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 1991, 6:617–
618.
29. Lautenschlager NT, Almeida OP, Flicker L. Preventing dementia: why we should focus on health promotion
now. International Psychogeriatrics, 2003, 15:111–119.
30. Tout K. Ageing in developing countries. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1989.
31. Schneider J et al. EUROCARE: a cross-national study of co-resident spouse carers for people with
Alzheimer’s disease. I: Factors associated with carer burden. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry,
1999, 14:651–661.
32. The world health report 2001 – Mental health: new understanding, new hope. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2001.

RECOMMENDED READING
For professionals
■ Burns A, O’Brien J, Ames D, eds. Dementia, 3rd ed. London, Hodder Arnold, 2005.
■ Draper B, Melding P, Brodaty H, eds. Psychogeriatric service delivery: an international perspective. New York,
Oxford University Press, 2004.
For carers and non-medical readers
■ Cayton H, Graham N, Warner J. Dementia – Alzheimer’s and other dementias, 2nd ed. London, Class
Publishing, 2003 (translated into several languages).
■ Shenk D. The forgetting. Understanding Alzheimer’s disease: a biography of disease. London, Harper Collins,
2003.
■ Bryden C. Dancing with dementia. My story of living positively with dementia. London, Jessica Publishers,
2005.

Box 3.1.3 Case-study: Brazil
Brazil has among the 11 largest populations of elderly people in the world; eight of these populations are in developing countries. According to the Brazilian 2000 census, there
are 10 million people aged 65 years and over, corresponding to about 6% of the whole population. It is predicted
that by 2050 the elderly population will have increased by
over 300%, whereas the population as a whole will have increased only by over 30%. Brazil has also one of the highest
rates of urbanization in the world with almost one third of
the whole population living in only three metropolitan areas (São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro and Belo Horizonte), as well
as one of the highest levels of inequality between the rich
and the poor with almost 50% of the national income concentrated among the richest 10% of the population. Most
elderly people live in large cities in poverty.
According to a recent consensus on the global prevalence of dementia, Brazil has today 729 000 people with
dementia; this number is estimated to increase to 1.4 million by 2020 and to 3.2 million by 2040. Dementia in Brazil
is still a hidden problem and there is little awareness of it.
Most elderly people live with their spouses or extended family (only 15% live alone and fewer than 1% live in
institutions). Families with one or more elderly members
are relatively advantaged because of the means-tested
non-contributory pension beneﬁts for older Brazilians, introduced in the 1990s. However, the informal support that
family caregivers can offer to their relations in more need
is still difﬁcult because of impoverishment.

The majority of Brazilians (75%) are cared for by the
federal programme SUS (Uniﬁed Health System) while the
remainder are in the hands of a private system. Primary
care is provided primarily by the Family Health Programme,
in which health professionals go to the patient’s home for
periodic health evaluation and management; however, this
programme covers only 40% of the population. Specialists
(geriatricians, psychiatrists and neurologists) see referred
patients as outpatients and inpatients. Long-term care is
scarce and is mostly provided by religious organizations
for those with severe disability and limited family support.
Community care is generally available in metropolitan
areas, but only from private providers for those who can
afford the charges. Home care provided by SUS is being
introduced but still covers only a small proportion of the
elderly population.
While the current health system does not meet the needs
of older people, there are encouraging developments. The
Brazilian Psychiatric Association has a Geriatric Psychiatry section promoting training in dementia assessment
and care; the geriatricians and neurologists have similar
initiatives. Four universities have research programmes in
dementia. Several regional nongovernmental organizations
work to support people with dementia and their caregivers;
these are united in a federation — Federação Brasileira de
Associaçãoes de Alzheimer (FEBRAZ) — which is a member of Alzheimer’s Disease International.

neurological disorders: a public health approach

Box 3.1.4 Case-study: India
In India, life expectancy has gone up from 20 years at the
beginning of the 20th century to 62 years at present. Better medical care and low fertility have made the elderly
population the fastest growing section of society. India has
over one billion people, 16% of the world’s population: it
is estimated that the growth in the elderly population is
5–8% higher than growth in the total population. The consequence is that, while in 2001 there were 70 million people aged over 60 years, by 2025 there will be an estimated
177 million.
According to a recent consensus, the prevalence of dementia in India is 1.9% over the age of 60 years. In the
context of the large population and demographic transition,
the total numbers are estimated to more than treble in the
next 35 years, reaching over six million by 2040. The public
health and socioeconomic implications are enormous.
The joint family system — the traditional support system for frail elderly people — is crumbling because of the
migration of the younger generation to the cities in search
of better prospects. The women who traditionally took on
the role of caregivers are also working and cannot spend
as much time caring for the elderly. Dementia is considered
as a normal part of ageing and is not perceived as requiring
medical care. Thus primary health-care physicians rarely
see this condition in their clinical work. Private medical care

(which includes home visits) is preferred and this leads to a
higher out-of-pocket cost for dementia care. Carers experience signiﬁcant burdens and health strain. More than 80%
of carers are female and around 50% are spouses who are
themselves quite old. People with dementia are often neglected, ridiculed and abused. Old-age homes do not admit
people with dementia.
These research ﬁndings led to the implementation of
the Dementia Home Care Project which was supported by
WHO. In this project, a ﬂexible, stepped-care intervention
was adopted to empower the carers with knowledge and
skills to manage the person with dementia at home. The
intervention was implemented by locally trained home
care advisers under supervision. This not only helped in
decreasing the stress of looking after a person with dementia, but also helped the caregivers to manage behavioural
problems and thus reduced the number of deaths in the
intervention group.
Evidence from research has helped the advocacy campaign in India. There is a need to make dementia a public
health priority and create a network of home care advisers
to provide supportive and educational interventions for the
family caregivers through the primary health-care system
in India.

Box 3.1.5 Case-study: Nigeria
Nigeria is the most populous African country, with about
130 million inhabitants. According to United Nations estimates, it is likely that the ﬁgure of 0.5 million (4.7% of
the whole population) people over 60 years of age in 2000
will have more than trebled by 2040 (1.8 million people, i.e.
7.5% of the population). Old people have traditionally been
cared for within the extended family. Social and economic
changes have disrupted this system, however, especially
by young people moving into the towns and leaving the old
people to cope on their own. No effective alternatives have
been provided for their care.
Specialist health services are in short supply. In 2005
there were only about 77 psychiatrists and three occupational therapists in the country. Industrial therapy was not
offered anywhere. Specialist social workers are few and
work under severe limitations. There are no specialist services for the elderly (geriatric or psychogeriatric services,
meals on wheels, respite care or drop-in centres) and few
nursing homes. There is no insurance cover for medical
services for elderly people.

Usually record-keeping, accountability and political will
are poor, so that many elderly people who retire do not receive their beneﬁts. Recently the Federal Government has
introduced a contributory pension scheme, but in the past
elderly people found it difﬁcult to learn about and access
their entitlements. Elderly Nigerians are among the poorest
groups in the country.
A national policy on elderly care was published in 2003,
and a National Implementation Plan is now under way, but
is being piloted only among certain Federal civil servants.
Assessing the extent of dementia among this huge,
varied and shifting population is not easy, but what little
research has been done suggests prevalence rates for dementia may be low. Interest in the mental health of elderly
Nigerians is only just beginning: for example in the past
three years, old-age mental health clinics have been established at two universities. There is no formal training
for geriatric medicine and psychiatry. Anti-dementia drugs
are rarely available.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

3.2 Epilepsy
57 Course and outcome
58 Epidemiology
59 Burden on patients, families and communities
62
63
64
65
67

Epilepsy is a chronic neurological disorder affecting
both sexes and all ages, with worldwide distribuTreatment, rehabilitation and cost
tion. The term is also applied to a large group of
Research
conditions characterized by common symptoms
Education and training
called “epileptic seizures”, which may occur in the
Partnerships within and beyond the health system
context of a brain insult that can be systemic, toxic
or metabolic. These events (called provoked or acute
Conclusions and recommendations
symptomatic seizures) are presumed to be an acute
manifestation of the insult and may not recur when the underlying cause has
been removed or the acute phase has elapsed.
Epilepsy has been deﬁned as “a disorder of the brain characterized by an enduring predisposition
to generate epileptic seizures, and by the neurobiological, cognitive, psychological and social
consequences of this condition. The deﬁnition of epilepsy requires the occurrence of at least
one epileptic seizure” (1). An epileptic seizure is deﬁned as “a transient occurrence of signs
and/or symptoms due to abnormal excessive or synchronous neuronal activity in the brain” (1).
These deﬁnitions recognize that a diagnosis of epilepsy implies the existence of a persistent
epileptogenic abnormality that is present whether seizures occur or not, as well as that there
may be consequences of this persistent abnormality other than the occurrence of seizures that
can cause continuous disability between seizure occurrence (interictally). Because it is often difﬁcult to identify deﬁnitively an enduring predisposition to generate epileptic seizures, a common
operational deﬁnition of epilepsy is the occurrence of two or more non-provoked epileptic seizures
more than 24 hours apart.
Differential diagnosis of transient events that could represent epileptic seizures involves ﬁrst
determining that the events are epileptic, then distinguishing between provoked epileptic seizures
and a chronic epileptic condition. Febrile seizures in infants and young children and withdrawal
seizures in alcoholics are common examples of provoked seizures that do not require a diagnosis
of epilepsy. If seizures are recurrent, it is next necessary to search for an underlying treatable
cause. If such a cause cannot be found, or if it is treated and seizures persist, then treatment of
seizures is guided by diagnosis of the speciﬁc seizure type(s), and syndrome if present (see Box
3.2.1).

Etiology and risk factors
Epileptic conditions are multifactorial disorders, and it is useful to discuss three important factors.
The ﬁrst factor is predisposition, or threshold. Anyone with a functioning brain is capable of having
a seizure; however, seizures occur more easily in some people than in others. The ease with which
a seizure can be provoked, or an epileptic condition can be induced, is referred to as a threshold.
Individual differences in threshold are largely attributable to genetic variations but could also be
acquired, such as certain types of perinatal injuries, which can alter threshold. Threshold is a dynamic phenomenon; it varies throughout the day, it also changes in relation to hormonal inﬂuences

neurological disorders: a public health approach
during the menstrual cycle in women. Stimulant drugs lower seizure threshold and sedative drugs
increase it; however, withdrawal from sedative drugs can lower threshold and provoke seizures.
Antiepileptic drugs work by increasing seizure threshold.
The second important factor for epilepsy is the epileptogenic abnormality itself. Epilepsies
attributable to identiﬁable brain defects are referred to as symptomatic epilepsies. Symptomatic
epilepsies can be caused by a variety of disorders, including brain malformations, infections,
vascular disturbances, neoplasms, scars from trauma, including strokes, and disorders of cerebral
metabolism. Treatment for symptomatic epilepsy is most effective if it is directed at the underlying
cause. The most common symptomatic epilepsy is temporal lobe epilepsy, usually associated
with a characteristic lesion called “hippocampal sclerosis”. Hippocampal sclerosis appears to be
caused by cerebral injury within the ﬁrst few years of life in individuals with a genetic predisposition to this condition. Some forms of epilepsy are unassociated with identiﬁable structural lesions
or diseases and are usually unassociated with other neurological or mental deﬁcits. These are
genetically transmitted, generally easily treated with medications without sequelae, and referred
to as idiopathic epilepsies.
The third important factor is the precipitating condition, which determines when seizures occur.
Common precipitating factors include fever for children with febrile seizures, alcohol and sedative
drug withdrawal, sleep deprivation, stimulant drugs and — in some patients — stress. Reﬂex
seizures are precipitated by speciﬁc sensory stimuli. The most common are photosensitive seizures
induced by ﬂickering light, but some patients have very speciﬁc reﬂex epilepsy with seizures precipitated by such stimuli as being startled, particular types of music, certain visual patterns, reading,
eating and hot-water baths. Identiﬁcation of precipitating factors is helpful if they can be avoided,
but in most patients speciﬁc precipitating factors are not apparent, and may not exist at all.
Patients with a high seizure threshold can experience severe epileptogenic brain injuries and
precipitating factors but never have seizures, while those with low seizure thresholds can develop
epilepsy with minimal insults and, in many, from precipitating factors alone (provoked seizures).

COURSE AND OUTCOME
Because there are many types of seizures and epilepsy, there is no single course or outcome.
Prognosis depends on the seizure type, the underlying cause, and the syndrome when this can
be determined. Approximately one in 10 individuals will experience at least one epileptic seizure
in their lifetime, but only one third of these will go on to have epilepsy. There are a number of
idiopathic epilepsy syndromes characterized by onset at a certain age, and speciﬁc seizure types.
Those that begin in infancy and childhood, such as benign familial neonatal seizures, benign
childhood epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes, and childhood absence epilepsy, usually remit
spontaneously, while those that begin in adolescence, the juvenile idiopathic epilepsies, are often
lifelong. Most of these are easily treated with antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), with no neurological or

Box 3.2.1 Types of epileptic seizure

I. Generalized onset

II. Focal onset

A.
B
C
D
E

A Local
1 Neocortical
2 Limbic
B With ipsilateral propagation
C With contralateral spread
D Secondarily generalized

Clonic and tonic seizures
Absences
Myoclonic seizure types
Epileptic spasms
Atonic seizures

Source: adapted from (2).

III. Neonatal

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
mental sequelae. Slowly, the genetic basis of these idiopathic epilepsies is being revealed, and
there appears to be considerable diversity in that single-gene mutations can give rise to more than
one syndrome, while single syndromes can be caused by more than one gene mutation.
The prognosis of symptomatic epilepsies depends on the nature of the underlying cause.
Epilepsies attributable to diffuse brain damage, such as West syndrome and Lennox–Gastaut
syndrome, are characterized by severely disabling medically refractory “generalized” seizures,
mental retardation and often other neurological deﬁcits. Epilepsies resulting from smaller lesions
may be associated with “focal” seizures that are more easily treated with drugs and can remit
spontaneously as well. When pharmacoresistant focal seizures are due to localized structural
abnormalities in one hemisphere, such as hippocampal sclerosis in temporal lobe epilepsy, they
can often be successfully treated by localized resective surgery. Some patients with more diffuse
underlying structural lesions that are limited to one hemisphere can also be treated surgically with
hemispherectomy or hemispherotomy.
Whereas 80–90% of patients with idiopathic epilepsies can expect to become seizure free, and
many will undergo spontaneous remission, the ﬁgure is much lower for patients with symptomatic
epilepsy, and perhaps only 5–10% of patients with temporal lobe epilepsy and hippocampal sclerosis will have seizures that can be controlled by pharmacotherapy. Of these patients, however,
60–80% can become free of disabling seizures with surgery. Advances in neurodiagnostics,
particularly neuroimaging, are greatly facilitating our ability to determine the underlying causes
of seizures in patients with symptomatic epilepsies and to design more effective treatments,
including surgical interventions.

EPIDEMIOLOGY
Incidence of epilepsy and unprovoked seizures
The annual incidence of unprovoked seizures is 33–198 per 100 000, and the incidence of epilepsy
is 23–190 per 100 000 (3). The overall incidence of epilepsy in Europe and North America ranges
from 24 and 53 per 100 000 per year, respectively (4–6). The incidence in children is eventually
higher and even more variable, ranging from 25 to 840 per 100 000 per year, most of the differences being explained by the differing populations at risk and by the study design (3). In developing
countries, the incidence of the disease is higher than that in industrialized countries and is up to 190
per 100 000 (3, 7). Although one might expect a higher exposure to perinatal risk factors, infections
and traumas in developing countries, the higher incidence of epilepsy may be also explained by the
different structure of the populations at risk, which is characterized by a predominant distribution
of young individuals and a short life expectancy.

Incidence by age, sex and socioeconomic status
In industrialized countries, epilepsy tends to affect mostly the individuals at the two extremes
of the age spectrum. The peak in the elderly is not detected in developing countries, where the
disease peaks in the 10–20-year age group (8). This may depend on the age structure of the
population and on a relative under-ascertainment of the disease in older individuals.
The incidence of epilepsy and unprovoked seizures has been mostly reported to be higher in men
than in women in both industrialized and developing countries, though this ﬁnding has rarely attained
statistical signiﬁcance. The different distribution of epilepsy in men and women can be mostly explained by the differing genetic background, the different prevalence of the commonest risk factors
in the two sexes, and the concealment of the disease in women for sociocultural reasons.
The incidence of epilepsy is higher in the lower socioeconomic classes. This assumption is supported by the comparison between industrialized and developing countries and by the comparison,
within the same population, of people of different ethnic origin (9).

neurological disorders: a public health approach

Prevalence of epilepsy
The overall prevalence of epilepsy ranges from 2.7 to 41 per 1000 population, though in the majority of reports the rate of active epilepsy (i.e. at least one seizure in the preceding ﬁve years) is in the
range 4–8 per 1000 (5, 10). The prevalence of active epilepsy is generally lower in industrialized
countries than in developing countries, which may reﬂect a lower prevalence of selected risk
factors (mostly infections and traumas), a more stringent case veriﬁcation, and the exclusion of
provoked and unprovoked isolated seizures.

Prevalence by age, sex and socioeconomic status
In industrialized countries, the prevalence of epilepsy is lower in infancy and tends to increase
thereafter, with the highest rate occurring in elderly people (10). Where available, age-speciﬁc
prevalence rates of lifetime and active epilepsy from developing countries tend to be higher in the
second (254 vs 148 per 1000) and third decades of life (94 vs 145 per 1000) (8). The differences
between industrialized and developing countries may be mostly explained by the differing distribution of the risk factors and by the shorter life expectancy in the latter.
As with incidence, prevalence of epilepsy tends to be higher in men. However, this ﬁnding is
not consistent across studies and, with few exceptions, is not statistically signiﬁcant.
Socioeconomic background has been found to affect the frequency of epilepsy reports in
both industrialized and developing countries. In developing countries, prevalence rates have been
shown to be greater in the rural compared with the urban context (11, 12) or in the lower compared
with the higher socioeconomic classes. However, opposite ﬁgures were reported in a meta-analysis of epidemiological studies from India (13), which suggests that rural and urban environments
should not be invariably used as proxies of lower vs higher socioeconomic conditions.

Mortality
The mortality rate of epilepsy ranges from 1 to 8 per 100 000 population per year, but international
vital statistics give annual mortality rates of 1–2 per 100 000 (14). Based on a meta-analysis of
studies investigating mortality in the past 100 years, the standardized mortality ratio (SMR) for
epilepsy, which is the ratio between the deaths observed among patients with epilepsy and the
deaths expected in a reference population with a similar age distribution, was found to range
from 1.3 to 9.3 (15). The SMR for epilepsy ranges from 1.6 to 5.3 in children and adults and is
inversely correlated with age (16). The higher SMRs may be partly explained by the inclusion of
provoked seizures. The highest mortality risk in the youngest age groups can be interpreted in
part in the light of the underlying epileptogenic conditions and the lower number of competing
causes of death.
It is extremely difﬁcult to analyse the epilepsy death rate in the general population of a developing country because incidence studies of epilepsy are difﬁcult to perform, death certiﬁcates
are unreliable and often unavailable, and the cause of death is difﬁcult to determine. Based on
available data, it seems that the mortality rate of epilepsy in developing countries is generally
higher than that reported in developed countries. These data cannot be generalized, however, as
they have been obtained from selected populations (17 ).

BURDEN ON PATIENTS, FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES
Worldwide, 50 million people have epilepsy. Many more people, however — an estimated
200 000 000 — are also affected by this disorder, as they are the family members and friends of
those who are living with epilepsy. Around 85% of people with epilepsy live in developing countries. There are two million new cases occurring in the world every year. Up to 70% of people with
epilepsy could lead normal lives if properly treated, but for an overwhelming majority of patients
this is not the case (18).

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
Epilepsy is among the disorders that are strongly associated with signiﬁcant psychological
and social consequences for everyday living (19). People with hidden disabilities such as epilepsy
are among the most vulnerable in any society. While their vulnerability may be partly attributed
to the disorder itself, the particular stigma associated with epilepsy brings a susceptibility of its
own. Stigmatization leads to discrimination, and people with epilepsy experience prejudicial and
discriminatory behaviour in many spheres of life and across many cultures (20).
People with epilepsy experience violations and restrictions of both their civil and human rights.
Civil rights violations such as unequal access to health and life insurance or prejudicial weighting
of health insurance provisions, withholding of the right to obtain a driving licence, limitations
to the right to enter particular occupations and the right to enter into certain legal agreements,
in some parts of the world even marriage, are severely aggravated by epilepsy. Discrimination
against people with epilepsy in the workplace and in respect of access to education is not uncommon for many people affected by the condition. Violations of human rights are often more subtle
and include social ostracism, being overlooked for promotion at work, and denial of the right
to participate in many of the social activities taken for granted by others in the community. For
example, ineligibility for a driving licence frequently imposes restrictions on social participation
and choice of employment.
Informing people with epilepsy of their rights and recourse is an essential activity. Considering
the frequency of rights violations, the number of successful legal actions is very small. People
are often reluctant to be brought into the public eye, so a number of cases are settled out of
court. The successful defence of cases of rights abuse against people with epilepsy will serve
as precedents, however, and will be helpful in countries where there are actions afoot to review
and amend legislation.

Epidemiological assessment of the global burden of epilepsy
Overall, epilepsy contributed more than seven million DALYs (0.5%) to the global burden of disease
in 2000 (21, 22). Figure 3.2.1 shows the distribution of DALYs or lost years of healthy life attributable to epilepsy, both by age group and by level of economic development. It is apparent that
close to 90% of the worldwide burden of epilepsy is to be found in developing regions, with more
than half occurring in the 39% of the global population living in countries with the highest levels
of premature mortality (and lowest levels of income). An age gradient is also apparent, with the
vast majority of epilepsy-related deaths and disability in childhood and adolescence occurring in
developing regions, while later on in the life-course the proportion drops on account of relatively
greater survival rates into older age by people living in more economically developed regions.

Figure 3.2.1 Distribution of the global burden of epilepsy, by age group and
level of economic development
100

Percentage of global burden

90
80

40%

70
60
50

64%

42%

41%

40%

37%

55%

56%

78%

26%

35%

33%

17%

22%

26%

30–44

45–59

60–69

42%

29%

34%

32%

29%

20
10

18%

11%

0–4

5–14

15–29

31%

37%

70–79

80+

12%

Age group
N Developed regions

Source (22).

N Low mortality developing regions

N High mortality developing regions

Total

neurological disorders: a public health approach

Economic assessment of the national burden of epilepsy
Economic assessments of the national burden of epilepsy have been conducted in a number of high
income countries (e.g. 23, 24) and more recently in India (25), all of which have clearly shown the
signiﬁcant economic implications the disorder has in terms of health-care service needs, premature
mortality and lost work productivity. For example, the Indian study calculated that the total cost per
case of these disease consequences for epilepsy amounted to US$ 344 per year (equivalent to 88%
of average income per capita), and that the total cost for the estimated ﬁve million cases resident
in India was equivalent to 0.5% of gross national product. Since such studies differ with respect to
the exact methods used, as well as underlying cost structures within the health system, they are
currently of most use at the level of individual countries, where they can serve to draw attention to
the wide-ranging resource implications and needs of people living with epilepsy.

The avertable burden of epilepsy
Having established the attributable burden of epilepsy, two subsequent questions for decisionmaking and priority setting relate to avertable burden (the proportion of attributable burden that
is averted currently or could be avoided via scaled-up use of proven efﬁcacious treatments) and
resource efﬁciency (determination of the most cost-effective ways of reducing burden). Figure
3.2.2 provides a schematic overview of these concepts.
As part of a wider WHO cost–effectiveness work programme (26), information has been generated concerning the amount of burden averted by the current or scaled-up use of treatment with
AEDs, together with estimates of cost and cost–effectiveness (27). Effectiveness was expressed
in terms of DALYs averted and costs were expressed in international dollars. Compared with a
“do nothing” scenario (i.e. the untreated natural history of epilepsy), results from nine developing
epidemiological subregions suggest that extending AED treatment coverage to 50% of primary
epilepsy cases would avert 150–650 DALYs per million population (equivalent to 13–40% of the
current burden), at an annual cost per case of International $ 55–192. Older ﬁrst-line AEDs (phenobarbitone, phenytoin) were most cost effective on account of their similar efﬁcacy but lower
acquisition cost (International $ 800–2000 for each DALY averted). In all nine developing regions,
the cost of securing one extra healthy year of life was less than average per capita income.
Extending coverage further to 80% or even 95% of the target population would evidently avert
more of the burden still, and would remain an efﬁcient strategy despite the large-scale investment
in manpower, training and drug supply/distribution that would be required to implement such a
programme. The results for one developing subregion in Africa — consisting of 20 countries with
a high rate of child mortality and a very high level of adult mortality — are depicted in Figure 3.2.2

Figure 3.2.2 Attributable and avertable burden of epilepsy in an
epidemiological subregion of Africa
Combined effectiveness (%)

100

Not avertable with first line AEDs (40%)
60

Already averted
(current AEDs)
19%

Avertable via scaling up of
cost effective AEDs*
+13%

+19%

Effective coverage in population (%)
* Each DALY averted costs less than average per capita income.

Source: schema (28); data (27 ).

+9%

100

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
(27, 28), which divides the total attributable burden of epilepsy into three categories: burden that is
averted by AEDs at current levels of effective treatment coverage (19%); burden that is avertable
via the scaling-up of AEDs (to a further 41% if complete coverage is reached); and burden that is
not avertable via AEDs (estimated to be 40%, though this assumes that the current level of drug
compliance would prevail).

TREATMENT, REHABILITATION AND COST
The primary focus of care for patients with epilepsy is the prevention of further seizures, which may,
after all, lead to additional morbidity or even mortality (29). The goal of treatment should be the
maintenance of a normal lifestyle, preferably free of seizures and with minimal side-effects of the
medication. Up to 70% of people with epilepsy could become seizure free with AED treatment.
In 25–30% of people with epilepsy the seizures cannot be controlled with drugs. Epilepsy
surgery is a safe and effective alternative treatment in selected cases. Investment in epilepsy
surgery centres, even in the poorest regions, could greatly reduce the economic and human
burden of epilepsy. There is a marked treatment gap with respect to epilepsy surgery, however,
even in industrialized countries.
Attention to the psychosocial, cognitive, educational and vocational aspects is an important
part of comprehensive epilepsy care (30). Epilepsy imposes an economic burden both on the
affected individual and on society, e.g. the disorder commonly affects young people in the most
productive years of their lives, often leading to avoidable unemployment.
Over the past years, it has become increasingly obvious that severe epilepsy-related difﬁculties
can be seen in people who have become seizure free as well as in those with difﬁcult-to-treat
epilepsies. The outcome of rehabilitation programmes would be a better quality of life, improved
general social functioning and better functioning in, for instance, performance at work and improved social contacts (31).
In 1990, WHO identiﬁed that the average cost of medication (phenobarbitone) could be as low
as US$ 5 per person per year (32). From an economic point of view also, therefore, it is an urgent
public health challenge to make effective epilepsy care available to all who need it, regardless of
national and economic boundaries.

Prevention
Currently, epilepsy tends to be treated once the condition is established, and little is done in
terms of prevention. In a number of people with epilepsy the cause for the condition is unknown;
prevention of this type of epilepsy is therefore currently not possible (33, 34). A sizeable number of
people with epilepsy will have known risk factors, but some of these are not currently amenable to
preventive measures. These include cases of epilepsy attributable to cerebral tumours or cortical
malformations and many of the idiopathic forms of epilepsy.
One of the most common causes of epilepsy is head injury, particularly penetrating injury. Prevention of the trauma is clearly the most effective way of preventing post-traumatic epilepsy, with
use of head protection where appropriate (for example, for horse riding and motorcycling) (34).
Epilepsy can be caused by birth injury, and the incidence should be reduced by adequate
perinatal care. Fetal alcohol syndrome may also cause epilepsy, so advice on alcohol use before
and during pregnancy is important. Reduction of childhood infections by improved public hygiene
and immunization can lessen the risk of cerebral damage and the subsequent risk of epilepsy
(33, 34).
Febrile seizures are common in children under ﬁve years of age and in most cases are benign,
though a small proportion of patients will develop subsequent epilepsy. The use of drugs and other
methods to lower the body temperature of a feverish child may reduce the chance of having a
febrile convulsion and subsequent epilepsy, but this remains to be seen.

neurological disorders: a public health approach
Epilepsy may be a complication of various infections of the central nervous system (CNS),
such as cysticercosis and malaria (35, 36). These conditions are more prevalent in the tropical
belt, where low income countries are concentrated. Elimination of the parasite in the environment would be the most effective way to reduce the burden of epilepsy worldwide, but education
concerning how to avoid infection can also be effective.
To sum up, currently the prevention of epilepsy may be possible in cases caused by head
trauma and by infections and infestations of the CNS, but would require intensive efforts to
improve basic sanitation, education and practice. Most cases of epilepsy at the current state of
knowledge are probably not preventable but, as research improves our understanding of genetics
and structural abnormalities of the brain, this may change.

Treatment gap
Worldwide, the proportion of patients with epilepsy who at any given time remain untreated is
large, and is greater than 80% in most low income countries (33, 34). The size of this treatment
gap reﬂects either a failure to identify cases or a failure to deliver treatment. In most situations,
however, both factors will apply. Inadequate case-ﬁnding and treatment have various causes,
some of which are speciﬁc to low income countries. They include people’s attitudes and beliefs,
government health policies and priorities (or the lack of them), treatment costs and drug availability, as well as the attitude, knowledge and practice of health workers. In addition, there is
clear scarcity of epilepsy-trained health workers in many low income countries. The lack of trained
personnel and a proper health delivery infrastructure are major problems, which contribute to
the overall burden of epilepsy. For instance, in most sub-Saharan countries there is no resident
neurologist and there are no scanning facilities using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (35).
This situation is found in many other resource-poor countries and is usually more acute in rural
areas. The lack of trained specialists and medical facilities needs to be seen in the context of
severe deﬁciencies in health delivery that apply not only to epilepsy but also to the whole gamut
of medical conditions. Training medical and paramedical personnel and providing the necessary
investigatory and treatment facilities will require tremendous effort and ﬁnancial expenditure
and will take time to achieve. The aim should be to provide high standards of epilepsy care with
equitable access to all who need them throughout the world.
There is a dearth of epilepsy services, trained personnel and AEDs, which contributes to a massive diagnostic and treatment gap in epilepsy that is more pronounced in low income countries.
A huge effort is required to equalize care for people with epilepsy around the world. Improvement
of the care delivery system and infrastructure alone are not a sufﬁcient strategy but need to be
supplemented by education of patients, their families and the general public.

RESEARCH
Despite the signiﬁcant advances in understanding epileptogenic mechanisms and in counteracting
their pathological consequences, the problem still has to be faced of treating more effectively the severe epilepsies and of preventing their unfavourable evolution (37). So far, research has been unsuccessful in developing effective strategies capable of preventing the development of the pathogenic
process, set in motion by different etiological factors, that leads ultimately to chronic epilepsies (38).
To do so, it is important to take advantage of the results that are continuously being made available to
the scientiﬁc community thanks to the synergy of basic and clinical multidisciplinary research. This
means that the clinical applicability of neurobiological results should be evaluated, the way in which
the new information can be translated into diagnostic and therapeutic terms should be assessed,
and ad hoc guidelines and recommendations should be produced accordingly.
In elaborating their health-care strategies, regional and national communities should not simply
refer to the available scientiﬁc information, but should also contribute to it by means of their own

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
original investigations. This is mandatory if they are to meet speciﬁc local requirements taking into
account the socioeconomic situations in which health-care policy is to be formulated. Important
actions have been undertaken by the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) through its various commissions (on genetics, neurobiology, psychobiology, epidemiology, therapeutic strategies,
diagnostic methods and health-care policy) to help developing countries in establishing research
projects oriented to their speciﬁc problems. Moreover, ILAE is active in promoting international
collaborative research networks, facilitating partnerships between developed and developing
countries, promoting fellowships and grant programmes and in sensitizing the relevant international institutions such as the World Bank, WHO and the United Nations Educational, Scientiﬁc
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) to epilepsy research (39). A speciﬁc project for collaborative
studies involving developed and developing countries is part of the triennial action plan of the
Global Campaign Against Epilepsy. The project aims to stimulate and facilitate the synergy between countries in different economic situations that is particularly important for epidemiological
and genetic studies and clinical trials of new AEDs.
The main point here is that research is not a matter of technology; rather, it is the result of
an intellectual attitude aimed at understanding and improving the principles upon which every
medical activity should be based. Therefore, everybody whose work concerns epilepsy can and
should contribute to the advancement of epileptology to the beneﬁt of the millions of human
beings suffering from epilepsy, no matter how advanced the technological context of his or her
current work.

EDUCATION AND TRAINING
Education and training programmes aimed at improving the expertise of health-care providers
play an essential role in fostering epilepsy care throughout the world. The need for an integrated,
multidisciplinary approach to epilepsy care prompted several countries to organize annual epilepsy
courses for neurologists, general practitioners, technicians and nurses at national level.
Multinational programmes are being implemented on the basis of the pioneering experience
of ILAE’s European Epilepsy Academy (EUREPA), which has developed two innovative educational
models: train-the-trainers courses and European Epileptology Certiﬁcation. The aim of the trainthe-trainers courses is to turn experienced personnel into qualiﬁed teachers of epileptology. It
signiﬁcantly contributes to raising the proﬁle of epilepsy care across Europe and is now being
implemented in other regions. European Epileptology Certiﬁcation can be obtained by completing
an 18-month educational programme based on periods of training in selected institutions that
allow the accumulation of credits.
EUREPA is also developing an important project of distance education in epileptology. Some modules have been completed and successfully tested: the course on genetics of epilepsy has already
been evaluated (40). An annual residential Epilepsy Summer School for young epileptologists from
all over the world exists at Venice’s International School of Neurological Sciences; since 2002, it has
trained students from 64 countries. The interaction between students and teachers and among the
students themselves resulted in several ongoing international collaborative projects that are further
contributing to raising the proﬁle of epilepsy care in several developing areas (41).
The philosophy on which the educational initiatives of ILAE and EUREPA are based is an
interactive relationship that stimulates the active participation of students. The theoretical teaching, based either on residential courses or distance education systems, includes an interactive
discussion of clinical cases and practical training programmes in qualiﬁed epilepsy centres. A
further effort is needed to expand exchange programmes for visiting students from economically
disadvantaged countries.

neurological disorders: a public health approach

PARTNERSHIPS WITHIN AND BEYOND THE HEALTH SYSTEM
Partnerships within and beyond the health system are essential in order to achieve a world in which
no person’s life is limited by epilepsy. As the President of ILAE put it, “we all have a shared interest
in that we want to improve epilepsy care throughout the world”. Such partnerships include:
■ nongovernmental organizations, which are themselves partnerships as they are made up of
individuals who have common goals and interests;
■ patients and professionals at national, regional and global levels, in order to raise awareness
of epilepsy and stimulate research;
■ patient and professional nongovernmental organizations and WHO, in order to decrease the
treatment gap;
■ patients, professionals and politicians, for example to develop national health-care programmes;
■ foundations and charitable organizations, who support the work of the nongovernmental organizations both ﬁnancially and with human resources;
■ health-care providers, to try to improve the availability, accessibility and affordability of treatment;
■ the private sector, especially the pharmaceutical industry.

ILAE/IBE/WHO Global Campaign Against Epilepsy
The problems related to provision of care and treatment to people with epilepsy are too complex
to be solved by individual organizations, therefore the three leading international organizations
working in the ﬁeld of epilepsy (ILAE, the International Bureau for Epilepsy (IBE) and WHO) joined
forces to create the Global Campaign Against Epilepsy. The Campaign aims to provide better
information about epilepsy and its consequences and to assist governments and those concerned
with epilepsy to reduce the burden of the disorder. Its strategy, speciﬁc objectives and activities
are summarized in Box 3.2.2.
To date, over 90 countries are involved in the Campaign. As part of general awareness-raising,
regional conferences on public health aspects of epilepsy have been organized in all six regions
of WHO with the participation of over 1300 delegates from the epilepsy organizations (IBE and

Box 3.2.2 ILAE/IBE/WHO Global Campaign Against Epilepsy

Objectives

Strategy

Activities

■ To increase public and professional awareness of epilepsy as
a universal and treatable brain
disorder
■ To raise epilepsy to a new plane
of acceptability in the public
domain
■ To promote public and professional education about epilepsy
■ To identify the needs of people
with epilepsy at national and regional levels
■ To encourage governments and
departments of health to address
the needs of people with epilepsy,
including awareness, education,
diagnosis, treatment, care, services and prevention

■ To provide a platform for general
awareness
■ To assist departments of health in
the development of national programmes on epilepsy

■ Organization of regional conferences followed by Regional
Declarations
■ Assessment of country resources
for epilepsy worldwide
■ Assistance with the development
of regional reports
■ Development of educational
materials
■ Coordination of demonstration
projects

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
ILAE), public health experts from governments and universities and representatives from WHO
headquarters and regions.
The goals of the conferences were to review the present situation of epilepsy care in the region,
to identify the country’s needs and resources to control epilepsy at a community level, and to
discuss the involvement of countries in the Campaign. As a result of these consultations, Regional
Declarations summarizing perceived needs and proposing actions to be taken were developed and
adopted by the conference participants.
In order to make an inventory of country resources for epilepsy worldwide, a questionnaire
was developed by an international group of experts in the ﬁeld. On the basis of the data collected
through this questionnaire, regional reports were developed. These reports provide a panoramic
view of the epilepsy situation in each region, outline the various initiatives that were taken to
address the problems, deﬁne the current challenges and offer appropriate recommendations
(32, 42).
The next logical step in the assessment of country resources was the comprehensive analysis
of the data. Within the framework of the WHO Atlas Project, launched by WHO in 2002 to provide
information about health resources in different countries, the analysis was summarized in the
Atlas of Epilepsy Care in the World (30). The epilepsy atlas has been produced in collaboration
with the ILAE/IBE/WHO Global Campaign Against Epilepsy using ILAE and IBE chapters and WHO
networks. The atlas provides global and regional analyses on epilepsy resources and is another
result of the fruitful collaboration between ILAE, IBE and WHO (43).
One of the main activities aiming to assist countries in the development of their national programmes on epilepsy is the initiation and implementation of demonstration projects. The ultimate
goal of these projects is the development of a variety of successful models of epilepsy control
that may be integrated into the health-care systems of the participating countries and regions. In
general terms, each demonstration project has four aspects:
■ assessing whether knowledge and attitudes of the population are adequate, correcting misinformation and increasing awareness of epilepsy and how it can be treated;
■ assessing the number of people with epilepsy and estimating how many of them are appropriately treated;
■ ensuring that people with epilepsy are properly served by health personnel equipped for their
task;
■ analysing the outcome and preparing recommendations for those who wish to apply the ﬁndings to the improvement of epilepsy care in their own and other countries.
In summary, it may be concluded that the collaboration of ILAE, IBE and WHO within the frame
of the Global Campaign has been very successful and led to signiﬁcant achievements in various
areas such as raising public and professional awareness and education, development of effective
modules for epilepsy control, and assessment and analysis of epilepsy resources in all countries
of the world.

neurological disorders: a public health approach

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1

Epilepsy is one of the most common serious neurological disorders worldwide with no
age, racial, social class, national or geographic boundaries.

Worldwide, 50 million people have epilepsy. Around 85% of these live in developing
countries.

Up to 70% of people with epilepsy could lead normal lives if properly treated, but for an
overwhelming majority of patients this is not the case.

The worldwide incidence, prevalence and mortality of epilepsy are not uniform and
depend on several factors, which include the structure of the local population, the basic
knowledge of the disease, the socioeconomic and cultural background, the presence of
environmental risk factors, and the distribution of infrastructure, ﬁnancial, human and
material resources.

Some forms of epilepsy, particularly those associated with CNS infections and trauma,
may be preventable.

As epileptic seizures respond to drug treatment, the outcome of the disease depends on
the early initiation and continuity of treatment. Difﬁculties with availability of or access
to treatment (the treatment gap) may seriously impair the prognosis of epilepsy and
aggravate the social and medical consequences of the disease.

In low income countries the treatment gap needs to be seen in the context of the local
situation, with inadequate resources for all forms of health delivery as well as education
and sanitation.

The treatment gap is not only a matter of the lack of availability of AEDs, but
encompasses the lack of infrastructure, training and public awareness of the condition. All
these areas need to be confronted.

Integration of epilepsy care in national health systems needs to be promoted by
developing models for epilepsy control worldwide.

REFERENCES
1. Fisher RS et al. Epileptic seizures and epilepsy. Deﬁnitions proposed by the International League against
Epilepsy (ILAE) and the International Bureau for Epilepsy (IBE). Epilepsia, 2005, 46:470–472.
2. Engel J Jr. Report of the ILAE Classiﬁcation Core Group. Epilepsia, 2006, 47:1558–1568.
3. Kotsopoulos IA et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of incidence studies of epilepsy and unprovoked
seizures. Epilepsia, 2002, 43:1402–1409.
4. Hauser WA, Annegers JF, Kurland LT. The incidence of epilepsy and unprovoked seizures in Rochester,
Minnesota, 1935–1984. Epilepsia, 1993, 34:453–468.
5. Forsgren L. Epidemiology and prognosis of epilepsy and its treatment. In: Shorvon S et al., eds. The
treatment of epilepsy, 2nd ed. Malden, MA, Blackwell Science, 2004:21–42.
6. Forsgren L et al. The epidemiology of epilepsy in Europe – a systematic review. European Journal of
Neurology, 2005, 12:245–253.
7. Preux P-M, Druet-Cabanac M. Epidemiology and aetiology of epilepsy in sub-Saharan Africa. Lancet
Neurology, 2005, 4:21–31.
8. Bharucha NE, Shorvon SD. Epidemiology in developing countries. In: Engel J Jr, Pedley TA, eds. Epilepsy: a
comprehensive textbook. Philadelphia, PA, Lippincott-Raven, 1997:105–118.
9. Shamansky SL, Glaser GH. Socioeconomic characteristics of childhood seizure disorders in the New Haven
area: an epidemiologic study. Epilepsia, 1979, 20:457–474.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
10. Hauser WA. Incidence and prevalence. In: Engel J Jr, Pedley TA, eds. Epilepsy: a comprehensive textbook.
Philadelphia, PA, Lippincott-Raven, 1997:47–57.
11. Placencia M et al. Epileptic seizures in an Andean region of Ecuador. Incidence and prevalence and regional
variation. Brain, 1992, 115:771–782.
12. Aziz H et al. Comparative epidemiology of epilepsy in Pakistan and Turkey: population-based studies using
identical protocols. Epilepsia, 1997, 38:716–722.
13. Sridharan R, Murthy BN. Prevalence and pattern of epilepsy in India. Epilepsia, 1999, 40:631–636.
14. Massey EW, Schoenberg BS. Mortality from epilepsy. International patterns and changes over time.
Neuroepidemiology, 1985, 4:65–70.
15. Shackleton DP et al. Survival of patients with epilepsy: an estimate of the mortality risk. Epilepsia, 2002,
43:445–450.
16. Jallon P. Mortality in patients with epilepsy. Current Opinion in Neurology, 2004, 17:141–146.
17. Carpio A et al. Mortality of epilepsy in developing countries. Epilepsia, 2005, 46(Suppl. 11):28–32.
18. Shorvon SD, Farmer PJ. Epilepsy in developing countries: a review of epidemiological, sociocultural, and
treatment aspects. Epilepsia, 1988, 29(Suppl. 1):36–54.
19. Baker GA. The psychosocial burden of epilepsy. Epilepsia, 2002, 43(Suppl. 6):26–30.
20. Pahl K, Boer HM de. Epilepsy and rights. In: Atlas: Epilepsy care in the world. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2005:72–73.
21. Leonardi M, Ustun B. The global burden of epilepsy. Epilepsia, 2002, 43(Suppl. 6):21–25.
22. The world health report 2004 – Changing history. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2004: Annex Table 3
(http://www.who.int/whr/annex/topic/en/annex_3_en.pdf).
23. Begley CE et al. The cost of epilepsy in the United States: an estimate from population-based and survey
data. Epilepsia, 2000, 41:342–351.
24. Cockerell OC et al. The cost of epilepsy in the United Kingdom: an estimation based on the results of two
population-based studies. Epilepsy research, 1994, 18:249–260.
25. Thomas SV et al. Economic burden of epilepsy in India. Epilepsia, 2001, 42:1052–1060.
26. Tan Torres T et al. Making choices in health: a WHO guide to cost–effectiveness analysis. Geneva, World
Health Organization, 2003.
27. Chisholm D. Cost-effectiveness of ﬁrst-line anti-epileptic drug treatments in the developing world: a
population-level analysis. Epilepsia, 2005, 46:751–759.
28. Investing in health research and development. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Health Research related to
Future Intervention Options. Geneva, World Health Organization, 1996.
29. Kwan P, Brodie MJ. Refractory epilepsy: a progressive, intractable but preventable condition? Seizure, 2002,
11:77–84.
30. Atlas: Epilepsy care in the world. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2005.
31. Brodie MJ, Boer HM de, Johannessen SI (Guest editors). European White Paper on epilepsy. Epilepsia, 2003,
44(Suppl. 6):1–88.
32. Epilepsy in the Western Paciﬁc Region – A call to action. Manila, World Health Organization Regional Ofﬁce
for the Western Paciﬁc, 2004.
33. Sander JW. Prevention of epilepsy. In: Shorvon SD et al., eds. The management of epilepsy in developing
countries: an ICBERG manual. London, Royal Society of Medicine, 1991. International Congress and
Symposium Series, No. 175:19–21.
34. Dreifuss FE. Critical review of health care for epilepsy. In: Engel J Jr, Pedley T, eds. Epilepsy: a
comprehensive textbook. Philadelphia, PA, Lippincott-Raven, 1997:2903–2906.
35. Pal DK, Carpio A, Sander JW. Neurocysticercosis and epilepsy in developing countries. Journal of
Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 2000, 68:137–143.
36. Carter JA et al. Increased prevalence of epilepsy associated with severe falciparum malaria in children.
Epilepsia, 2004, 45:978–981.
37. Arroyo S et al. Is refractory epilepsy preventable? Epilepsia, 2002, 43:437–444.
38. Walker MC, White HS, Sander JWAS. Disease modiﬁcation in partial epilepsy. Brain, 2002, 125:1937–1950.
39. ILAE strategic plan. Brussels, International League Against Epilepsy, 2005 (http://www.ILAE.org).
40. May T, Pfäfﬂin M. Evaluation of the distance learning course on Genetics of Epilepsy. Bielefeld, European
Epilepsy Academy, 2005 (http://www.epilepsy-academy.org).
41. ILAE annual report 2005. Brussels, International League Against Epilepsy, 2005 (http://www.ILAE.org).
42. Global Campaign Against Epilepsy. Epilepsy in the WHO African Region: bridging the gap. Brazzaville, World
Health Organization Regional Ofﬁce for Africa, 2004 (AFR/MNH/04.1).
43. Dua T et al. Epilepsy care in the world: results of an ILAE/IBE/WHO Global Campaign Against Epilepsy
survey. Epilepsia, 2006, 47:1225–1231.

neurological disorders: a public health approach

RECOMMENDED READING
■ Annegers JF et al. Incidence of acute symptomatic seizures in Rochester, Minnesota: 1935–1984. Epilepsia,
1995, 36:327–333.
■ Beghi E. Aetiology of epilepsy. In: Shorvon SD et al., eds. The treatment of epilepsy, 2nd ed. Malden, MA,
Blackwell Science, 2004:50–63.
■ Engel J Jr. Report of the ILAE Classiﬁcation Core Group. Epilepsia, 2006, 47:1558–1568.
■ Engel J Jr, Pedley TA. The comprehensive CD-ROM on epilepsy. Philadelphia, PA, Lippincott, Williams &
Wilkins, 1999.
■ Engel J Jr. Epilepsy: global issues for the practicing neurologist. New York, Demos Medical Publishing, 2005
(World Federation of Neurology: Seminars in Clinical Neurology).
■ Hauser WA. Epidemiology of epilepsy. In: Gorelick PB, Alter M, eds. Handbook of neuroepidemiology. New
York, Marcel Dekker, 1994:315–353.
■ Hauser WA, Hesdorffer DC, eds. Epilepsy: frequency, causes and consequences. New York, Demos Medical
Publishing, 1990.
■ Shorvon SD, Farmer PJ. Epilepsy in developing countries: a review of epidemiological, sociocultural and
treatment aspects. Epilepsia, 1988, 29(Suppl. 1):S36–S54.
■ Tomson T. Mortality studies in epilepsy. In: Jallon P et al., eds. Prognosis of epilepsies. Paris, John Libbey,
2003:12–21.
■ Tomson T et al. Medical risks in epilepsy: a review with focus on physical injuries, mortality, trafﬁc accidents and their prevention. Epilepsy Research, 2004, 60:1–16.
■ Atlas: Epilepsy care in the world. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2005.
■ The world health report 2001 – Mental health: new understanding, new hope. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2001.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

3.3 Headache disorders
72 Types of headache disorders
74 Epidemiology and burden
75 Barriers to care
76 Management and prevention
78 Therapeutic interventions
80 Follow-up and referral
80 Health-care policy
81 Partnerships within and beyond the health system
81 Research

Headache is a painful feature of a relatively small
number of primary headache disorders, some of
which are widespread and are often life-long conditions. Headache also occurs as a characteristic symptom of many other conditions; these are
termed secondary headache disorders. Collectively,
headache disorders are among the most common
disorders of the nervous system, causing substantial disability in populations throughout the world.

82 Conclusions and recommendations

Figure 3.3.1 Population-based
epidemiological
studies
of ofmigraine
Population-based
epidemiological
studies
migraine
13.2
11.6
10.0
15.5
14.3
23.2
10.2
16.7

14.7
14.7
11.7
8.2
14.0

13.3
12.2
8.5

11.6

8.4
5.9

9.6
22.3
7.7

13.5

10.0

10.1

8.5
3.0

9.3
8.2
8.2
5.3

9.0

5.0

12.6
16.3

7.3
5.0

1 year prevalence %

Africa
Asia
Europe
N. America
Oceania
S. America

4.0 (2 studies)
10.6 (6 studies
13.8 (9 studies)
12.6 (8 studies)
–
9.6 (10 studies)

WHO 06.156

Note: All studies used International Headache Society criteria (or reasonable modifications of these criteria) for diagnosing migraine and were conducted
in general population or community-based adult samples of at least 500 participants. Numbers are estimated 1-year prevalences.
Source: (3).

neurological disorders: a public health approach

Despite the widespread and incapacitating nature of headache, it is underestimated in scope and
scale, and headache disorders remain under-recognized and under-treated everywhere (1). Table
3.3.1 classifies headache disorders into primary, secondary, and neuralgias and other headaches,
with their symptoms (2).
The worldwide epidemiology of headache disorders is only partly documented. Populationbased studies have mostly focused on migraine (Figure 3.3.1) which, though the most frequently
studied, is not the most common headache disorder. Others, such as the more prevalent tensiontype headache and the more disabling so-called chronic daily headache syndromes, have received
less attention. Furthermore, few population-based studies exist for developing countries, where
limited funding and large and often rural (and therefore less accessible) populations, coupled
with the low profile of headache disorders compared with communicable diseases, prevent the
systematic collection of information.
Nevertheless, despite regional variations, headache disorders are thought to be highly prevalent throughout the world, and recent surveys add support to this belief. Sufficient studies have
been conducted to establish that headache disorders affect people of all ages, races, income
levels and geographical areas (Figure 3.3.2). Four of them — three primary headache disorders
and one secondary — have particular public health importance.

Population-based
epidemiologicalstudies
studies of
Figure 3.3.2 Population-based
epidemiological
of headache
headachedisorders
disordersa
(all headache disorders or unspecified headache)
63.0
37.7

77.0

87.3

13.4

76.0
71.0
49.4
46.0
29.0

59.7

55.6
28.5
68.0
62.0

35.9

78.8

23.1

28.7
63.1

20.0

37.3

1 year prevalence %

Africa
Asia
Europe
N. America
Oceania
S. America

21.6 (2 studies)
58.6 (5 studies)
56.1 (8 studies)
53.5 (3 studies)
50.0 (1 study)
41.3 (4 studies)

50.0

all headache disorders or unspecified headache.
Note: All studies were conducted in general population or community-based adult samples of at least 500 participants. Numbers are estimated
1-year prevalences.
Source: (3).
a

WHO 06.155

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

Table 3.3.1 Classiﬁcation of headache disorders
Type
Primary

Symptoms
1.
2.
3.
4.

Migraine
Tension-type headache
Cluster headache and other trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias
Other primary headaches

Secondary

5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.

Headache attributed to head and/or neck trauma
Headache attributed to cranial or cervical vascular disorder
Headache attributed to non-vascular intracranial disorder
Headache attributed to a substance or its withdrawal
Headache attributed to infection
Headache attributed to disorder of homoeostasis
Headache or facial pain attributed to disorder of cranium, neck, eyes, ears, nose, sinuses,
teeth, mouth or other facial or cranial structures
12. Headache attributed to psychiatric disorder

Neuralgias and
other headaches

13. Cranial neuralgias, central and primary facial pain and other headaches
14. Other headache, cranial neuralgia, central or primary facial pain

Source: (1).

TYPES OF HEADACHE DISORDERS
Migraine
Migraine is a primary headache disorder. It almost certainly has a genetic basis (4), but environmental
factors play a signiﬁcant role in how the disorder affects those who suffer from it. Pathophysiologically, activation of a mechanism deep in the brain causes release of pain-producing inﬂammatory
substances around the nerves and blood vessels of the head. Why this happens periodically, and
what brings the process to an end in spontaneous resolution of attacks, are uncertain.
Usually starting at puberty, migraine is recurrent throughout life in many cases. Adults with
migraine describe episodic disabling attacks in which headache and nausea are the most characteristic features; others are vomiting and dislike or intolerance of normal levels of light and sound.
Headaches are typically moderate or severe in intensity, one-sided and pulsating, aggravated by
routine physical activity; they usually last from several hours to 2–3 days. In children, attacks
tend to be of shorter duration and abdominal symptoms more prominent. Attack frequency is
typically once or twice a month but can be anywhere between once a year and once a week, often
subject to lifestyle and environmental factors that suggest people with migraine react adversely
to change in routine.
Migraine is most disabling to people aged 35–45 years, but it can trouble much younger
people, including children. Studies in Europe and the United States have shown that migraine
affects 6–8% of men and 15–18% of women (5, 6). A similar pattern probably exists in Central
America: in Puerto Rico, for example, 6% of men and 17% of women were found to have migraine
(7 ). In South America, prevalences appear only slightly lower (8).
A recent survey in Turkey suggested even greater prevalence in that country: 9% in men and 29%
in women (9). Similarly, in India, although major studies are still to be conducted, anecdotal evidence
suggests migraine is very common. High temperatures and high light levels for more than eight months
of the year, heavy noise pollution and the Indian habits of omitting breakfast, fasting frequently and
eating rich, spicy and fermented food are thought to be common triggers (10). Migraine appears less
prevalent, but still common, elsewhere in Asia (around 8%) and in Africa (3–7% in community-based
studies) (3). In these areas also, major studies have yet to be carried out.
The higher rates in women everywhere (2–3 times those in men) are hormonally driven.

neurological disorders: a public health approach

Tension-type headache
The mechanism of tension-type headache is poorly understood, though it has long been regarded
as a headache with muscular origins (11). It may be stress related or associated with musculoskeletal problems in the neck.
Tension-type headache has distinct subtypes. As experienced by very large numbers of people,
episodic tension-type headache occurs, like migraine, in attack-like episodes. These usually last
no more than a few hours but can persist for several days. Chronic tension-type headache, one
of the chronic daily headache syndromes, is less common than episodic tension-type headache
but is present most of the time: it can be unremitting over long periods. This variant is much more
disabling.
Headache in either case is usually mild or moderate and generalized, though it can be onesided. It is described as pressure or tightness, like a band around the head, sometimes spreading
into or from the neck. It lacks the speciﬁc features and associated symptoms of migraine.
Tension-type headache pursues a highly variable course, often beginning during the teenage
years and reaching peak levels around the age of 30–40 years. It affects three women to every
two men. Episodic tension-type headache is the most common headache disorder, reported by
over 70% of some populations (12), though its prevalence appears to vary greatly worldwide (3).
In Japan, for example, Takeshima et al. (13) found 22% of the population to be affected, while
Abduljabbar et al. (14) recorded only 3.1% with tension-type headache in a rural population of
Saudi Arabia (though it was still the most common headache type). Lack of reporting and underdiagnosis were thought to be factors here, and it may be that cultural attitudes to reporting a
relatively minor complaint explain at least part of the variation elsewhere. Chronic tension-type
headache affects 1–3% of adults (3).

Cluster headache
Cluster headache is one of a group of primary headache disorders (trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias) of uncertain mechanism that are characterized by frequently recurring, short-lasting but
extremely severe headache (1).
Cluster headache also has episodic and chronic forms. Episodic cluster headache occurs in
bouts (clusters), typically of 6–12 weeks’ duration once a year or two years and at the same time
of year. Strictly one-sided intense pain develops around the eye once or more daily, mostly at night.
Unable to stay in bed, the affected person agitatedly paces the room, even going outdoors, until
the pain diminishes after 30–60 minutes. The eye is red and watery, the nose runs or is blocked
on the affected side and the eyelid may droop. In the less common chronic cluster headache there
are no remissions between clusters. The episodic form can become chronic, and vice versa.
Though relatively uncommon, probably affecting no more than 3 per 1000 adults, cluster headache is clearly highly recognizable. It is unusual among primary headache disorders in affecting six
men to each woman. Most people developing cluster headache are 20–30 years of age or older;
once present, the condition may persist intermittently for 40 years or more.

Medication-overuse headache
Chronic excessive use of medication to treat headache is the cause of medication-overuse headache (15), another of the chronic daily headache syndromes.
Medication-overuse headache is oppressive, persistent and often at its worst on awakening
in the morning. A typical history begins with episodic headache — migraine or tension-type
headache. The condition is treated with an analgesic or other medication for each attack. Over
time, headache episodes become more frequent, as does medication intake. In the end-stage,
which not all patients reach, headache persists all day, ﬂuctuating with medication use repeated
every few hours. This evolution occurs over a few weeks or much, much longer. A common and

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
probably key factor at some stage in the development of medication-overuse headache is a switch
to pre-emptive use of medication, in anticipation of the headache.
All medications for the acute or symptomatic treatment of headache, in overuse, are associated with this problem, but what constitutes overuse is not clear in individual cases. Suggested
limits are the regular intake of simple analgesics on 15 or more days per month or of codeine- or
barbiturate-containing combination analgesics, ergotamine or triptans on more than 10 days a
month (1). Frequency of use is important: even when the total quantities are similar, low daily
doses carry greater risk than larger weekly doses.
In terms of prevalence, medication-overuse headache far outweighs all other secondary
headaches (16). It affects more than 1% of some populations (17 ), women more than men, and
children also. In others for whom there are no published data, in Saudi Arabia for example, clinical experience suggests this disorder is not uncommon, with a tendency to be more evident in
afﬂuent communities.

Serious secondary headaches
Some headaches signal serious underlying disorders that may demand immediate intervention
(see Box 3.3.1). Although they are relatively uncommon, such headaches worry nonspecialists
because they are in the differential diagnosis of primary headache disorders. The reality is that
intracranial lesions give rise to histories and physical signs that should bring them to mind.

Over-diagnosed headaches
Headache should not be attributed to sinus disease in the absence of other symptoms indicative
of it. Many patients with headache visit an optician, but errors of refraction are overestimated as
a cause of headache. Dental problems may cause jaw or facial pain but rarely headache.

EPIDEMIOLOGY AND BURDEN
Taken together, headache disorders are extraordinarily common. In developed countries, tensiontype headache alone affects two thirds of adult males and over 80% of females (12). Extrapolation
from ﬁgures for migraine prevalence and attack incidence suggests that 3 000 migraine attacks
occur every day for each million of the general population (6). Less well recognized is the toll of
chronic daily headache: up to one adult in 20 has headache on more days than not (17, 18). Fur-

Box 3.3.1 Serious secondary headaches (headaches to worry about)
Intracranial tumours rarely produce headache until quite
large, when raised intracranial pressure is apparent in the
history and, in all likelihood, focal neurological signs are
present. Because of the infrequency of intracranial tumours, brain scanning is not justiﬁed as a routine investigation in patients with headache (18).
Meningitis, and its associated headache, occur in an obviously ill patient. The signs of fever and neck stiffness, later
accompanied by nausea and disturbed consciousness, reveal the cause.
The headache of subarachnoid haemorrhage, commonly
but not always of sudden onset, is often described as the
worst ever. Neck stiffness may take some hours to develop.
Unless there is a clear history of similar uncomplicated episodes, these characteristics demand urgent investigation.
New headache in any patient over 50 years of age should
raise the suspicion of giant cell (temporal) arteritis.
Headache can be severe. The patient, who does not feel
entirely well, may complain of marked scalp tenderness.
Jaw claudication is highly suggestive.

Primary angle-closure glaucoma, rare before middle
age, may present dramatically with acute ocular hypertension, a painful red eye with the pupil mid-dilated and ﬁxed,
and, essentially, impaired vision. In other cases headache
or eye pain may be episodic and mild.
Idiopathic intracranial hypertension is a rare cause of
headache not readily diagnosed on the history alone. Papilloedema indicates the diagnosis in adults, but is not seen
invariably in children with the condition.
More commonly encountered in the tropics are the acute
infections, viral encephalitis, malaria and dengue haemorrhagic fever, all of which can present with sudden severe headache with or without a neurological deﬁcit. These
infections need to be recognized wherever they are likely
to occur.
Other disorders seen more in the tropics that may present with subacute or chronic headache are tuberculosis,
neurocysticercosis, neurosarcoidosis and HIV-related
infections. These are often diagnosed only on imaging or
by speciﬁc laboratory tests.

neurological disorders: a public health approach
thermore, several (though not all) follow-up studies in developed countries suggest that headache
prevalence and burden are increasing (19).
No signiﬁcant mortality is associated with headache disorders, which is one reason why they
are so poorly acknowledged. Nevertheless, among the recognizable burdens imposed on people
affected by headache disorders are pain and personal suffering, which may be substantial, impaired quality of life and ﬁnancial cost. Above all, headache disorders are disabling: worldwide,
WHO ranks migraine alone at 19th among all causes of years of life lost to disability (YLDs) (20).
Collectively, all headache disorders probably account for double this burden (3), which would put
them among the top ten causes of disability. Repeated headache attacks, and often the constant
fear of the next, damage family life, social life and employment (21). For example, social activity and work capacity are reduced in almost all people with migraine and in 60% of those with
tension-type headache. Headache often results in the cancellation of social activities while, at
work, people who suffer frequent attacks are likely to be seen as unreliable — which they may
be — or unable to cope. This can reduce the likelihood of promotion and undermine career and
ﬁnancial prospects.
While people actually affected by headache disorders bear much of their burden, they do not
carry it all: employers, fellow workers, family and friends may be required to take on work and
duties abandoned by headache sufferers. Because headache disorders are most troublesome in
the productive years (late teens to 60 years of age), estimates of their ﬁnancial cost to society
are massive — principally from lost working hours and reduced productivity because of impaired
working effectiveness (22). In the United Kingdom, for example, some 25 million working or school
days are lost every year because of migraine alone (6). Tension-type headache, less disabling
but more common, and chronic daily headache, less common but more disabling, together cause
losses that are almost certainly of similar magnitude.
Therefore, while headache rarely signals serious underlying illness, its public health importance
lies in its causal association with these personal and societal burdens of pain, disability, damaged
quality of life and ﬁnancial cost. Not surprisingly, headache is high among causes of consulting
both general practitioners and neurologists (23, 24). One in six patients aged 16–65 years in a
large general practice in the United Kingdom consulted at least once because of headache over
an observed period of ﬁve years, and almost 10% of them were referred to secondary care (25). A
survey of neurologists found that up to a third of all their patients consulted because of headache
— more than for any other single complaint (26).
Far less is known about the public health aspects of headache disorders in developing and
resource-poor countries. Indirect ﬁnancial costs to society may not be so dominant where labour
costs are lower but the consequences to individuals of being unable to work or to care for children
may be severe. There is no reason to believe that the burden of headache in its personal elements
weighs any less heavily where resources are limited, or where other diseases are also prevalent.

BARRIERS TO CARE
Headache ought to be a public health concern, yet there is good evidence that very large numbers
of people troubled, even disabled, by headache do not receive effective health care (2). For example, in representative samples of the general populations of the United States and the United
Kingdom, only half the people identiﬁed with migraine had seen a doctor for headache-related
reasons in the last 12 months and only two thirds had been correctly diagnosed (27 ). Most were
solely reliant on over-the-counter medications, without access to prescription drugs. In a separate
general-population questionnaire survey in the United Kingdom, two thirds of respondents with
migraine were searching for better treatment than their current medication (28). In Japan, awareness of migraine and rates of consultation by those with migraine are noticeably lower (29). Over

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
80% of Danish tension-type headache sufferers had never consulted a doctor for headache (30).
It is highly unlikely that people with headache fare any better in developing countries.
The barriers responsible for this lack of care doubtless vary throughout the world, but they may
be classiﬁed as clinical, social, or political and economic.

Clinical barriers
Lack of knowledge among health-care providers is the principal clinical barrier to effective headache management. This problem begins in medical schools where there is limited teaching on the
subject, a consequence of the low priority accorded to it. It is likely to be even more pronounced
in countries with fewer resources and, as a result, more limited access generally to doctors and
effective treatments.

Social barriers
Poor awareness of headache extends similarly to the general public. Headache disorders are not
perceived by the public as serious since they are mostly episodic, do not cause death and are not
contagious. In fact, headaches are often trivialized as “normal”, a minor annoyance or an excuse to
avoid responsibility. These important social barriers inhibit people who might otherwise seek help
from doctors, despite what may be high levels of pain and disability. Surprisingly, poor awareness
of headache disorders exists among people who are directly affected by them. A Japanese study
found, for example, that many patients were unaware that their headaches were migraine, or that
this was a speciﬁc illness requiring medical care (31). The low consultation rates in developed
countries may indicate that many headache sufferers are unaware that effective treatments exist.
Again, the situation is unlikely to be better where resources are more limited.

Political and economic barriers
Many governments, seeking to constrain health-care costs, do not acknowledge the substantial
burden of headache on society. They fail to recognize that the direct costs of treating headache are
small in comparison with the huge indirect cost savings that might be made (for example by reducing lost working days) if resources were allocated to treat headache disorders appropriately.

MANAGEMENT AND PREVENTION
Successful management of headache disorders follows ﬁve essential steps:
■ the sufferer must seek medical treatment;
■ a correct diagnosis should be made;
■ the treatment offered must be appropriate to the diagnosis;
■ the treatment should be taken as directed;
■ the patient should be followed up to assess the outcome of treatment, which should be changed
if necessary.
Therefore the key to successful health care for headache is education (31), which ﬁrst should
create awareness that headache disorders are a medical problem requiring treatment. Education
of health-care providers should encompass both the elements of good management (see Box
3.3.2) and the avoidance of mismanagement.

Diagnosis
Committing sufﬁcient time to taking a systematic history of a patient presenting with headache
is the key to getting the diagnosis right. The history-taking must highlight or elicit description of
the characteristic features of the important headache disorders described above. The correct
diagnosis is not always evident initially, especially when more than one headache disorder is
present, but the history should awaken suspicion of the important secondary headaches. Once it
is established that there is no serious secondary headache, a diary kept for a few weeks to record

neurological disorders: a public health approach
the pattern of attacks, symptoms and medication use will usually clarify the diagnosis. Physical
examination rarely reveals unexpected signs after an adequately taken history, but should include
blood pressure measurement and a brief but comprehensive neurological examination including
the optic fundi; more is not required unless the history is suggestive. Examination of the head and
neck may ﬁnd muscle tenderness, limited range of movement or crepitation, which suggest a need
for physical forms of treatment but do not necessarily elucidate headache causation.
Investigations, including neuroimaging, rarely contribute to the diagnosis of headache when
the history and examination have not suggested an underlying cause.

Realistic objectives
There are few patients troubled by headache whose lives cannot be improved by the right medical
intervention with the objective of minimizing impairment of life and lifestyle (32). Cure is rarely
a realistic aim in primary headache disorders, but people disabled by headache should not have
unduly low expectations of what is achievable through optimum management.
Medication-overuse headache and other secondary headaches are, at least in theory, resolved
through treatment of the underlying cause.

Predisposing and trigger factors
Migraine, in particular, is said to be subject to certain physiological and external environmental
factors. While predisposing factors increase susceptibility to attacks, trigger factors may initiate
them. The two may combine. Attempts to control migraine by managing either are often disappointing. A few predisposing factors (stress, depression, anxiety, menopause, and head or neck
trauma) are well recognized but not always avoidable or treatable. Trigger factors are important
and their inﬂuence is real in some patients, but generally less so than is commonly supposed.
Dietary triggers are rarely the cause of attacks: lack of food is a more prominent trigger. Many
attacks have no obvious trigger and, again, those that are identiﬁed are not always avoidable.
Diaries may be useful in detecting triggers but the process is complicated as triggers appear to
be cumulative, jointly overﬂowing the “threshold” above which attacks are initiated. Too much
effort in seeking triggers causes introspection and can be counter-productive. Enforced lifestyle
change to avoid triggers can itself adversely affect quality of life.
In tension-type headache, stress may be obvious and likely to be etiologically implicated.
Musculoskeletal involvement may be evident in the history or on examination. Sometimes, neither
of these factors is apparent. An interesting variation in the Muslim world is the marked rise,
observed in people ordinarily susceptible to headache, in tension-type headache incidence on the
ﬁrst day of fasting (33).

Box 3.3.2 Seven elements of good headache management
1

Evident interest and investment of time to inform, explain, reassure and educate

Correct and timely diagnosis

Agreed high but realistic objectives

Identiﬁcation of predisposing and/or trigger factors and their avoidance through appropriate lifestyle
modiﬁcations

Intervention (optimal management of most primary headaches combines adequate but not excessive use of effective and cost-effective pharmaceutical remedies with non-pharmacological approaches; secondary headaches
generally require treatment of the underlying cause)

Follow-up to ensure optimum treatment has been established

Referral to specialist care when these measures fail

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
Cluster headache is usually but not always a disease of smokers, many of them heavy consumers of tobacco. However, patients with cluster headache who still smoke cannot be promised that
giving up will end or even improve their headaches. Alcohol potently triggers cluster headache
and most patients have learnt to avoid it during cluster periods.

THERAPEUTIC INTERVENTIONS
The purpose of pharmacotherapy of primary headache, once non-drug measures have been fully
exploited, is to control symptoms so that the impact of the disorder on each individual patient’s life
and lifestyle is minimized. This requires a therapeutic plan tailored for each patient, and patients with
two or more coexisting headache disorders are likely to require separate plans for each disorder.

Migraine
Most people with migraine require drugs for the acute attack. These may be symptomatic or speciﬁc. The desirable goal of acute therapy with drugs currently available — resolution of symptoms
and full return of function within two hours — is not attainable by all. When symptom control
with best acute therapy is inadequate, it can be supplemented with prophylactic medication (34),
usually for 4–6 months, aiming to reduce the number of attacks.
General population surveys indicate that large numbers of people with migraine manage
themselves, with no more than symptomatic over-the-counter remedies (27 ). For many this appears adequate. Simple oral analgesia — acetylsalicylic acid or ibuprofen — is used to best
advantage in soluble formulations taken early because gastric stasis develops as the migraine
attack progresses and this impedes absorption. A prokinetic antiemetic — metoclopramide or
domperidone — enhances the analgesic effect by promoting gastric emptying and is most suitable for nausea and vomiting. When oral symptomatic therapy fails, it is logical to bypass the gut
using a non-steroidal anti-inﬂammatory drug such as diclofenac, with or without domperidone,
given as rectal suppositories (35).
Speciﬁc drugs — triptans and, in certain circumstances, ergotamine tartrate — should not
be withheld from those who need them. There are speciﬁc contraindications to these drugs,
particularly coronary disease (and multiple risk factors thereof) and uncontrolled hypertension,
but triptans as a class show higher efﬁcacy rates than symptomatic treatments. Population-based
needs assessments suggest many more people with migraine should receive triptans than currently do. Cost has much to do with this, and this constraint must be more evident in resourcepoor countries where triptans are unlikely to be available. Denial of the best treatment available
is difﬁcult to justify for patients generally, however, and therefore for individuals: unnecessary
pain and disability are the result. In addition, increasingly it is being demonstrated in developed
countries that under-treatment of migraine is not cost effective: the time lost by sufferers and
their carers is expensive, as are repeated consultations in the search for better therapy. On this
basis some specialists believe that disability assessment should be the means to select patients
to receive triptans. Where disability is the basis of choice, however, it should be noted that over
80% of people with migraine report disability because of it (36).
Which triptan to choose is an individual matter because different patients respond differently
to them: one may work where another does not. In countries where more than one is available,
patients may reasonably try each in turn to discover which suits them best. Relapse (return of
headache within 6–48 hours) in 20–50% of patients who have initially responded is a troublesome
limitation of triptans. A second dose is usually effective for relapse but, occasionally in some patients and often in a few, induces further relapse. This problem may underlie medication-overuse
headache attributable to triptan overuse (37 ).
Drugs in a range of pharmacological classes have limited but often useful prophylactic efﬁcacy
against migraine through mechanisms that are presumably not identical but are unclear. The choice

neurological disorders: a public health approach
of agent is guided by comorbidities and contraindications. Because poor compliance is a major
factor impairing effectiveness, drugs given once daily are preferable, all else being equal. Betablockers without partial agonism (such as atenolol, metoprolol, and propranolol in a long-acting
formulation) are likely to be ﬁrst-line prophylactics in many countries. Cardioselectivity and hydrophilicity do not affect efﬁcacy but both improve the side-effect proﬁle, so atenolol may be preferred.
Certain antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), notably divalproex or sodium valproate and topiramate, have
good evidence of efﬁcacy. Amitriptyline is useful especially when migraine and tension-type headache occur together. Relatively low doses are often sufﬁcient. Among calcium channel blockers,
only ﬂunarizine has efﬁcacy. Methysergide, a synthetic ergot alkaloid, is effective but recommended
for use only under specialist supervision, and not for more than six months continuously.
In some women, hormonal inﬂuences are important in driving attack frequency, and a special
approach may be taken to menstruation-related migraine (38).

Tension-type headache
Reassurance and over-the-counter analgesics (acetylsalicylic acid or ibuprofen rather than
paracetamol) (39) are sufﬁcient for infrequent episodic tension-type headache. Most people with
this condition manage themselves: episodic tension-type headache is self-limiting and, though it
may be temporarily disabling, it rarely raises anxieties. If medication usage is on fewer than two
days per week there is little risk of escalating consumption.
People consult doctors because of episodic tension-type headache when it is becoming frequent and, in all likelihood, is no longer responding to painkillers. Long-term remission is then the
objective of management, as it is for chronic tension-type headache. Symptomatic medication is
contraindicated for tension-type headache occurring on more than two days per week: where it is
already being taken at high frequency a diagnosis of chronic tension-type headache rather than
medication-overuse headache cannot be made with conﬁdence. Whichever condition is present
(and it can be both), frequently taken symptomatic medication must be withdrawn as the ﬁrst step
(see below).
Physiotherapy is the treatment of choice for musculoskeletal symptoms accompanying frequent episodic or chronic tension-type headache. In stress-related illness, lifestyle changes to
reduce stress, and relaxation and/or cognitive therapy to develop stress-coping strategies, are
the treatment mainstays. Prophylactic medication has a limited role. Amitriptyline is ﬁrst-line
in most cases, withdrawn after improvement has been maintained for 4–6 months. Long-term
remission is not always achievable, especially in long-standing chronic tension-type headache. A
pain management clinic may be the ﬁnal option.

Cluster headache
Because of its relative rarity, cluster headache has a tendency to be misdiagnosed, sometimes
for years. It is the one primary headache that may not be best managed in primary care, but the
primary care physician has an important role not only in recognizing it at once but also in discouraging inappropriate “treatments” (tooth extraction is not infrequent).

Medication-overuse headache
Prevention is the ideal management of medication-overuse headache, which means avoidance of
acute medication for headache on more than 2–3 days per week on a regular basis. Education is
the key factor: many patients with medication-overuse headache are unaware of it as a medical
condition (40). Once this disorder has developed, early intervention is important since the longterm prognosis depends on the duration of medication overuse (41).
Treatment is withdrawal of the suspected medication(s). Although this will lead initially to
worsening headache and sometimes nausea, vomiting and sleep disturbances, with forewarning
and explanation it is probably most successful when done abruptly (42).

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
Serious secondary headaches
All the serious secondary headaches described above require specialist referral. In most cases,
this should be immediate or urgent.

FOLLOW-UP AND REFERRAL
Neither the ﬁrst diagnosis, nor the ﬁrst proposed treatment plan, may be correct. Follow-up
is essential, at intervals balanced on the one hand to allow time for treatment interventions to
achieve observable effect and on the other to meet patients’ natural desires for a quick solution
to a painful and often debilitating problem.
For migraine and episodic tension-type headache, attack frequency is likely to be the principal
determinant. For chronic tension-type headache, follow-up provides the psychological support
that is often needed while recovery is slow.
In medication-overuse headache, early review is essential once withdrawal from medication
has begun, in order to check that it is being achieved: nothing is less helpful than discovering, three
months later, that the patient ran into difﬁculties and gave up the attempt. During later follow-up,
the underlying primary headache condition is likely to re-emerge and require re-evaluation and a
new therapeutic plan. Most patients with medication-overuse headache require extended support:
the relapse rate is around 40% within ﬁve years (41).
Urgent referral for specialist management is recommended at each onset of cluster headache.
Weekly review is unlikely to be too frequent and allows dosage incrementation of potentially toxic
drugs to be as rapid as possible. Patients commencing lithium therapy, or changing their dose,
need levels checked within one week.
In all other cases, specialist referral is appropriate when the diagnosis remains (or becomes)
unclear or these standard management options fail.

HEALTH-CARE POLICY
The volume of headache referrals to neurologists seen in developed countries is difﬁcult to justify,
and should not be repeated in countries where headache-related health services are being developed. The common headache disorders require no special investigation and they are diagnosed
and managed with skills that should be generally available to physicians. Management of headache
disorders therefore belongs in primary care for all but a very small minority of patients. Models of
health care vary but, in most countries, primary care has an acknowledged and important role.
It is a role founded on recognition that decisions in primary care take account of patient-related
factors — family medical history and patients’ individual expectations and values — of which the
continuity and long-term relationships of primary care generate awareness (43) while promoting
trust and satisfaction among patients (44).
Even in primary care, however, the needs of the headache patient are not met in the time usually allocated to a physician consultation in many health systems. Nurses and pharmacists can
complement the delivery of health care.
■ The evident burden of headache disorders on individuals and on society is sufﬁcient to justify
a strategic change in the approach to headache management (31, 45). In order to implement
beneﬁcial change, public health policy in all countries must embrace the following elements.
■ The prevalence of the common headache disorders in each region of the world needs to be
known, through further epidemiological research where necessary, in order to gain a complete
picture of headache disorders and their clinical, social and economic implications locally.
■ This information, as it is accumulated, should be employed to combat stigma and increase
public awareness of headache as a real and substantial health problem.

neurological disorders: a public health approach
■ Education, as the key to effective headache management, needs improving at all levels. In
the case of the medical profession, this should begin in medical schools by giving headache
disorders a place in the undergraduate curriculum that matches their clinical importance as
one of the most common causes of consultation. Nowhere is this the case at present.
■ The health economics of headache disorders and their effective treatment generally support
investment of health-care resources in headache management programmes, set up in collaboration with key stakeholders to create services appropriate to local systems and local needs.
Their outcomes should be evaluated in terms of measurable reductions in population burden
attributable to headache disorders.

PARTNERSHIPS WITHIN AND BEYOND THE HEALTH SYSTEM
The elements listed above form the framework of WHO’s Global Campaign to Reduce the Burden
of Headache Worldwide (45). Launched in March 2004, this campaign — known as “Lifting
the Burden” — is a formal partnership between WHO and the international nongovernmental
organizations for headache: the lay World Headache Alliance and the professional International
Headache Society and European Headache Federation. The objectives of Lifting the Burden are,
region by region throughout the world, to:
■ measure the burden of headache disorders;
■ raise awareness of headache disorders among local health policy-makers;
■ work with people and agencies locally to plan locally appropriate health-care solutions;
■ put these solutions in place, providing clinical management supports;
■ test them, and modify and re-test if necessary, for optimal beneﬁcial change.
Aside from this partnership, lay and professional groups in countries around the world play important, though often less formal, roles in education and in sharing information and experience.

RESEARCH
Five research fronts are currently important in the ﬁeld of headache medicine.
■ Basic research concentrates on elucidating disease mechanisms, particularly those that respond to environmental inﬂuences and those with a genetic basis. The ﬁndings will guide the
development of new treatments.
■ Pharmaceutical research and clinical trials support the translation of new discoveries into
better treatments for people with headache disorders.
■ Epidemiological research will establish the scope and scale of headache-related burden of illness around the world. The results will guide appropriate allocation of health-care resources by
policy-makers. Epidemiological studies may also identify preventable risk factors for headache
disorders.
■ Health services research, backed by health economics studies, may show that the reallocation
of resources towards improving health-care delivery offers greater beneﬁts for people with
headache disorders — by more effectively using treatments already available — than the
search for new pharmacological interventions. This is particularly so given the prevalence of
medication misuse (both underuse and overuse). Community intervention studies may lead to
better prevention of headache disorders.
■ Outcomes research is needed to guide optimal health care and its delivery through organized
health services.
The importance of patient and public involvement in deﬁning research objectives should be
emphasized: lay people have experience and skills that complement those of researchers.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1

Headache disorders are common and ubiquitous. They have a neurological basis,
but headache rarely signals serious underlying illness. The huge public health
importance of headache disorders arises from their causal association with
personal and societal burdens of pain, disability, damaged quality of life and
ﬁnancial cost.

Headache disorders have many types and subtypes, but a very small number of
them impose almost all of these burdens. They are diagnosed clinically, requiring
no special investigations in most of the cases.

Although headache disorders can be treated effectively, globally they are not,
because health-care systems fail to make treatment available.

Management of headache disorders everywhere in the world has low priority,
which abjectly fails to match headache-related health-care provision and delivery
to people’s needs.

Effective management of headache disorders can be provided in primary care for
all but a very small minority of patients. Nurses and pharmacists can complement
the delivery of health care by primary care physicians.

Good management, at whatever level, requires education of doctors and of people
affected by headache disorders. Mismanagement, and overuse of medications to
treat acute headache, are major risk factors for disease aggravation.

Every government should acknowledge the humanitarian arguments for effective
health care for headache disorders.

Every government should be aware of the ﬁnancial cost to the country of
headache disorders in its population. Cost-of-illness studies will create
awareness of the potential savings that better health care for headache disorders
may achieve through mitigated productivity losses.

Partnerships between health policy-makers, health-care providers and people
affected by headache disorders and their advocacy groups may be the best
vehicle for determining, and bringing about, the changes that people with
headache need.

neurological disorders: a public health approach

REFERENCES
1. American Association for the Study of Headache and International Headache Society. Consensus statement
on improving migraine management. Headache, 1998, 38:736.
2. Headache Classiﬁcation Subcommittee of the International Headache Society. The international
classiﬁcation of headache disorders, 2nd ed. Cephalalgia, 2004, 24(Suppl. 1):1–160.
3. Stovner LJ et al. The global burden of headache: a documentation of headache prevalence and disability
worldwide. Cephalalgia (accepted for publication).
4. Ferrari MD. Migraine. Lancet, 1998, 351:1043–1051.
5. Scher AI, Stewart WF, Lipton RB. Migraine and headache: a meta-analytic approach. In: Crombie IK, ed.
Epidemiology of pain. Seattle, WA, IASP Press, 1999:159–170.
6. Steiner TJ et al. The prevalence and disability burden of adult migraine in England and their relationships to
age, gender and ethnicity. Cephalalgia, 2003, 23:519–527.
7. Miranda H et al. Prevalence of headache in Puerto Rico. Headache, 2003, 43:774–778.
8. Morillo LE et al. Prevalence of migraine in Latin America. Headache, 2005, 45:106–117.
9. Celik Y et al. Migraine prevalence and some related factors in Turkey. Headache, 2005, 45:32–36.
10. Ravishankar K. Barriers to headache care in India and efforts to improve the situation. Lancet Neurology,
2004, 3:564–567.
11. Kellgren JH. Observations on referred pain arising from muscle. Clinical Science, 1938,
3:175–190.
12. Rasmussen BK. Epidemiology of headache. Cephalalgia, 1995, 15:45–68.
13. Takeshima T et al. Population-based door-to-door survey of migraine in Japan: the Daisen study. Headache,
2004, 44:8–19.
14. Abduljabbar M et al. Prevalence of primary headache syndrome in adults in the Qassim region of Saudi
Arabia. Headache, 1996, 36:385–388.
15. Diener H-C et al. Analgesic-induced chronic headache: long-term results of withdrawal therapy. Journal of
Neurology, 1989, 236:9–14.
16. Srikiatkhachorn A, Phanthurachinda K. Prevalence and clinical features of chronic daily headache in a
headache clinic. Headache, 1997, 37:277–280.
17. Castillo J et al. Epidemiology of chronic daily headache in the general population. Headache, 1999,
39:190–196.
18. Frishberg BM et al. Evidence-based guidelines in the primary care setting: neuroimaging in patients with
nonacute headache. Saint Paul, MN, American Academy of Neurology, 2001
(http://www.aan.com/professionals/practice/pdfs/gl0088.pdf).
19. Scher AI et al. Prevalence of frequent headache in a population sample. Headache, 1998, 38:497–506.
20. Stovner LJ, Hagen K. Prevalence, burden and cost of headache disorders. Current Opinion in Neurology,
2006, 19:281–285.
21. The world health report 2001 – Mental health: new understanding, new hope. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2001:22–24.
22. Lipton RB et al. The family impact of migraine: population-based studies in the US and UK. Cephalalgia,
2003, 23:429–440.
23. Schwartz BS, Stewart WF, Lipton RB. Lost workdays and decreased work effectiveness associated with
headache in the workplace. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 1997, 39:320–327.
24. Hopkins A, Menken M, De Friese GA. A record of patient encounters in neurological practice in the United
Kingdom. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 1989, 52:436–438.
25. Wiles CM, Lindsay M. General practice referrals to a department of neurology. Journal of the Royal College of
Physicians, 1996, 30:426–431.
26. Laughey WF et al. Headache consultation and referral patterns in one UK general practice. Cephalalgia,
1999, 19:328–329.
27. Hopkins A. Neurological services and the neurological health of the population in the United Kingdom.
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 1997, 63(Suppl. 1):S53–S59.
28. Lipton RB et al. Patterns of health care utilization for migraine in England and in the United States.
Neurology, 2003, 60:441–448.
29. Dowson A, Jagger S. The UK Migraine Patient Survey: quality of life and treatment. Current Medical Research
and Opinion, 1999, 15:241–253.
30. Rasmussen BK, Jensen R, Olesen J. Impact of headache on sickness absence and utilisation of medical
services: a Danish population study. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 1992, 46:443–446.
31. Headache disorders and public health: education and management implications. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2000.
32. Steiner TJ, Fontebasso M. Headache. BMJ, 2002, 325:881–886.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
33. Awada A, al Jumah M. The ﬁrst-of-Ramadan headache. Headache, 1999, 39:490–493.
34. Ramadan NM, Schultz LL, Gilkey SJ. Migraine prophylactic drugs: proof of efﬁcacy, utilization and cost.
Cephalalgia, 1997, 17:73–80.
35. Guidelines for all doctors in the diagnosis and management of migraine and tension-type headache. London,
British Association for the Study of Headache, 2004 (http://www.bash.org.uk).
36. Lipton RB et al. Prevalence and burden of migraine in the United States: data from the American Migraine
Study II. Headache, 2001, 41:646–657.
37. Limmroth V et al. Headache after frequent use of serotonin agonists zolmitriptan and naratriptan. Lancet,
1999, 353:378.
38. MacGregor EA. Menstruation, sex hormones and headache. Neurology Clinics, 1997, 15:125–141.
39. Steiner TJ, Lange R, Voelker M. Aspirin in episodic tension-type headache: placebo-controlled dose-ranging
comparison with paracetamol. Cephalalgia, 2003, 23:59–66.
40. Duarte RA, Thornton DR. Short-acting analgesics may aggravate chronic headache pain. American Family
Physician, 1995, 51: 203.
41. Schnider P et al. Long-term outcome of patients with headache and drug abuse after inpatient withdrawal:
ﬁve-year follow-up. Cephalalgia, 1996, 16:481–485.
42. Hering R, Steiner TJ. Abrupt outpatient withdrawal of medication in analgesic-abusing migraineurs. Lancet,
1991, 337:1442–1443.
43. Van Weel C. Primary care: political favourite or scientiﬁc discipline? Lancet, 1996, 348:1431–1432.
44. Mainous AG et al. Continuity of care and trust in one’s physician: evidence from primary care in the United
States and the United Kingdom. Family Medicine, 2001, 33:22–27.
45. Steiner TJ. Lifting the burden: the global campaign against headache. Lancet Neurology, 2004, 3:204–205.

RECOMMENDED READING
■ American Association for the Study of Headache and International Headache Society. Consensus statement
on improving migraine management. Headache, 1998, 38: 736.
■ Frishberg BM et al. Evidence-based guidelines in the primary care setting: neuroimaging in patients with
nonacute headache. Saint Paul, MN, American Academy of Neurology, 2001
(http://www.aan.com/professionals/practice/pdfs/gl0088.pdf).
■ Headache Classiﬁcation Subcommittee of the International Headache Society. The international classiﬁcation of headache disorders, 2nd ed. Cephalalgia, 2004, 24(Suppl. 1):1–160.
■ Lipton RB et al. The family impact of migraine: population-based studies in the US and UK. Cephalalgia,
2003, 23:429–440.
■ Olesen J et al., eds. The headaches, 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA, Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, 2006.
■ Schwartz BS, Stewart WF, Lipton RB. Lost workdays and decreased work effectiveness associated with
headache in the workplace. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 1997, 39:320–327.
■ Steiner TJ. Lifting the burden: the global campaign against headache. Lancet Neurology, 2004, 3:204–205.
■ Steiner TJ, Fontebasso M. Headache. BMJ, 2002, 325:881–886.
■ Steiner TJ et al. The prevalence and disability burden of adult migraine in England and their relationships to
age, gender and ethnicity. Cephalalgia, 2003, 23:519–527.
■ Guidelines for all doctors in the diagnosis and management of migraine and tension-type headache. London,
British Association for the Study of Headache, 2004 (http://www.bash.org.uk).
■ Headache disorders and public health: education and management implications. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2000.
■ The world health report 2001 – Mental health: new understanding, new hope. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2001:22–24.

neurological disorders: a public health approach

3.4 Multiple sclerosis
85 Diagnosis and classiﬁcation
86 Course and outcome
87 Epidemiology and burden
89 Impact

Multiple sclerosis affects around 2.5 million people worldwide:
it is one of the most common neurological disorders and cause
92 Research
of disability of young adults, especially in Europe and North
93 Training
America. There is a lack of epidemiological studies from Asia
where the prevalence is reported to be low, though, with the
93 Conclusions and recommendations
availability of more neurologists and magnetic resonance imaging, a larger number of patients are being diagnosed. Although some people experience little
disability during their lifetime, up to 60% are no longer fully ambulatory 20 years after onset,
with signiﬁcant implications for their quality of life and the ﬁnancial cost to society.
90 Prevention and treatment

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an inﬂammatory demyelinating condition of the central nervous system
(CNS) that is generally considered to be autoimmune in nature. In people with MS, the immune
trigger is unknown, but the targets are myelinated CNS tracts. In regions of inﬂammation, breakdown of the blood–brain barrier occurs and destruction of myelin ensues, with axonal damage,
gliosis and the formation of sclerotic plaques.
Plaques (MS lesions) may form in the CNS white matter in any location (and also in grey matter); thus, clinical presentations may be diverse. Continuing lesion formation in MS often leads to
physical disability and, not infrequently, to cognitive decline.

DIAGNOSIS AND CLASSIFICATION
As the above deﬁnition suggests, MS can lead to a wide variety of symptoms, affecting different
parts of the body and with varying severity. Diagnosis of MS has always been clinically based,
but many tests — notably magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and more speciﬁc diagnostic criteria — are now available to assist the clinician. MRI, the examination of the cerebrospinal ﬂuid
(CSF) and visual evoked potentials are helpful in conﬁrming the clinical suspicion of MS. In Asia,
where the prevalence is reported to be low (1–5 per 100 000), the clinical presentation may be
similar to that seen in Europe and North America, with manifestations suggesting cerebral, brainstem, cerebellar, optic nerve and spinal cord involvement (western type of MS) or may present
with more restricted recurrent optic nerve and spinal cord involvement (opticospinal form or the
Asian variant). The reason for this variation is not known.
Typically, the clinician takes a detailed neurological history and carries out a neurological examination to assess how the nervous system has been affected. To establish the diagnosis of MS,
a neurologist must demonstrate that involvement of the CNS is disseminated in time and space
and exclude any other diagnostic possibility. Deﬁned criteria are used to conclude whether the
features fulﬁl the clinical diagnosis and allow for more precision, thus lessening the likelihood of
an incorrect diagnosis. Currently, the most widely accepted guidelines to the diagnosis of MS are
the “McDonald criteria” (1). These criteria incorporate MRI to provide evidence of dissemination in

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
time and space and enable the clinician to make an early diagnosis of MS. They also facilitate the
diagnosis of MS after a ﬁrst attack (a clinically isolated syndrome) and in disease with insidious
progression (the primary progressive form of MS), see below.
While these criteria have proved to be useful in a typical adult Caucasian population of western
European ethnic origin, their validity remains to be proven in other regions such as Asia where
some studies still use Poser’s criteria. As the experience with MRI in MS builds up, it is expected
that the McDonald criteria with minor modiﬁcations will become applicable worldwide. It is always
essential that other conditions mimicking MS (such as vascular disorders, Sjogren’s disease and
sarcoid) are excluded.

COURSE AND OUTCOME
Just as the symptoms of MS are varied, so too is the course of the disease. Although some people
with MS experience little disability during their lifetime, up to 60% are no longer fully ambulatory
20 years after onset. In rare cases MS is so malignantly progressive it is terminal, but most people
with MS have a normal or near-normal life expectancy.
Typical patterns of progression, illustrated in Figure 3.4.1, are explained below.
■ Relapsing/remitting MS. Approximately 80% of patients will initially present this form of
MS, in which there are unpredictable attacks (relapses) during which new symptoms appear
or existing symptoms become more severe. The relapses can last for varying periods (days
or months) and there is partial or total recovery (remission). The disease may appear to be
clinically inactive for months or years, though MRI studies show that asymptomatic inﬂammatory activity is usually more frequent. Over time, however, symptoms may become more
severe with less complete recovery of function after each attack, possibly because of gliosis
and axonal loss in repeatedly affected plaques. People with MS may then enter a progressive
phase, characterized by a step-like downhill course.

Disability

Figure 3.4.1 Patterns of progression of multiple sclerosis

Disability
Time

Relapsing/remitting MS (2 typical courses)

Time

Secondary progressive MS (2 typical courses)

Disability

Time
Source (2).

Primary progressive MS (2 typical courses)

neurological disorders: a public health approach
■ Secondary progressive MS is characterized by progression that is not relapse related. Approximately 50% of patients with relapsing/remitting MS will develop secondary progressive MS
within 10 years, and 80% will have developed this form of MS within 20 years of disease onset.
■ Primary progressive MS, which affects around 10–15% of all MS patients, is characterized by
a lack of distinct attacks, but with slow onset and then steadily worsening symptoms. There is an
accumulation of deﬁcits and disability which may level off at some point or continue over years.
■ Benign MS. A diagnosis of benign MS is retrospective, when the accumulated disability from
relapsing/remitting MS is either mild or non-existent after a long period (usually considered
to be 15–20 years). Given that follow-up studies show that most patients of this type will
eventually enter a disabling secondary progressive phase, the term “benign” is somewhat
misleading.

Prognostic factor
Although MS is an unpredictable condition, some studies have suggested that onset with sensory
symptoms or optic neuritis may have a better outlook. It has also been shown that multisite
presentations and poor recovery from an initial episode may indicate a worse outcome. Studies
that have observed a difference by sex usually indicate that males experience a more severe
course than females.

EPIDEMIOLOGY AND BURDEN
The incidence and prevalence of MS have been studied extensively (3). Some features of the
disease are generally accepted and are discussed further in this section.
■ The frequency of MS varies by geographical region throughout the world, apparently increasing
with distance from the equator in both hemispheres.
■ The disease is more common among women than men.
■ Peak onset is at around 30 years of age.
■ The disease is less common among non-white individuals than whites.

Etiology and risk factors
The distributions of MS by geography, sex, age, and race or ethnicity have all been explored for
clues to etiology. Most early research focused on the possible role of an environmental factor that
varied with latitude. To date no such risk factor for the disease has been unequivocally identiﬁed,
though researchers continue to believe that one exists. There is substantial evidence of a genetic
predisposition to the disease based on familial aggregation, and some debate over whether genetics or exposure to an environmental trigger primarily accounts for its geographical distribution.
Relatively little is known about factors that predict the course of MS.
The worldwide distribution of MS can be only an indirect reﬂection of its cause, implicating
some environmental factor that varies with latitude, and can be interpreted in at least three different ways in the search for clues to a speciﬁc etiology. First, an environmental risk factor may be
more common in temperate than tropical climates. Second, such a factor may be more common
in tropical climates, where it is acquired at an earlier age and consequently has less impact.
Third, this factor may be equally common in all regions, but the chance of its acquisition or of the
manifestation of symptoms is either increased by some enhancing factor present in temperate
climates or reduced by a protective factor present in tropical areas.
Among those factors that have been most closely scrutinized are:
■ infections, including a number of viral infections such as measles and Epstein–Barr virus;
■ climate and solar conditions;
■ living conditions;
■ diet and trace elements.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
It is now generally accepted that the etiology of MS involves some interplay of genetic and
environmental factors. Evidence of racial or ethnic resistance, the increased risk among MS family
members, and elevated monozygotic twin concordance rate all favour a genetic contribution to
acquisition of the disease. The studies from which this evidence is derived, however, also indicate
that heredity cannot entirely explain the occurrence of MS. This is underlined by the fact that no
population-based study of monozygotic twins has found a concordance rate in excess of 30%.
Some environmental factor, such as a virus or toxin, must still play a role.

Global and regional distribution
The fact that there is an uneven geographical distribution of MS has been known since early in the
20th century. The prevalence of MS has been shown to vary with latitude, with rates broadly rising
as distance from the equator increases, in both the northern and southern hemispheres. While
there is some truth to this, it belies the complex interaction of geography, genes and environment
that larger scale epidemiological studies have uncovered.
As a recent meta-analysis of the epidemiology of MS put it “The updated distribution of MS
[in Europe], showing many exceptions to the previously described north-south gradient, requires
more explanation than simply a prevalence-latitude relationship. Prevalence data imply that racial
and ethnic differences are important in inﬂuencing the worldwide distribution of MS and that its
geography must be interpreted in terms of the probable discontinuous distribution of genetic
susceptibility alleles, which can however be modiﬁed by environment. Because the environmental
and genetic determinants of geographic gradients are by no means mutually exclusive, the race
versus place controversy is, to some extent, a useless and sterile debate” (4).
There is substantial literature on the relationship between migration and the prevalence and
incidence of MS. Studies both between and within countries invariably show that immigrants moving from high-risk to low-risk areas have a higher rate than that in their new homeland, but often
somewhat lower than that in their place of origin. (Note that if this observation were based only
on prevalence data, it might simply reﬂect the fact that sick and disabled people are less likely to
move, rather than less frequent exposure to a risk factor or more frequent exposure to a protective
factor in the new place of residence. However, data for the United States are based primarily on
incidence and document the same decline in risk as found in prevalence studies.)
There are fewer studies of immigrants from low-risk to high-risk areas, but most ﬁndings indicate that immigrants retain the same risk as in their countries of origin. This may be because they
carry some protective factor with them, but these studies frequently involve non-white immigrants
in whom the disease is known to be rare and who may be genetically resistant.
All areas at medium to high risk for MS throughout the world have predominantly white populations. In countries with both white and non-white populations, MS rates are lower among nonwhites. For example, the disease is virtually non-existent among Australian Aborigines, New
Zealand Maoris and Black people in South Africa. In the United States, incidence and prevalence
rates are twice as high among whites as among African Americans regardless of latitude. Furthermore, MS is also less frequent among North American Indians, Latin Americans, and people
of the Western Paciﬁc Region than among whites.

Childhood multiple sclerosis
While MS is predominantly an illness of young to middle-aged adults, it is also increasingly apparent that the disease can occur in children. Interest in, and knowledge of, paediatric MS has been
increasing, and as a consequence the number of children diagnosed has also risen considerably
over the last 10 years. At least 2.5–5% of all patients with MS experience their ﬁrst clinical attack
prior to their 16th birthday, though this may be an underestimate.
Typically, with paediatric MS, the sex difference is not as marked as it is with adults, the ratio
of female to male being closer to 1:1 than the 2:1 that is normally cited for adults. This suggests

neurological disorders: a public health approach
that, while the genetic implication of being female may inﬂuence MS risk, it appears to do so
much more after puberty.
Further evidence of the role that environmental factors play comes from the studies of children
of migrants. For example, the prevalence rates among the British-born children of immigrants from
India, Pakistan, and parts of Africa and the West Indies were very much higher than those recorded
for their parents and approximately equal to the expected rate for England.

IMPACT
Multiple sclerosis has a profound impact on patients’ social roles and the well-being of their
families. Varying degrees of functional decline typically accompany MS. Because the onset is
usually at about 30 years of age, the loss in productivity of people with MS can be substantial.
Such functional decline will often interfere with the opportunities for people with MS to perform
their customary roles. For example, physical disability — complicated by fatigue, depression and
possibly cognitive impairment — contributes to an unemployment rate as high as 70% among
people with MS; to replace lost earnings, they frequently collect disability beneﬁts and social
welfare. People with MS use more health-care resources than the general population (5). Together
with their family members, they may also bear a ﬁnancial burden related to home and transport
modiﬁcations and the need for additional personal services.
The socioeconomic impact of MS on the individual is well illustrated by a recent United Kingdom study (6). In this population-based survey of all known patients with MS and their relatives
in the county of Hampshire, England, about 53% of those who were employed at the time of diagnosis gave up their jobs, and the standard of living of 37% of patients and their families declined
as a direct result of the disease. The ability to continue in gainful employment or to maintain
social contacts and leisure activities correlates with the course and severity of the disease and
cognitive function. Most carers reported symptoms that clearly related to organic pathologies,
anxiety and symptoms of depression. The occurrence of these symptoms was associated with
disease severity. The professional careers of 57% of relatives were also adversely affected by
the patient’s illness.
The economic cost to society is also great (7 ). A recent economic analysis for the Australian
MS Society (Acting Positively) illustrated the impact of the disease, which is considered typical
(so far no global economic impact studies have been published). The Australian study found that
the burden of the disease is likely to grow. Prevalence is expected to grow by 6.7% in the next ﬁve
years, faster than population growth attributable to demographic ageing. The total ﬁnancial costs
of MS in 2005 are estimated at more than US$ 450 m (0.07% of GDP) and US$ 29 070 per person
with MS, or US$ 23 per Australian per year. Lost productive capacity and the replacement value
of informal community care are the two largest cost components (8). The following key economic
factors were highlighted by the Australian study.
■ Informal care for people with MS in the community represents 43% of total costs, with an
average of 12.3 hours per week of informal care required per person with MS.
■ Aids and modiﬁcations for people with physical disability were estimated to represent a further
4.6% of total ﬁnancial costs.
■ Production losses stemming from reduced work hours, temporary absences, early retirement
and premature death are responsible for around 26% of total economic costs.
■ Pharmaceuticals for people with MS, mainly beta-interferons, are estimated to represent 14%
of total costs.
■ Nursing home accommodation accounts for around 4.3% of total economic costs. Of the
estimated 730 people with MS in (high care) nursing homes 37% are under 65 years of age.
■ Other health-care costs — including hospitalizations, specialist and primary care and allied
health expenses — account for 4.4%. Research is 1.9% of health expenditure, below the aver-

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
age of 2.4%. Deadweight losses arising from taxation revenue foregone and welfare payment
transfers are estimated as US$ 10.5 million or 2.3% of total costs in 2005.
■ The burden of disease — the suffering and premature death experienced by people with
MS — is estimated to cost an additional 8968 DALYs (years of healthy life lost), with two thirds
attributable to disability and one third to premature death.
■ Last but not least, in Australia MS causes more disability and loss of life than all chronic back
pain, slipped discs, machinery accidents, rheumatic heart disease or mental retardation.

PREVENTION AND TREATMENT
Uncertainty over the cause or development of MS implies that prevention is not currently a realistic
option. Furthermore, there are no curative treatments available for MS (9). A number of diseasemodifying drugs have been developed in the past 20 years, however, which reduce the number
of attacks in the relapsing/remitting form of the disease. The extent to which eventual disease
burden and disability are limited by use of the drugs is less clear. The most widely used diseasemodifying drugs for MS are the beta-interferons (1a and 1b) and glatiramer acetate, which reduce
the frequency and perhaps the severity of relapses. Although these drugs have been introduced in
the developing regions, their high cost means many patients are unable to have access to them.
The United States National MS Society also has developed several guidelines and recommendations, mainly for medical treatment (such as changing therapy and early intervention). To date,
no medical treatments for the progressive forms of the disease exist, and results from studies
focusing on neuroprotection and repair are eagerly awaited.
Corticosteroids are the medications of choice for treating exacerbations and can be administered in the hospital or community setting (the latter is usually preferred) (10). In addition to
strategies aimed at the impact of the disease, drugs to ameliorate common MS symptoms — such
as urinary dysfunction, spasticity and neuropathic pain — are relatively well established and
widely used. European guidelines have been developed for both the use of the established disease-modifying drugs and the treatment of symptoms (11, 12).
Even though drug treatment options are relatively limited, signiﬁcant improvements in the quality of life of people with MS can be supported by improved rehabilitation approaches. For patients
with relatively moderate disability, exercise (both aerobic and non-aerobic) has been found to be
useful, as has physiotherapy. There have been few, if any, studies evaluating the rehabilitation
needs of those with more severe disability.

Neurorehabilitation
The philosophy of neurorehabilitation, which emphasizes patient education and self-management, is well suited to meet the complex and variable needs of MS (13). Neurorehabilitation aims
to improve independence and quality of life by maximizing ability and participation. It has been
deﬁned by WHO as “an active process by which those disabled by injury or disease achieve a
full recovery or, if a full recovery is not possible, realize their optimal physical, mental and social
potential and are integrated into their most appropriate environment”. Together with Rehabilitation
in Multiple Sclerosis, the European Multiple Sclerosis Platform (EMSP) developed useful guidance
on this issue in their recommendations on MS rehabilitation services (14), one of the reference
guidelines for their European Code of Good Practice in MS.
The essential components of successful neurorehabilitation include expert multidisciplinary
assessment, goal-oriented programmes and evaluation of impact on patient and goal achievement
through the use of clinically appropriate, scientiﬁcally sound outcome measures incorporating the
patient’s perspective (14).
While these principles are intuitively sound, the evidence underpinning multidisciplinary assessment and goal-orientated programmes is weak. Fundamental to the provision of robust

neurological disorders: a public health approach
evidence of the beneﬁts of rehabilitation interventions is the use of scientiﬁcally sound outcome
measures. In the ﬁeld of MS, the limitations of the Expanded Disability Status Scale have been
well aired and it can be argued that the scale is even less relevant to neurorehabilitation as it fails
to incorporate the views of the patient.
The issues relating to the management of symptoms that affect people with MS are identical
to those concerning neurorehabilitation: the need for robust clinical trials based on scientiﬁcally sound outcome measures, multidisciplinary expertise and the involvement of patients. The
frequency with which these symptoms affect people with MS has been documented for a range
of symptoms including fatigue, spasticity, pain and cognitive impairment. The need for a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach to symptom management is described in a recent review
(15) and is exempliﬁed in the case of spasticity (16).

Service delivery
Evaluating service delivery may be considered the most important and relevant issue in the management of MS. This is because it incorporates acute hospital and neurorehabilitation services
with community-based activities and has to bring together medical and social services in a way
that meets the complex and ever-changing needs of the person with MS.
Ideally, most services should be community-based with supporting expertise from the acute
hospital or rehabilitation centre at times of particular need (such as at diagnosis or during a severe
relapse) or complexity (when multiple symptoms interact and intensive inpatient rehabilitation is
required). The optimum method of service delivery has not yet been deﬁned, and little comparison
has been made of existing services.
A recently published study (17 ) compared two forms of service delivery in a randomized controlled trial. One group received what was described as “hospital home care”, in which patients
remained in the community but had immediate access to the hospital-based multidisciplinary team
when required, while the other group received routine care. No difference was seen in the level
of disability between the two groups after 12 months, but the “hospital home care” patients, who
were more intensely treated, had signiﬁcantly less depression and improved quality of life.
There continue to be major problems worldwide in delivering a model of care that provides
truly coordinated services. There is serious inequity of service provision both within and across
countries, and an inordinate and unacceptable reliance on family and friends to provide essential
care. Establishing guidance, such as has been done by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence
(18), is a step forward but a global initiative such as that of the Multiple Sclerosis International
Federation (MSIF) to promote the quality of life of people with MS may be more effective (19). The
key challenge will be ensuring the translation of these guidelines into practice.
Delivery of care to people with MS varies signiﬁcantly around the world. In part this reﬂects
the differences in incidence and therefore the relative importance afforded to the disease within
a country’s health system. Given the importance of expensive diagnostic equipment (scanners)
and the cost of the existing treatments, however, the variation also reﬂects different national
income levels. In the developed countries, the cost of the treatment is borne by the government
or insurance companies but in some regions the patients have to pay for drugs, making it difﬁcult
for them to take advantage of emerging new treatments.
The delivery of care for people with long-term illnesses is becoming increasingly “patient centred”, and a culture of treatment by interdisciplinary teams is emerging. Within this model, the aim
is to offer patients a seamless service, which typically involves bringing together various health
professionals including doctors, nurses, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, speech and
language therapists, clinical psychologists and social workers. Other professionals with expertise
in treating neurologically disabled people cover dietetics, continence advisory and management
services, pain management, chiropody, podiatry and ophthalmology services.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
Quality of life issues
MS will usually have a substantial adverse effect on a person’s quality of life. Improving quality
of life should be a key goal for policy-makers as well as those who advocate on behalf of people
with MS. A recent key step has been the publication by MSIF of its quality of life principles (19),
as mentioned above. The development of these principles was based on a series of interviews, a
literature review, the clinical, programmatic, and research experience of the authors, and review
by a work group and a technical oversight group organized by MSIF.
The principles are designed to be used by international organizations, national MS societies,
people with MS and their families, governments, health, social and continuing care providers,
employers, researchers, businesses and others to evaluate existing and proposed services and
programmes and to advocate for improvements. The areas covered include:
■ independence and empowerment;
■ medical care;
■ continuing care (long-term or social);
■ health promotion and disease prevention;
■ support for family members;
■ transport;
■ employment and volunteer activities;
■ disability beneﬁts and cash assistance;
■ education;
■ housing and accessibility of buildings in the community.

Treatment gap
There is no doubt that a signiﬁcant treatment gap exists in approaches to MS between countries
(and possibly within countries). Until a cure is found, people with MS have to rely on reducing
the inﬂammation during an acute phase by the use of corticosteroids and providing symptomatic
relief. The disease-modifying agents such as beta-interferon and glatiramer acetate can be offered
to decrease the relapses and disease burden. Ideally, this treatment programme requires early
diagnosis and adequate human resources and equipment. The situation is especially problematic
in the developing countries, as often equipment such as an MRI scanner is not available or is too
expensive. The disease-modifying agents are also costly and beyond the reach of many patients.
In addition, rehabilitation centres for people with MS are not available.
A further illustration of the treatment gap between rich and less developed countries in their
treatment of MS is apparent from data currently being collected by WHO, the MSIF and the EMSP.
These data, which will in time be integrated into an international comparative and interactive database (MSIF/WHO Atlas of MS and European Map of MS), have been sourced by surveying neurologists and patient organizations across 98 geographically and economically diverse countries.
For example, in response to the key treatment question “What percentage of people with MS
who fulﬁl the clinical prescription criteria for disease-modifying drugs [in your country] receive
treatment?” the average answer from 15 responding members of the European Union was 64%.
This compares with (for example) 45% for Brazil, 50% for the Russian Federation, 10–15% for
Turkey and less than 5% for India.

RESEARCH
As with many neurological diseases, MS is extremely difﬁcult to study. Even after several decades
of intense research activity, it remains a mysterious condition with no known pathogen or accepted determinants of its severity or course. Nonetheless, optimism amongst the MS research
community is high. Advances in non-invasive investigative techniques, particularly MRI, have led

neurological disorders: a public health approach
to signiﬁcant improvements in the ability to create images and track the course of the disease. Key
areas of current research encompass immunology, genetics, virology/bacteriology, and the biology
of the cells that make, maintain and repair myelin in the CNS (including developments in neural
stem cells). The key outcome of the research effort to date has been an improved understanding
of the pathology and the evolution of the disease and, as a consequence, new approaches to
treatment including repair and neuroprotection.
In addition to the advances being made at the therapeutic level, signiﬁcant improvements are
being made in the management of the disease. In large part this has been stimulated by researchers adopting a more patient-centred approach. Whereas MS research used to be conducted by
physicians on behalf of people with MS, today’s research protocols are more likely to be driven
by patient perspectives. This is leading to research being carried out into factors determining the
quality of life of people with MS, such as health-care policy, employment and welfare matters and
the wider familial impact of the disease. Fortunately, there are active multiple sclerosis support
groups in several regions of the world that are involved in improving the quality of life of people
with MS.

TRAINING
There is a speciﬁc lack of public and professional awareness of the dimension of MS in the
domains of epidemiology and impact of disease on individuals, carers and society, including
impact on individual loss of independence, and cost of long-term care. In particular, the chronic
progressive nature of the condition must be better conveyed to all. MSlF, through its member
organizations, has proven very effective and capable of concerted action in the ﬁeld of patient
and lay public education.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1

MS is the most prevalent inﬂammatory demyelinating disease of the central nervous
system in young adults.

The cause is (as yet) unknown.

Initially, MS most often runs a relapsing/remitting course, later becoming progressive.

Depending on the site and extent of the lesions, a variety of symptoms may occur, often
in parallel.

Many of the symptoms may be treated effectively with drugs and rehabilitation measures.

Immunomodulating therapies may reduce relapse frequency and progression of MRI
abnormalities.

Rehabilitation is most important and aims at leading individuals to adapt their lifestyle.

Burden and costs, including the costs of treatment, are considerable for the persons
affected, their relatives and society.

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

REFERENCES
1. Polman CH et al. Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2005 revisions to the “McDonald criteria”. Annals
of Neurology, 2005, 58:840–846.
2. Update on medical management of multiple sclerosis to staff of the Multiple Sclerosis Society of New South
Wales. Lidcombe, Multiple Sclerosis Society of New South Wales, 2003.
3. Warren S, Warren KG. Multiple sclerosis. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2001.
4. Rosati G. The prevalence of multiple sclerosis in the world: an update. Neurological Sciences, 2001,
22:117–139.
5. Sternfeld L. Utilization and perceptions of healthcare services by people with MS. New York, US National
Multiple Sclerosis Society, 1995.
6. Hakim EA et al. The social impact of multiple sclerosis – a study of 305 patients and their relatives. Disability
and Rehabilitation, 2000, 22:288–293.
7. Kobelt G, Pugliatti M. Cost of multiple sclerosis in Europe. European Journal of Neurology, 2005, 12(Suppl.
1):63–67.
8. Acting positively: strategic implications of the economic costs of multiple sclerosis in Australia. Canberra,
Access Economics Pty Ltd. for Multiple Sclerosis Australia, 2005.
9. Polman CH et al. Multiple sclerosis – The guide to treatment and management. London, Multiple Sclerosis
International Federation, 2006.
10. Chataway J et al. Treating multiple sclerosis relapses at home or in hospital: a randomised controlled trial of
intravenous steroid delivery. Lancet Neurology, 2006, 5:565–571.
11. Multiple Sclerosis Therapy Consensus Group. Escalating immunotherapy of multiple sclerosis. Journal of
Neurology, 2004, 251:1329–1339.
12. Henze T, Rieckmann P, Toyka KV and Multiple Sclerosis Therapy Consensus Group of the German Multiple
Sclerosis Society. Symptomatic treatment of multiple sclerosis. European Neurology, 2006, 56:78–105.
13. Thompson AJ. Neurorehabilitation in multiple sclerosis: foundations, facts and ﬁction. Current Opinion in
Neurology, 2005, 18:267–271.
14. Recommendations on rehabilitation services for persons with multiple sclerosis in Europe. Brussels, European
Multiple Sclerosis Platform and Rehabilitation in Multiple Sclerosis, 2004 (European Code of Good Practice
in Multiple Sclerosis).
15. Crayton H, Heyman R, Rossman H. A multimodal approach to managing the symptoms of multiple sclerosis.
Neurology, 2004, 11(Suppl. 5):S12–S18.
16. Thompson AJ et al. Clinical management of spasticity (Editorial review). Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery
and Psychiatry, 2005, 76:459–463.
17. Pozzilli C et al. Home based management in multiple sclerosis: results of a randomised controlled trial.
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 2002, 73:250–255.
18. Multiple sclerosis: management of multiple sclerosis in primary and secondary care. London, National
Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, 2003.
19. Principles to promote the quality of life of people with multiple sclerosis. London, Multiple Sclerosis
International Federation, 2005.

RECOMMENDED READING
■ Compston A et al., eds. Multiple sclerosis. Amsterdam, Elsevier, 2005.
■ Goodin DS et al. Disease modifying therapies in multiple sclerosis: report of the Therapeutics and
Technology Assessment Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the MS Council for
Clinical Practice Guidelines. Neurology, 2002, 58:169–178.
■ Joy JE, Johnston RB, eds. Multiple sclerosis: current status and strategies for the future. Washington, DC,
Institute of Medicine, 2001.
■ Murray TJ. Multiple sclerosis: the history of a disease. New York, Demos Medical Publishing, 2005.
■ Polman CH et al. Multiple sclerosis – The guide to treatment and management. London, Multiple Sclerosis
International Federation, 2006.
■ Warren S, Warren KG. Multiple sclerosis. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2001.
■ Multiple sclerosis: management of multiple sclerosis in primary and secondary care. London, National
Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, 2003.
■ Principles to promote the quality of life of people with multiple sclerosis. London, Multiple Sclerosis
International Federation, 2005.
■ Recommendations on rehabilitation services for persons with multiple sclerosis in Europe. Brussels,
European Multiple Sclerosis Platform and Rehabilitation in Multiple Sclerosis, 2004 (European Code of Good
Practice in Multiple Sclerosis).

neurological disorders: a public health approach

3.5 Neuroinfections
96 Viral diseases
100 Mycobacterial and other bacterial diseases
103 Parasitic diseases

Infectious diseases that involve the nervous system affect millions of people
around the world. They constitute the sixth
108 Conclusions and recommendations
cause of neurological consultation in primary care services and are reported globally by a quarter of WHO’s Member
States and by half the countries in some parts of Africa and South-East Asia.
Neuroinfections are of major importance since ancient times and, even with the
advent of effective antibiotics and vaccines, still remain a major challenge in
many parts of the world, especially in developing nations.
107 Implications and prevention

Approximately 75% of the world population live in developing countries where the worst health
indicators are found. Their major health problems are generally related to warm climate, overcrowding, severe poverty, illiteracy and high infant mortality which induce a burden of illness
from communicable diseases that differs drastically from the rest of the world. Added to these
problems, the health budgets are low and opportunities for community interventions very small.
A demographic transition is under way throughout the world: as populations age, the burden of
noncommunicable diseases (cardiovascular illnesses, stroke and cancer) increases, particularly
in the least favoured regions. Thus, the majority of least-developed countries are facing a double
burden from communicable and noncommunicable diseases. The global public health community
is now faced with a more complex and diverse pattern of adult disease than previously expected
and proposes a “double response” that integrates prevention and control of both communicable
and noncommunicable diseases within a comprehensive health-care system (1).
Some diseases that used to be found in the developed world but have virtually disappeared,
such as poliomyelitis, leprosy and neurosyphilis, are still taking their toll in developing regions.
In addition, some of the protozoan and helminthic infections that are so characteristic of the
tropics are now being seen with increasing frequency in developed countries owing to migration,
large-scale military ventures and rapid means of transport that have the undesirable potential to
introduce disease vectors. Although some infectious diseases have been nearly wiped out, the
vast majority of them will not be eliminated in the foreseeable future. Indeed, WHO reports that at
least 30 new diseases have been scientiﬁcally recognized around the world in the last 20 years
(2). These emerging diseases include hantavirus (ﬁrst identiﬁed in the United States in 1993),
cryptosporidiosis (a waterborne cause of diarrhoea that recently affected more than 400 000
people in a single outbreak in the United States), the Ebola virus from Africa and the human immunodeﬁciency virus (HIV), among others. Re-emerging diseases are the infections once thought

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
under control and that re-emerge: diseases such as tuberculosis, malaria, cholera and even
diphtheria are making a comeback.
Other main concerns are the development of drug-resistant organisms, the increasing number
of immunocompromised populations such as those affected by the acquired immunodeﬁciency
syndrome (AIDS) and malnutrition, and the rising number of diseases previously considered rare
(Lyme disease, rickettsioses, Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease and Ebola). Most of these diseases can
cause high mortality rates in some populations and produce severe complications, disability and
economic burden for individuals, families and health systems. Education, surveillance, development of new drugs and vaccines, and other policies are in constant evolution to ﬁght against old
and emerging infectious diseases of the nervous system.
This chapter covers some of the more frequent neuroinfections that have a major impact on
health systems, especially in the developing world. Infectious diseases that involve the nervous
system are reported globally by 26.5% of WHO’s Member States and by 50% of countries in some
parts of Africa and South-East Asia (3).
■ Viral diseases: HIV/AIDS, viral encephalitis, poliomyelitis and rabies.
■ Mycobacterial and other bacterial diseases: tuberculosis, leprosy neuropathy, bacterial meningitis and tetanus.
■ Parasitic diseases: neurocysticercosis, cerebral malaria, toxoplasmosis, American trypanosomiasis (Chagas disease), African trypanosomiasis (sleeping sickness), schistosomiasis and
hydatidosis.

VIRAL DISEASES
HIV/AIDS
The acquired immunodeﬁciency syndrome (AIDS) is caused by a retrovirus known as the human immunodeﬁciency virus (HIV), which attacks and impairs the body’s natural defence system
against disease and infection. HIV is a slow-acting virus that may take years to produce illness
in a person. During this period, an HIV-infected person’s defence system is impaired, and other
viruses, bacteria and parasites take advantage of this “opportunity” to further weaken the body
and cause various illnesses, such as pneumonia, tuberculosis and mycosis. When a person starts
having such opportunistic infections, he or she has AIDS. The amount of time it takes for HIV
infection to become full-blown AIDS depends on the person’s general health and nutritional status
before and during the time of HIV infection. The average time for an adult is approximately 10
years without antiretroviral therapy (ART). Women are more likely to be infected with HIV than
men. Children are also at risk (4).
The number of people living with HIV globally has reached its highest level with an estimated
40.3 million people, rising from an estimated 37.5 million in 2003. More than three million people
died of AIDS-related illnesses in 2005; more than 500 000 of them were children. Sub-Saharan
Africa continues to be the most affected region globally, with 64% of new infections occurring
there. HIV treatment has improved markedly, however, and hundreds of thousands of people are
now living longer in better health because they are receiving ART: an estimated 250–350 000
deaths were averted in 2005 because of expanded access to HIV treatment (5).
Neurological complications occur in 39–70% of patients with AIDS and signiﬁcantly impact on
functional capacity, quality of life and survival. Neuropathological examination identiﬁes abnormal
neurological conditions in more than 90% of autopsies but is not always demonstrated clinically
(6). The main etiological considerations include primary HIV-related syndromes, opportunistic
conditions, inﬂammatory conditions, and medications (7 ) (see Table 3.5.1).

neurological disorders: a public health approach

Table 3.5.1 Neurological diseases in the HIV-infected individual
Type of condition

Examples

Primary HIV-related syndromes

HIV-associated cognitive–motor complex
HIV-associated myelopathy
HIV-associated polyneuropathy
HIV-associated myopathy

Opportunistic conditions

Toxoplasma encephalitis
Cryptococcal meningitis
Cytomegalovirus encephalitis/polyradiculitis
Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy
Primary central nervous system lymphoma

Inﬂammatory conditions

Acquired demyelinating neuropathies
Aseptic meningitis

Treatment-associated conditions

Zidovudine-induced myopathy
Nucleoside analog-induced neuropathy

Source: (7 ).

Multiple investigations in recent years suggest that the effects of neurological complications
and opportunistic infections related to HIV have a clear trend to diminish since the introduction of
new and more powerful antiretroviral agents. Nevertheless, prolonging the life of patients infected
by the virus, attributable to therapeutic success, paradoxically favours the emergence of some
neurological affections as treatment-associated neuropathy/myopathy; these affections can be
more important than the beneﬁts of therapy to achieve viral suppression.
Accurately diagnosing neurological disease in the HIV-infected individual is crucial for several
reasons. First, many complications are treatable and their treatment can lead to either increased
survival or improved quality of life. Second, identifying currently untreatable conditions provides
the patient with the opportunity to participate in a growing number of therapeutic trials. Further,
an accurate and focused diagnostic assessment and treatment plan will limit therapeutic misadventures and lead to cost-effective care delivery.
The worldwide use of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) has played an important
role in changing the incidence of neurological complications in AIDS patients. Recent studies
have shown that HAART has produced both quantitative and qualitative changes in the pattern
of HIV neuropathology: an overall decrease in the incidence of some cerebral opportunistic infections such as toxoplasmosis and cytomegalovirus encephalitis, for which successful treatment is
available, whereas other uncommon types and new variants of brain infections, such as varicellazoster encephalitis, herpes simplex virus encephalitis or HIV encephalitis, are being reported more
frequently as ART promotes some immune recovery and increases survival (8). In developing
countries, some endemic infections such as tuberculosis and Chagas disease have re-emerged in
direct association with the spreading of HIV, and are now being considered as markers of AIDS.
Unfortunately, some patients may develop paradoxical clinical outcomes after starting treatment with HAART, known as neurological immune restoration inﬂammatory syndrome (NIRIS).
Some treatment-related neurological disorders, like zidovudine-induced myopathy, nucleoside
analog-induced neuropathy and efavirenz-induced neuropsychiatric disorders, can be more important than the beneﬁts of the therapy of viral suppression (9).
Some therapies can prevent, treat or even cure many of the opportunistic infections and relieve
the symptoms associated with them, but there is no cure for HIV/AIDS. The core beneﬁt of HAART
lies in its ability to reduce the rate of opportunistic infections by enhancing immune function,

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
slowing viral replication in the body and thereby improving patients’ quality of life and diminishing
mortality. The cost of antiretroviral drugs is declining but, unfortunately, the treatments are still
not affordable or accessible for most people.
Nevertheless, these important advances over the last decade have transformed HIV infection
from a short-term, inevitably fatal disease to a chronic condition amenable to medical management, similar to diabetes or congestive heart failure.
It is important to integrate HIV prevention and care, and the challenges are immense: worldwide, fewer than one in ﬁve people at risk of becoming infected with HIV has access to basic
prevention services. Of people living with HIV, only one in ten has been tested and is aware of the
infection. For prevention interventions to achieve the results necessary to get ahead of the epidemic, projects with short-term horizons must translate into long-term programmatic strategies.
In settings in which HIV is largely sexually transmitted, information and education campaigns
can save lives. For example, intensive prevention programmes in the Mbeya region of the United
Republic of Tanzania led to an increase in the use of condoms and the treatment of sexually transmitted infections between 1994 and 2000; those changes were accompanied by a decline in HIV
prevalence among 15–24-year-old women from 21% to 15% in the same period (10). In settings
in which HIV transmission is linked more closely to injecting drug use, harm-reduction strategies
(for example, the provision of clean injecting equipment as well as adequate therapy for drug dependence) have proved to be effective. Other measures include voluntary counselling and testing,
and improving women’s health — including access to family planning and safe childbirth — in
order to prevent HIV transmission from mother to infant. There is no cure for HIV/AIDS.

Viral encephalitis
Acute viral encephalitis is often an unusual manifestation of common viral infections and most
commonly affects children and young adults. Every day, more types of viruses are being associated with encephalitis (see Box 3.5.1), and its variable presence depends on the age group,
geographical zone, season of the year and the state of health of patients. In the United States,
epidemiological studies calculate the incidence of viral encephalitis approximately at 3.5–7.4 per
100 000 population. Estimates have been given for some causes of viral encephalitis: for example,
it has been estimated that herpes simplex encephalitis (HSE) has an annual incidence of about
one per million.
Herpes simplex encephalitis is the most important and common cause of fatal sporadic viral
encephalitis in the industrialized world. At a global level, it seems that the most common cause
of epidemic encephalitis is actually Japanese B encephalitis, with 10–15 000 deaths per year,
markedly more than for herpes simplex encephalitis. It must be considered, however, that in up
to about 50% of cases of viral encephalitis no speciﬁc cause can be found, so the predominant
type is difﬁcult to determine (11).

Box 3.5.1 Causes of viral encephalitis
■ Herpes simplex virus (HSV-1, HSV-2)
■ Other herpes viruses:
› varicella zoster vírus (VZV)
› cytomegalovirus (CMV)
› Epstein–Barr vírus (EBV)
› human herpes vírus 6 (HHV6)
■ Adenoviruses
■ Inﬂuenza A
■ Enteroviruses, poliovirus
■ Measles, mumps and rubella viruses
■ Rabies
Source: adapted from (11).

■ Arboviruses, e.g.
› Japanese B encephalitis virus
› St Louis encephalitis virus
› West Nile encephalitis virus
› Eastern, Western, and Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus
› Tick-borne encephalitis viruses
■ Bunyoviruses, e.g. La Crosse strain of California virus
■ Reoviruses, e.g. Colorado tick fever virus
■ Arenaviruses, e.g. lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus
■ Retroviruses, e.g. HIV-1
■ Papovavirus, e.g. JC virus

neurological disorders: a public health approach
Viruses enter the central nervous system (CNS) through two distinct routes: hematogenous
dissemination or neuronal retrograde dissemination. Hematogenous spread is the most common
path. Humans are usually incidental terminal hosts of many viral encephalitides. Arbovirus encephalitides are zoonoses, with the virus surviving in infection cycles involving biting arthropods
and various vertebrates, especially birds and rodents. The virus can be transmitted by an insect
bite and then undergoes local replication in the skin.
Patients with viral encephalitis are marked by acute onset of a febrile illness and can experience signs and symptoms of meningeal irritation, focal neurological signs, seizures, alteration of
consciousness and behavioural and speech disturbances. The diagnosis is made by immunological tests, neuroimaging techniques, electroencephalography and, sometimes, brain biopsy. No
speciﬁc treatment is available for every encephalitis, and the illness often requires only medical
support. The mortality rate and severity of sequelae depend largely on the etiological agent.
Herpes virus encephalitis carries a mortality rate of 70% in untreated patients, with severe sequelae among survivors. Pharmacotherapy for herpes virus encephalitis consists of acyclovir and
vidarabine. Effective preventive measures include control of vectors by removing water-holding
containers and discarded tyres. Vaccines are available for eastern equine encephalitis, western
equine encephalitis, and Venezuelan equine encephalitis in horses. Despite control efforts and
disease surveillance, the 1999 outbreak of West Nile virus in New York with subsequent spread
to other states showed that different viruses may spread because of increased international travel
and trade (12).
Japanese encephalitis is a leading cause of viral encephalitis in Asia, with 30–50 000 clinical cases reported annually. It occurs from the islands of the Western Paciﬁc in the east to the
Pakistan border in the west, and from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in the north to
Papua New Guinea in the south. Japanese encephalitis virus is transmitted by mosquitoes, which
breed particularly in ﬂooded rice ﬁelds. Pigs are the amplifying hosts. Distribution of the infection
is thus very signiﬁcantly linked to irrigated rice production combined with pig-rearing. An effective
killed vaccine is available, but it is expensive and requires one primary vaccination followed by
two boosters. It provides adequate protection for travellers but has limited public health value in
areas where health service resources are scarce.

Poliomyelitis
Poliomyelitis is a crippling disease caused by any one of three related viruses, poliovirus types 1,
2 or 3. The primary way to spread poliovirus is through the faecal–oral route: the virus enters the
body through the mouth when people eat food or drink water that is contaminated with faeces.
The virus then multiplies in the intestine, enters the bloodstream, and may invade certain types
of nerve cells which it can damage or destroy. Polioviruses spread very easily in areas with poor
hygiene. In any child under 15 years of age with acute ﬂaccid paralysis or any person of any age
with paralytic illness, poliomyelitis always has to be suspected.
In 1963, Cuba began using an oral vaccine in a series of nationwide polio campaigns. Shortly
thereafter, indigenous wild poliovirus transmission was interrupted. Through an extraordinary international effort that begun 18 years ago, indigenous polioviruses have now been eliminated from
all but four countries of the world, down from over 125 when the collaboration started (13). This
progress is the result of a unique partnership forged between governments and the spearheading
partners of the Global Polio Eradication Initiative — WHO, Rotary International, the United States
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and UNICEF — to take up key challenges to
reach all children, everywhere. The most visible element of the polio eradication initiative has
been the National Immunization Days, as they require the immunization of every child under ﬁve
years of age (nearly 20% of a country’s population) several times a year for a number of years in
a row. As the result of an aggressive, deliberate and internationally coordinated effort, endemic

100

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
poliomyelitis has changed from being a devastating disease with a global distribution to one that
is now endemic in four countries. In 2005, 1951 cases were reported worldwide.

Rabies
Rabies is one of the oldest and most feared diseases reported in medical literature. Rabies is a
viral zoonosis (an animal disease transmissible to humans) caused by rhabdoviruses of the genus
Lyssavirus. The disease is maintained in nature by several domestic and wild animal reservoir
species, including dogs, foxes, mongooses, raccoons, skunks and many species of bat. Human
infection is incidental to the epidemiology of rabies. In terms of risks to human health, dogs are
the most dangerous reservoir: more than 99.9 % of human deaths from rabies worldwide result
from the bite of a rabid dog. It is estimated that 50 000 persons die of rabies each year, mainly
in Africa and Asia.
Human infection occurs when the virus, contained in the saliva of a rabid animal, is transmitted
through penetrating bite wounds, open cuts in the skin, or contact with mucous membranes. The
severity of the bite determines the risk of infection. The virus slowly travels up the nerve to reach
the CNS where it replicates and then travels down nerves to the salivary glands where there is
further replication. Man is occasionally infected, and once infection is established in the CNS the
outcome is almost invariably fatal.
Second-generation vaccines consisting of highly puriﬁed vaccines prepared on primary and
continuous cell lines and in embryonating eggs are available, though expensive, to prevent the
occurrence of the disease in persons exposed to an animal suspected of rabies. The vaccines
are usually administered according to regimens involving fewer doses (usually ﬁve or six) than
those used for brain tissue vaccines. The regimens most commonly applied in the world are those
recommended by WHO.
Control of rabies depends on education, vaccination of dogs, cats and farm animals and notiﬁcation of suspected cases to local authorities (14).

MYCOBACTERIAL AND OTHER BACTERIAL DISEASES
Tuberculosis
With nine million new cases in 2004, resulting in 1.7 million deaths, tuberculosis is a leading
infectious cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide (15). The resurgence of tuberculosis in
many countries is attributable to its interaction with HIV infection, which has pernicious effects.
Tuberculosis is the leading cause of death among people with HIV, while infection with HIV is the
most potent risk factor for a latent tuberculosis infection to convert to active disease (16). Although
tuberculosis most commonly affects the lungs (the usual site of primary infection), it can cause
disease in any part of the body as a consequence of haematogenous spread from the lung. The
proportion of all cases of tuberculosis that are extrapulmonary (i.e. in sites other than the lungs)
varies between countries but is typically about 10–20%. Among extrapulmonary cases, the most
common sites involved are the lymph nodes and the pleura, but the sites of tuberculosis associated with neurological disorders (meninges, brain and vertebrae) also constitute an important
group. Meningeal tuberculosis has a high case-fatality rate, and neurological sequelae are common among survivors. Cerebral tuberculoma usually presents as a space-occupying lesion with
focal signs depending on the location in the brain. Vertebral tuberculosis usually presents with
local pain, swelling and deformity, and there is risk of neurological impairment because of spinal
cord or cauda equina compression.
The diagnosis of nervous system tuberculosis is often difﬁcult, because of its nature of great
simulator and also because of limited access to methods to conﬁrm it (17 ). Diagnosis depends on
epidemiological and clinical data and ﬁndings during cerebrospinal ﬂuid (CSF), neuroimaging and

neurological disorders: a public health approach
bacteriological studies. Although not a direct consequence of tuberculosis, peripheral neuropathy
can occur in tuberculosis patients as a side-effect of treatment with isoniazid, especially among
patients who are malnourished, abuse alcohol, or are infected with HIV.
There are important public health approaches to the primary prevention of these tuberculosisrelated conditions and to the secondary prevention of their adverse consequences. The most
important overall approach to primary prevention consists of cutting the chain of transmission by
case-ﬁnding and treatment. This approach is the basis of the international tuberculosis control
strategy known as DOTS, which forms a central pillar of WHO’s new strategy for its Stop TB
campaign (16). Although BCG vaccination has little impact in reducing the number of adults with
infectious pulmonary tuberculosis, it is of crucial importance in preventing disseminated and
severe cases of disease (including tuberculosis meningitis) in children. Therefore, in countries
with high tuberculosis prevalence, WHO recommends a policy of routine BCG immunization for
all neonates as part of the Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI). It is estimated that the
100 million BCG vaccinations given to infants worldwide in 2002 will have prevented 30 000
cases of tuberculosis meningitis in children during their ﬁrst ﬁve years of life (18). The primary
prevention of isoniazid-induced peripheral neuropathy is by routine administration of pyridoxine
to tuberculosis patients.
The main public health approach to the secondary prevention of the adverse consequences of
tuberculosis disease of the meninges, brain and vertebrae is through promoting the application of
the International Standards for Tuberculosis Care (19) to ensure prompt diagnosis and effective
treatment. High-quality tuberculosis care will result not only in patients having the best possible
outcome of treatment, but also in the public health beneﬁt of decreased tuberculosis transmission by
infectious cases and thereby, ultimately, an impact on the global burden of all tuberculosis cases, including those associated with neurological disorder. The key steps in diminishing the global burden of
neurological disorder associated with tuberculosis are to promote: investment in full implementation
of the Stop TB strategy and International Standards for Tuberculosis Care; full immunization coverage so that all neonates are protected by BCG from risk of disseminated and severe tuberculosis;
and better understanding of the epidemiology of tuberculosis disease associated with neurological
disorder through improved surveillance in countries with high tuberculosis prevalence.

Leprosy neuropathy
Leprosy is the cause of the most common treatable neuropathy in the world, caused by Mycobacterium leprae. The incubation period of the disease is about ﬁve years: symptoms, however,
can take as long as 20 years to appear. The infection could affect nerves by direct invasion or
during immunological reactions. In rare instances, the diagnosis can be missed, because leprosy
neuropathy may present without skin lesions (neuritic form of leprosy). Patients with this form of
disease display only signs and symptoms of sensory impairment and muscle weakness, posing
difﬁculties for diagnosis, particularly in services where diagnostic facilities such as bacilloscopy,
electroneuromyography and nerve biopsy are not available.
Delay in treatment is a major problem, because the disease usually progresses and the resulting
disability if untreated may be severe, even though mycobacteria may be eliminated. Delay in treatment is, however, usually a result of delayed presentation because of the associated stigma. People
with long-term leprosy may lose the use of their hands or feet because of repeated injury resulting
from lack of sensation. Early diagnosis and treatment with the WHO-recommended multidrug therapy
(MDT) is essential in order to prevent the disease from progressing and resulting in disability.

Bacterial meningitis
Bacterial meningitis is a very common cause of morbidity, mortality and neurological complications in both children and adults, especially in children. It has an annual incidence of 4–6

101

102

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
cases per 100 000 adults (deﬁned as patients older than 16 years of age), and Streptococcus
pneumoniae and Neisseria meningitidis are responsible for 80% of all cases (20). In developing
countries, overall case-fatality rates of 33–44% have been reported, rising to over 60% in adult
groups (21). Bacterial meningitis can occur in epidemics that can have a serious impact on large
populations.
The highest burden of meningococcal disease occurs in sub-Saharan Africa, which is known
as the “meningitis belt”, an area that stretches from Senegal in the west to Ethiopia in the east,
with an estimated total population of 300 million people. The hyperendemicity in this area is attributable to the particular climate (dry season between December and June, with dust winds) and
social habits: overcrowded housing at family level and large population displacements for pilgrimages and traditional markets at regional level. Because of herd immunity (whereby transmission
is blocked when a critical percentage of the population had been immunized, thus extending
protection to the unvaccinated), the epidemics occur in a cyclical fashion.
Meningitis is characterized by acute onset of fever and headache, together with neck stiffness,
altered consciousness and seizures. The diagnosis can be conﬁrmed by its clinical characteristics
and bacteriological and immunological analyses of the CSF. Antibiotic treatment is effective in
most cases but several neurological complications can remain, such as cognitive difﬁculties, motor disabilities, hypoacusia and epilepsy. In a recent review, treatment with corticosteroids was
associated with a signiﬁcant reduction in neurological sequelae and mortality (22).
Progress is more likely to come from investigations into preventive measures, especially the
use of available vaccines and the development of new vaccines. Meningitis caused by Haemophilus
inﬂuenzae type B has been nearly eliminated in developed countries since routine vaccination with
the H. inﬂuenzae type B conjugate vaccine was initiated. The introduction of conjugate vaccines
against S. pneumoniae may substantially reduce the burden of childhood pneumococcal meningitis and may even produce herd immunity among adults. The approval in 2005 of a conjugate
meningococcal vaccine against serogroups A, C, Y and W135 is also an important advance that
may decrease the incidence of this devastating infection. Local and nationwide surveillance, including the laboratory investigation of suspected cases, is critical for early detection of epidemics
and the formulation of appropriate responses.

Tetanus
Tetanus is acquired through exposure to the spores of the bacterium Clostridium tetani which are
universally present in the soil. The disease is caused by the action of a potent neurotoxin produced
during the growth of the bacteria in dead tissues, e.g. dirty wounds or — for neonatal tetanus —
in the umbilicus following non-sterile delivery. Tetanus is not transmitted from person to person:
infection usually occurs when dirt enters a wound or cut. At the end of the 1980s, neonatal tetanus
was considered a major public health problem. WHO estimated that, in 1988, 787 000 newborn
children died of neonatal tetanus, a rate of 6.5 cases per 1000 live births. In 2004 the number of
reported cases was 13 448. A worldwide total of 213 000 deaths were estimated to have occurred
in 2002, 198 000 of them concerning children younger than ﬁve years of age (23).
Unlike poliomyelitis and smallpox, the disease cannot be eradicated because tetanus spores are
present in the environment. Once infection occurs, mortality rates are extremely high, especially in
areas where appropriate medical care is not available. However, this death toll can be prevented.
Neonatal tetanus can be prevented by immunizing pregnant women and improving the hygienic
conditions of delivery. Adult tetanus can be prevented by immunizing people at risk, such as workers manipulating soil; others at risk of cuts should be also included in the prevention measures.
Some forms of toxoid are available (DTP, DT, TT or Td) and at least three primary doses should be
given by the intramuscular route. Vaccination coverage with three doses of DTP is more than 80%
for most countries around the world. The Maternal and Neonatal Tetanus elimination initiative was

neurological disorders: a public health approach
launched by UNICEF, WHO and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) in 1999, revitalizing
the goal of elimination of maternal and neonatal tetanus as a public health problem, deﬁned as
less than one case of neonatal tetanus per 1000 live births in every district of every country.

PARASITIC DISEASES
Neurocysticercosis
Cysticercosis is infection by the larvae of the pork tapeworm Taenia solium. The adult tapeworm
(ﬂat, ribbon-like, approximately 2–4 m long) lives only in the small intestine of humans, who
acquire it (taeniasis) by eating undercooked pork containing the viable larvae or cysticerci. A
tapeworm carrier passes microscopic Taenia eggs with the faeces, contaminating the close environment and contacts and causing cysticercosis to pigs and humans. Human beings therefore
acquire cysticercosis through faecal–oral contamination with T. solium eggs (24). Thus, vegetarians and other people who do not eat pork can acquire cysticercosis. Recent epidemiological
evidence suggests that the most common source of infective eggs is a symptom-free tapeworm
carrier in the household. Therefore, cysticercosis should be seen as a disease mostly transmitted
from person to person (25). In the CNS, the larvae or cysticerci can cause epilepsy, hydrocephalus,
spinal cord involvement, stroke, etc. (24, 26).
Cysticercosis is the parasitic disease that most frequently affects the CNS and is one of the
major health problems of developing countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America. In addition,
because of high immigration rates from endemic to non-endemic areas and tourism, neurocysticercosis is now commonly seen in countries that were previously free of the disease. Despite
the advances in diagnosis and therapy, neurocysticercosis remains endemic in most low income
countries, where it represents one of the most common causes of acquired epilepsy (27 ). Almost
50 000 deaths attributable to neurocysticercosis occur every year. Many more patients survive
but are left with irreversible brain damage — with all the social and economic consequences that
this implies (28). Seizures occur in up to 70% of patients. Several articles from different countries
in Latin America consistently showed an association between around 30% of all seizures and
cysticercosis (29).
Accurate diagnosis of neurocysticercosis is based on assessment of the clinical and epidemiological data and the results of neuroimaging studies and immunological tests (30). Therapy must
be individualized according to the location of parasites and the degree of disease activity: this
implies symptomatic therapy, anticysticidal drugs (albendazole/praziquantel), antiepileptic drugs
and surgical treatment of complications such as hydrocephalus.
Neurocysticercosis is one of a few conditions included in a list of potentially eradicable infectious diseases of public health importance (31). The control strategy that seems promising at the
moment is a combination of different available tools in order to interrupt or reduce the cycle of direct person-to-person transmission: mass human chemotherapy to eliminate the tapeworm stage,
enforced meat inspection and control, improvement of pig husbandry and inspection, treatment of
infected animals, surveillance, identiﬁcation and treatment of individuals who are direct sources
of contagion (human carriers of adult tapeworm) and their close contacts, combined with hygiene
education and better sanitation. Animal vaccines are under development. Major obstacles include
the lack of basic sanitary facilities in endemic areas, the extent of domestic pig-rearing, the costs
of the interventions, and their cultural acceptability. Multiple genotypes of T. solium ramiﬁcations
have been discovered in different regions, which could explain some of the possible differences
in pathology of T. solium worldwide. Recently, a proposal was published to declare neurocysticercosis an international reportable disease (32). WHO suggests that all endemic countries should
recognize the importance of taeniasis and cysticercosis, collect epidemiological data and adopt
policies and strategies for their control. So far, the infection has not been eliminated from any

103

104

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
region by a speciﬁc programme and no national control programmes are yet in place. Successful
pilot demonstrations of control measures have been or are being conducted in Cameroon, Ecuador,
Mexico and Peru, and a regional action plan developed in 2002 for eastern and southern Africa
is now under way.

Cerebral malaria
Malaria remains a serious public health problem in the tropics, mostly in Africa. There exist four
Plasmodium species that affect humans; of these, only Plasmodium falciparum can sequester in
capillaries of the CNS and cause cerebral malaria. The infection is acquired when the parasite is
inoculated through the skin during the sting of an infected Anopheles mosquito. Some patients
with cerebral malaria present with diffuse cerebral oedema, small haemorrhages and occlusion
of cerebral vessels by parasitized red cells. The burden of falciparum malaria is not only because
of infection and mortality: the neurocognitive sequelae add signiﬁcantly to this burden (33).
P. falciparum is identiﬁed by examination of blood smears with Giemsa stain. Since parasitaemia is cyclical, repeated examinations may be required. The CSF is normal in cerebral malaria.
Neuroimaging studies may demonstrate brain swelling, cerebral infarcts, or small haemorrhages
in severe cases. Artemisinin derivatives and quinine are the drugs of choice for cerebral malaria.
Despite therapy, mortality remains high in severe or complicated malaria (34).
Preventive strategies relied upon are: the early treatment of malaria infections with effective
medicines (artemisinin-based combination therapies) to prevent the progression of the disease to
severe malaria; and vector control through different practices to reduce the rate of infection (use
of insecticide-treated nets, bednets, insecticide sprays and mosquito coils). All these methods
have been found to be highly cost effective. At present, multiple studies are under way to modify
Plasmodium genes in order to diminish parasite virulence and consequently the morbidity and
mortality attributable to malaria.

Toxoplasmosis
Toxoplasmosis is a disease caused by an obligate intracellular protozoal parasite termed Toxoplasma gondii. Human infection usually occurs via the oral or transplacental route. Consumption
of raw or undercooked meat containing viable tissue cysts (principally lamb and pork) and direct
ingestion of infective oocysts in other foods (including vegetables contaminated by feline faeces)
are common sources of infection. Transplacental infection may occur if the mother acquires an
acute infection or if a latent infection is reactivated during immunosuppression. In immunocompetent women a primary infection during early pregnancy may lead to fetal infection, with death of
the fetus or severe postnatal manifestations. Later in pregnancy, maternal infection results in mild
or subclinical fetal disease. In adults, most T. gondii infections are subclinical, but severe infection
can occur in patients who are immunocompromised, such as those with AIDS and malignancies.
Affected organs include both the grey and white matter of the brain, retina, alveolar lining of the
lungs, heart, and skeletal muscle.
Patients with AIDS are at particular risk for developing disseminated toxoplasmosis, which more
often manifests as CNS abnormalities. As many as 50% of patients with AIDS who are seropositive
for T. gondii develop encephalitis. Toxoplasmosis is the most common cause of a focal brain lesion
in patients with AIDS. The disease commonly localizes to the basal ganglia, though other sites in
the brain and spinal cord may be affected. A solitary focus may be seen in one third of patients, but
multiple foci are more common. In AIDS-related Toxoplasma encephalitis, a well-circumscribed
indolent granulomatous process or features of diffuse necrotizing encephalitis occur.
For most people, prevention of toxoplasmosis is not a serious concern, as infection generally
causes no symptoms or mild symptoms. High-risk groups, however, should consider being tested
for Toxoplasma infection. HIV-infected individuals who test positive should receive drugs to prevent

neurological disorders: a public health approach
development of toxoplasmosis when their CD4 count falls below 100 (35). Pregnant women,
women who plan to become pregnant, and immunocompromised individuals who test negative
for Toxoplasma infection should take precautions against becoming infected. Precautions consist
in measures such as consuming only properly frozen or cooked meats, avoiding cleaning cats’
litter pans and avoiding contact with cats of unknown feeding history.

American trypanosomiasis: Chagas disease
Chagas disease is a serious problem of public health in Latin America, and is becoming more
important in developed nations owing to the high ﬂow of immigrants from endemic areas. Chagas
disease is caused by Trypanosoma cruzi, a protozoan that it is transmitted by means of triatomine
insects. Up to 8% of the population in Latin America are seropositive, but only 10–30% of them
develop symptomatic disease (36).
The disease is a major cause of congestive heart failure, sudden death related to chronic
Chagas disease, and cerebral embolism (stroke). Chagas disease can be diagnosed by demonstration of T. cruzi in blood smears and CSF samples or by serological testing. Neuroimaging usually
demonstrates the location and extent of the cerebral infarct. Secondary prevention of stroke with
long-term anticoagulation is recommended for all chagasic patients with stroke and heart failure,
cardiac arrhythmias or ventricular aneurisms.
Traditional control programmes in Latin American countries have focused on the spraying of
insecticides on houses, household annexes and other buildings. National programmes aimed at
the interruption of the domestic and peridomestic cycles of transmission involving vectors, animal
reservoirs and humans are feasible and have proved to be very effective. A prime example is the
programme that has been operating in Brazil since 1975, when 711 municipalities had triatomine-infested dwellings: 10 years later only 186 municipalities remained infested, representing
a successful accomplishment of the programme’s objectives in 74% of the originally infested
areas (37 ).

African trypanosomiasis: sleeping sickness
African trypanosomiasis, also known as sleeping sickness, is a severe disease that is fatal if left
untreated. The causative agents are protozoan parasites of the genus Trypanosoma, which enter
the bloodstream via the bite of blood-feeding tsetse ﬂies (Glossina spp.). The acute form of the
disease attributable to Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense, widespread in eastern and southern
Africa, is closely related to a common infection of cattle known as N’gana, which restricts cattlerearing in many prime areas of Africa. The chronic form caused by T.b. gambiense is found in
western and central Africa.
Cattle and other wild mammals act as reservoir hosts of the parasites. Tsetse ﬂies can acquire
parasites by feeding on these animals or on an infected person. Incubation time usually varies from
three days to a few weeks for T.b. rhodesiense, and several weeks to months for T.b. gambiense.
Inside the human host, trypanosomes multiply and invade most tissues. Infection leads to malaise,
lassitude and irregular fevers. Early symptoms, which include fever and enlarged lymph glands
and spleen, are more severe and acute in T.b. rhodesiense infections. Advanced symptoms include
neurological and endocrine disorders. As the parasites invade the CNS, mental deterioration begins, leading to coma and death.
Sleeping sickness claims comparatively few lives annually, but the risk of major epidemics
means that surveillance and ongoing control measures must be maintained, especially in subSaharan Africa where 36 countries have epidemiological risk. Control relies mainly on systematic
surveillance of at-risk populations, coupled with treatment of infected people. In addition, reduction of tsetse ﬂy numbers plays a signiﬁcant role, especially against the rhodesiense form of the
disease. In the past, this has involved extensive clearance of bush to destroy tsetse ﬂy breeding

105

106

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
and resting sites, and widespread application of insecticides. More recently, efﬁcient traps and
screens have been developed that, usually with community participation, can keep tsetse populations at low levels in a cost-effective manner (38).

Schistosomiasis
Schistosomiasis is an infection with a relatively low mortality rate but a high morbidity rate; it
is endemic in 74 developing countries, with more than 80% of infected people living in sub-Saharan Africa. Infection is caused by trematode ﬂatworms (ﬂukes) of the genus Schistosoma: in
freshwater, intermediate snail hosts release infective forms of the parasite. There are ﬁve species of schistosomes able to infect humans: Schistosoma haematobium (the urinary form) and S.
japonicum, S. mekongi, S. mansoni and S. intercalatum (the “intestinal” forms).
If people are in contact with water where infected snails live, they become infected when larval
forms of the parasites penetrate their skin. Later, adult male and female schistosomes pair and
live together in human blood vessels. The females release eggs, some of which are passed out in
the urine (in S. haematobium infection) or stools (S. mansoni and S. japonicum), but some eggs
are trapped in body tissues. Immune reactions to eggs lodged in tissues are the cause of disease.
Systemic complications are bladder cancer, progressive enlargement of the liver and spleen,
intestinal damage due to ﬁbrotic lesions around eggs lodged in these tissues, and hypertension
of the abdominal blood vessels. Most cases of cerebral schistosomiasis are observed with S.
japonicum, constituting 2–4% of all S. japonicum infections. However, CNS schistosomiasis also
can occur with other species and involves seizures, headache, back pain, bladder dysfunction,
paresthesias and lower limb weakness. Death is most often caused by bladder cancer associated
with urinary schistosomiasis and by bleeding from varicose veins in the oesophagus associated
with intestinal schistosomiasis. Children are especially vulnerable to infection, which develops
into chronic disease if not treated. Diagnosis is made by using urine ﬁltration and faecal smear
techniques, antigen detection in endemic areas and antibody tests in non-endemic areas.
The disease is controlled through an integrated approach: drug treatment with praziquantel
or oxamniquine (effective only against S. mansoni), provision of an adequate safe water supply,
sanitation and health education (39).

Hydatidosis
Cystic hydatidosis/echinococcosis is an important zoonosis caused by the tapeworm Echinococcus granulosus. At present, four species of Echinococcus are recognized: E. granulosus, E.
multilocularis, E. oligarthrus and E. vogeli. The parasite is distributed worldwide and about 2–3
million patients are estimated in the world (40). It causes serious human suffering and considerable losses in agricultural and human productivity. General lack of awareness of transmission
factors and prevention measures among the population at risk, abundance of stray dogs, poor
meat inspection in abattoirs, improper disposal of offal and home slaughtering practices play a
role in the persistence of the disease.
The incidence of surgical cases ranges from 0.1 to 45 cases per 100 000 people. The real
prevalence ranges between 0.22% and 24% in endemic areas. Ultrasounds have been very useful in large-scale prevalence surveys. Large prevalence studies have been conducted in many
countries: in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Morocco and Tunisia, the prevalence ranged from 1%
to 2%.
In the normal life-cycle of Echinococcus species, adult tapeworms (3–6 mm long) inhabit the
small intestine of carnivorous deﬁnitive hosts, such as dogs, coyotes or wolves, and echinococcal
cyst stages occur in herbivorous intermediate hosts, such as sheep, cattle and goats. In most
infected countries there is a dog–sheep cycle in which grazing sheep ingest tapeworm eggs
passed in the faeces of an infected dog. Dogs ingest infected sheep viscera, mainly liver and lungs,

neurological disorders: a public health approach
containing larval hydatid cysts in which numerous tapeworm heads are produced. These attach
to the dog’s intestinal lining and develop into mature adult tapeworms. Humans become infected
by ingesting food or drink contaminated with faecal material containing tapeworm eggs passed
from infected carnivores, or when they handle or pet infected dogs. Oncospheres released from
the eggs penetrate the intestinal mucosa and lodge in the liver, lungs, muscle, brain and other
organs, where the hydatid cysts form. In the CNS, hydatidosis produces spinal disease and also
is a potential cause of intracranial hypertension.
To control the parasite, a number of antihelminthic drugs have proved to be effective against
adult stages of E. granulosus in the ﬁnal host. The best drug currently available is praziquantel
which exterminates all juvenile and adult echinococci from dogs. Several of the benzimidazole
compounds have been shown to have efﬁcacy against the hydatid cyst in the intermediate host.
Echinococcosis can be controlled through preventive measures that break the cycle between the
deﬁnitive and the intermediate host. These measures include dosing dogs, inspecting meat and
educating the public on the risk to humans and the necessity to avoid feeding offal to dogs.

IMPLICATIONS AND PREVENTION
Infectious diseases that involve the nervous system affect millions of people around the world,
especially in some regions in Africa and South-East Asia. Most of these diseases can cause high
mortality rates in some populations and produce severe complications, disability and economic
burden for individuals, families and health systems. Even with the advent of effective antibiotics and vaccines, they still remain a major challenge in many parts of the world, especially in
developing countries where the worst health indicators are found. Some diseases that had been
found in the developed world but have virtually disappeared, such as poliomyelitis, leprosy and
neurosyphilis, are still taking their toll in developing regions. Conversely, some of the protozoan
and helminthic infections that are so characteristic of the tropics are now being seen with increasing frequency in developed countries. Other major concerns are the development of drug-resistant
organisms, the increasing number of immunocompromised populations and the rising number
of diseases previously considered rare. Education, surveillance, development of new drugs and
vaccines, and other policies are in constant evolution to ﬁght against old and emerging infectious
diseases of the nervous system.
Some preventive measures have a more rapid impact and are more cost effective than others.
Regular, large-scale treatment to prevent disease is cheap, by treating carriers (i.e. humans or
dogs) to prevent humans from getting infected as an intermediate host, or to regularly lower the
worm load so that the person does not suffer from infection. Large-scale treatment in humans can
be combined for several diseases (the “preventive chemotherapy” concept), and can be packaged
in domestic animals — such as dogs — with other interventions such as rabies vaccination. The
basic idea is to deliver such public health treatment packages regularly, to enable people to avoid
the worst effects of infection, even with an ongoing lack of water, sanitation and hygiene. It has
to be said that environmental measures would eventually solve the problem, but require a much
more substantial investment and commitment. Some diseases are easily controlled and prevented
with basic, inexpensive measures that are available worldwide, but their effectiveness entails a
massive education effort and steady surveillance.

107

108

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1

Neuroinfections constitute the sixth cause of neurological consultation in primary care
services worldwide and, even with the advent of effective antibiotics and vaccines, still
remain a major challenge in many parts of the world.

The global public health community is now faced with a more complex and diverse
pattern of adult disease than previously expected and proposes a double response that
integrates prevention and control of both communicable diseases and noncommunicable
diseases within a comprehensive health-care system.

Some diseases that had virtually disappeared from the developed world are still taking
their toll in developing regions. Conversely, some of the protozoan and helminthic
infections that are so characteristic of the tropics are now being seen with increasing
frequency in developed countries.

Other major concerns are the development of drug-resistant organisms, the increasing
number of immunocompromised populations and the rising number of diseases previously
considered rare.

Education, surveillance, development of new drugs and vaccines and other public policies
are in constant evolution to ﬁght against old and emerging infectious diseases of the
nervous system.

neurological disorders: a public health approach

REFERENCES
1. The world health report 2003 – Shaping the future. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2003.
2. The world health report 1996 – Fighting disease, fostering development. Geneva, World Health Organization,
1996.
3. Atlas: Country resources for neurological disorders 2004. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2004.
4. HIV/AIDS: a guide for nutrition, care and support. Geneva, United Nations Joint Programme on HIV/AIDS and
World Health Organization, 2001.
5. AIDS epidemic update 2005. Geneva, Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS and World Health
Organization, 2005.
6. Budka H. Neuropathology of human immunodeﬁciency virus infection. Brain Pathology, 1991, 1:163–175.
7. Bacellar H et al. Temporal trends in the incidence of HIV-1-related neurologic diseases: Multicenter AIDS
Cohort Study, 1985–1992. Neurology, 1994, 44:1892–1900.
8. Gray F et al. The changing pattern of HIV neuropathology in the HAART era. Journal of Neuropathology and
Experimental Neurology, 2003, 62:429–440.
9. Treisman G, Kaplin A. Neurologic and psychiatric complications of antiretroviral agents. AIDS, 2002,
16:1201–1215.
10. Jordan-Harder B et al. Thirteen years HIV-1 sentinel surveillance and indicators for behavioural change
suggest impact of programme activities in south-west Tanzania. AIDS, 2004, 18:287–294.
11. Kennedy PGE. Viral encephalitis: causes, differential diagnosis and management. Journal of Neurology,
Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 2004, 75(Suppl. I):10–15.
12. Lopez W. West Nile virus in New York City. American Journal of Public Health, 2002, 92:1218–1221.
13. Global eradication of poliomyelitis by the year 2000. Geneva, World Health Organization, 1988 (World Health
Assembly resolution WHA41.28).
14. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Human rabies – Montana and Washington, 1997. Morbidity and
Mortality Weekly Report, 1997, 46:770–774.
15. Global tuberculosis control: surveillance, planning and ﬁnancing. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2006
(WHO/HTM/TB/2006.362).
16. The Stop TB strategy. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2006 (WHO/HTM/TB/2006.368).
17. Kox LFF, Kuijper S, Kolk AHJ. Early diagnosis of tuberculous meningitis by polymerase chain reaction.
Neurology, 1995, 45:2228–2232.
18. Bourdin Trunz B, Fine PEM, Dye C. Effect of BCG vaccination on childhood tuberculous meningitis and miliary
tuberculosis worldwide: a meta-analysis and assessment of cost-effectiveness. Lancet, 2006, 367:1175–
1182.
19. International standards for tuberculosis care. The Hague, Tuberculosis Coalition for Technical Assistance,
2006.
20. Van de Beek D et al. Community-acquired bacterial meningitis in adults. New England Journal of Medicine,
2006, 354:44–53.
21. Wright JP, Ford HL. Bacterial meningitis in developing countries. Tropical Doctor, 1995, 25:5–8.
22. Van de Beek D et al. Steroids in adults with bacterial meningitis: a systematic review. Lancet Infectious
Diseases, 2004, 4:139–143.
23. The world health report 2005 – Make every mother and child count. Geneva, World Health Organization,
2005.
24. Sanchez AL et al. A population based, case-control study of Taenia solium taeniasis and cysticercosis.
Annals of Tropical Medicine and Parasitology, 1999, 93:247–258.
25. García HH et al. The Cysticercosis Working Group in Peru. Taenia solium cysticercosis. Lancet, 2003,
362:547–556.
26. Rodriguez-Salinas L, Medina MT. Stroke in developing countries. In: Bogousslavsky J et al., eds. Stroke:
selected topics. New York, World Federation of Neurology and Demos Medical Publishing, 2006:49–62
(Seminars in Clinical Neurology, in press).
27. Medina MT et al. Neurocysticercosis as the main cause of late-onset epilepsy in Mexico. Archives of Internal
Medicine, 1990, 150:325–327.
28. Gemmel M et al. Guidelines for surveillance, prevention and control of taeniasis/cysticercosis. Geneva, World
Health Organization, 1983 (WHO/VPH/83.49).
29. Montano SM et al, The Cysticercosis Working Group in Peru. Neurocysticercosis: association between
seizures, serology and brain CT in rural Peru. Neurology, 2005, 65:229–233.
30. Del Brutto OH et al. Proposed diagnostic criteria for neurocysticercosis. Neurology, 2001, 57:177–183.
31. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Recommendations of the International Task Force for Disease
Eradication. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 1993, 42:1–38.

109

110

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
32. Roman G et al. A proposal to declare neurocysticercosis an international reportable disease. Bulletin of the
World Health Organization, 2000, 78:399–406.
33. Mung’Ala-Odera V, Snow RW, Newton CR. The burden of the neurocognitive impairment associated with
Plasmodium falciparum malaria in sub-Saharan Africa. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene,
2004, 71(Suppl. 2):64–70.
34. Newton CR, Hien TT, White N. Cerebral malaria. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 2000,
69:433–441.
35. Trikha I, Wig N. Management of toxoplasmosis in AIDS. Indian Journal of Medical Sciences, 2001, 55:87–98.
36. Umezawa ES et al. Chagas disease. Lancet, 2001, 357:797–799.
37. Dias JC. Control of Chagas disease in Brazil. Parasitology Today, 1987, 3:336–341.
38. UNICEF/UNDP/World Bank/WHO Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR).
Geneva, World Health Organization (http://www.who.int/tdr/diseases/tryp/diseaseinfo.htm).
39. Craig PS, Rogan MT, Allan JC. Detection, screening and community epidemiology of taeniid cestode
zoonoses: cystic echinococcosis, alveolar echinococcosis and neurocysticercosis. Advances in Parasitology,
1996, 38:169–250.
40. Oku Y et al. Control program against hydatidosis and the decreased prevalence in Uruguay. International
Congress Series, 2004, 1267:98–104.

RECOMMENDED READING
■ Craig PS, Rogan MT, Allan JC. Detection, screening and community epidemiology of taeniid cestode
zoonoses: cystic echinococcosis, alveolar echinococcosis and neurocysticercosis. Advances in Parasitology,
1996, 38:169–250.
■ Eckert MA et al., eds. Manual on echinococcosis in humans and animals: a public health problem of global
concern. Paris, World Health Organization and Ofﬁce International des Epizooties, 2001.
■ García HH, Del Brutto OH. The Cysticercosis Working Group in Peru. Neurocysticercosis: updated concepts
about an old disease. Lancet Neurology, 2005, 4:653–661.
■ García HH, Gonzalez AE, Gilman RH. The Cysticercosis Working Group in Peru. Diagnosis, treatment and
control of Taenia solium cysticercosis. Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases, 2003, 16:411–419.
■ Gendelman HE, Persidsky Y. Infections of the nervous system. Lancet Neurology, 2005, 4:12–13.
■ Medina MT, DeGiorgio C. Introduction to neurocysticercosis: a worldwide epidemic. Neurosurgery Focus,
2002, 12:6 (http://www.neurosurg.focus.org/jun02/12-6-nsf-toc.html).
■ Medina MT et al. Prevalence, incidence, and etiology of epilepsies in rural Honduras: the Salama study.
Epilepsia, 2005, 46:124–131.
■ Raviglione MC, Snider DE, Kochi A. Global epidemiology of tuberculosis: morbidity and mortality of a
worldwide epidemic. JAMA, 1995, 273:220.
■ Román G. Cerebral malaria: the unsolved riddle. Journal of the Neurological Sciences, 1991, 101:1–6.
■ Román G et al. A proposal to declare neurocysticercosis an international reportable disease. Bulletin of the
World Health Organization, 2000, 78:399–406.
■ Shakir B, Newman P, Poser CH. Tropical neurology. London, WB Saunders Company, 1996.
■ Uplekar MW, Antia NH. Clinical and histopathological observations on pure neuritic leprosy. Indian Journal of
Leprosy, 1986, 58:513–521.
■ AIDS epidemic update 2005. Geneva, Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS and World Health
Organization, 2005.
■ Atlas: Country resources for neurological disorders 2004. Geneva, World Health Organization (2004).
■ The Stop TB strategy. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2006 (WHO/HTM/TB/2006.368).

neurological disorders: a public health approach

3.6 Neurological disorders
associated with
malnutrition
111 Etiology, risk factors and burden
112 Main neurological complications of
malnutrition

In low income countries, inadequate amounts of food (causing
conditions such as child malnutrition and retarded growth) and
121 Prevention of nutritional deﬁciencies
inadequate diversity of food (causing deﬁciency of vital micronu123 A public health framework
trients such as vitamins, minerals or trace elements) continue to
124 Conclusions and recommendations
be priority health problems. Malnutrition in all its forms increases
the risk of disease and early death. Nearly 800 million people in
the world do not have enough to eat. Malnutrition affects all age groups, but it is especially common among poor people and those with inadequate access to health education, clean water and good sanitation. Most of the malnutrition-related neurological
disorders are preventable.
118 Toxiconutritional disorders

Chronic food deﬁcits affect about 792 million people in the world (1). Malnutrition directly or indirectly
affects a variety of organ systems including the central nervous system (CNS). A number of nutritional
conditions are included in the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study, such as protein–energy malnutrition, iodine deﬁciency, vitamin A deﬁciency, and iron deﬁciency anaemia. Over 15% of the disabilityadjusted life years (DALYs) lost globally are estimated to be from malnutrition (2).
This section focuses on neurological disorders associated with malnutrition. In addition, it touches
brieﬂy on the ingestion of toxic substances in food or alcohol, as these also contribute to neurological
disorders.
Most of the malnutrition-related neurological disorders can be prevented and therefore they are of
public health concern. Raising awareness in the population, among leaders and decision-makers and in
the international community is important in order to adopt an appropriate health policy.

ETIOLOGY, RISK FACTORS AND BURDEN
The major dietary nutrients needed by living organisms, especially human beings, can be grouped into
macronutrients and micronutrients. The macronutrients are the energy-yielding nutrients — proteins,
carbohydrates and fat — and micronutrients are the vitamins and minerals. The macronutrients have a
double function, being both “ﬁrewood” and “building blocks” for the body, whereas the micronutrients
are special building items, mostly for enzymes to function well. The term “malnutrition” is used for
both macronutrient and micronutrient deﬁciencies. Macronutrient and micronutrient problems often
occur together, so that the results in humans are often confounded and impossible to separate out.
Table 3.6.1 outlines which of the nutrients may contribute to neurological disorders if not provided in
sufﬁcient amounts, together with their recommended daily allowances. Table 3.6.2 outlines some of the

111

112

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
neurological consequences attributable, in certain circumstances, to ingestion of toxic substances
in food and alcohol.

Table 3.6.1 Neurological disorders caused by nutrient deﬁciency
RDAa

Nutrient

Neurological disorder when deﬁcient

Macronutrients
Total energy

2200 (kcal)

In childhood: long-term mental deﬁcit

Vitamins
Vitamin B1 Thiamine

1.1 mg

Vitamin B3 Niacin

Beri-beri, polyneuropathy, Wernicke’s encephalopathy

15 mg NE

Pellagra including dementia and depression

Vitamin B6 Pyridoxine

1.6 mg

Polyneuropathy

Vitamin B12 Cobalamine

2.0 μg

Progressive myelopathy with sensory disturbances in the legs

Folate

180 μg

Neural tube defects (myelomeningocele) of the fetus, cognitive
dysfunction in children and elderly?

Iodine

150 μg

Iodine deﬁciency disorders

Iron

15 mg

Delayed mental development in children

Minerals

Zinc

12 mg

Delayed motor development in children, depression

Selenium

55 mg

Adverse mood states

Recommended daily allowance for an adult.

Table 3.6.2 Potentially toxic food compounds that may contribute
to neurological disorders
Food compound

Potential neurological disorder when ingested

Alcohol

Fetal alcohol syndrome, retarded mental development in childhood, Wernicke’s
encephalopathy, visual problems (amblyopia), peripheral neuropathy

Lathyrus sativus

Spastic paraparesis (lathyrism)

Cyanogenic glucosides from
insufﬁciently processed cassava roots

Konzo, tropic ataxic neuropathy

MAIN NEUROLOGICAL COMPLICATIONS
OF MALNUTRITION
Macronutrient deﬁciency (general malnutrition)
The nervous system develops in utero and during infancy and childhood, and in these periods it
is vulnerable to macronutrient deﬁciencies. As a rule, general malnutrition among adults does not
cause speciﬁc neurological damage, whereas among children it does.
Undernutrition can be assessed most commonly by measurement of the body weight and
the body height. With these two measurements, together with age and sex, it will be possible to
evaluate the energy stores of the individual. The aims of the anthropometric examination are:
■ to assess the shape of the body and identify if the subject is thin, ordinary or obese;

neurological disorders: a public health approach
■ to assess the growth performance (this applies only to growing subjects, i.e. children).
A person who is too thin is said to be “wasted” and the phenomenon is generally called
“wasting”. Children with impaired growth are said to be “stunted” and the phenomenon is called
“stunting”. Both these conditions may cause neurological disturbances in children.
The percentage of wasted children in low income countries is 8%, ranging from 15% in Bangladesh and India down to 2% in Latin America (3). Different kinds of disasters may raise the ﬁgures
dramatically in affected areas. This presents a disturbing picture of malnutrition among children
under ﬁve years of age in underprivileged populations. These children should be an important
target group for any kind of nutritional intervention to be undertaken in these countries.
Stunting is also widespread among children in low income countries. Its prevalence ranges
from 45% in Bangladesh and India to 16% in Latin America. The global average for stunting
among children in low income countries is 32% (3). Increasing evidence shows that stunting is
associated with poor developmental achievement in young children and poor school achievement or intelligence levels in older children. “The causes of this growth retardation are deeply
rooted in poverty and lack of education. To continue to allow underprivileged environments to
affect children’s development not only perpetuates the vicious cycle of poverty but also leads to
an enormous waste of human potential. … Efforts to accelerate economic development in any
signiﬁcant long-term sense will be unsuccessful until optimal child growth and development are
ensured for the majority” (3).

Long-term effects of malnutrition
Apart from the risk of developing coronary heart disease, diabetes and high blood pressure later
in life owing to malnutrition in early life, there is now accumulating evidence of long-term adverse
effects on the intellectual capacity of previously malnourished children. It is methodologically
difﬁcult, however, to differentiate the biological effects of general malnutrition and those of the
deprived environment on a child’s cognitive abilities. It is also methodologically difﬁcult to differentiate the effect of general malnutrition from the effect of micronutrient deﬁciencies, such
as iodine deﬁciency during pregnancy and iron deﬁciency in childhood, which also cause mental
and physical impairments. Malnourished children lack energy, so they become less curious and
playful and communicate less with the people around them, which impairs their physical, mental
and cognitive development.
Two recent reviews highlight the evidence of general malnutrition per se causing long-term
neurological deﬁcits (4, 5). An increasing number of studies consistently show that stunting at
a young age leads to a long-term deﬁcit in cognitive development and school achievement up to
adolescence. Such studies include a wide range of tests including IQ, reading, arithmetic, reasoning, vocabulary, verbal analogies, visual-spatial working memory, simple and complex auditory
working memory, sustained attention and information processing. Episodes in young childhood of
acute malnutrition (wasting) also seem to lead to similar impairments. The studies also indicate
that the period in utero and up to two years of age represents a particularly vulnerable time for
general malnutrition (4).
In addition to food supplementation, it has been nicely demonstrated that stimulation of the
child has long-term beneﬁcial effects on later performance. One such study is from Jamaica,
where stunted children who were both supplemented and stimulated had an almost complete
catch-up with non-stunted children (6), see Figure 3.6.1.

Treatment of severe malnutrition
If a child becomes seriously wasted, this in itself is a life-threatening condition. Even if the child
is brought to hospital, the risk of dying still remains very high. WHO has issued a manual for the
management of severe malnutrition that is available on its web site (7 ). An important element, in

113

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
addition to initial treatment similar to intensive care, is to stimulate the child in order to prevent
the negative long-term effect on the cognitive capacity of the child.

Micronutrient deﬁciencies
Micronutrients is the term used for those essential nutrients that are needed in small amounts for
human growth and functioning. They are essentially used as cofactors for enzymes engaged in
various biochemical reactions. They comprise vitamins, fat-soluble as well as water-soluble, and
trace elements (= minerals). Iron, vitamin A, zinc and iodine are most discussed today, but other
important micronutrients are vitamin C and the vitamin B complex. Diets that supply adequate
energy and have an acceptable nutrient density will usually also cover the needs for micronutrients. When the diet is otherwise monotonous, however, it is recommended to supplement it with
micronutrient-rich foods. Food preservation methods, high temperature and exposure to sunlight
can reduce the activity of many vitamins. Most of these deﬁciencies are strongly linked to poverty
and human deprivation. Some of these conditions are much more signiﬁcant with regard to their
global occurrence and their impact on the nervous system than other micronutrient deﬁciencies,
so this section focuses on deﬁciencies of vitamin A, vitamin B complex, iodine and iron.

Vitamin A deﬁciency
Vitamin A assumes two types of function in the body: systemic functions (in the whole body) and
local functions in the eye.
Vitamin A is very important for the mucous membranes as it is needed for the proper production of mucopolysaccharides, which help to protect against infections. If vitamin A is deﬁcient, the
wetness of the mucous membranes will decrease and the membranes will become more like skin
than mucous membranes. This can be seen in the eye as xerophthalmia (dry eye in Greek). Inside
the eye, vitamin A is used in the rods (the receptors for low intensities of light). If there is too little
vitamin A, the person will not be able to see in low light intensity: he or she will become nightblind. Vitamin A deﬁciency has long been identiﬁed as the major cause of nutritional blindness.
This is still an important problem around the world: it is estimated that 250–500 000 children are
blinded each year because of eye damage brought about by severe vitamin A deﬁciency. It is the
single most important cause of blindness in low and middle income countries.

Figure 3.6.1 Mean developmental quotients of stunteda and non-stuntedb children:
results of intervention over two years
110

Non-stunted
Developmental quotient

114

●

Stimulated and
supplemented

✖
■

Stimulated

▲

Controls

105

●
100

Stunted

●
✖
■
▲

90
Enrolment

Months

✖

Supplemented

■
▲
18

a
Adjusted for initial age
and score.
b
Adjusted for age only.
Source: (6).

neurological disorders: a public health approach
Vitamin A deﬁciency does not only cause eye damage: it also increases mortality owing to
increased vulnerability and impaired immune function, especially to diarrhoeal diseases and
measles. Vitamin A deﬁciency develops quite quickly in children with measles, as infections make
the body consume its vitamin A stores much more quickly. Children between six months and four
years old are most vulnerable to vitamin A deﬁciency. An estimated 100 million pre-school children
globally are estimated to have vitamin A deﬁciency and 300 000 are estimated to die each year
because of vitamin A deﬁciency.
In order to prevent child deaths and childhood blindness, many low income countries have integrated vitamin A supplementation into their immunization programmes. Children at risk are given
vitamin A capsules every six months. The cost of the capsules is low (currently US$ 0.05 each).

Vitamin B complex deﬁciencies
The B vitamins generally are coenzymes in the energy metabolism in the body. Vitamin B deﬁciencies have occurred in extreme situations in the past, such as in the 19th century when the steam
mills in South-East Asia started to provide polished rice. Suddenly, people had enough energy but
insufﬁcient supply of B vitamins and developed beri-beri, a Sinhalese word for “I cannot”. It may
also occur today in refugee populations, if they are provided with a very limited choice of food
items with enough energy but deﬁcient in B vitamins. Similarly, it may also happen to alcoholics
and people with other types of very monotonous diets.
The different deﬁciency syndromes of vitamin B overlap and are sometimes very difﬁcult to distinguish from one another. A recent example is the Cuban neuropathy in the mid-1990s, in which
over 50 000 people suffered from a gait and visual disturbance, technically a polyneuropathy
(8, 9). Massive research resources were put in to ﬁnd the exact cause. It is now known that the
population that experienced the epidemic had an extreme diet (tea with sugar as the main source
of energy; which is likely to generate a vitamin B deﬁciency) and the epidemic stopped as soon
as universal distribution was made of tablets with vitamin B complex. This led the scientists to
conclude that it was a vitamin B complex deﬁciency, without being able to distinguish the vitamins
from each other. From a public health perspective, therefore, the B vitamins may as well be treated
together, the only exceptions being vitamin B12 and folate.
Vitamin B1 (thiamine). Beri-beri is one form of vitamin B1 deﬁciency, and the main symptom is
a polyneuropathy in the legs (10). In severe cases, one can suffer from cardiovascular complications, tremor, and gait and visual disturbances. An acute form of the syndrome seen in alcoholics
is Wernicke’s encephalopathy (discussed in the section on alcohol). It is characterized by a serious confusion, unsteadiness and eye movement disorders. It can be rapidly reversed if correctly
diagnosed and immediately treated with high-dose thiamine.
Vitamin B3 (niacin). Deﬁciency of niacin leads to “pellagra”, an Italian word for “rough skin”,
which was common in Italy and Spain in the 19th century when large populations were sustained
on a maize diet. In its classic form it appears with three Ds: dermatitis, diarrhoea and dementia;
that is with cutaneous signs, erythema, pigmentation disorders, diarrhoea and neuropsychiatric
disturbances such as confusion and psychomotor agitation.
Vitamin B6 (pyridoxine). Vitamin B6 is involved in the regulation of mental function and mood.
Neuropsychiatric disorders including seizures, migraine, chronic pain and depression have been
linked to vitamin B6 deﬁciency (11). Some studies have suggested that neurological development
in newborns could be improved by supplementation in pregnancy, but this is still a hypothesis (12).
Vitamin B6 deﬁciency may occur especially during intake of some drugs which antagonize with
the vitamin (i.e. isoniazid, penicillamine).
Folate. Folate (or folic acid) plays an important role for rapidly dividing cells such as the blood
cells, and a folate deﬁciency causes a special type of anaemia called megaloblastic anaemia which
is reversible when folate is given. In recent years, it has been found that folate deﬁciency during

115

116

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
pregnancy increases the risk of fetal malformation in the form of neural tube defects (NTDs =
myelo-meningocele) (13). Folate supplementation for women at the time of conception protects
against neural tube defects (13). Supplementation of folate in wheat ﬂour is therefore common in
Europe and North America, with the objective of reducing the risk of neural tube defect (14–16).
In Canada, Chile and the United States, mandatory fortiﬁcation of ﬂour substantially improved
folate and homocysteine status, and neural tube defect rates fell by between 31% and 78% (17 ).
Nevertheless, many countries do not choose mandatory folic acid fortiﬁcation, in part because
expected additional health beneﬁts are not yet scientiﬁcally proven in clinical trials, in part because
of feared health risks, and because of the issue of freedom of choice. Thus additional creative
public health approaches need to be developed to prevent neural tube defects and improve the
folate status of the general population.
Vitamin B12 (cobalamine). The vitamin B12 or cobalamine is — like folate — important in the
formation of blood cells, particularly the red blood cells. Vitamin B12 is different from the other
B vitamins because it needs an “intrinsic factor” produced by the gut in order to be absorbed.
This means that people with gut disorders and also elderly people may experience vitamin B12
deﬁciency. Vitamin B12 deﬁciency also causes a megaloblastic anaemia which is reversible when
vitamin B12 is given. What is worse is an insidious irreversible damage to the central and peripheral nervous systems. In a severe form it may also cause a psychiatric disorder with irritability,
aggressiveness and confusion. It has been suggested that vitamin B12 deﬁciency might contribute
to age-related cognitive impairment; low serum B12 concentrations are found in more than 10%
of older people (18) but so far there is insufﬁcient proof of beneﬁcial effects of supplementation.
The most serious problem with vitamin B12 deﬁciency still seems to be the irreversible progressive
myeloneuropathy, which is difﬁcult to diagnose.

Iodine deﬁciency disorders
Iodine deﬁciency does not cause one single disease, but many disturbances in the body. These
are denoted by the term iodine deﬁciency disorders: their effects range from increased mortality
of fetuses and children, constrained mental development — in its worst form, cretinism — to
impaired school performance and socioeconomic development, as detailed in Table 3.6.3.
WHO has estimated that 1.6 billion people in 130 countries live in areas where they are at risk
of being deﬁcient in iodine. Goitre — indicated by a swelling of the thyroid gland — is present in
740 million people, and some 300 million suffer from lowered mental ability as a result of a lack
of iodine. Iodine deﬁciency disorders
today constitute the single greatest
cause of preventable brain damage in
Figure 3.6.2 Toll of iodine deﬁciency worldwide
the fetus and infant and retarded psychomotor development in young chilCretinism: 16 million
dren. At least 120 000 children every
Brain damage: 49 million
year are born cretins — mentally retarded, physically stunted, deaf-mute
or paralysed — as a result of iodine
deﬁciency. In addition, an estimated
annual total of at least 60 000 miscarriages, stillbirths and neonatal deaths
Goitre: 740 million
stem from severe iodine deﬁciency in
early pregnancy, as shown in Figure
3.6.2 (19).

Total population at risk: 1.6 billion (30% of the world’s population)
Source: adapted from (19).

neurological disorders: a public health approach

Table 3.6.3 Spectrum of disorders caused by iodine deﬁciency
Iodine deﬁciency disorder

Effect

Goitre

Enlargement of the thyroid gland

Hypothyroidism

Decreased production of thyroid hormones

Miscarriages

Early death of fetuses in the womb

Stillbirths

Late death of fetuses (the child is dead at birth)

Perinatal mortality

Increased number of deaths among newborn children

Congenital abnormalities

Abnormalities of the newborn child

Cretinism

Severe mental retardation, growth retardation, deaf-mutism and physical
disability

Decrease in IQ
Impaired educability

Lower school performance

Impaired social and human development

At the World Summit for Children in 1990, the problem of iodine deﬁciency disorders was
highlighted and a strong political will to eliminate them was demonstrated. At that time, the scale
and severity of the iodine problem was only just being realized. Since then, several surveys have
shown even more severe damage than was estimated from this deﬁciency in many regions of the
world. Work to eliminate iodine deﬁciency disorders has made enormous progress and is becoming
a success story in the prevention of a nutritional deﬁciency. WHO has issued a useful guide to help
programme managers assess the problem and monitor progress towards its elimination (20).
The main intervention strategy for control of iodine deﬁciency disorders is universal salt iodization. Salt was chosen as the commodity to be fortiﬁed for a number of reasons: it is widely
consumed in fairly equal amounts by most people in a population, it is usually produced centrally
or in a few factories, and the cost of iodizing is low (about US$ 0.05 per person per year). Over the
last decade, extraordinary progress has been made in increasing the number of people consuming
iodized salt. In 1998, more than 90 countries had salt iodization programmes. Now, more than two
thirds of households living in countries affected by iodine deﬁciency disorders consume iodized
salt. Universal salt iodization ranges from 63–90% in Africa, the Americas, South-East Asia and
the Western Paciﬁc, whereas in Europe it is only 27%, thus leaving Europeans at risk of iodine deﬁciency disorders. Because of active programmes of salt fortiﬁcation, iodine deﬁciency disorders
are rapidly declining in the world. In 1990, 40 million children were born with mental impairment
attributable to iodine deﬁciency and 120 000 cretins were born, which was substantially more
than just seven years later. WHO has estimated that the number of people with goitre will decrease
to 350 million by the year 2025 as a result of iodine enrichment and supplementation programmes.
A challenge is to enforce the legislation that has been passed in all but seven of the countries of the
world with a recognized iodine-deﬁciency public health problem. All the salt producers, from large
industries to small-scale producers, need to be encouraged to use the more expensive procedure
to fortify their salt production, and the consumers also need to be informed. Quality control and
monitoring of the impact of the procedures are other continuing tasks related to the world’s most
widespread preventable cause of mental impairment (20).

Iron deﬁciency anaemia
Iron deﬁciency anaemia affects more than 3.5 billion people globally, making it the most frequent
micronutrient deﬁciency in the world. Iron deﬁciency seems to be the only micronutrient deﬁciency
that high income and low income countries have in common. Of the total burden of disease in

117

118

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
DALYs, over 2% is attributable to anaemia. Iron deﬁciency anaemia depresses human productivity
by tiredness, breathlessness, decreased immune function and impaired learning in children. The
effect of iron deﬁciency on learning is difﬁcult to study because iron deﬁciency is also closely
related to poverty and socioeconomic disadvantage. The indirect productivity effects of improved
iron status are on cognitive ability and achievement, through impact on mental and motor skills
in infants and on cognition, learning and behaviour in children and adolescents. An early severe
chronic iron deﬁciency leads to poorer overall cognitive functioning and lower school achievements
(21, 22). Thus, macronutrient, iodine and iron deﬁciencies all have a substantial negative effect on
cognition, behaviour and achievement; in all three cases, the effects produced by chronic deﬁciencies in the early years are manifested later in life (23). The estimated losses of GDP attributable
to iron deﬁciency in three countries are considerable (Figure 3.6.3).
The most affected populations are children in the pre-school years and pregnant women in low
and middle income countries. In these populations, deﬁciencies of dietary iron are aggravated by
repeated episodes of parasitic diseases such as malaria, hookworm infestation or schistosomiasis
in children, and by menstruation, repeated pregnancies or blood loss at delivery in women. A
low dietary intake of iron and the inﬂuence of factors affecting absorption also contribute to iron
deﬁciency. About 40% of the women in low and middle income countries and up to 15% in high
income countries suffer from anaemia.
Better nutrition, iron supplementation or fortiﬁcation, child spacing and the prevention and
treatment of malaria and hookworms can all prevent iron deﬁciency. Iron is found naturally in
meat, ﬁsh, liver and breastmilk. Vitamin C increases iron absorption, and coffee and tea decrease
absorption. Correction of iron deﬁciency anaemia is cheap, but a functioning health service is
needed to promote the measures among the most vulnerable groups. There is, however, some
evidence to suggest that iron supplementation at levels recommended for otherwise healthy children carries the risk of increased severity of infectious disease in the presence of malaria and/or
undernutrition. It is therefore advised that iron and folic acid supplementation be targeted to those
who are anaemic and at risk of iron deﬁciency. They should receive concurrent protection from
malaria and other infectious diseases through prevention and effective case management (25).

Zinc deﬁciency
There is a close connection between zinc deﬁciency and stunting. In addition, zinc supplementation of young children in low income countries improves their neurophysiological performance (26),
also in combination with iron supplements (27 ). Some behavioural abnormalities in adults also
seem to respond favourably to zinc supplementation, such as mood changes, emotional lability,
anorexia, irritability and depression (28).

Selenium deﬁciency
Selenium deﬁciency has been linked to adverse mood states (29). Selenium supplementation
together with other vitamins has been found beneﬁcial in the treatment of mood lability (30).
Generally, the scientiﬁc information about selenium and neurological disorders remains scarce.

TOXICONUTRITIONAL DISORDERS
In the 19th century, medical science successfully revealed the causation of several neurological
disorders that occurred in localized epidemics or endemic foci. There are, however, still a number
of obscure neurological disorders occurring in localized epidemics or endemic foci in tropical
countries. Most of these syndromes consist of various combinations of peripheral polyneuropathy
and signs of spinal cord involvement. The term “tropical myeloneuropathies” has been used to
group these disorders of unknown etiology; to reduce the confused clinical terminology, Román
distinguishes two clinical groups which he calls tropical ataxic neuropathy, with prominent sensory

neurological disorders: a public health approach

119

ataxia, and tropical spastic paraparesis, with predominantly spastic paraparesis with minimal
sensory deﬁcit (31).

Syndromes of ataxic polyneuropathy
Reports on a form of ataxic polyneuropathy described by Strachan and later by Scott led to the
recognition of a tropical neurological syndrome characterized by painful polyneuropathy, orogenital
dermatitis and amblyopia, known as Strachan’s syndrome. It was linked with malnutrition and
reported from Africa. During the Second World War, prisoners of war in tropical and subtropical
regions suffered from similar syndromes with “burning feet”, numbness and loss of vision with
pallor of the temporal border of the optic disks. Spastic paraplegia was also seen in these highly
variable conditions (32). Since the Second World War, ataxic polyneuropathies have been reported
from many tropical and subtropical areas (31).
In the 1930s, Moore described, in an institution in Nigeria, a syndrome of visual loss, sore
tongue, stomatitis and eczema of the scrotum in adolescent boys. Their cassava-based diet was
suggested to be the cause, as the students improved during holidays. The cyanide-yielding capacity of bitter cassava and its toxic effects were described at that time. This syndrome of painful
polyneuropathy, ataxia and blurred vision was extensively studied in Nigeria by Osuntokun (33).
The diagnostic criteria used for this tropical ataxic neuropathy were the presence of two of the
following: myelopathy, bilateral optic atrophy, bilateral sensorineural deafness, and symmetrical
peripheral polyneuropathy. Men and women were equally affected, with a peak incidence in the
ﬁfth and sixth decades of life. The prevalence in certain areas of Nigeria ranged from 1.8% to
2.6% in the general population. When discussing the neurological syndromes resembling Nigerian
ataxic neuropathy described from different parts of the world, Osuntokun pointed out that it is
unlikely that the same speciﬁc etiological factor is involved in all places. In Nigeria, tropical ataxic
neuropathy has been shown to persist also into this millennium (34).

Syndromes of spastic paraparesis

GDP lost (%)

The second clinical group of tropical myeloneuropathies proposed by Román (31) is comprised
of syndromes with spastic paraparesis as the main feature. Besides paraparesis as a sequel of
extrinsic cord compression resulting from trauma or tuberculosis, several syndromes with spastic
paraparesis have been reported in epidemics or endemic foci throughout the world.
The classic form of locally occurring spastic paraparesis, mentioned already by Hippocrates,
is lathyrism (35), caused by excessive consumption of grass pea, Lathyrus sativus (36). The clinical picture is an acute or sub-acute
onset of an isolated spastic paraparesis, with increased muscle tone,
Figure 3.6.3 Loss of gross domestic product
brisk reflexes, extensor plantar
to iron deﬁciency
responses and no sensory signs.
3.0
It has been known since ancient
times and has occurred in Europe
2.5
(37 ) and North Africa but is today
1.9
2.0
known as a public health problem
in only Bangladesh, India (38) and
1.5
Ethiopia (39). An excitotoxic amino
1.1
0.9
acid in the grass pea, beta-N-oxa1.0
0.8
lylamino-L-alanine is held respon0.5
sible for the disease (36).

(GDP) attributable

1.3
1.1

0
Bangladesh
■ cognitive losses only
■ cognitive losses + losses in manual work
Source: (24).

India

Pakistan

120

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
A second form of spastic paraparesis, nowadays called HTLV-I associated myelopathy/tropical
spastic paraparesis, has been found in geographical isolates in different parts of the world (40).
It is now proved to be caused by the human T-lymphotropic virus type I (HTLV–I) and is unrelated
to nutrition.
A third form of spastic paraparesis with abrupt onset has been reported in epidemic outbreaks
in Africa. Clinically and epidemiologically it is similar to lathyrism but without any association with
consumption of L. sativus. This disease is now called konzo (41). Konzo has been reported only
from poor rural communities in Africa; it is characterized by the abrupt onset of an isolated and
symmetric spastic paraparesis which is permanent but non-progressive. The name derives from
the local designation used by the Congolese population affected by the ﬁrst reported outbreak in
1936. Konzo means “tied legs”, and is a good description of the resulting spastic gait. Outbreaks of
konzo are described from Cameroon, the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of the
Congo, northern Mozambique and the United Republic of Tanzania. Konzo has been associated with
exclusive consumption of insufﬁciently processed bitter cassava in epidemiological studies (42).

Toxic optic neuropathy
Toxic optic neuropathy, also called nutritional amblyopia, is a complex, multifactorial disease,
potentially affecting individuals of all ages, races, places and economic strata (43). It may be
precipitated by poor nutrition and toxins (especially smoking and alcohol) but genetic predisposal
is also an important factor. Most cases of nutritional amblyopia are encountered in disadvantaged
countries (9). Typically, toxic and nutritional optic neuropathy is progressive, with bilateral symmetrical painless visual loss causing central or cecocentral scotoma. There is no speciﬁc treatment for this disorder. Nevertheless, early detection and prompt management may ameliorate and
even prevent severe visual deﬁcit.

Alcohol-related neurological disorders
Alcohol and other drugs play a signiﬁcant role in the onset and course of neurological disorders.
As toxic agents, these substances directly affect nerve cells and muscles, and therefore have
an impact on the structure and functioning of both the central and peripheral nervous systems.
For example, long-term use of ethanol is associated with damage to brain structures which are
responsible for cognitive abilities (e.g. memory, problem-solving) and emotional functioning. In
people with a history of chronic alcohol consumption the following abnormalities have been observed: cerebral atrophy or a reduction in the size of the cerebral cortex, reduced supply of blood
to this section of the brain which is responsible for higher functions, and disruptions in the functioning of neurotransmitters or chemical messengers. These changes may account for deﬁcits in
higher cortical functioning and other abnormalities which are often symptoms of alcohol-related
neurological disorders.

Fetal alcohol syndrome
The role of alcohol in fetal alcohol syndrome has been known for many years: the condition affects
some children born to women who drank heavily during pregnancy. The symptoms of fetal alcohol syndrome include facial abnormalities, neurological and cognitive impairments, and deﬁcient
growth with a wide variation in the clinical features (44). Not much is known about the prevalence
in most countries but, in the United States, available data show that the prevalence is between
0.5 and 2 cases per 1000 births (45). Though there is little doubt about the role of alcohol in this
condition, it is not clear at what level of drinking and during what stage of pregnancy it is most
likely to occur. Hence the best advice to pregnant women or those contemplating pregnancy seems
to be to abstain from drinking, because without alcohol the disorder will not occur.

neurological disorders: a public health approach
Alcohol-related polyneuropathy
A typical example of a toxiconutritional disorder, alcohol-related polyneuropathy is elicited by a
combination of the direct toxicity of alcohol on the peripheral nerve and a relative deﬁciency of
vitamin B1 and folate. In its usual form it starts in an insidious, progressive way with signs located
at the distal ends of the lower limbs: night cramps, bizarre sensations of the feet and the sufferer is
quickly fatigued when walking. Examination reveals pain at the pressure of the muscular masses.
This polyneuropathy evolves to a complete form with permanent pain in the feet and legs. The signs
of evolution of alcoholic polyneuropathy are represented by the deﬁcit of the leg muscles leading
to abnormal walk, exaggerated pain (compared to burning, at any contact) and skin changes. At
the latest stage, ulcers may occur (46). The onset of the peripheral neuropathy depends on the age
of the patient, the duration of the abuse and also the amount of alcohol consumed. The excessive
abuse of this substance determines the central and/or peripheral nervous lesions.

Wernicke’s encephalopathy
Wernicke’s encephalopathy is the acute consequence of a vitamin B1 deﬁciency in people with
severe alcohol abuse. It is due to very poor diet, intestinal malabsorption and loss of liver thiamine
stores. The onset may coincide with an abstinence period and is generally marked by somnolence
and mental confusion; which gradually worsens, together with cerebellar signs, hypertonia, paralysis and/or ocular signs. The prognosis depends on how quickly the patient is given high-dose
vitamin B1 (by intravenous route, preferably). A delay or an absence of treatment increases the risk
of psychiatric sequelae (memory disorders and/or intellectual deterioration). If the treatment is too
late, the consequences could be an evolution to a Wernicke–Korsakoff syndrome, a dementia.

Alcohol and epilepsy
Alcohol is associated with different aspects of epilepsy, ranging from the development of the
condition in chronic heavy drinkers and dependent individuals to an increased number of seizures
in people already with the condition. Alcohol aggravates seizures in people undergoing withdrawal
and seizure medicines might interfere with tolerance for alcohol, thereby increasing its effect.
Though small amounts of alcohol might be safe, people suffering from epilepsy should be advised
to abstain from consuming this agent.
After an episode of weeks of uninterrupted drinking, sudden abstinence may lead to epileptic
seizures and severe coma, “delirium tremens”. Detoxiﬁcation should be under medical supervision
and possibly with medication to decrease the risk of this potentially life-threatening condition.
In terms of relative risk, much more is known about alcohol and epilepsy than other conditions.
There is little difference between abstainers and light drinkers in the risk for chronic harmful alcohol-related epilepsy. Risk is highest at levels of consumption which exceed 20 g of pure alcohol (or
two drinks) per day for women and 40 g for men. For example, the WHO project on comparative
risk assessment has shown more than a sevenfold increase in risk among those who consume
these high volumes or are dependent on alcohol when compared with abstainers for both male
and female drinkers (47 ).

PREVENTION OF NUTRITIONAL DEFICIENCIES
The neurological disorders discussed in this chapter stem from three main causes:
■ general malnutrition in childhood leading to macronutrient deﬁciency;
■ micronutrient deﬁciencies caused by insufﬁcient supply or increased consumption (sometimes
called “hidden hunger”);
■ ingestion of toxic compounds.

121

122

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
The prevention of neurological complications attributable to the ﬁrst two causes is, in theory,
very simple: achieve Millennium Development Goal No. 1 by eradicating extreme poverty and
hunger. Most people encountering a nutritional deﬁciency do so because of poverty. Acknowledging that eradicating poverty is easier said than done, there are some strategies that can be used
to prevent some of the micronutrient deﬁciencies. There are three principal ways of approaching
a potentially micronutrient-deﬁcient diet:
■ Diversiﬁcation — include other micronutrient-rich food items in the diet.
■ Supplementation — add a supplement of the micronutrient, for instance as a pill. This method
is used with vitamin A in a large number of low income countries, linked to the immunization
programme.
■ Fortiﬁcation — add more of the micronutrient to a common food commodity. Universal salt
iodization is an example where this strategy has been used.
Worldwide efforts to cope with the most appalling micronutrient deﬁciencies are ongoing.
Adding iodine to all salt has been a very successful way of preventing neurological complications
caused by iodine deﬁciency. Supplementation of vitamin A for children under ﬁve years of age is
another successful strategy to prevent blindness as a result of vitamin A deﬁciency. In societies
with more resources and more centralized food distribution, fortiﬁcation of ﬂour with folate has
been shown to decrease the occurrence of neural tube defects. In populations with restricted food
choice, such as refugee populations in camps surviving on food rations, surveillance is needed to
detect and correct vitamin deﬁciencies.
The toxic exposures need different approaches. For L. sativus, supplementation of cereals
during acute food shortages in lathyrism-endemic areas can reduce its consumption. Another possibility is the development of a genetically modiﬁed atoxic variety that could prevent the problem.
In the case of insufﬁciently processed toxic cassava, this solution does not seem so attractive,
as low-toxic varieties are not as reliable in producing food for the family; the approach should
concentrate on the proper processing of cassava. For alcohol, the focus needs to be on restricting
alcohol consumption, at least during pregnancy.
The large majority of the malnutrition-related neurological disorders can be avoided by simple
measures, such as the following recommended actions for policy-makers.
■ Support efforts towards universal salt iodization.
■ Support vitamin A supplementation among children under ﬁve years of age, if judged necessary.
■ Consider strategies to decrease childhood malnutrition.
■ Consider folate fortiﬁcation of ﬂour, if affordable and possible.
■ Oversee the distribution of food rations to refugee populations, in order to detect and correct
vitamin deﬁciencies.
■ Promote the proper processing of toxic cassava.
■ Restrict alcohol consumption, especially during pregnancy.
A preventive approach should include adapted communication with the aim of changing behaviour, strengthening capacities and reducing the incidence of some chronic diseases such as
frequent neurological complications. The following activities are possible examples:
■ speciﬁc nutritional programmes for children and pregnant and nursing women;
■ rapid diagnosis of nutritional deﬁciencies in vitamins and minerals that could have a severe
impact on mother and child and alter their mental and physical status and development;
■ nationwide measures such as those for the prevention of iodine deﬁciency and its consequences.

neurological disorders: a public health approach
Early interventions could reverse the deleterious tendencies. In many countries, the mass
interventions against iron, vitamin A and iodine deﬁciencies among children (those under ﬁve years
of age and older ones as well) and pregnant and nursing women, must be reinforced. At the other
end of the scale, much remains to be done for adults and elderly people.

A PUBLIC HEALTH FRAMEWORK
Political aspects
Within the context of the ﬁght against poverty, malnutrition would beneﬁt from strong political
commitment to improve and develop an integrated approach of various ministries. Improving the
dialogue between public and private sectors should be an important approach to emphasize in
every country. Efforts remain to be made for a comprehensive salt iodization as recommended
by international organizations. This implicates obligatory reinforcement of policies for legislation,
standards, application and control. Regulations on the advertising of beers, wines, other alcoholic
drinks and tobacco must be reinforced, especially during sports and cultural events. Nigerian
President Olusegun Obasanjo has lent his support to the goal of reducing death from chronic disease: “Governments have a responsibility to support their citizens in their pursuit of a healthy, long
life. It is not enough to say: ‘we have told them not to smoke, we have told them to eat fruit and
vegetables, we have told them to take regular exercise’. We must create communities, schools,
workplaces and markets that make these healthy choices possible.”

Management and provision of care
The management of neurological disorders related to malnutrition — attributable to direct causes
or secondary induced effects of metabolic diseases — is a challenge that requires a pragmatic
approach in order to be effective. Setting up pilot interventions that are feasible and realistic
would be a useful demonstration to WHO Member States concerned by this public health problem.
Lessons learnt from other integrated programmes (for both noncommunicable and communicable
diseases) could serve as a model for neurological disorders associated with malnutrition.
It is essential to set up a multidisciplinary task force surrounding neurologists and nutritionists.
This team should be supplemented by clinicians who are concerned with the secondary causes of
neurological diseases related to nutrition, i.e. cardiologists, endocrinologists, specialists in internal
medicine and paediatricians. Social scientists would also have an important role, for a better
understanding of knowledge, attitudes and practices. Specialists in communication would be
involved in the initiative, so as to reach, educate and sensitize the population. Other sectors such
as education, private and public sectors, civil society, community leaders and nongovernmental
organizations will all have a part to play to contribute to the concretization and reinforcement of
the strategies and interventions.

123

124

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1

Malnutrition, micronutrient deﬁciencies and ingestion of toxic compounds continue to be
priority public health problems. Most of the neurological disorders associated with them
are preventable.

Priorities need to be identiﬁed for the actions needed to deal with neurological disorders
associated with malnutrition, micronutrient deﬁciencies, or the ingestion of toxic
compounds.

The strategy of communication should use appropriate and diversiﬁed channels for
better sensitization and social mobilization. It should target the general population,
health professionals and social workers. Schools constitute a favourable environment
because they provide access to teachers and pupils who can carry the message home at
household level.

The interrelationship between neurological disorders and nutrition must be stressed in the
training of general practitioners, paramedical staff and social workers. The capacities of
nongovernmental organizations, community organizations and the education sector must
be reinforced and developed so as to target the prevention of nutritional problems.

Development and review of training manuals, counselling guidelines and training curricula
is a necessary part of capacity-strengthening whose contents need to be centred on
speciﬁc subjects in accordance with needs assessment, the gaps to be ﬁlled and the
interventions to be implemented in the community.

Educative support to the health services must be elaborated to develop tools of education
and counselling for primary and secondary prevention and to develop guidelines and
support to facilitate management of the targeted diseases and secondary complications,
including disabilities and rehabilitation.

neurological disorders: a public health approach

REFERENCES
1. The state of food insecurity in the world 2000. Rome, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations, 2000.
2. Ezzati M et al. Selected major risk factors and global and regional burden of disease. Lancet, 2002,
360:1347–1360.
3. Onis M de et al. The worldwide magnitude of protein–energy malnutrition: an overview from the WHO Global
Database on Child Growth. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 1993, 71:703–712.
4. Grantham-McGregor S, Ani C. Cognition and undernutrition: evidence for vulnerable period. Forum of
Nutrition, 2003, 56:272–275.
5. Grantham-McGregor S, Baker-Henningham H. Review of the evidence linking protein and energy to mental
development. Public Health Nutrition, 2005, 8:1191–1201.
6. Grantham-McGregor SM et al. Nutritional supplementation, psychosocial stimulation, and mental
development of stunted children: the Jamaican study. Lancet, 1991, 338:1–5.
7. Management of severe malnutrition: a manual for physicians and other senior health workers. Geneva, World
Health Organization, 1999 (http://www.who.int/nut).
8. McCarthy M. Cuban neuropathy. Lancet, 1994, 343:844.
9. Ordunez-Garcia PO et al. Cuban epidemic neuropathy, 1991 to 1994: history repeats itself a century after the
“amblyopia of the blockade”. American Journal of Public Health, 1996, 86:738–743.
10. Neumann CG et al. Biochemical evidence of thiamin deﬁciency in young Ghanaian children. American Journal
of Clinical Nutrition, 1979, 32:99–104.
11. Malouf R, Grimley Evans J. The effect of vitamin B6 on cognition. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews,
2003, 4:CD004393.
12. Thaver D et al. Pyridoxine (vitamin B6) supplementation in pregnancy. Cochrane Database of Systematic
Reviews, 2006, 2:CD000179.
13. Lumley J et al. Periconceptional supplementation with folate and/or multivitamins for preventing neural tube
defects. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2001, 3:CD001056.
14. Oakley GP Jr et al. Recommendations for accelerating global action to prevent folic acid-preventable birth
defects and other folate-deﬁciency diseases: meeting of experts on preventing folic acid-preventable neural
tube defects. Birth Defects Research. Part A, Clinical and Molecular Teratology, 2004, 70:835–837.
15. Oakley GP Jr et al. Scientiﬁc evidence supporting folic acid fortiﬁcation of ﬂour in Australia and New
Zealand. Birth Defects Research. Part A, Clinical and Molecular Teratology, 2004, 70:838–841.
16. Dietrich M et al. The effect of folate fortiﬁcation of cereal-grain products on blood folate status, dietary
folate intake, and dietary folate sources among adult non-supplement users in the United States. Journal of
the American College of Nutrition, 2005, 24:266–274.
17. Eichholzer M, Tonz O, Zimmerman R. Folic acid: a public health challenge. Lancet, 2006, 367:1352–1361.
18. Malouf R, Areosa Sastre A. Vitamin B12 for cognition. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2003, 3:
CD004326.
19. The state of the world’s children. New York, United Nations Children’s Fund, 1995.
20. Assessment of iodine deﬁciency disorders and monitoring their elimination. A guide for programme managers.
Geneva, World Health Organization, 2001.
21. Andraca I de et al. Psychomotor development and behavior in iron-deﬁcient anemic infants. Nutrition
Reviews, 1997, 55:125–132.
22. Lozoff B, Wachs T. Functional correlates of nutritional anemias in infancy and childhood – child development
and behavior. In: Ramakrishnan U, ed. Nutritional anemias. Boca Raton, FL, CRC Press, 2001:69–88.
23. Hunt JM. Reversing productivity losses from iron deﬁciency: the economic case. Journal of Nutrition, 2002,
132(Suppl. 4):794S–801S.
24. Horton S. Opportunities for investment in nutrition in low-income Asia. Asian Development Review, 1999,
17:246–273.
25. WHO Global Malaria Programme. Geneva, World Health Organization (http://malaria.who.int/).
26. Bentley ME et al. Zinc supplementation affects the activity patterns of rural Guatemalan infants. Journal of
Nutrition, 1997, 127:1333–1338.
27. Black MM et al. Iron and zinc supplementation promote motor development and exploratory behavior among
Bangladeshi infants. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2004, 80:903–910.
28. Aggett P. Severe zinc deﬁciency. In: Mills C, ed. Zinc in human biology. London, Springer, 1989:259–280.
29. Rayman MP. The importance of selenium to human health. Lancet, 2000, 356:233–241.
30. Reilly C. The nutritional trace metals. Oxford, Blackwell Publishing, 2004.
31. Román GC et al. Tropical myeloneuropathies: the hidden endemias. Neurology, 1985, 35:1158–1170.
32. Fisher C. Residual neuropathological changes in Canadians held prisoners of war by the Japanese
(Strachan’s disease). Canadian Services Medical Journal, 1955, 11:157–199.

125

126

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
33. Osuntokun BO. Cassava diet, chronic cyanide intoxication and neuropathy in Nigerian Africans. World Review
of Nutrition and Dietetics, 1981, 36:141–173.
34. Oluwole O et al. Persistence of tropical ataxic neuropathy in a Nigerian community. Journal of Neurology,
Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 2000, 69:96–101.
35. Acton H. An investigation into the causation of lathyrism in man. Indian Medical Gazette, 1922, 57:241–247.
36. Spencer PS et al. Lathyrism: evidence for role of the neuroexcitatory aminoacid BOAA. Lancet, 1986,
2(8515):1066–1067.
37. Gardner A, Sakiewicz N. A review of neurolathyrism including the Russian and Polish literature. Experimental
Medicine and Surgery, 1963, 21:164–191.
38. Dwivedi MP, Prasad BG. An epidemiological study of lathyrism in the district of Rewa, Madhya Pradesh.
Indian Journal of Medical Research, 1964, 52:81–116.
39. Haimanot R et al. Lathyrism in rural northwestern Ethiopia: a highly prevalent neurotoxic disorder.
International Journal of Epidemiology, 1990, 19:664–672.
40. Proietti FA et al. Global epidemiology of HTLV-I infection and associated diseases. Oncogene, 2005,
24:6058–6068.
41. Konzo, a distinct type of upper motoneuron disease. Weekly Epidemiological Record, 1996, 71:225–232.
42. Tylleskär T et al. Cassava cyanogens and konzo, an upper motoneuron disease found in Africa. Lancet, 1992,
339:208–211.
43. Kesler A, Pianka P. Toxic optic neuropathy. Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports, 2003, 3:410–414.
44. Chaudhuri JD. Alcohol and the developing fetus – a review. Medical Science Monitor, 2000, 6:1031–1041.
45. Chang G. Screening and brief intervention in prenatal care settings. Alcohol Research and Health, 2005,
28:80–84.
46. Agelink M et al. Alcoholism, peripheral neuropathy (PNP) and cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (CAN).
Journal of the Neurological Sciences, 1998, 161:135–142.
47. Rehm J et al. Alcohol use. In: Ezzati M et al., eds. Comparative quantiﬁcation of health risks. Global and
regional burden of disease attributable to selected major risk factors. Geneva, World Health Organization,
2004:959–1108.

RECOMMENDED READING
■ Reilly C. The nutritional trace metals. Oxford, Blackwell Publishing, 2004.
■ Assessment of iodine deﬁciency disorders and monitoring their elimination. A guide for programme managers. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2001.
■ Physical status: the use and interpretation of anthropometry. Geneva, World Health Organization, 1995.
■ The Micronutrient Initiative web site (http://www.micronutrient.org/) includes links to the most important
Internet sites regarding the individual micronutrients discussed in this chapter.

neurological disorders: a public health approach

3.7 Pain associated with
neurological disorders
128 Types of pain associated with neurological
disorders
130 Assessment of pain
131 Public health aspects of pain disorders

Pain can be a direct or an indirect consequence of a
neurological disorder, with physical and psychological
Treatment and care
dimensions that are both essential for its correct diagResearch
nosis and treatment. Pain — acute and chronic — is a
Training
major public health problem that poses signiﬁcant challenges to health professionals involved in its treatment.
Conclusions and recommendations
Chronic pain may persist long after initial tissue damage
has healed: in such cases, it becomes a speciﬁc health-care problem and a recognized disease. Adequate pain treatment is a human right, and it is the duty of any
health-care system to provide it.

133 Disability and burden
133
136
136
137

The current and most widely used deﬁnition of pain was published by the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) in 1979, which states that pain is “an unpleasant sensory and
emotional experience associated with actual or potential tissue damage or, is described in terms
of such damage” (1). This deﬁnition was qualiﬁed by the Taxonomy Task Force of the association
in 1994 (2): “Pain is always subjective. Each individual learns the applications of the word through
experiences relating to injuries in early life”.
The physiological effect of pain is to warn of tissue damage and so to protect life. Pain is
classiﬁed as nociceptive if it is caused by the activation of nociceptors (primary sensory neurons
for pain). Nociceptive pain can be somatic (pain originating from the skin or musculoskeletal
system) or visceral (pain originating from visceral organs). The sensory system itself can be damaged and become the source of continuous pain. This type of pain is classiﬁed as neuropathic.
Chronic neuropathic pain has no physical protective role as it continues without obvious ongoing
tissue damage. Pain without any recognizable tissue or nerve damage has its cause classiﬁed
as idiopathic pain. Any individual pain state may be a combination of different pains. A clinician’s
duty is to diagnose, treat and support pain patients, which means the identiﬁcation of pain type(s)
and their causative disease(s). It is also to provide adequate treatment aimed at the cause of the
pain and symptomatic relief which should include psychosocial support. As the deﬁnition of pain
reveals, pain has both a physical and a psychological element. The latter plays an important part
in chronic pain disorders and their management. Adequate pain treatment is a human right and
organization of it involving all its dimensions is the ethical and legal duty of society, health-care
professionals and health-care policy-makers.

127

128

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

TYPES OF PAIN ASSOCIATED WITH NEUROLOGICAL
DISORDERS
Pain can be a direct or an indirect consequence of a neurological disorder. The former is seen
in neurological conditions where there has been a lesion or disease of pathways that normally
transmit information about painful stimuli either in the peripheral or in the central nervous system
(CNS). These types of pain are termed neuropathic pains. Pain can also be an indirect consequence of a nervous disease when it causes secondary activation of pain pathways. Examples of
these types of pain include musculoskeletal pain in extrapyramidal diseases such as Parkinson’s
disease, or deformity of joints and limbs due to neuropathies or infections.
It is useful to distinguish between acute and chronic pain. Pain begins frequently as an acute
experience but, for a variety of reasons — some physical and often some psychological — it
becomes a long-term or chronic problem. According to the IASP classiﬁcation of chronic pain,
this term refers to any pain exceeding three months in duration.

Pain directly caused by diseases or abnormalities
of the nervous system
Neuropathic pain
In contrast to nociceptive pain which is the result of stimulation of primary sensory nerves for pain,
neuropathic pain results when a lesion or disruption of function occurs in the nervous system.
Neuropathic pain is often associated with marked emotional changes, especially depression, and
disability in activities of daily life. If the cause is located in the peripheral nervous system, it gives
rise to peripheral neuropathic pain and if it is located in the CNS (brain or spinal cord) it gives rise
to central neuropathic pain.
Peripheral neuropathic pain. Painful diabetic neuropathy and the neuralgia that develops after
herpes zoster are the most frequently studied peripheral neuropathic pain conditions. Diabetic
neuropathy has been estimated to afﬂict 45–75% of patients with diabetes mellitus. About 10%
of these develop painful diabetic neuropathy, in particular when the function of small nerve ﬁbres
is impaired. Pain is a normal symptom of acute herpes zoster, but disappears in most cases with
the healing of the rash. In 9–14% of patients, pain persists chronically beyond the healing process
(postherpetic neuralgia). Neuropathic pain may develop also after peripheral nerve trauma as in
the condition of chemotherapy-induced neuropathy.
The frequencies of many types of peripheral neuropathic pain are not known in detail but vary
considerably because of differences in the frequency of underlying diseases in different parts
of the world. While pain caused by leprosy is common in Brazil and parts of Asia, such pains
are exceedingly rare in Western parts of the world. Because of an explosion in the frequency of
diabetes as a result of obesity in many industrialized countries and in South-East Asia, the likely
result of this will be an increase in painful diabetic neuropathy within the next decade.
Central neuropathic pain, including pain associated with diseases of the spinal cord. Central
post-stroke pain is the most frequently studied central neuropathic pain condition. It occurs in
about 8% of patients who suffer an infarction of the brain. The incidence is higher for infarctions
of the brainstem. Two thirds of patients with multiple sclerosis have chronic pain, half of which is
central neuropathic pain (3).
Damage to tissues of the spinal cord and, at times, nerve roots, carries an even higher risk
of leading to central neuropathic pain (myelopathic pain). The cause may lie within the cord and
be intrinsic, or alternatively, be extrinsic outside the cord. Intrinsic causes include multiple sclerosis and acute transverse myelitis, both of which may result in paraplegia and pain. In certain
developing countries, for example in sub-Saharan Africa, intrinsic damage may be attributable
to neurotoxins — as in the case of incorrectly prepared cassava, which leads to tropical spastic

neurological disorders: a public health approach
paresis. Lathyrism resulting from consumption of the grass pea (Lathyrus sativus) may cause a
spinal disorder and, in both cases, pain is a signiﬁcant symptom (see also Chapter 3.6).
Extrinsic causes of cord damage and pain are numerous. Spinal cord injuries result in pain in
about two thirds of all patients (4). Other causes include compressive lesions, for example tumours
and infections, especially tuberculosis and brucellosis. The former group comprises both primary
CNS tumours (e.g. neuroﬁbroma and meningioma) and secondary tumours from breast, lung,
prostate and other organs, together with lymphomas and leukaemias.

Pain indirectly caused by diseases or abnormalities of the nervous
system
Pain arises as a result of several distinct abnormalities of the musculoskeletal system, secondary
to neurological disorders. These can be grouped into the following categories:
■ musculoskeletal pain resulting from spasticity of muscles;
■ musculoskeletal pain caused by muscle rigidity;
■ joint deformities and other abnormalities secondary to altered musculoskeletal function and
their effects on peripheral nerves.

Pain caused by spasticity
Pain caused by spasticity is characterized by phasic increases in muscle tone with an easy predisposition to contractures and disuse atrophy if unrelieved or improperly managed. In developed
countries, the main causes of painful spasticity are strokes, demyelinating diseases such as
multiple sclerosis, and spinal cord injuries. With an ageing population, especially in the industrialized countries, and rising numbers of road trafﬁc accidents, an increase in these conditions, and
therefore pain, is to be expected in the future.
Strokes and spinal cord disease are also major causes of spasticity in developing countries, for
example stroke is the most common cause of neurological admissions in Nigeria.

Pain caused by muscle rigidity
Pain can be one of the ﬁrst manifestations of rigidity and is typically seen in Parkinson’s disease,
dystonia and tetanus. Apart from muscle pain in the early stages of Parkinson’s disease, it may
also occur after a long period of treatment and the use of high doses of L-Dopa causing painful
dystonia and freezing episodes. Poverty of movement and tremors may also contribute to the
pain in this disorder.
Tetanus infection, common in developing countries, is characterized by intense and painful
muscle spasms and the development of generalized muscle rigidity, which is extremely painful.
During intense spasm, fractures of spinal vertebrae may occur, adding further pain.

Pain caused by joint deformities
A range of neurological disorders give rise to abnormal stresses on joints and, at times, cause
deformity, subluxation or even dislocation. For example “frozen shoulder” or pericapsulitis occurs
in 5–8% of stroke patients. Disuse results in the atrophy of muscles around joints and various
abnormalities giving rise to pain, the source of which are the tissues lining the joint. In addition,
deformities may result in damage to nerves in close proximity resulting in neuropathic pain of the
“evoked” or spontaneous type.
The literature does not give data for the prevalence and incidence of the pain associated with
the disorders mentioned.

Complex painful disorders
Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) refers to several painful disorders associated with damage to the nervous system including the autonomic nervous system. CRPS Type I was previously

129

130

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
known as reﬂex sympathetic dystrophy, with the cause or preceding event being a minor injury
or limb fracture. CRPS II, formerly known as causalgia, develops after injury to a major peripheral
nerve. The symptoms exceed both in magnitude and duration those which might be expected
clinically given the nature of the causative event. Also, patients often experience a signiﬁcant
reduction in motor function. The pain is spontaneous in type with allodynia and hyperalgesia. Other
features of the syndrome include local oedema or swelling of tissues, abnormalities of local blood
ﬂow, sweating (autonomic changes) and local trophic changes. Both conditions tend to become
chronic. They are a cause of signiﬁcant psychological and psychiatric disturbance, and treatment
is a major problem.

Headache and facial pain
Any discussion of pain arising from disorders of the nervous system must include headache
and facial pains: these conditions are discussed in Chapter 3.3. They have been the subject
of considerable research and been carefully classiﬁed by the International Headache Society.
Epidemiological studies have focused primarily on migraine and tension-type headaches (primary
headache disorders). Secondary headache disorders are also described (see Box 3.3.1).

ASSESSMENT OF PAIN
Pain has physical and psychological dimensions, both of which may be measured; they form an
important aspect of the diagnosis of painful disorders and are essential for the correct application of treatment and its assessment. Pain is a subjective experience but physiological changes
that accompany it may be measured: they include changes in heart rate, muscle tension, skin
conductivity and electrical and metabolic activity in the brain. These measures are most consistent
in acute rather than chronic pain and they are used primarily in laboratory studies. Clinically, pain
assessment includes a full history of the development, nature, intensity, location and duration of
pain. In addition to clinical examination, self-report measures of pain are often used.
The use of words as descriptors of pain have permitted the development of graded descriptions
of pain severity. For example, mild pain, moderate pain, severe pain and very severe pain, to which
numerical values may be attached (1–4), may be graded on a numerical scale from 0 to 4 indicating the level of pain being experienced. In clinical practice, however, there is widespread use of a
0–10 scale, a visual analogue scale, which is easy to understand and use and is not affected by
differences in language. Such measures are often repeated at intervals to gain information about
the levels of pain throughout the day, after a given procedure or as a consequence of treatment.
More sophisticated verbal measures use groups of words to describe the three dimensions of
pain, namely its sensory component, the mood-related dimension and its evaluative aspect. This
technique was devised by Melzack and others and is best seen in the Short-Form McGill Pain
Questionnaire (5). The questionnaire requires the patient to be well acquainted with the words
used. Often because of age, not having English as a ﬁrst language or as a result of some form
of mental impairment, the scale cannot be used. In its place it is possible to use a “faces scale”
in which recognizable facial images representing a range of pain experiences from no pain to
very severe pain are readily understood. Such scales are often used with children. In the case of
patients with pain generated as a result of a lesion within the nervous system (neuropathic pain)
speciﬁc measures have been devised to distinguish between that type of pain and pain arising
outside the nervous system (6). In the assessment of a patient with neuropathic pain, the evaluation of sensory function is crucial and can be carried out at the bedside with simple equipment.
Another technique used in clinical assessment includes pain drawings, which allow the patient to
mark the location of pain and its qualities using a code on a diagram of the body. A pain diary is used
by patients to record levels of pain throughout the day, using a visual analogue scale. This reveals
the pattern of pain severity in relation to drug therapy and activity levels. Finally, pain behaviour is

neurological disorders: a public health approach
often used to aid diagnosis. It is especially useful for determining the extent to which psychological
factors inﬂuence pain. For example, a wide discrepancy between the behaviour exhibited in the
clinic and what might be expected, given the nature of the disorder, is a valuable clue to a person’s
emotional state, ability to cope with pain and conscious or unconscious desire to communicate
distress non-verbally to the clinician. Pain assessment should take account of the patient’s sex and
ethnic and cultural background, all of which tend to inﬂuence the clinical presentation.

PUBLIC HEALTH ASPECTS OF PAIN DISORDERS
Pain — acute and chronic — is a ubiquitous experience and it is also a major public health problem
that poses signiﬁcant challenges to health professionals involved in its treatment. Reliable data
about the prevalence and incidence of pain, however, are limited, with available studies being based
on either regional surveys of a broad spectrum of painful disorders, or speciﬁc pain states.
In a collaborative study of pain in a primary care setting, WHO revealed that persistent pain
afﬂicted between 5.3% and 33% of individuals resident in both developing and developed countries. The lowest frequency was reported in Nigeria and the highest in Santiago, Chile. The study
revealed that persistent pain was associated with depression, which affected the quality of life
and reduced the level of daily activity of the sufferers (7 ). It was concluded that the essential
need to work and to earn income might be a reason why many people in developing countries
tolerate pain rather than reporting to doctors or hospitals. Therefore, lack of an adequate social
and health-care support network, cost implications and job security must inﬂuence the extent to
which people living in developing countries and suffer pain fail to seek help.
A detailed study of the prevalence, severity, treatment and social impact of chronic pain in 15
European countries was carried out recently (8). The prevalence of chronic pain ranged between
12% and 30%, ﬁgures similar to those in the WHO study. The most common sites for pain were the
head and neck, knees and lower back. Of the respondents, 25% had head or neck pains (migraine
headaches, 4%; nerve injury from whiplash injuries, 4%). Although back pain may have a neurological cause, the likelihood was that in the great majority pain was the result of musculoskeletal
disorders or back strain. The authors concluded that one in ﬁve Europeans suffer from chronic pain
which is of moderate severity in two thirds and severe in the remainder. The study also reveals
that, in the opinion of 40% of the respondents, their pain had not been treated satisfactorily and
20% reported that they were depressed. In economic terms, 61% were less able or unable to work
outside their homes, 19% had lost their jobs because of pain and another 13% had changed their
jobs for the same reason.
A large-scale survey in Australia (9) of just over 17 000 adults with pain daily for at least three
months (chronic pain) yielded a prevalence rate of 18.5%; in a comparable survey in Denmark,
a prevalence rate of 19% was obtained (10). It is therefore evident from the three surveys that
a prevalence rate for chronic pain of 18–20% is to be expected in adult populations selected at
random from developed countries. Unfortunately, these ﬁgures do not give any detail about pain
arising from the nervous system, except for the information about head and neck pain in the
European survey.
Certain neurological disorders causing pain have been examined in terms of the incidence of
pain. For example Kurtzke (11) estimated that the annual incidence of herpes zoster infection in
the United States was 400 per 100 000 of the population. A study of the incidence of post-herpetic
neuralgia in 1982 revealed a ﬁgure of 40 per 100 000 (12). Further information from Bowsher (13)
indicated that the number of individuals with post-herpetic neuralgia increases with age so that
40% of people over 80 years of age who acquire acute herpes zoster will suffer from chronic postherpetic neuralgia. In populations in which ever greater numbers are living to 80 years and more,
there is likely to be a signiﬁcant increase in individuals suffering from post-herpetic neuralgia.

131

132

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
The earlier study by Ragozzino et al. (12) gave ﬁgures for the anatomical distribution of the
neuralgia that was present in 56% in the thoracic region, 13% in the face and 13% in the lumbar
regions; 11% had pain in the cervical region. One third of patients with multiple sclerosis develop
neuropathic pain states, of whom trigeminal neuralgia occurs in 5%, and another one third develop
other forms of chronic pain (3). There is an increase in the incidence of trigeminal neuralgia in
patients with cancer and other diseases that impair the immunological systems.
It is signiﬁcant that one third of cancer patients have a neuropathic component to their pain as
do a similar proportion of patients with prolonged low back pain (14).
It should be noted that stump pain arises from a severed nerve in the limb and may be caused
by a local neuroma or by tethering of the severed nerve to local tissues. In either case the pain
is of the peripheral neuropathic type. In contrast, phantom limb pain is central neuropathic pain
and more difﬁcult to treat.
Central stroke pain is deﬁned as neuropathic pain that follows an unequivocal episode of
stroke. It is associated with partial sensory loss in all but a few cases. A prospective study by
Andersen et al. (15) revealed a one-year incidence of 8%, with symptoms being severe in 5%
and mild in 3%. For most patients the pain develops gradually during the ﬁrst month but delays
of many months have been recorded. The pain is incapacitating, distressing and often even more
so than other symptoms.
Headache disorders have also been the subject of intensive epidemiological research (see
Chapter 3.3).
Poor relief of acute pain is a recognized risk factor for the development of chronic pain after
various forms of surgery, for example herniotomy, mastectomy, thoracotomy, dental surgery and
other forms of trauma. In part, this is the result of nerve injury which presents as acute neuropathic pain in 1–3% of patients. The majority of such patients experience persistent pain one year
after the causative event, indicating that acute neuropathic pain is a very deﬁnite risk factor for
chronic pain. Prompt treatment of early nerve pain is therefore important (16).
Hernia repair is followed by moderate to severe pain in 12% of patients one year postoperatively
and is of the somatic or neuropathic type (17 ). Breast surgery of various types gives rise to the
experience of phantom breast and pain with or without a phantom.
Information about the incidence and prevalence of pain generally, and neurologically related
pain in particular, is almost totally lacking for developing countries, although there is no reason
to believe that conditions that give rise to pain such as stroke, multiple sclerosis, various forms of
headache and other disorders vary in nature. There may well be differences, however, in the extent
to which some disorders are present, for example multiple sclerosis is less common in developing
countries, whereas others are not encountered in the Western world, such as certain forms of
poisoning by neurotoxins from foods, and leprosy which is a cause of neuropathic pain.
HIV/AIDS is a major cause of neuropathic pain in the later stages of the disease: 70% of
AIDS sufferers develop this form of pain, which is severe and comparable with the severe pain
experienced in cases of advanced cancer. The incidence of severe pain must, therefore, be high
in countries where AIDS is a major health problem.

Box 3.7.1 Signs and symptoms of chronic pain
■ Immobility and consequent wasting of muscle, joints,
etc.
■ Depression of the immune system causing increased
susceptibility to disease
■ Disturbed sleep
■ Poor appetite and nutrition
■ Dependence on medication

■ Overdependence on family and other caregivers
■ Overuse and inappropriate use of health-care providers
and systems
■ Poor performance on the job, or disability
■ Isolation from society and family
■ Anxiety and fear
■ Bitterness, frustration, depression and suicide

neurological disorders: a public health approach
The ﬁgures quoted in this section show that a signiﬁcant number of individuals suffer from
chronic and incapacitating pain as a result of diseases of the nervous system, or as a result of
damage to peripheral nerves at the time of surgery and other forms of trauma. The nature of the
pain, which is often neuropathic in type, means that the sufferer has a disabling condition that in
time may be primarily the result of pain, which is difﬁcult to relieve. As such, it poses a signiﬁcant
health problem in terms of its personal, social and economic consequences.

DISABILITY AND BURDEN
Anyone involved primarily in the management of chronic pain is aware that it may persist long
after the initial tissue damage has healed. Pain reﬂects pathophysiological changes in the nervous
system and they, together with changes that usually occur in patients’ emotions and behaviour,
have led to the conclusion that, in such cases, chronic pain is a speciﬁc health-care problem and
a disease in its own right. This diagnostic category is not fully accepted among clinicians because
many continue to believe that pain must be a symptom of an ongoing disease or injury. Current
research reveals, however, that the pathophysiological changes mentioned persist when signs of
the original cause for pain have disappeared. The signs and symptoms of chronic pain, once it has
evolved into a disease, are listed in Box 3.7.1. The combination of these features of the condition
reveal the potential for physical impairment, disability and handicap which collectively form the
basis of signiﬁcant degrees of burden for both the patient and the family.

TREATMENT AND CARE
Barriers to effective pain relief
Educational barriers
Despite the wide availability of teaching aids for educating professional groups who are heavily engaged in pain management (18), relatively little attention has been given to their use in
developed countries. They are used to an even lesser extent in developing countries. Therefore
many doctors, nurses and others dealing with patients in pain enter their professional careers
inadequately equipped to deal with the most common symptom and cause of considerable suffering worldwide.

Politicoeconomic barriers
The availability of drugs for the treatment of pain is a problem in over 150 countries. Frequently,
pain management has a low priority, because the chief focus of attention is infectious diseases
and, often, there are exaggerated fears of dependence with very restrictive drug control policies.
In addition, in developing countries, the cost of medicines generally and therefore problems in their
procurement, manufacture and distribution, add further barriers to their use.

A treatment gap
In many countries, therefore, there is a treatment gap, meaning that there is a difference between
what could be done to relieve pain and what is being done. That gap exists in a number of developed countries, primarily because of poor pain education and the often limited and patchy nature
of specialized facilities for pain treatment. Additionally, in developing countries these problems
are far greater and the gap is far wider because of the lack of education, access to appropriate
drugs for pain relief and facilities for pain management.
The treatment gap can be reduced worldwide by improving pain education, increasing facilities
for pain treatment and access to pain-relieving drugs. In the case of opioid analgesics, an increase
in their availability and the employment of correct protocols is a matter of urgency. Improvements
of this kind are possible if use is made of the guidelines published by WHO, together with the

133

134

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
International Narcotics Control Board, on achieving balance in a national opioids control policy,
which are available in 22 languages on the web site of the WHO Collaborating Centre for Policy
and Communications in Cancer Care (19). Also, no stricter measures should be enacted than those
requested by the international drug conventions and international recommendations (20) on the
use of opioid medicines. WHO is developing a programme to assist countries in improving access
to medications controlled under the drug conventions (see Box 3.7.2) (19).

Management of pain of neurological origin
The range of treatments available for pain directly caused by diseases of the nervous system
includes pharmacological, physical, interventional (nerve blocks, etc.) and psychological therapies.
Treatments for pain are used in association with other forms of treatment for the primary condition, unless of course pain is itself the primary disorder. IASP deﬁnitions of pain treatment facilities
and services are given in Box 3.7.3.
There are many studies of the medical treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain (21). There are
far fewer studies published on the treatment of central neuropathic pain, for example post-stroke
pain. Neuropathic pain does not respond well to non-opioid analgesics such as paracetamol, acetylsalicylic acid and ibuprofen — a non-steroidal anti-inﬂammatory drug. Opioids have been shown
to have some efﬁcacy in neuropathic pain but there are speciﬁc contraindications for their use.
Topical agents may give local relief with relatively little toxicity; they include lidocaine and, to a
lesser extent, capsaicin cream, particularly in the treatment of post-herpetic neuralgia. In selected
cases, electrical stimulation techniques such as transcutaneous electrical stimulation or dorsal
column stimulation may be used, but the latter in particular is expensive which clearly limits its use.
Pain associated with spasticity and rigidity is treated with muscle relaxants. In the case of baclofen,
it can be administered systemically or intrathecally. However, the latter route requires administration by a trained specialist and therefore is unlikely to be freely available in developing countries.
Pain arising from joints secondarily damaged by the effects of neurological disorders is usually
controlled using simple analgesics, for example paracetamol or a non-steroidal anti-inﬂammatory
drug (NSAID).

Box 3.7.2 Access to Controlled Medications Programme
In many parts of the world, patients suffering severe pain
face immense challenges in obtaining pain relief, because
the opioids that could provide such relief have been categorized as “controlled substances”. They are therefore
subject to stringent international control and rendered
inaccessible.
Severe under-treatment is reported in more than 150
countries, both developing and industrialized. They account for about 80% of the world population. Annually, up
to 10 million people suffer from lack of access to controlled
medications. Nearly one billion of the people living today
will encounter this problem sooner or later. Most of them
are pain patients.
The future Access to Controlled Medications Programme,
initiated by WHO, will address the main causes for impaired
access. These causes stem essentially from an imbalance
between the prevention of abuse of controlled substances and the use of such substances for legitimate medical
purposes.
For almost 50 years the focus was on the prevention of

abuse, which led to too strict rules in many countries that
do not allow medical use. In relation to that, prejudice has
developed consisting of an unjustiﬁed fear of psychological
dependence of patients on opioid medication and an unjustiﬁed fear of death caused by opioids. Many countries have
neglected their obligation to provide sufﬁcient analgesia
given in the United Nations drug conventions and as called
for by many international bodies (the International Narcotics Control Board, the United Nations Economic and Social
Council, the World Health Assembly, etc.)
The programme, as proposed, will focus on regulatory
barriers, the functioning of the estimate system for importing/exporting by the countries, and the education of healthcare professionals and others involved. It will organize regional workshops where health-care providers, legislators
and law enforcers will exchange their views and the problems they encounter. It will train civil servants responsible
for submitting estimates and, in doing so, train health-care
providers in the rational use of opioids. Furthermore, it will
develop other activities, including advocacy.

neurological disorders: a public health approach
Psychological techniques — and cognitive/behaviour therapy in particular — are used to help
patients cope with pain and maximize their social, family and occupational activities. Research
reveals that such therapies are effective in the reduction of chronic pain and absenteeism from
work (22).
Physical therapy carried out by physiotherapists and nurses is an important part of the management of many patients with neurological diseases, painful or not, including strokes, multiple
sclerosis and Parkinson’s disease, to name but a few. Relaxation techniques, hydrotherapy and
exercise are helpful in the management of painful conditions that have a musculoskeletal component. In fact, in the case of CRPS type I and II they form the ﬁrst line of treatment when used
together with analgesics. There is good evidence that multimodal treatment and rehabilitation
programmes are effective in the treatment of chronic pain (23, 24).
All health-care workers who treat pain, especially chronic pain, whatever its cause, can expect
about 20% of patients to develop symptoms of a depressive disorder. Among patients attending
pain clinics, 18% have moderate to severe depression when pain is chronic and persistent. It
is known that the presence of depression is associated with an increased experience of pain
whatever its origin and also reduced tolerance for pain. Therefore the quality of life of the patient
is signiﬁcantly reduced, and active treatment for depression is an important aspect of the management of the chronic pain disorder.

Service delivery
The management of neurological diseases is primarily a matter for specialist medical and nursing
staff, both in developed and developing countries. In contrast, speciﬁc facilities for pain management, especially chronic pain management outside neurological centres, are much less well
organized and are often absent, especially in developing countries. The relief of pain should be
one of the fundamental objectives of any health service. Good practice should ensure provision of
evidence-based, high quality, adequately resourced services dedicated to the care of patients and
to the continuing education and development of staff. In 1991, an IASP Taskforce on Guidelines for
Desirable Characteristics for Pain Treatment Facilities issued deﬁnitions of the various types of service in existence for the management of pain by pain clinicians (25). They are given in Box 3.7.3.

Box 3.7.3 Deﬁnitions of pain treatment services
Pain treatment facility

A generic term describing all forms of pain treatment facilities without regard to personnel involved or types of patient served.

Multidisciplinary pain centre

The centre comprises a team of professionals from several disciplines (e.g. medicine,
nursing, physiotherapy, psychology) devoted to the analysis and management of pain,
both acute and chronic. The work of the centre includes teaching and research. The
centre may have both inpatient and outpatient facilities.

Multidisciplinary pain clinic

The clinic is a health-care delivery facility with a team of trained professionals who
are devoted to the analysis and treatment of pain. The clinic may have both inpatient
and outpatient facilities.

Pain clinic

Pain clinics vary in size and stafﬁng complements but should not be run single-handed
by a clinician. The clinic may specialize in speciﬁc diagnoses (e.g. neuropathic pain) or
pains related to a speciﬁc area of the body (e.g. headache).

Modality-orientated clinic

The clinic offers a speciﬁc type of treatment and does not conduct comprehensive assessment or management. Examples include clinics dealing with nerve block, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), acupuncture and hypnosis.

Source: (25).

135

136

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
During the past 15–20 years, the ideals for pain management in general, and services in particular, have increasingly been met in developed countries. They are met to a much lesser extent
in developing countries, where other health priorities, costs of treatment and availability of trained
personnel are all contributing factors to the relative lack of resources. Nevertheless, strenuous
efforts to improve services for people in pain are being made in many developing countries. Even
though services for neurological disorders are better provided, many patients with pain of neurological origin may never reach such centres. There is therefore a great need for health-care providers
to devote more resources to pain relief in general, which in turn will bring about an improvement in
the treatment facilities available for neurological patients with pain.

RESEARCH
Worldwide, research on pain takes place within the disciplines of experimental neurosciences (molecular biology, anatomy, physiology), clinical neurosciences (neurology, neurosurgery, psychiatry),
psychology and psychosomatic medicine, anaesthesiology, orthopaedic surgery, public health
and community medicine, physical therapy and nursing. The IASP is an interdisciplinary scientiﬁc
society that fosters interactions between these diverse lines of research via its triennial World
Pain Congresses, its scientiﬁc journal Pain, and books published by IASP Press (18). Its Special
Interest Group on Neuropathic Pain provides a forum for scientiﬁc exchange on neuropathic pain
and other types of pain that are related to neurological disorders (26).

TRAINING
At present, pain medicine and algesiology are recognized as medical specialties in only a small
number of countries (for example Finland, Germany, Turkey and the United Kingdom). Therefore,
most medical doctors interested in treating patients for pain spend their residency in one of the
existing medical disciplines — particularly anaesthesiology but also orthopaedic surgery, neurology or, more rarely, psychiatry or psychosomatic medicine.
Pain treatment fellowships are offered by some countries, and IASP has postgraduate training positions. In Germany, a medical subspecialty, specialized pain therapy, is supervised by a
licensed training centre and carried out after ﬁnishing a residency in one of the traditional medical
specialties. More general training in pain management does exist but it is very variable within and
between specialist medical areas and between countries.
Training programmes for nurses who will specialize in pain management are growing steadily.
Such programmes exist mainly in relation to palliative care, post-operative pain management
and the work of pain clinics in developed countries but, increasingly, also in countries in the
developing world.
Physiotherapy is a discipline in which pain management is an integral part of the working day
and therefore should be a major aspect of the training of all physiotherapists.
Clinical psychologists have a major role in the treatment of chronic pain patients. Usually they
specialize in pain management after a period of postgraduate training in general clinical psychology and practise either independently or in specialist pain centres. Very few clinical psychologists
are available for work with patients in pain, whether attributable to neurological conditions or not,
in developing countries. However, specialist training in pain management for medical practitioners
who work in hospitals or the community in developing countries is spreading gradually. IASP has
provided a core curriculum for professional education in pain that forms the basis for growing
numbers of pain education programmes and is available via open access (27 ).

neurological disorders: a public health approach

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1

Pain is associated with neurological disorders in three ways: as neuropathic pain
resulting from diseases, infections or injuries of the central and peripheral nervous
system, as musculoskeletal pain secondary to neurological disorders, and as complex
regional syndromes in which both the somatic and autonomic nervous systems are
involved.

Chronic pain may develop from poorly treated or neglected acute pain as a result
of changes in the function of the CNS: the pain persists and as such has become a
disorder of the nervous system.

Pain is a signiﬁcant symptom in several neurological disorders or after injuries to the
nervous system, adding signiﬁcantly to physical and emotional suffering and often to
disability. Neurologists and non-neurologists who have responsibility for patients with
neurological disorders should ensure that pain is assessed carefully and recorded in
terms of its origins, nature and severity as part of an overall clinical assessment prior to
diagnosis and management.

There is an urgent need for the inclusion of speciﬁc pain education programmes in
undergraduate curricula for doctors, nurses and other health professionals likely to deal
with pain problems. Postgraduate training is also neglected in many countries, though
specialization in pain management is increasing steadily, particularly in developed
countries. There is a need to continue and expand postgraduate training in pain
management and to develop specialized pain management centres.

A treatment gap, which is greatest in developing countries, results from inadequate pain
education, the low priority given to pain relief compared with other medical problems
such as infectious diseases, and poor access to the most powerful analgesics.

A fear of addiction, coupled with unnecessarily restrictive legal controls and limitation
of access by cost and availability of other pain-relieving drugs, signiﬁcantly reduces
the potential for pain relief. Recognized international guidelines for the use of powerful
analgesics should be observed and unduly restrictive regulations should be suitably
modiﬁed to ensure availability on a reasonable basis. Guidelines should be made
available on the use of co-analgesic drugs and other treatments used to relieve or
control very severe pain.

There is an urgent need for more research into chronic pain of neurological origin.

137

138

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

REFERENCES
1. International Association for the Study of Pain Sub-Committee on Taxonomy. Pain Terms: a list with
deﬁnitions and notes on usage, recommended by the IASP Sub-Committee on Taxonomy. Pain, 1979,
6:249–252.
2. Merskey H, Bogduk N. Classiﬁcation of chronic pain: descriptions of chronic pain syndromes and deﬁnitions of
pain terms, 2nd ed. Seattle, WA, IASP Press, 1994:22.
3. Osterberg A, Boivie J, Thuomas KA. Central pain in multiple sclerosis – prevalence and clinical
characteristics. European Journal of Pain, 2005, 9:531–542.
4. Finnerup N, Jensen TS. Spinal cord injury pain – mechanisms and treatment. European Journal of Neurology,
2004, 11:73–82.
5. Melzack R. The short-form McGill questionnaire. Pain, 1987, 30:191–197.
6. Cruccu G et al. EFNS guidelines on neuropathic pain assessment. European Journal of Neurology, 2004,
11:153–162.
7. Gureje O et al. Persistent pain and well-being: a World Health Organization study in primary care. JAMA,
1998, 280:147–151.
8. Breivik H, Collett B, Ventafridda V. Survey of chronic pain in Europe: prevalence, impact on daily life and
treatment. European Journal of Pain, 2006, 10:287–333.
9. Blyth FM et al. Chronic pain in Australia: a prevalence study. Pain, 2001, 89:127–134.
10. Eriksen J et al. Epidemiology of chronic non-malignant pain in Denmark. Pain, 2003, 106:221–228.
11. Kurtzke JG. Neuroepidemiology. Annals of Neurology, 1984, 16:265–277.
12. Ragozzino MW et al. Population based study of herpes zoster and its sequelae. Medicine, 1982, 61:310–316.
13. Bowsher D, Lahuerta J, Brock L. Pain patients: a retrospective survey of 1056 cases. The Pain Clinic, 1984,
1:163–170.
14. Freynhagen R et al. Screening of neuropathic pain components in patients with chronic back pain associated
with nerve root compression: a prospective observational pilot study. Current Medical Research Opinion,
2006, 22:529–537.
15. Andersen G et al. Incidence of central post-stroke pain. Pain, 1995, 61:187–193.
16. Rasmussen PV et al. Therapeutic outcome in neuropathic pain: relationship to evidence of nervous system
lesion. European Journal of Neurology, 2004, 11:545–553.
17. Cunningham J, Temple WJ, Mitchell P. Cooperative hernia study. Pain in the post-repair patient. Annals of
Surgery, 1996, 224:598–602.
18. International Association for the Study of Pain. Seattle, WA (http://www-iasp.pain.org).
19. Achieving balance in national opioids control policy. Guidelines for assessment. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2000 (http://www.medsch.wisc.edu/painpolicy/publicat/00whoabi/00whoabi.htm).
20. Kalso E et al. Recommendations for using opioids in chronic non-cancer pain. European Journal of Pain,
2003, 7:381–386.
21. Finnerup NB et al. Algorithm for neuropathic pain treatment: an evidence-based proposal. Pain, 2005,
118:289–305.
22. Linton S, Nordin E. A 5-year follow-up evaluation of the health and economic consequences of an early
cognitive behavioural intervention for back pain: a randomized controlled trial. Spine, 2006, 31:853–858.
23. Flor H, Fydrich T, Turk DC. Efﬁcacy of multidisciplinary pain treatment centres: a meta-analytic review. Pain,
1992, 49:221–230.
24. Becker N et al. Treatment outcome of chronic non-malignant pain patients managed in a Danish multidisciplinary pain centre compared with general practice: a randomized controlled trial. Pain, 2000,
84:203–211.
25. Loeser JD. Desirable characteristics for pain treatment facilities: report of the IASP taskforce. In: Bond MR,
Charlton JE, Woolf CJ, eds. Proceedings of the V1th World Congress on Pain. Amsterdam, Elsevier, 1991:411–
417.
26. Special Interest Group on Neuropathic Pain of the International Association for the Study of Pain (http://
www.neupsig.org/).
27. Charlton JE. Core curriculum for professional education in pain. Seattle, WA, IASP Press, 2005 (http://www.
iasp-pain.org/CoreCurriculumThirdEdition.htm).

neurological disorders: a public health approach

RECOMMENDED READING
■ Bakonja M, Rowbotham MC. Pharmacological therapy for neuropathic pain. In: McMahon SB, Koltzenburg
M, eds. Wall and Melzack’s textbook of pain. London, Elsevier–Churchill Livingstone, 2005:1075–1083.
■ Baron R. Complex regional pain syndromes. In: McMahon SB, Koltzenburg M, eds. Wall and Melzack’s
textbook of pain. London, Elsevier–Churchill Livingstone, 2005:1011–1027.
■ Boivie J. Central pain. In: McMahon SB, Koltzenburg M, eds. Wall and Melzack’s textbook of pain. London,
Elsevier–Churchill Livingstone, 2005:1057–1074.
■ Bond MR, Simpson KH. Pain, its nature and treatment. London, Elsevier–Churchill Livingstone, 2006.
■ Breivik H, Bond M. Why pain control matters in a world full of killer diseases. Seattle, WA, International
Association for the Study of Pain, 2004 (Pain: Clinical Update, 12, No. 4; http://www.iasp-pain.org/
PCUOpen.html, accessed 27 June 2006).
■ Nikolajsen L, Jensen TS. Phantom limb. In: McMahon SB, Koltzenburg M, eds. Wall and Melzack’s textbook
of pain. London, Elsevier–Churchill Livingstone, 2005:961–971.
■ Achieving balance in national opioids control policy. Guidelines for assessment. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2000.

139

140

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

3.8 Parkinson’s disease
140 Diagnosis
141 Etiology and risk factors
141 Epidemiology and magnitude
142 Course and outcome
142 Burden on patients, families and communities
143 Treatment, management and cost
144 Prevention
145 Infrastructure and human resources
146 Delivery of care
147 Research
147 Training
148 Partnerships within and beyond the health system
148 Conclusions and recommendations

Parkinson’s disease is a chronic progressive
neurodegenerative disorder of insidious onset,
characterized by the presence of predominantly
motor symptomatology (bradykinesia, rest
tremor, rigidity, and postural disturbances). It
is also associated with a diversity of non-motor
symptoms, which, together with late-onset motor
symptoms (such as postural instability and falls,
freezing of gait, speech and swallowing difﬁculties), are presently one of the most difﬁcult challenges the treating physician is faced with when
dealing with patients with a long duration of the
disease.

In addition to the motor symptomatology of Parkinson’s disease (PD) (1), some non-motor symptoms such as hyposmia, rapid eye movements, sleep behaviour disorder, personality changes,
pain, paresthesias and depression may be present and may even manifest before the motor
symptoms (2). Urinary disturbances, orthostatic hypotension and neuropsychiatric disturbances
(dementia, hallucinations and delirium) usually become evident and troublesome after several
years in the course of the disease (3). Overt dementia is a late complication that most frequently
affects older patients with prolonged disease duration (4). Late-onset motor symptoms include
postural instability and falls, freezing of gait, speech and swallowing difﬁculties.
The pathophysiology of PD involves the progressive loss of dopamine-containing neurons of
the pars compacta of the substantia nigra leading to denervation of the nigrostriatal tract and signiﬁcant reduction of dopamine at the striatal level. The consequence of this denervation process
is an imbalance in the striato-pallidal and pallido-thalamic output pathways, which is responsible
for the major motor deﬁcits (5). Genetic predisposing factors in combination with environmental
factors are thought to be responsible for the cellular changes leading to progressive neuronal
degeneration in which mitochondrial dysfunction, oxidative mechanisms and failure of the protein
degradation machinery at the cellular level are probably involved (6). The presence of Lewy bodies (cytoplasmic proteinaceous inclusions) in surviving dopaminergic neurons is the pathological
hallmark of PD.

DIAGNOSIS
As there are no deﬁnitive biological or imaging markers, diagnosis is at present made through the
use of stringent clinical criteria such as those developed by the Brain Bank of the Parkinson’s Disease Society in the United Kingdom (7). These criteria are used worldwide and provide for a deﬁnite

neurological disorders: a public health approach
diagnosis with a high degree of accuracy. Clinicopathological studies based on brain bank material
from Canada and the United Kingdom have shown that clinicians diagnose the disease incorrectly in
about 25% of patients. In these studies, the most common reasons for misdiagnosis were presence
of essential tremor, vascular parkinsonism and atypical parkinsonian syndromes (8).
Although, as previously mentioned, the diagnosis is made exclusively on a clinical basis, there
are new diagnostic tools that can be used to conﬁrm the presence of dopaminergic denervation at
the striatal level, thus lending support to the clinical diagnosis. These include ﬂuorodopa positron
emission tomography (FDOPA-PET) and dopamine transporter imaging with radionucleide tracers
by means of single photon emission tomography (DAT-SPECT). Both methods are still used as
investigational tools and not for the routine diagnosis of PD.
Most cases of Parkinsonism are attributable to primary Lewy body PD. “Parkinsonism-plus”
syndromes (which include progressive supranuclear palsy, multisystem atrophy, corticobasal
degeneration) and secondary parkinsonisms (mainly drug induced, ﬂunarizine and cinarizine still
being important culprits particularly in Latin American countries where these drugs are misused
frequently for the prevention of cerebrovascular disorders) account for a small proportion of cases
of parkinsonism seen in clinical practice.

ETIOLOGY AND RISK FACTORS
Current theories on the etiology and pathogenesis of PD consider this disorder to be multifactorial
and the result of a genetic predisposition possibly interacting with environmental factors. That
genes play a role in the etiology of PD is supported at present by the discovery of at least 11
forms of genetic parkinsonism that share clinical features and possibly pathogenetic mechanisms
with the more common, as yet, sporadic form of the disease (9). The quest for environmental
exogenous triggering factors has remained elusive and supported only through indirect evidence
gathered from numerous and extensive epidemiological studies. Age, sex, dietary habits, infections, environmental toxins and trauma are among the factors considered by these studies (10).

EPIDEMIOLOGY AND MAGNITUDE
Parkinson’s disease is a universal disorder, with a crude incidence rate of 4.5–19 per 100 000
population per year. The wide variation in incidence estimates probably reﬂects differences in
methodology and case ascertainment as well as age distribution of the sample population. Ageadjusted rates provide a more realistic ﬁgure and range from 9.7 to 13.8 per 100 000 population
per year. As this is a chronic disorder with a prolonged course, prevalence is much higher than
incidence. Crude prevalence estimates vary from 18 per 100 000 persons in a population survey in
Shanghai, China, to 328 per 100 000 in a door-to-door survey of the Parsi community in Bombay,
India. Age-adjusted rates give a more restricted range of 72–258.8 per 100 000 persons. The
majority of studies reporting overall crude prevalence (including males and females across the
entire age range) fall between 100 and 200 per 100 000 persons (11). Differences in prevalence
have been suggested to be related to environmental risk factors or differences in the genetic
background of the population under study. There is no evidence that any increase in the number
of new patients being diagnosed each year has to do with variations in causative factors, but more
probably with increased awareness and earlier recognition of the disease. Although the disease
usually begins in the ﬁfth or sixth decade of life, recent evidence shows increased incidence with
advancing age (12). It has long been recognized that a small proportion of patients develop the
disease at an early age. Patients presenting with the disease before 40 years of age are generally
designated as having “early-onset” PD. Among them, those beginning between 21 and 40 years
are called “young-onset” PD while those beginning before the age of 20 years are called “juvenile
Parkinsonism”. Contributions from the ﬁeld of genetics have demonstrated that a large proportion

141

142

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
of “young-onset”, and “juvenile” cases are of genetic origin, while the majority of the remaining
cases are presently considered to be sporadic. Some of the late-onset PD cases are also found
to have a genetic component. Although PD has been traditionally considered to affect individuals
from both sexes equally, data recently published show a higher proportion of males to be affected
by this disorder, with a male to female ratio of 1.9 (12).

Global and regional distribution
Parkinson’s disease affects individuals globally. Regional ﬁgures showing differences in both
incidence and prevalence probably reﬂect the existence of factors that may be demographic
(variations in life expectancy across countries), health-care-related (lack of proper and widespread
recognition of the disorder, variations in access to health care), genetic, and environmental, together with methodological differences. Examples of regional variations abound, and some of
them were commented upon above. In addition, early studies had shown variations in prevalence
at the international level attributed to ethnic differences across regions. Higher rates were reported for Caucasians in Europe and North America, intermediate rates for Asians in China and
Japan, and the lowest rates for Blacks in Africa. However, more recent studies from Asia do not
show signiﬁcant differences in prevalence compared with studies in Caucasians (11).

COURSE AND OUTCOME
Parkinson’s disease runs a chronic slowly progressive course, being extremely variable in patients.
During the initial years of the disease, motor disability may not be signiﬁcant as symptoms are
usually unilateral and mild. If left untreated, after several years it causes signiﬁcant motor deterioration with loss of independence and ambulation. As the disease progresses, the increasing motor
disability affects the activities of daily living. This is further complicated by the development of motor ﬂuctuations and dyskinesias (owing to long term levodopa therapy) (13). The gait disturbances
— especially freezing of gait and postural instability — lead to frequent falls, with increased risk
of fractures. Dysarthria and hypophonia lead to difﬁculties in communication, while deglutition
disorders increase the risk of aspiration pneumonia. In the later stages of the disease, patients
usually need increased assistance for most activities of daily living such as feeding, personal
hygiene, dressing, turning in bed, rising from the sitting position and walking (2, 14).
Mortality in PD is increased compared with a control population, though ﬁgures vary considerably from one study to another. Before the discovery of levodopa as the rational therapy of PD the
observed mortality vs expected mortality ratio was approximately 3:1 (15). The introduction of
levodopa has resulted in signiﬁcant improvement in quality of life and reduction in mortality. The
standardized mortality ratio for the PD group in a recent study was 1.52 compared with the controls
(16). The cause of this increased mortality is attributable to incidental complications related to motor disability (immobility, prostration, deglutition disorders) and autonomic dysfunction leading to
falls, fractures, pneumonia, urinary tract infections, etc. (17). With an increase in life expectancy,
the disease, at present, runs a more prolonged course. As a result, long-term motor complications,
both attributable to the disease and treatment-related, and a host of non-motor manifestations
mentioned earlier are seen more frequently and account for signiﬁcant morbidity (18).

BURDEN ON PATIENTS, FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES
The deﬁnition of burden, in the case of PD as in any other chronic disabling disorder, varies according to whether it is analysed from the perspective of the patient, the family, or the community. In the
case of the patient, burden carries the meaning of a heavy, worrisome and emotionally disturbing
load. For the family, the burden also takes into account the plight of the caregivers: it involves the
caregiver’s appraisal of the balance between level of care demands, resources available, and quality

neurological disorders: a public health approach
of giver–recipient relationship. For the community, burden entails both the impact related to social
responsibility as well as economic costs. Some of these aspects are covered below.
The impact of receiving a diagnosis of a disease such as PD causes an initial emotional burden
on the patient and family: they face an uncertain future living with a chronic disabling disorder
— for which there is no cure and which entails signiﬁcant social stigmatization. After the initial
impact and with proper counselling, the patient learns to cope with the disease. As the effect of
medications initially, and for a considerable time, produces signiﬁcant beneﬁt, there ensues what
is usually called a honeymoon period, during which an acceptable state of health is achieved.
Most patients carry on with their activities and lead an almost normal life for several years without
the need of special assistance if they complement their pharmacological treatment with proper
physical activity and psychological support.
With the progression of the disease, there is increasing motor impairment and disability. The
patient may lose signiﬁcant autonomy as the severity of the symptoms increases. Motor ﬂuctuations and dyskinesias are compounding factors that further add to the patient’s disability and
interfere with everyday life. Moreover, with advanced disease the increased prevalence of gait
and balance disorders reduces the capacity for independent ambulation. In this scenario, patients
begin to need increasing help in everyday activities, and the burden on the caregivers increases
in parallel (19). Depending on the individual patient, the degree of dependence may vary. In instances in which the disease runs a benign course, the need for special care and assistance may
be limited, while in those with a more aggressive course, they may become totally dependent on
external help. Designing and creating a more apt housing environment is therefore a necessary
consequence that adds to the burden of the family.
An additional burden for the family is indirectly related to the functional impact of the disease.
Progressive motor impairment and disability leads the majority of patients still in their active years
to lose their jobs, therefore causing a signiﬁcant reduction of the total household income.
In an ideal setting, the burden on the community may be reﬂected in many aspects. This
burden may be absorbed by the private sector, nongovernmental organizations and government
institutions if they provide the necessary funds and efforts for:
■ removal of architectural barriers to provide for easier accessibility;
■ public transport with disabled access;
■ institutions and programmes that provide comprehensive care for the patients and family
(establishment and ongoing support);
■ subsidized medication programmes;
■ compensation for loss of employment beneﬁts;
■ research support.

TREATMENT, MANAGEMENT AND COST
The discovery of the dopaminergic deﬁcit was the major turning point in the development of
rational pharmacotherapeutic approaches to PD leading to the introduction of levodopa and later
dopamine agonists. With the exception of anticholinergics and amantadine, all other drugs subsequently developed (dopa-decarboxylase inhibitors, monoamine oxidase inhibitors, catechol-Omethyl transferase inhibitors) act indirectly through dopaminergic mechanisms (1, 19). Functional
surgery, developed many years ago as a palliative approach to the therapy of PD, has more
recently become an important therapeutic option (19, 20).
There have been newer developments in the ﬁeld of PD pharmacotherapy in an attempt to intervene at different levels of the biochemical machinery of the basal ganglia beyond the dopamine
agonist receptor. Drugs acting at the adenosine, glutamate, adrenergic, and serotonin receptors
are at present under scrutiny as potentially beneﬁcial at different stages of the disease (21).

143

144

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

Figure 3.8.1

Uncompensated
Care 18.8%

Initiation of therapy depends on the age and mental status of the patient and the severity of the
disease. In young patients, there is evidence supporting the postponement of more potent medications such as levodopa to prevent early development of motor complications. In older patients,
not only the risk of motor complications is less, but the safety proﬁle of levodopa is better within
a higher age range. Initially, patients are generally medicated with a single drug but as disease
progresses multiple medications may be required (22).
In addition to the primary medications used for symptomatic treatment of the speciﬁc motor
symptoms of PD, there is also a need for complementary medication to treat the diverse non-motor
symptoms (constipation, urinary incontinence, sexual dysfunction, orthostatic hypotension, sleep
disorders, psychiatric symptoms such as depression, psychosis and behavioural disorders, and cognitive disturbances) that affect a signiﬁcant number of patients with PD in the advanced stages.
Functional surgery, both lesional or deep-brain stimulation, also plays an important role in
the treatment of the complicated PD patient with drug-refractory disease, as this resource has
become increasingly useful in the management of motor complications (motor ﬂuctuations and
dyskinesias) (20). Three different brain targets for surgery are presently used, depending on the
characteristics of the patient.
The comprehensive management of the disease requires, in addition to medical and surgical
treatment, the participation of numerous other medical disciplines and health-related professionals, including physical therapist, specialized nurse, occupational therapist, speech and deglutition
disorders specialist, psychologist, psychiatrist, urologist and gastroenterologist.
It is also important to deal with the issues related to cost of the disease for the patient, family
and society. Unfortunately, available information is limited, and almost restricted to Europe and
North America, which makes it difﬁcult to extrapolate it to other regions of the world. It is perhaps
better to analyse it in relative terms compared with a control population than to make absolute
currency estimates. In a recently published study from the United States, the annual utilization of
health services and cost for the PD cohort was signiﬁcantly higher than for a control population.
On an annual basis, PD patients spend approximately two more days in hospital, 43 more days in
long-term care institutions, and ﬁll more than 20 more prescriptions than do the controls. The total
annual cost is more than double that of the control population, even before adding indirect costs
(uncompensated care, productivity loss, etc.). Prescription drugs account for roughly 5% of total
costs, followed by outpatient care 7.5%, uncompensated care 19%, and inpatient care 20%, while
productivity loss is by far the largest share of the total cost reaching almost 50%. Figure 3.8.1
provides a breakdown of cost distribution in Parkinson’s disease
according to a study by Huse et al. (23).
Cost is also relative to accessibility to health delivery and mediCost distribution in
cations, which is quite variable in different regions of the world. An
Parkinson’s disease
indirect method to estimate cost is to review health spending in
absolute terms and relative to the GNP, which will show major difInpatient Care
19.9%
ferences from one country to another. Of course, different countries
have different health priorities, and depending on life expectancy
the burden of PD may differ signiﬁcantly.
Outpatient
Care 7.5%

Prescription
Drugs 4.4%

Productivity
Loss 49.4%
Source: (23).

PREVENTION
At present there are no proven therapies for prevention of PD (1).
Although there is evidence of the existence of risk and protective
factors, these are not strong enough to warrant speciﬁc measures
in an attempt to diminish risk or enhance protection.

neurological disorders: a public health approach
An important part of the present research effort in PD is targeted at understanding the pathogenesis of the disease, in particular the mechanisms involved in cell death. In parallel, drug development
programmes, both in the pharmaceutical industry and in non-commercial research laboratories, are
engaged in ﬁnding neuroprotective and neurorestorative therapies (21). If and when these drugs
become available, early detection of the disease would be of paramount importance.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND HUMAN RESOURCES
As the disease runs a progressive course going through different stages with changing needs
according to each stage, the need for infrastructure and the involvement of human resources
varies accordingly. Figure 3.8.2 provides an algorithm on health systems requirement as the
disease progresses.
Special mention has to be made of the demand for human resources and infrastructure in the
case of patients in whom pharmacological manipulations fail to modify long-term motor complications and who are considered candidates for stereotactic surgery (both lesional or deep-brain stimulation). Although the percentage of patients requiring these procedures is still small, the demand will
probably grow until better pharmacological options are available. The cost of these procedures is
quite high and the need for specialized personnel, infrastructure, and equipment is signiﬁcant.

Figure 3.8.2 Progression of Parkinson’s disease and health system requirements
Early stages
Periodic medical controls
Preserved autonomy and independence

Outpatient clinic, may be managed
by non-specialist

May retain job

Treatment requirements simple

Intermediate stages
More frequent medical control required
May need specialized care

Motor impairment and
disability more evident

Treatment requirements more complex
(physical and speech therapy, in some cases surgery)

Motor complications
(ﬂuctuations and dyskinesias)

Advanced stages
May require hospital admissions and participation of
other medical specialties
(urologist, clinician, gastroenterologist,
orthopaedist, psychiatrist; specialized nurses,
social workers)

More pronounced motor complications,
non motor complications
(urinary, autonomic,
cognitive impairment, falls)
Deglutition disorders

May require PD surgery

End stage disease
Institutionalization as a last resort

Major disability, patient may become bedridden or
need signiﬁcant degree
of assistance
(feeding tube, gastrostomy)

145

146

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

DELIVERY OF CARE
Diagnosis and delivery of care for the uncomplicated patient can be performed by the general
practitioner or family physician only if they are properly trained in the clinical diagnosis of PD and
informed on the critical decisions at initiation of treatment which could affect long-term prognosis.
In recent years there has been a shift in different regions of the world, in which PD or movement
disorders specialists have become involved with delivery of primary care. This change has taken
place for several reasons.
■ Initiation of therapy involves crucial therapeutic decisions that may inﬂuence the future course
of the disease, thus making it necessary for a more experienced physician to make these
decisions.
■ Awareness and education campaigns have brought PD to the forefront, making the patients
more demanding in terms of the quality of medical care they seek.
■ The worldwide launching of the Charter for People with Parkinson’s Disease in 1997 by the WHO
Working Group on Parkinson’s Disease (with the support of the European Parkinson’s Disease
Association), on occasion of the commemoration of World Parkinson’s Disease Day. The charter
states: “People with PD should have the right to be referred to a doctor with special interest in
Parkinson’s disease” (24).
In the more advanced stages of the disease, it becomes necessary to resort to more specialized
care: most patients are referred to a neurologist who can deal more efﬁciently with the complex
issues involved. Depending on the medical customs or organizational aspects of medical care in
different countries or regions of the world, consultation with the neurologist is performed at the
request of the primary care physician but follow-up rests in the hands of the referring doctor with
the occasional assistance of the specialist. In other instances the neurologist, specialized in PD
or not, may at this point become the one responsible for the follow-up of the patient.
The complicated PD patient presenting with long term motor complications (ﬂuctuations and/or
dyskinesias; gait disturbances, and speech and deglutition disorders; autonomic dysfunction) will
need to be referred to specialists working in a centre that has personnel and facilities for special
investigation and treatment. It is also necessary at this stage to seek the help of other medical
specialties and in some instances admit the patient to hospital, clinic or other health-care institution, either to perform more complex ancillary studies or specialized surgery, or provide for acute
inpatient care. According to published data, almost 40% of advanced PD patients (at 15 years
into the course of the disease) need to be admitted to long-term care facilities when the need for
complex care exceeds the possibilities of the family or primary caregivers at home (3).

Treatment gap
There are wide gaps in different aspects of PD care. The ﬁrst has to do with education and
awareness. Knowledge and information about PD is nowhere near as comprehensive as that
available for vascular disease or cancer, despite being one of the most frequent neurodegenerative
disorders affecting roughly 1% of the population over the age of 65 years. Another very important
gap is that related to present limitations of therapy; lack of effective preventive treatments, lack
of restorative treatments, and lack of effective therapies to prevent or symptomatically improve
long-term complications, both motor and non-motor.
The third aspect has to do with the lack of universal access to the presently available wide
range of PD medications, surgery and complementary therapies. This is particularly signiﬁcant in
the poorer or less developed regions of the world, where the lack of properly trained physicians,
the high cost of medication and the small number of centres equipped to provide comprehensive
management result in inadequate health-care delivery to PD patients.

neurological disorders: a public health approach
In WHO’s recently published Atlas of Country Resources for Neurological Disorders (25), availability of anti-Parkinson drugs in primary care is extremely variable in WHO regions. In the world
as a whole, drug availability is only 60.6%, ranging from an extreme of only 12.5% in Africa to
79.1% in Europe. The same is true for rehabilitation, which is an important aspect of the treatment
of PD. Worldwide availability of rehabilitation services is of the order of 73.2%, ranging from just
18.8% in Africa to 88.1% in Europe. No less problematic is the lack of neurologists in certain
regions; there are 0.03 neurologists per 100 000 population in Africa and 0.07 per 100 000 in
South-East Asia as the lowest extremes, compared with 4.84 per 100 000 population in Europe.
Finally, there is a paucity of comprehensive management programmes for PD throughout the
world to provide the best standard of care for this disorder. Development of simpliﬁed treatment
and management guidelines suitable for use in developing countries might be a step forward in
closing this treatment gap.
Information on government policy speciﬁcally addressing the needs and requirements of PD
patients in different regions of the world is scarce. In the majority of cases, wherever information
is available, there is no legislation relating to the needs of patients with any type of disability or
chronic disorders, including PD. Canada, the European Union and the United States are probably
the only countries in the world in which legislation has been passed that consider PD in particular
as a medical problem that requires speciﬁc policy.

RESEARCH
Research in PD is carried out by different organizations. These include government institutions,
government-supported research laboratories at universities and private not-for-proﬁt research
facilities, and as part of the research and development programmes of the pharmaceutical industry
and private corporations. Even though millions of dollars are invested every year in different areas
of research, there are few countries in which signiﬁcant funds are assigned to research in PD as
part of a concerted effort or carefully designed programme with proper supervision and clearly
deﬁned goals. Only the European Union and the United States have passed legislation or provided
a regulatory framework towards obtaining tangible results in PD within a reasonable time frame.
Multiple areas of research are at present focused on ﬁnding the answer to the important questions facing the ﬁeld of PD. They include research on genetics, pathogenesis, molecular biology
and early diagnostic markers (clinical and non-clinical). Therapy is also a main area of research
comprising pharmacological therapy as well as non-pharmacological methods (such as surgery,
gene therapy, stem cell therapy and trophic factors).
An area of research that has not received proper attention is that related to health systems and
service delivery. This subject is crucial in resource-poor countries, where the lack of adequate
supervision and guidance in the allocation of funds may cause a distortion — such as being able
to provide sophisticated surgical procedures to a minority of PD patients while more than 80% of
them are unable to receive the more basic pharmacological agents.

TRAINING
The core medical curricula in most medical schools throughout the world dedicate little time
to providing information on PD and the complexities of its treatment and management. Where
available, residency training programmes in neurology provide their trainees with more thorough
information and training in this regard. In some parts of the world there are PD and movement
disorders post-residency fellowships that allow for the development of more comprehensive education in this neurology subspecialty. In their scientiﬁc programmes, most local, regional and
international neurology meetings have topics related to PD.

147

148

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
Unfortunately the training of health-care professionals towards a more effective health-care
delivery for PD patients in resource-poor countries is lacking and constitutes a major challenge.
These countries are the ones having the greatest need for trained professionals. Efforts should be
made to establish training programmes in these regions to provide for at least:
■ proper diagnostic skills for the primary care physician;
■ rational use of available pharmacological treatments;
■ training of nurses and carers in the complex management issues affecting the long-term
complicated PD patient;
■ increasing the availability of trained professionals in the areas of physical rehabilitation, speech
and deglutition therapy.

PARTNERSHIPS WITHIN AND BEYOND
THE HEALTH SYSTEM
Fortunately, the number of nongovernmental organizations, advocacy groups and private foundations with a special interest in PD has grown considerably throughout the world. In the majority of
cases these organizations, working together or independently of the health and education systems,
provide for training of personnel, disseminate information and organize awareness campaigns for
the general population, exert inﬂuence on policy-makers and help in the design of speciﬁc policy.
In addition, many of them ﬁll the gaps wherever and whenever government health organizations
fail to respond to the needs of PD patients and their families, providing funds for research and
establishing outpatient clinics, rehabilitation centres, long-term care facilities, etc.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1

Diagnosis of PD can be made without the aid of costly resources if clinical criteria are
adequately applied.

Effective management of PD in its early and intermediate stages can be achieved if
available drugs are rationally used.

Major challenges from the medical point of view are:
a. increasingly complex pharmacological or even surgical requirements in the
complicated patient;
b. need for a multidisciplinary team approach for the comprehensive management of
advanced cases with both motor and non-motor complications.

Major challenges from the health system delivery perspective include:
a. need for more properly trained professionals (primary care physicians, neurologists,
and PD-specialized neurologists, nurses, physiotherapists and speech therapists);
b. need for widespread access to current PD medications;
c. adequate allocation of resources to establish comprehensive management
programmes for PD patients.

neurological disorders: a public health approach

REFERENCES
1. Nutt JG, Wooten GF. Clinical practice. Diagnosis and initial management of Parkinson’s disease. New
England Journal of Medicine, 2005, 353:1021–1027.
2. Chaudhuri KR, Yates L, Martinez-Martin P. The non-motor symptom complex of Parkinson’s disease: a
comprehensive assessment is essential. Current neurology and neuroscience reports, 2005, 5:275–283.
3. Hely MA et al. Sydney Multicenter Study of Parkinson’s disease: non-L-dopa-responsive problems dominate
at 15 years. Movement disorders, 2005, 20:190–199.
4. Emre M. Dementia associated with Parkinson’s disease. Lancet Neurology, 2003, 2:229–237.
5. Albin RL, Young AB, Penney JB. The functional anatomy of basal ganglia disorders. Trends in Neurosciences,
1989, 12:366–375.
6. Gandhi S, Wood NW. Molecular pathogenesis of Parkinson’s disease. Human Molecular Genetics, 2005,
2:2749–2755.
7. Hughes AJ, Daniel SE, Lees AJ. Improved accuracy of clinical diagnosis of Lewy body Parkinson’s disease.
Neurology, 2001, 57:1497–1499.
8. Tolosa E, Wenning G, Poewe W. The diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease. Lancet Neurology, 2006, 5:75–86.
9. Bonifati V. Genetics of Parkinson’s disease. Minerva Medica, 2005, 96:175–186.
10. Logroscino G. The role of early life environmental risk factors in Parkinson disease: what is the evidence?
Environmental Health Perspectives, 2005, 113:1234–1238.
11. Marras C, Tanner CM. Epidemiology of Parkinson’s disease. In: Watts RL, Koller WC, eds. Movement
disorders, neurologic principles and practice, 2nd ed. New York, McGraw Hill, 2004:177–196.
12. Van Den Eeden SK et al. Incidence of Parkinson’s disease: variation by age, gender, and race/ethnicity.
American Journal of Epidemiology, 2003, 157:1015–1022.
13. Ahlskog JE, Muenter MD. Frequency of levodopa-related dyskinesias and motor ﬂuctuations as estimated
from the cumulative literature. Movement Disorders, 2001, 16:448–458.
14. Bloem BR et al. Falls and freezing of gait in Parkinson’s disease: a review of two interconnected, episodic
phenomena. Movement Disorders, 2004, 19:871–884.
15. Hoehn MM, Yahr MD. Parkinsonism: onset, progression and mortality. Neurology, 1967, 17:427–442.
16. Herlofson K et al. Mortality and Parkinson disease: a community-based study. Neurology, 2004, 62:937–
942.
17. Alves G et al. Progression of motor impairment and disability in Parkinson disease: a population-based study.
Neurology, 2005, 65:1436–1441.
18. Schrag A et al. Caregiver burden in Parkinson’s disease is closely associated with psychiatric symptoms,
falls, and disability. Parkinsonism Related Disorders, 2006, 12:35–41.
19. Goetz CG et al. Evidence-based medical review update: pharmacological and surgical treatments of
Parkinson’s disease: 2001 to 2004. Movement Disorders, 2005, 20:523–539.
20. Metman LV, O’Leary ST. Role of surgery in the treatment of motor complications. Movement Disorders, 2005,
20(Suppl. 11):S45–S56.
21. Schapira AH. Present and future drug treatment for Parkinson’s disease. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery
and Psychiatry, 2005, 76:1472–1478.
22. Lang AE et al. Progress in clinical neurosciences: a forum on the early management of Parkinson’s disease.
Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences, 2005, 32:277–286.
23. Huse DM et al. Burden of illness in Parkinson’s disease. Movement Disorders, 2005, 20:1449–1454.
24. Charter for People with Parkinson’s Disease. European Parkinson’s Disease Association, 2006 (www.epda.
eu.com/worldPDDay/2006_.shtm).
25. Atlas: country resources for neurological disorders 2004. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2004.

149

150

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

RECOMMENDED READING
■ Alves G et al. Progression of motor impairment and disability in Parkinson disease: a population-based
study. Neurology, 2005, 65:1436–1441.
■ Emre M. Dementia associated with Parkinson’s disease. Lancet Neurology, 2003, 2:229–237.
■ Goetz CG et al. Evidence-based medical review update: pharmacological and surgical treatments of
Parkinson’s disease: 2001 to 2004. Movement Disorders, 2005, 20:523–539.
■ Hely MA et al. Sydney Multicenter Study of Parkinson’s disease: non-L-dopa-responsive problems dominate
at 15 years. Movement Disorders, 2005, 20:190–199.
■ Huse DM et al. Burden of illness in Parkinson’s disease. Movement Disorders, 2005, 20:1449–1454.
■ Lang AE et al. Progress in clinical neurosciences: a forum on the early management of Parkinson’s disease.
Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences, 2005, 32:277–286.
■ Marras C, Tanner CM. Epidemiology of Parkinson’s disease. In: Watts RL, Koller WC, eds. Movement disorders, neurologic principles and practice, 2nd ed. New York, McGraw Hill, 2004:177–196.
■ Nutt JG, Wooten GF. Clinical practice. Diagnosis and initial management of Parkinson’s disease. New
England Journal of Medicine, 2005, 353:1021–1027.
■ Schapira AH. Present and future drug treatment for Parkinson’s disease. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery
and Psychiatry, 2005, 76:1472–1478.
■ Schrag A et al. Caregiver burden in Parkinson’s disease is closely associated with psychiatric symptoms,
falls, and disability. Parkinsonism Related Disorders, 2006, 12:35–41.

neurological disorders: a public health approach

3.9 Stroke
151 Diagnosis and classiﬁcation
152 Risk factors and prevention strategies
153 Course and outcome
154 Epidemiology and magnitude
156 Mortality, disability and burden
157 Treatment, management and rehabilitation
159 Secondary prevention
160 Delivery of care
161 Partnerships within and beyond the health system

Stroke is one of the main noncommunicable diseases of public
health importance. After coronary heart disease and cancer,
stroke is the most common cause of death in most industrialized countries. In general terms, stroke is a sudden neurological deﬁcit owing to localized brain ischaemia or haemorrhage.
Most strokes are attributed to focal occlusion of the cerebral
blood vessel (ischaemic stroke) and the remainder are the
result of rupture of a blood vessel (haemorrhagic stroke).

161 Research
162 Conclusions and recommendations

WHO deﬁnes stroke as the clinical syndrome of rapid onset of focal (or global, as in subarachnoid
haemorrhage) cerebral deﬁcit, lasting more than 24 hours (unless interrupted by surgery or death),
with no apparent cause other than a vascular one (1). In developed countries up to 75–80% of
strokes are attributed to brain ischaemia, while 10–15% of strokes represent primary intracerebral
haemorrhage (ICH) and approximately 5–10% are subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH).

DIAGNOSIS AND CLASSIFICATION
Acute stroke is a medical emergency, and the clinician must diagnose stroke properly and quickly.
The diagnosis of stroke is made reasonably accurately on clinical grounds alone by specialists;
however, in general medical and emergency-department settings up to 20% of patients with
suspected stroke may be misdiagnosed, which indicates that infarction cannot be reliably distinguished from haemorrhage without brain imaging.
In the diagnosis of haemorrhagic stroke, computerized tomography (CT) is the most reliable
method of demonstrating acute haemorrhage within the ﬁrst week after stroke onset. Generally,
a non-enhanced scan is all that is required. In the diagnosis of ischaemic stroke, CT may or may
not show a deﬁnite infarct, but a normal scan does not necessarily mean that the patient has not
had a stroke. The proportion of visible infarcts also depends on the timing of scanning. Within the
ﬁrst few hours, few infarcts can be seen. It should be noted that less than 50% of infarcts never
become visible on CT, especially in patients with milder strokes. In such cases diffusion-weighted
magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) would be a preferable method of investigation. In developing
countries, patients may not give a clear clinical history, and neuroimaging techniques (CT and MRI)
are not widely available, which frequently leads to imprecise diagnosis (2).
Subsequently, major advances in the diagnosis have been made with the development of perfusion CT, CT angiography, diffusion-weighted MRI (which permits sensitive imaging of cerebral ischaemia already very early after onset), perfusion MR, MR angiography. Positron emission tomography
(PET) and single-photon emission computerized tomography (SPECT) are important research tools
to help in better understanding of the intimate pathogenetic aspects of brain ischaemia.

151

152

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
For classiﬁcation and clinical differentiation of ischaemic stroke subtypes, Oxfordshire Community Stroke Project classiﬁcation is frequently used. The ICH subtypes are mainly classiﬁed
and characterized by the means of topographical patterns, namely localization of intracerebral
haematomas (clots) in the brain.

RISK FACTORS AND PREVENTION STRATEGIES
In Caucasians, about 50% of all ischaemic strokes and transient ischaemic attacks (TIAs) are
probably attributable to atherothrombotic disease of the extracranial or (less commonly) large
intracranial arteries; about 20% of all ischaemic strokes arise from emboli from the heart; about
25% are so-called lacunar infarcts, probably caused by occlusion of one of the small, deep, perforating cerebral arteries; and the remainder are due to a miscellany of much rarer causes (see
Figure 3.9.1). In Asian and Afro-Caribbean populations, intracranial small-vessel disease appears
to be more common than in Caucasian populations.
Intracerebral haemorrhage occurs as a result of bleeding from an arterial source directly into
brain substance. Because hypertension is one of its main causative factors, arterial changes associated with it have been commonly implicated in its pathogenesis. As to SAH, the leading cause
— accounting for approximately 80% of cases — is rupture of an intracranial saccular aneurism.
Most conventional vascular risk factors — age, tobacco smoking, diabetes and obesity — are
broadly similar for ischaemic stroke and for vascular disease in other parts of the arterial tree. The
continuous relationship between stroke and blood pressure, however, is stronger than that for ischaemic heart disease. In contrast to coronary heart disease, initial studies found no overall association between plasma cholesterol concentration and stroke. Several more recent studies have found
that plasma lipids and lipoproteins affect the risk of ischaemic stroke, but the exact relationships are
still being clariﬁed. Low high-density lipoprotein (HDL) is a risk factor for ischaemic stroke in men,
but more data are needed to determine its effect in women (4). Potential sources of embolism from
the heart are associated with an increased risk of stroke. Atrial ﬁbrillation is by far the most important because it is so common, carries a high relative risk of stroke, and is deﬁnitely a causal factor
in many cases. Recent years have seen an increasing interest and recognition of new risk factors
for vascular disease, including stroke. Most are thought to operate by accelerating atherosclerosis.

Figure 3.9.1 Causes of ischaemic stroke
Subarachnoid haemorrhage 5%
Primary intracerebral haemorrhage
15%

Rare causes
5%
Cardiac source
of embolism
20%
Ischaemic stroke
80%

Intracranial
small-vessel disease
25%
Source: (3).

Atherothromboembolism
50%

neurological disorders: a public health approach
They include infections, inﬂammatory and rheological markers, plasma homocysteine concentration
and various genetic polymorphisms (3). For ICH, age, male sex, low cholesterol, hypertension and
excessive alcohol intake were associated with the disease, while only hypertension, smoking and
excessive alcohol intake showed their signiﬁcance as risk factors for SAH.
The importance of any risk factor on a population basis will depend upon both its relative risk
and the prevalence of that risk factor in the population. For stroke, ﬁve classic risk factors are
of main interest in a population perspective: hypertension, smoking, physical inactivity, diabetes
and atrial ﬁbrillation. Taken together, these ﬁve risk factors account for more than two thirds of
all stroke. For hypertension, smoking and atrial ﬁbrillations, studies have convincingly shown that
interventions substantially reduce the risk, whereas scientiﬁc support for the effect of interventions of physical inactivity and diabetes is weaker.
Current knowledge on stroke risk factors clearly indicates that there is a potential to reduce the
incidence of stroke considerably: stroke is largely preventable. It remains a challenge, however,
to implement effective preventive programmes in the population. One of the success stories has
been in Japan, where government-led health education campaigns and increased treatment of
high blood pressure have reduced blood pressure levels in the populations: stroke rates have
fallen by more than 70% (5).
It is also very important that a strategy of comprehensive cardiovascular risk management
is followed, rather than treating risk factors in isolation. To make assessment and management
of cardiovascular risk feasible and affordable in low and medium resource settings, WHO has
developed a CVD risk management package (6), see Chapter 1.

COURSE AND OUTCOME
Early death after stroke is generally due to the complications of the brain lesion. Later the complications of dependency (e.g. pulmonary embolism and infection) are a more likely cause. About
30% of patients die within a year of a stroke. Recovery after stroke occurs through several
overlapping processes. In the ﬁrst hours and days these processes may include resolution of the
ischaemia, cerebral oedema, and comorbidities (e.g. infection) that exacerbate the functional
effects of the stroke itself. Later, neural plasticity by which neurons take on new functions,
the acquisition of new skills through training (e.g. physiotherapy and occupational therapy), and
modiﬁcation of the patient’s environment lead to further gains in function. Of stroke survivors,
nearly half are left dependent. The outcome depends on the pathological type of stroke and the
subtype of ischaemic stroke (see Figure 3.9.2) (3).

Figure 3.9.2 Outcome patterns in different stroke subtypes
■ Independent

■ Dependent

■ Dead

Proportion of patients (%)

100
80
60
40
20
0
All strokes

PICH

SAH

Ischaemic

TACI

PACI

LACI

POCI

Type of stroke and ischaemic stroke subtype
Source: (3).

PICH=primary intracerebral haemorrhage; SAH=subarachnoid haemorrhage; TACI=total anterior circulation infarct;
PACI=partial anterior circulation infarct; LACI=lacunar infarct; POCI=posterior circulation infarct.

153

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
The past few years have changed perception of the prognosis after stroke and TIA. Several
studies have shown that the imminent risk of recurrence after TIA or minor stroke is much higher
than previously thought, emphasizing the importance that all patients with suspected TIA or stroke
are urgently admitted to hospital, adequately diagnosed and appropriately treated. Furthermore,
neuroimaging studies have shown that clinically “silent” (but most probably not innocuous) new
ischaemic events are at least as common as symptomatic ones. In the long term, the prognosis
for recurrence is also grave: after 10 years more than half of patients will experience at least one
ischaemic event, indicating a need for better and durable secondary preventive measures and
systems for follow-up.
Vascular cognitive impairment and dementia are also common after stroke and at least as
frequent as recurrent ischaemic events in a longer perspective. Its development depends on
the volume of tissue affected either by infarction and haemorrhage or by their localization. The
prevalence of post-stroke dementia in stroke survivors is about 30%, and the incidence of new
onset dementia after stroke increases from 7% after one year to 48% after 25 years. Having a
stroke doubles the risk of dementia.

EPIDEMIOLOGY AND MAGNITUDE
Stroke prevalence
The best measure of the total burden of stroke in any population is the prevalence, which provides
information about the number of people at any one time in that population who have survived a
stroke; however, reliable estimates of stroke prevalence are difﬁcult to obtain. The prevalence of
stroke among white populations ranges from 500 to 600 per 100 000. Reported rates per 100 000
in New Zealand are 793 crude, 991 men and 700 women; in Finland 1030 men and 580 women;
and in France 1445 crude rate in elderly population. Rates per 100 000 from developing countries
are also variable and range from 58 in India and 76 in the United Republic of Tanzania to 620 in
China and 690 in Thailand. A recent comprehensive review of nine studies of stroke prevalence
carried out after 1990 shows far less geographical variation (5–10 per 1000), with the exception

100

0
All age

Age 45–84 years
All age- and sex-standardized incidence

Tbilisi, Georgia

Novosibirsk, Russian Federation

Söderhamn, Sweden

Frederiksberg, Denmark

Arcadia, Greece

Rochester, Minn

Auckland, New Zealand

Oxfordshire, United Kingdom

Perth, Australia
Dijon, France

Melbourne, Australia
Tbilisi, Georgia

Oyabe, Japan

Uzhgorod, Ukraine

L’Aquila, Italy

Innherrd, Norway

Iquique, Chile

Warsaw, Poland

China

Barbados

200

Belluno, Italy

300

Vibo Valentia, Italy

400

south London, United Kingdom
Erlangen, Germany

500

Tartu, Estonia

600

Russian Federation (12 centres)

Figure 3.9.3 Stroke incidence in selected countries

Annual incidence rate/ 100 000

154

neurological disorders: a public health approach
of populations in rural Bolivia, in which the prevalence of stroke was as low as 1.7 per 1000, and
Papua New Guinea, where no strokes were detected at all (7 ). The study in Bolivia, however,
included only patients with stroke-related disability, and the one in Papua New Guinea screened
only 213 patients over 20 years of age (the refusal rate in the older age group was 63%). The
small variation in age-speciﬁc and age-standardized prevalence of stroke across the populations
is consistent with the geographical similarity in stroke incidence and case-fatality.
It is uncertain whether the lower prevalence in some developing countries is related to low
incidence rates or high mortality rates. It is anticipated that, with time, these populations will have
a larger proportion of elderly people, life expectancies will lengthen, disease patterns will shift to
patterns in developed countries, and the number of strokes will rise.

Stroke incidence and case-fatality
The ﬁrst population-based data about stroke incidence in developing countries (India, Nigeria
and Sri Lanka) were obtained by WHO in 1971–1974 and showed moderate variations in incidence rates between different parts of the world. A higher prevalence of hypertension but a
lower prevalence of diabetes in stroke patients in developing countries compared with developed
countries was also reported. In the late 1980s, the WHO Monitoring Trends and Determinants in
Cardiovascular Disease (MONICA) stroke project showed relatively large geographical differences
in stroke incidence and case-fatality rates, with the rates in less developed countries among the
highest in the world (conﬁned to patients 35–64 years old) (8, 9). The most recent data, taking
into account only so-called “ideal” population-based studies of stroke incidence, show persistent
geographical variations (see Figure 3.9.3).
The high incidence of stroke in eastern European countries can be attributed to well-known
social and economic changes that have occurred over the past decade, including changes in
medical care, access to vascular prevention strategies among those at high risk, and exposure to
risk factors such as poor diet and high rates of smoking and alcohol consumption. The marked
difference in stroke incidence between genetically similar areas (eastern and western Europe)
suggests that potentially modiﬁable environmental factors are more important than genetic differences in determining stroke susceptibility.
Stroke incidence has shown little or no change over the last 10–20 years in most areas,
perhaps owing to unchanged blood pressure levels and unsuccessful hypertension detection and
management in the general population. More recently, however, a study from Oxfordshire, United
Kingdom, showed that the age-speciﬁc incidence of major stroke had declined by over 40% in
the last 20 years, while the incidence of minor stroke was similar (10), indirectly pointing to the
possibility of substantial change being brought about in the rate of stroke by means of primary
preventive strategies.
As to the frequency of different stroke subtypes, in some developing countries (Chile, China and
Georgia) there is a tendency for haemorrhagic stroke to appear more frequently than ischaemic
stroke (see Figure 3.9.4). This may be attributed to the high prevalence of hypertension in these
countries as well as genetic, environmental and sociocultural factors.
Case-fatality of total strokes varies little between populations and mostly falls in the range
of 20–30%, with the exception of Italy (33%), Georgia (35%) and the Russian Federation (35%)
showing higher rates (7 ).
In almost all countries the stroke incidence increases with age, with highest rates in the age
group of ≥ 85 years (7 ). As to distribution by sex, stroke is slightly more frequent in men than
in women.

155

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

MORTALITY, DISABILITY AND BURDEN
According to the most recent estimates, stroke is the second most common cause of mortality worldwide and the third most common in more developed countries (9, 11). Each year, stroke causes about
5.54 million deaths worldwide, with two thirds of these deaths occurring in less developed countries
(12). Stroke mortality varies widely among countries for which routine death-certiﬁcate data are
available. In the early 1990s, it was lowest — and had been declining steeply — in Australia, western Europe, Japan and the United States; however, it was two or three times higher in South America.
Mortality was up to ten times higher — and increasing — in eastern Europe and the countries of
the former Soviet Union. Routine mortality data are, however, limited by the inaccuracies of death
certiﬁcates and the lack of reliable information about different pathological types of stroke (13).
Furthermore, mortality depends on both the incidence of stroke and case-fatality and can give no
information about strokes that are disabling but not fatal. Without urgent action, deaths from stroke
will increase over the next decade by 12% globally and 20% in resource-poor countries (12).
Stroke is a major cause of long-term disability. About half of the patients surviving for three
months after their stroke will be alive ﬁve years later, and one third will survive for 10 years. Approximately 60% of survivors are expected to recover independence with self-care, and 75% are
expected to walk independently. It is estimated that 20% will require institutional care. The remainder will need assistance either by family, a close personal friend, or paid attendant. It is noteworthy
that psychosocial disabilities (such as difﬁculties in socialization and vocational functions) are more
common than physical disabilities (such as problems with mobility or activities of daily living).
As a major cause of long-term disability, stroke has potentially enormous emotional and socioeconomic impact on patients, their families, and health services. It causes a loss of 49 million
disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) worldwide each year (12). Lifetime costs per patient are
estimated at between US$ 59 800 and US$ 230 000. In the United Kingdom, the cost burden of
stroke is estimated to be nearly twice that of coronary heart disease, accounting for about 6%
of the total national health and social service expenditure. It is estimated that 41% of all costs
for stroke are direct costs and 26% are indirect costs, whereas no less than 34% of expenditure
corresponds to informal care. By the year 2020, stroke and coronary artery disease together are
expected to be the leading causes of lost healthy life years worldwide. Even these bleak ﬁgures
do not capture the full burden of stroke: more than a third of people who survive a stroke will have

Figure 3.9.4 Proportional frequency of stroke subtypes in different populations
100
80
60
40
20

Intracerebral haemorrhage

Ischaemic stroke

a, Chin
a
Tbilis
i, Geo
Russia
rgia
n Fed
eratio
n (12
centre
s)

iangy

dies

e, Chil

and X

g, Sha

nghai

Iquiqu

dos

West
In

Barba

Frenc
h
Martin

ique,

s, Italy

, Italy

Island
Aeolia
n

Vibo V
alentia

Austra
lia

Melbo

urne,

y
rman

ia, Gre
e
Arcad

en, Ge

ila, Ita
ly
L'Aqu

Erlang

Norw
ay

den

o, Italy

rred,
Innhe

Bellun

, Swe

nmark

hamn
Soder

, Italy

rg, De

Aosta

iksbe

Subarachnoid haemorrhage

Beijin

Unspeciﬁed stroke

Frede
r

Franc
e
Perth,
Austra
lia
Umbr
ia, Ita
ly
Roche
ster, M
Oxfor
inn
dshire
, Unite
d King
dom

Dijon,

% of population

156

neurological disorders: a public health approach
severe disability. By 2015, over 50 million healthy life years will be lost to stroke, with 90% of this
burden in low income and middle income countries (14).

TREATMENT, MANAGEMENT AND REHABILITATION
The past decade has witnessed a dramatic change in treatment of acute stroke, leaving the era
of an indifferent approach ﬁrmly behind. Equally as important as the development of particular
emergency treatments, however, is the recognition that the organization of stroke services per
se plays a key role in the provision of effective therapies and in improving the overall outcome
after stroke.
An important advance in stroke management is the advent and development of specialized
stroke services (stroke units) in the majority of developed countries. These services are organized
as specialized hospital units focusing exclusively on stroke treatment. Evidence favours all strokes
to be treated in stroke units regardless of the age of the patient and the severity and subtype of
the stroke. Evidence from randomized trials shows that treatment in stroke units is very effective,
especially when compared with treatment in general medical wards, geriatric wards or any other
kind of hospital department in which no beds or specialized staff are exclusively dedicated to
stroke care. The Stroke Unit Trialist’s Collaboration (15) has shown that stroke units reduce early
fatality (death within 12 weeks) by 28% and death by the end of one year follow-up by 17% (relative risk reduction). Stroke units also decrease disability and result in more discharges to home,
rather than having patients institutionalized. In most European countries, the elements of comprehensive stroke unit care outlined by the Stroke Unit Trialists’ Collaboration have been adopted, and
include assessment and monitoring, physiological management, early mobilization, skilled nursing
care, and short-term multidisciplinary team rehabilitation services. Despite proven efﬁcacy and
cost–effectiveness, stroke unit care remains underused in almost all parts of the world.
Ischaemic stroke is caused by interruption of the blood supply to a localized area of the brain.
This results in cessation of oxygen and glucose supply to the brain with subsequent breakdown
of the metabolic processes in the affected territory. The process of infarction may take several
hours to complete, creating a time window during which it may be possible to facilitate restoration
of blood supply to the ischaemic area and interrupt or reverse the process. Achieving this has
been shown to minimize subsequent neurological deﬁcit, disability and secondary complications.
Therefore the acute ischaemic stroke should be regarded as a treatable condition that requires
urgent attention in the therapeutic window when the hypoxic tissue is still salvageable (16). Recent
advances in management of ischaemic stroke imply implementation of thrombolytic therapy that
restores circulation in zones of critical ischaemia thus allowing minimizing, or even reversing, the
neurological deﬁcit. Thrombolysis is effective for strokes caused by acute cerebral ischaemia
when given within three hours of symptom onset. Intravenous thrombolysis has been approved
by regulatory agencies in many parts of the world and has been established or is in the build-up
phase in many areas. The therapy is associated with a small but deﬁnitive increase in the risk of
haemorrhagic intracerebral complications, which emphasize the need for careful patient selection.
Currently less than 5% of all patients with stroke are treated with thrombolysis in most areas
where the therapy has been implemented. One half to two thirds of all patients with stroke cannot
even be considered for intravenous thrombolytic therapy within a three-hour window because
of patient delays in seeking emergency care. Changing the patients’ behaviour in the event of
acute suspected stroke remains a major challenge. Several studies are currently ongoing on the
possibility to extend the current criteria for thrombolysis to larger patient groups including beyond
the three-hour window.
In cases of acute stroke, aspirin is given as soon as CT or MRI has excluded intracranial
haemorrhage. Immediate aspirin treatment slightly lowers the risk of early recurrent stroke and

157

158

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
increases the chances of survival free of disability: about one fewer patient dies or is left dependent per 100 treated. However, because aspirin is applicable to so many stroke patients, it has
the potential to have a substantial public health effect. Aspirin is also likely to reduce the risk of
venous thromboembolism.
Heparins or heparinoids lower the risk of arterial and venous thromboembolism, but these beneﬁts are offset by a similar-sized risk of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, and such therapy
is therefore not generally recommended. For patients at high risk of deep venous thrombosis,
low-dose subcutaneous heparin or graded compression stockings are currently being evaluated
in clinical trials.
A recent trial did not conﬁrm superiority of surgical treatment over non-surgical management
in cases of ICH, though appropriately selected patients with acute, spontaneous ICH may beneﬁt
from urgent removal of the clot, particularly in the cerebellum. Selection criteria and choice of
surgical procedure vary widely between centres.
Several advances are noted with endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurisms by detachable coils. Recent evidence suggests that endovascular intervention is at least as effective as open
surgery, with fewer complications.

Costs of acute stroke treatments
Although limited, the evidence suggests that the cost of organized care in a stroke unit is not any
greater than that of care in a conventional general medical ward. Stroke-unit care is therefore
likely to be highly cost effective, given that it has an absolute treatment effect similar to that for
thrombolysis but is appropriate for so many more acute stroke patients. Although aspirin has only
a very modest effect, it is very cost effective (about US$ 58 to prevent one death or dependent
stroke survivor) because it is widely applicable and accessible, inexpensive and relatively safe.
Thrombolysis is less cost effective, but an accurate analysis requires considerably more data
than available (17 ).

Acute stroke management in resource-poor countries
In almost all developed countries, the vast majority of patients with acute stroke are admitted
to hospital. By contrast, in the developing world hospital admission is much less frequent and
depends mainly on the severity of the stroke — the more severe, the better the chance of being
hospitalized. Thus hospital data on stroke admission are usually biased towards the more serious
or complicated cases. Home and traditional treatment of stroke is still accepted practice in the
most resource-poor countries (2).
The aims in the general management of acute stroke are good nursing care, maintenance of
pulmonary and cardiovascular functions, ﬂuid, electrolyte and nutritional balance, avoidance of
systemic complications, and early rehabilitation, as well as speciﬁc stroke treatment (e.g. thrombolysis). All these goals are rarely reached in developing countries, because expert stroke teams
and stroke units are rarely available, so patients are unlikely to be treated urgently. The patients
are usually cared for by a general practitioner, with only a minority of patients being under the
care of a neurologist. Treatment for acute stroke in developing countries is generally symptomatic;
thrombolytic and neuroprotective drugs are the exception rather than the rule. Many drugs are
delivered by the intravenous route, thus preventing patients from early mobilization. Antiplatelet
agents are not used in a systemic manner, and anticoagulants in atrial ﬁbrillation are usually
under-prescribed because of poor compliance and the need for frequent monitoring of blood
coagulation. Removal of cerebral haematomas and extensive craniotomy for brain decompression
are the main neurosurgical procedures for stroke patients in some parts of the developing world;
endarterectomy is rarely used though there are few speciﬁc data available.

neurological disorders: a public health approach

Rehabilitation
Stroke survivors frequently suffer from neurological impairments, functional deﬁcits and handicap.
Stroke rehabilitation is the restoration of patients to their previous physical, mental and social
capability. Rehabilitation may have an effect upon each level of expression of stroke-related
neurological dysfunction. It is of extreme importance to start rehabilitation as soon as possible
after stroke onset. In stroke units, in cases of severe stroke with decreased level of consciousness,
passive rehabilitation is started and active rehabilitation is initiated in patients with preserved
consciousness.
Several organizational models of stroke rehabilitation exist. Rehabilitation is typically started in
hospital and followed by short-term rehabilitation in the same unit (comprehensive stroke units),
rehabilitation clinics or outpatient settings. A multidisciplinary team approach and involvement and
support to carers are key features also in the long term. Several studies have shown that different
types of rehabilitation services improve outcome, but less is known about the optimum intensity
and duration of speciﬁc interventions. The scientiﬁc basis for rehabilitation and neural repair has
increased considerably, and reorganization of activation patterns in the brain after injury may be
monitored by functional imaging studies (PET, functional MRI).
Because of a lack of modern rehabilitation equipment and organization of services in the
resource-poor countries, proper and prompt rehabilitation (both passive and active) are often
deﬁcient in the majority of developing countries.

SECONDARY PREVENTION
Almost a third of all strokes occur in patients who have previously had a stroke, and about 15% of
all strokes are preceded by TIAs. Recurrent cerebrovascular events thus contribute substantially
to the global burden of the disease. Recently, an encouraging amount of new information has
emerged to modify clinical practice in secondary prevention of ischaemic stroke and TIA.
Lowering of blood pressure has been known for years to reduce the risk of ﬁrst stroke. The
recent trials show that the same applies for secondary stroke prevention, whether ischaemic or
haemorrhagic. The relative risk reduction of about a quarter is associated with a decrease in blood
pressure of 9 mm Hg systolic and 4 mm Hg diastolic.
Although higher plasma cholesterol concentrations do not seem to be associated with increased stroke risk, it has been suggested that lowering the concentration may decrease the risk.
The risk of stroke or myocardial infarction, and the need for vascular procedures, is also reduced
by a decrease in cholesterol concentration but it is still debated whether statins are effective in
stroke prevention. Aspirin, given to TIA/ischaemic stroke patients, reduces the relative risk of
stroke and other important vascular events by about 13%. Compared with aspirin, clopidogrel
reduces the risk of stroke and other important vascular events from about 6.0% (aspirin) to 5.4%
(clopidogrel) per year. The combination of aspirin and modiﬁed-release dipyridamole may also be
more effective than aspirin alone.
Long-term oral anticoagulants for TIA/ischaemic stroke patients in atrial ﬁbrillation reduce the
annual risk of stroke from 12% to 4%. Anticoagulation may be indicated for about 20% of patients
with TIA/ischaemic stroke who have high-risk sources of embolism from the heart to the brain,
mostly atrial ﬁbrillation.
Stroke risk ipsilateral to a recently symptomatic carotid stenosis increases with degree of stenosis, and is highest soon after the presenting event. Carotid endarterectomy reduces the risk of
stroke substantially in such patients. The recent evidence suggests that the beneﬁt from surgery
is also greater in men, patients aged ≥75 years, and those randomized and operated upon within
two weeks after their last ischaemic event.

159

160

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
Carotid artery stenting is less invasive than carotid endarterectomy but has only been compared with endarterectomy in a few small randomized controlled trials with inconclusive results.
Several large studies comparing the two treatments are currently ongoing.
The undoubted effectiveness of medical and surgical interventions must not detract from
lifestyle modiﬁcation, which should provide additional beneﬁts and at lower cost — though with
more effort by the patient. In spite of a lack of formal randomized evidence, ceasing to smoke,
increasing physical activity, lowering body weight and eating a diet rich in potassium seem to be
effective measures to prevent stroke.
All these measures are less achievable in developing countries where there is also a lack of
knowledge and information regarding stroke prevention strategies, including lifestyle modiﬁcation
(18). Antiplatelet agents are not used systematically and anticoagulants are usually under-prescribed mainly because of difﬁculties with monitoring. The high-technology preventive measures
indicated above are not accessible in the poorest countries. WHO has developed evidence-based
recommendations for policy-makers and health professionals for prevention of recurrent heart
attacks and strokes in low and middle income populations (19).

DELIVERY OF CARE
Developed countries are able to provide accessible health-care services to their people but, even
in these countries, services are far from optimal. In developing countries, however, cultural beliefs
and failure to recognize stroke symptoms may have an impact on the number of patients seeking
medical attention, and those who do come may present after complications have developed. In the
United States, approximately 60% of stroke patients present within three hours of stroke onset,
while in Europe 40–56% arrive at hospital within six hours. In Turkey, only 40% of stroke patients
are seen in the hospital within 12 hours (2).
Economic policies of developing countries may not allow large investments in health care,
hospitals, brain scanners or rehabilitation facilities. Health care in the acute phase of stroke is
the most costly component of the care of stroke patients; in low-resource countries hospital care
of even a small proportion of all patients with stroke accounts for a disproportionately high share
of total hospital costs. Stroke units, which have been shown to reduce mortality, morbidity and
other unfavourable outcomes without necessarily increasing health costs, are available in very
few developing countries.
Costs of consultation, investigation, hospitalization and medication may be beyond the means
of poor people, especially those who do not have welfare beneﬁts or medical insurance plans.
This seriously hampers the provision of care to patients who are otherwise able to seek medical
attention.
Although hospital care represents a large proportion of the costs of stroke, institutional care
also contributes signiﬁcantly to overall stroke care costs. Most developing countries do not have
well-established facilities for institutional care. The bulk of long-term care of the stroke patient is
likely to fall on community services and on family members, who are often ill equipped to handle
such issues. There is thus a need for appropriate resource planning and resource allocation to
help families cope with a stroke-impaired survivor.

Priorities for stroke care in the developing world
Governments and health planners in developing countries tend to underestimate the importance
of stroke. To compound this difﬁculty, 80% of the population in developing countries live in rural
areas, a factor that limits access to specialized services. In these parts of the world, top priority
for resource allocation for stroke services should go to primary prevention of stroke, and in particular to the detection and management of hypertension, discouragement of smoking, diabetes
control and other lifestyle issues. To achieve this task, stroke prevention awareness must be

neurological disorders: a public health approach
raised among health-care planners and governments. Another priority is education of the general
public and health-care providers about the preventable nature of stroke, as well as about warning
symptoms of the disease and the need for a rapid response. Furthermore, allocation of resources
for implementation and delivery of stroke services (e.g. stroke units and stroke teams) should also
be a priority. Finally, it is very important to establish key national institutions and organizations
that would promote training and education of health professionals and dissemination of strokerelevant information.

PARTNERSHIPS WITHIN AND BEYOND THE HEALTH SYSTEM
Despite the enormous and growing burden of stroke, the disease does not receive the attention
it deserves — including funds for prevention, management and research. In the context of an
integrated approach to chronic disease, a Global Stroke Initiative has been formed involving WHO,
the International Stroke Society and the World Federation of Neurology. The primary focus of this
international collaboration will be to harness the necessary resources for implementing existing
knowledge and strategies, especially in the middle and low income countries. The purpose of this
strategy is threefold: to increase awareness of stroke; to generate surveillance data on stroke; and
to use such data to guide improved strategies for prevention and management of stroke (20).
Each of these components is necessary to reduce the global stroke burden. The Global Stroke
Initiative is only possible through a strong interaction between governments, national health authorities and society, including two major international nongovernmental organizations.
Increasing awareness and advocacy among policy-makers, health-care providers and the
general public of the effect of stroke on society, health-care systems, individuals and families
is fundamental to improving stroke prevention and management. Advocacy and awareness are
also essential for the development of sustainable and effective responses at local, district and
national levels. Policy-makers need to be informed of the major public health and economic
threats posed by stroke as well as the availability of cost-effective approaches to both primary and
secondary prevention of stroke. Health professionals require appropriate knowledge and skills for
evidence-based prevention, acute care and rehabilitation of stroke. Relevant information needs to
be provided to the public about the potential for modifying personal risk of strokes, the warning
signs of impending strokes, and the need to seek medical advice in a timely manner.

RESEARCH
Stroke research is grossly underfunded even in developed countries (21). One of the major problems of stroke epidemiology is the lack of good-quality epidemiological studies in developing
countries, where most strokes occur and resources are limited. To address the problem of accurate and comparable data in these countries, an approach to increase the quality of the data
collected for stroke surveillance has recently been proposed by WHO. This ﬂexible and sustainable
system includes three steps: standard data acquisition (recording of hospital admission rates for
stroke), expanded population coverage (calculation of mortality rates by the use of death certiﬁcates or verbal autopsy), and comprehensive population-based studies (reports of nonfatal events
to calculate incidence and case-fatality). These steps could provide vital basic epidemiological
estimates of the burden of stroke in many countries around the world (20).

161

162

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1

Stroke is the second leading cause of mortality worldwide and the major cause of longterm disability in adults.

Further increase of stroke mortality is expected, with the majority of deaths from stroke to
occur in less developed countries.

By 2015, over 50 million healthy life years will be lost from stroke, with 90% of this
burden in low and middle income countries.

In developed countries, up to 80% of strokes represent ischaemic stroke, while the
remaining 20% are attributed to either intracerebral or subarachnoid haemorrhage. In
some developing countries the proportion of haemorrhagic strokes is higher.

Non-contrast computerized tomography is a reliable diagnostic tool allowing proper
differentiation between ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke and excluding other causes of
brain damage.

Advent of thrombolytic therapy together with development of stroke units leads to a
reduction of mortality and disability caused by stroke.

Immediate aspirin treatment of ischaemic stroke is beneﬁcial in terms of reducing early
stroke recurrence and increasing disability-free survival.

Effective measures to prevent stroke are lifestyle modiﬁcation (smoking cessation,
increased physical activity and the lowering of body weight), control of hypertension and
blood sugar, lowering of plasma cholesterol, carotid endarterectomy in selected cases,
and long-term antiplatelet or anticoagulant treatment.

There is a gap between developed and developing countries in terms of stroke prevention,
diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation caused by the lack of trained specialists and
expertise, lack of equipment, inadequate diagnostic evaluation and insufﬁcient funds in
resource-poor countries.

Stroke research and training are grossly underfunded.

neurological disorders: a public health approach

REFERENCES
1. Hatano S. Experience from a multicentre stroke register: a preliminary report. Bulletin of the World Health
Organization, 1976, 54:541–553.
2. Poungvarin N. Stroke in the developing world. Lancet, 1998, 352(Suppl. 3): 19–22.
3. Warlow C et al. Stroke. Lancet, 2003, 362:1211–1224.
4. Goldstein LB et al. Primary prevention of ischemic stroke: a guideline from the American Heart Association/
American Stroke Association Stroke Council. Stroke, 2006, 37:1583.
5. Mackay J, Mensah GA. The atlas of heart disease and stroke. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2004.
6. WHO CVD-risk management package for low- and medium-resource settings. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2002.
7. Feigin VL et al. Stroke epidemiology: a review of population-based studies of incidence, prevalence, and
case-fatality in the late 20th century. Lancet Neurology, 2003, 2:43–53.
8. Thorvaldsen P et al. Stroke trends in the WHO MONICA project. Stroke, 1997, 28:500–506.
9. Sarti C et al. International trends in mortality from stroke, 1968 to 1994. Stroke, 2000, 31:1588–1601.
10. Rothwell PM et al. Changes in stroke incidence, mortality, case-fatality, severity, and risk factors in
Oxfordshire, UK from 1981 to 2004 (Oxford Vascular Study). Lancet, 2004, 363:1925–1933.
11. Murray CJL, Lopez AD. Mortality by cause for eight regions of the world: global burden of disease study.
Lancet, 1997, 349:1269–1276.
12. The world health report 2004 – Changing history. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2004 (Statistical
Annex).
13. Warlow CP. Epidemiology of stroke. Lancet, 1998, 352(Suppl. 3):1–4.
14. Preventing chronic diseases: a vital investment. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2005.
15. The Stroke Unit Trialists’ Collaboration. Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care for stroke (Cochrane Review).
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2002, 1:CD000197.
16. Brott T, Bogousslavsky J. Treatment of acute ischaemic stroke. New England Journal of Medicine, 2000,
343:710–722.
17. Hankey GJ, Warlow CP. Treatment and secondary prevention of stroke: evidence, costs, and effects on
individuals and populations. Lancet, 1999, 354:1457–1463.
18. Mendis S et al. WHO study on Prevention of Recurrences of Myocardial Infarction and Stroke (WHOPREMISE). Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 2005, 83:820–829.
19. Prevention of recurrent heart attacks and strokes in low and middle income populations: evidence-based
recommendations for policy-makers and health professionals. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2003.
20. Bonita R et al. The Global Stroke Initiative. Lancet Neurology, 2004, 3:391–393.
21. Pendlebury ST et al. Underfunding of stroke research: a Europe-wide problem. Stroke, 2004, 35:2368–2371.

RECOMMENDED READING
■ Brown MM, Markus H, Oppenheimer S. Stroke medicine. Abingdon, Taylor & Francis, 2006.
■ Dobkin B. Strategies for stroke rehabilitation. Lancet Neurology, 2004, 3:526–536.
■ European Stroke Initiative recommendations for stroke management – Update 2003. Cerebrovascular
Disease, 2003, 16:311–337.
■ Ginsberg M, Bogousslavsky J, eds. Cerebrovascular disease: pathophysiology, diagnosis and management.
Malden, Blackwell Science, 1998.
■ Leys D et al. Poststroke dementia. Lancet Neurology, 2005, 4:752–750.
■ Intercollegiate Stroke Working Party. National clinical guidelines for stroke, 2nd ed. London, Royal College of
Physicians, 2004.
■ Rothwell PM, Buchan A, Johnston SC. Recent advances in management of transient ischaemic attacks and
minor ischaemic strokes. Lancet Neurology, 2006, 5:323–331.
■ Sacco R et al. Guidelines for prevention of stroke in patients with ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic
attack. AHA/ASA guidelines. Stroke, 2006, 37:577–617.
■ Management of patients with stroke. Rehabilitation, prevention and management of complications, and discharge planning. A national clinical guideline. Edinburgh, Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, 2002.
■ Warlow CP et al. Stroke: a practical guide to management, 2nd ed. Oxford, Blackwell Science, 2000.
■ WHO CVD-risk management package for low- and medium-resource settings. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2002.
■ Prevention of recurrent heart attacks and strokes in low and middle income populations: evidence-based
recommendations for policy-makers and health professionals. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2003.
■ Preventing chronic diseases: a vital investment. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2005.

163

164

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

3.10 Traumatic brain injuries
164 Deﬁnition and outcome
165 Diagnosis and classiﬁcation
165 Epidemiology and burden
168 Etiology and risk factors
169 Acute management of traumatic brain injury
170 Rehabilitation after traumatic brain injury
171 Costs

Traumatic brain injury is the leading cause of
death and disability in children and young adults
173 Infrastructure and human resources for care
around the world and is involved in nearly half of
173 Research
all trauma deaths. Many years of productive life
are lost, and many people have to suffer years of
173 Conclusions and recommendations
disability after brain injury. In addition, it engenders great economic costs for individuals, families and society. Many lives can
be saved and years of disability spared through better prevention.
171 Prevention and education

More and better epidemiological data can help in tailoring effective preventive measures against
traumatic brain injury (TBI), with particular emphasis on reducing the impact of road trafﬁc accidents. The world is facing a silent epidemic of road trafﬁc accidents in the developing countries:
by 2020, road trafﬁc crashes will have moved from ninth to third place in the world ranking of the
burden of disease and will be in second place in developing countries. A lot can be done to reduce
the devastating consequences of TBIs.
Systematic triage of patients can lead to important economic savings and better use of scant
hospital resources. More standardized pre-hospital and in-hospital care, to minimize secondary
brain injury, can improve outcomes substantially.

DEFINITION AND OUTCOME
If the head is hit by an external mechanical force, the brain will be displaced inside the skull and
can be injured against the solid meningeal membrane, the dura, or against the inside of the neurocranium. Acceleration and deceleration forces may disrupt the nervous tissue and blood vessels of
the brain. All grades of injury can occur, ranging from no visible abnormality of the brain in cases
of mild TBI to superﬁcial bruising (contusion), and, in severe cases, dramatic swelling (oedema)
as well as large collections of blood (haematomas).
Initial classiﬁcation of TBI is based mostly upon the clinical examination which is carried out
by the physician in the hospital’s accident and emergency department. Around 90% of TBIs are
classiﬁed as “mild”, implying that the patient is awake but may have had a loss of consciousness
and/or a short amnesia. Only 3–5% are “severe” TBIs, meaning that the patient is unconscious
upon admission.
Outcome of TBI, in terms of mortality rates and disability, is related to:
■ pre-injury status: age, health and psychosocial function;
■ initial clinical grade immediately after injury, reﬂecting the primary brain damage;

neurological disorders: a public health approach
■ acute management: pre-hospital and in-hospital;
■ complications and secondary brain damage that may develop within minutes of the impact;
■ rehabilitation.
In mild TBI, the mortality rate is below 1%, while 20–50% die after suffering a severe TBI. The
intermediate category, “moderate” head injury, implies a mortality rate of 2–5%. Disability is a
common problem after hospitalization for TBI, even after a mild event (1).

DIAGNOSIS AND CLASSIFICATION
The diagnosis of TBI can be obvious in cases where a blow to the head is reported and when
superﬁcial wounds can be identiﬁed. But some cases are less clear-cut, and TBI may be present
without any superﬁcial signs of a head injury.
Further classiﬁcation of the brain injury is made in order to evaluate prognosis, identify patients at risk for deterioration and choose appropriate observation and treatment. As shown in
Table 3.10.1, the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) uses a points system to evaluate the best ocular,
verbal and motor responses. A normal healthy person will obtain a GCS score (adding up the eye
opening score, the verbal score and the motor score) of 15. Someone who opens his eyes only
after painful stimulation, utters only incomprehensible sounds and withdraws his hand only after
pinching will be given a score of 8. This scale permits the following classiﬁcation of TBI after
clinical examination:
■ mild head injury (GCS 13–15);
■ moderate head injury (GCS 9–12);
■ severe head injury (GCS 3–8).

Table 3.10.1 Glasgow Coma Scale to evaluate brain injury
Points awarded

Eye opening

Verbal response

Motor response

None

To pain

Sounds (incomprehensible)

Extends

To speech

Words (inappropriate)

Abnormal ﬂexion

Spontaneous

Confused

Withdraws

Orientated

Localizes pain

5
6

Obeys commands

Triage
Classiﬁcation into these categories based on clinical assessment alone must be supported by
the results of a computerized tomography (CT) examination in many cases, or a skull X-ray if a
CT scanner is not available. A fracture detected on the skull X-ray images indicates an increased
risk of deterioration, and the patient will need admission. A CT scan reveals a skull fracture more
clearly than an ordinary X-ray examination will do. In addition, it visualizes the bleeding, bruising
and swelling of actual brain injury: CT signs of brain damage are present in one third of the mild
cases, two thirds of the moderate cases and all the severe cases (2–4).

EPIDEMIOLOGY AND BURDEN
There are many scientiﬁc reports on TBI, but in view of methodological shortcomings the epidemiological data are not easily comparable (5). In spite of these reservations, it can be interesting
and informative to compile data from different parts of the world.

165

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
Incidence
In Tagliaferri’s European study, the TBI incidence rate collected from 23 reports with epidemiological data was found to vary greatly between countries (5). Some of the differences could be ascribed to variations in study years, inclusion criteria and research methods. Most rates were in the
range 150–300 per 100 000 population per year. The estimated European incidence of TBI was
235 per 100 000 per year, including all hospitalized patients with head injury and those dying of a
head injury prior to admission. Admission policies, particularly in cases of mild TBI, will, of course,
inﬂuence the incidence rates markedly. Therefore, incidence rates such as 546 per 100 000 per
year in Sweden and 91 per 100 000 per year in Spain must be interpreted with caution.
Data from many parts of the world consistently show a peak incidence rate in children, young
adults and elderly people. Males are injured 2–3 times as often as women.

Prevalence
Prevalence of TBI measures the total number of injuries at a point in time or in a period interval; the
calculation should include all those with TBI sequelae such as impairments, disabilities, handicaps
or complaints, plus all the newly diagnosed cases at the deﬁned time or time interval.
Estimates from the United States indicate that 1–2% of the population, i.e. around ﬁve million
people, live with a TBI disability (6–7 ). Many disabled people have neurobehavioural problems. It
is therefore no exaggeration to describe TBI disability as an enormous public health problem (6).
Information on how sequelae develop (diminish or increase) over time is scarce (8); better data
on prevalence would certainly be useful for improved planning of rehabilitation needs.

Mortality
Case-fatality rate in different parts of the world. The average European pre-hospital case-fatality
rate was 8%, while the in-hospital rate was 3%, i.e. a total rate of 11 deaths per 100 cases of
TBI, all grades of severity included. The in-hospital rate varies from 2.4 in Australia to 6.2 in the
United States and 11 in China, Province of Taiwan (5). Admission policies may inﬂuence these
rates. About one third of the hospitalized patients dying after TBI had talked at some time after
the injury: this is an indication that some of them might have been saved (9).
Mortality rate per 100 000 population per year is more informative than the case-fatality rate.
The average European rate was estimated to be 15 TBI-associated deaths per 100 000 population per year (5). The rate is around 10 in Scandinavia, 20 in India, 30 in the United States, 38 in
China, Province of Taiwan, 81 in South Africa and 120 in Colombia (10). In three of the four Nordic

Figure 3.10.1 Mortality rates associated with traumatic brain injury,
Nordic countries, 1987–2000
26
Finland

Denmark

Norway

Sweden

Mortality rate per 100 000

166

22
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
1987

Source: (11).

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

Year

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

neurological disorders: a public health approach
countries, the TBI mortality rate decreased considerably between 1987 and 2000, as shown in
Figure 3.10.1. The decrease is explained by a marked reduction in serious road trafﬁc accidents.
It has been suggested that heavy alcohol abuse may explain the persistent and high mortality
rate in Finland (11).

Disability
Traumatic brain injury is the leading cause of disability in people under 40 years of age. Disability
can be classiﬁed in a simple fashion using the Glasgow Outcome Scale (see Table 3.10.2):

Table 3.10.2 Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS)
Classiﬁcation (GOS level)

Description

Dead
Persistent vegetative state

Awake but not aware

Severely disabled

Conscious but dependent

Moderately disabled

Independent but disabled

Good recovery

May have minor sequelae

Source: (10).

Thornhill and colleagues have recently estimated the annual incidence of disability after TBI
(moderate and severe disability together) to be approximately 100 per 100 000 population per
year. Their ﬁndings revealed a higher incidence than indicated in previous reports, particularly
in patients with mild TBI (1). Most patients (90%) had sustained a mild head injury, while a few
had suffered moderate (5%) or severe (3%) brain injury. Half of the survivors were disabled after
mild or moderate TBI, while three quarters of survivors were disabled after a severe injury. Even
among young patients with mild injuries and a good pre-injury status, one third failed to achieve
a good recovery.
Moderate disability after TBI is 3–4 times more common than severe disability. Severe disability after TBI is reported in 15–20 per 100 000 population per year (8). Mostly, patients with
severe disability will have a combined mental and physical handicap.
The rarest form of disability after TBI is the vegetative state. It may be transitory, subsiding
after a month or so, but may persist in many cases. The persistently vegetative patient needs
artiﬁcial nutrition and hydration and will have a markedly reduced life span, i.e. 2–5 years. In
some cases, complicated ethical and legal discussions arise about the purpose of continuing
life-sustaining treatment.
Disability after moderate or severe TBI may take various forms:
■ Mental sequelae with personality change, memory disorders, reduced reasoning power and
apathy (9). A defective recent memory may be particularly incapacitating.
■ Disturbed motor function of arm or leg.
■ Speech disturbances.
■ Epilepsy, which may develop years after the primary injury, is seen in 1–5% of patients.

Recovery
Some patients continue to recover for years after a TBI, but 90% reach their deﬁnitive GOS level
after six months (9).
Elderly patients with TBI are known to have a slower rate of functional recovery, longer stays in
rehabilitation and greater levels of disability with comparable injuries.

167

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

ETIOLOGY AND RISK FACTORS
The three main causes of TBI are road trafﬁc accidents (RTAs), falls and violence. Their relative
importance varies from region to region, see Figure 3.10.2. The graph shows that exposure to
hazards varies considerably between regions (5). These variations must be taken into account by
health planners who design prevention programmes.

Road trafﬁc accidents
As the leading cause of head injury in the world, RTAs account for 40–50% of the cases hospitalized for TBI. The impact of RTAs is even higher in children and young adults with TBI, in cases of
moderate or severe TBI and in patients with multiple injuries. Every day about 3000 people die and
30 000 people are seriously injured on the world’s roads, nearly half of them with head injuries.
Most of the victims are from the low income or middle income countries, with pedestrians, cyclists
and bus passengers bearing most of the burden (12). Fatality rates among children are six times
greater in developing countries than in high income countries.
There has been a steady decrease in RTAs in many industrialized countries during the last two
decades, while the problem is increasing in developing countries (4). Terms such as “a public health
crisis” and “a neglected epidemic” have been used to describe this growing problem (13).

Falls and violence
Falls are second in frequency to RTAs, as shown in Figure 3.10.2, and occur more frequently in
Australia, India and northern Europe (5). In Pakistan, falls from the roof are a common cause
of head injury, and account for more than 10% of the injuries in a large neurosurgical series of
relatively serious TBIs (14).
People 70 years or older have a relatively high incidence of head injuries, and in these patients
falls are the most common cause. Many factors contribute to the increased risk for falls in elderly
people: gait impairment, dizziness, previous stroke, cognitive impairment, postural hypotension,
poor visual acuity and multiple medication.
Interpersonal violence is involved in 2–15% of cases (5). Most TBIs are the result of blunt
trauma, but in some countries there is a high percentage of penetrating injuries, e.g. in the United
States where gunshot wounds are the major cause and account for 40% of all head injury deaths,
while 34% are secondary to RTAs (15,16).
Many factors increase the risk of sustaining a TBI:
■ Alcohol and drugs: alcohol is an important contributing factor in TBI from all causes in more
than one third of cases (5).
■ Poverty: living in a low income neighbourhood increases the risk of TBI in children as well as
in adults (17,18).
■ Comorbidity: seizures and being elderly and handicapped aggravate the risk of TBI.

Figure 3.10.2 External causes of traumatic brain injury in selected areas
70
60
% of total

168

■ Road trafﬁc accident

■ Fall

■ Violence

50
40
30
20
10
0
Europe

USA

Australia

Asia

India

Note: Variations must be interpreted with caution since case deﬁnitions and classiﬁcation schemes have not been standardized.
Source: (5).

neurological disorders: a public health approach

ACUTE MANAGEMENT OF TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY
Treatment of mild head injuries
Many of the mild cases can be classiﬁed as “minor head injuries”. These patients can be dismissed
after a short clinical examination and adequate information, since their risk of further problems
will be very low, i.e. <0.1%. Before dismissal, they deserve brief information, preferably written,
about:
■ warning signs indicating possible complications;
■ how normal and mild symptoms are expected to develop;
■ how to resume normal daily activities.
The remaining patients with mild TBI have a 1–6% risk of deterioration (19). Therefore, a
closer examination may be required to identify the individuals with the highest risk of developing
complications. Patients who need special attention are those with:
■ decreasing level of consciousness;
■ neurological deﬁcit;
■ epileptic seizure;
■ deﬁcient blood coagulation;
■ age >60 years;
■ alcohol abuse.
Patients at risk will need a CT examination and/or admission.
■ Observation should be maintained for 12–24 hours with repeated examinations to detect a
decreasing level of consciousness.
■ A CT scan gives excellent information about fractures and brain damage:
■ CT scanning of patients with mild TBI has been found very cost effective in Sweden, where
scanners are available and manpower in hospitals is expensive (20).
■ A skull X-ray should be performed if a CT scanner is not available. A fracture will indicate a
higher risk of deterioration and admission is necessary for a short time of observation.
The clinical examination, a CT scan and, in some cases, observation in a hospital ward will
identify the very few patients in this group requiring treatment by a qualiﬁed neurosurgeon.

Treatment of moderate and severe injuries
Patients with moderate or severe TBI represent less than 10% of all the traumatic head injuries.
In this category of TBIs, adequate health care can make a difference and substantially improve
outcomes. Airway obstruction and falling blood pressure are the acute threats to the vulnerable
brain-injured patient. Pre-hospital care with skilled paramedics, early arrival at the scene of the
accident, prompt stabilization of the patient’s condition in accordance with ABC guidelines, and
rapid evacuation reduced overall TBI mortality by 24% in two years in San Diego (6, 21).
Well-organized and updated hospital inpatient treatment is equally important. On admission,
life-supporting measures should be continued, in accordance with Advanced Trauma Life Support
recommendations (22). Simultaneously, a rapid diagnostic overview must be carried out: many
patients, particularly in RTA cases, will have concomitant injuries of the chest, abdomen, spine
or extremities.
In the United Kingdom, the mortality in patients with epidural haematoma declined progressively from 28% to 8% after the introduction of national guidelines for the early management
of head injury (22). The guidelines clearly indicate how patients at risk should be identiﬁed and
managed before progressive brain damage occurs.
A study from the United States in patients with severe TBI showed improved outcomes after
implementation of evidence-based treatment guidelines. At the same time, reduced hospital costs

169

170

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
were obtained through shortened length of stay, from an average of 21.2 days to an average of
15.8 days (7 ).
Research that focused on identifying the ideal conditions for the extremely vulnerable brain
in severe TBIs has resulted in two different approaches in neurointensive care, the Lund model
and the perfusion concept. Although they are different in many ways, both have led to improved
outcomes in patients with severe TBI (23).

REHABILITATION AFTER TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY
Although disability after mild TBI may have been underestimated, most patients will make a
good recovery with provision of appropriate information and without requiring additional speciﬁc
interventions (24, 25).
Patients with moderate to severe TBI should be routinely followed up to assess their need for
rehabilitation. There is strong evidence of beneﬁt from formal interventions, particularly more intensive programmes beginning when the patients are still in the acute ward. The balance between
intensity and cost–effectiveness has yet to be determined (24, 25).
The importance of rehabilitation is consistently underestimated, not least because of its cost.
It is a regrettable truth that this part of the treatment lacks the drama of the primary treatment
and is consequently more difﬁcult to fund. It is nonetheless of great importance since TBI damages young lives for whom rehabilitation is as important for the regaining of function as primary
treatment is for the saving of life.
Examples of rehabilitation services are shown in Box 3.10.1 and Box 3.10.2.
Neuropsychologists evaluate orientation, attention, intellect, memory, language, visual perception, judgement, personality, mood and executive functions of the patients with TBI. An example
of a TBI patient with neuropsychological sequelae is given in Box 3.10.2.

Box 3.10.1 Traumatic brain injury rehabilitation services in Costa Rica
Since 1974, rehabilitation services following TBIs are
provided in Costa Rica at the National Rehabilitation Centre (CENARE), San José, which is part of the national health
services. This Centre receives patients from all over the
country; it is classiﬁed as a tertiary care hospital and offers highly specialized medical care to the population on
an inpatient and outpatient basis. The neurotrauma unit in
the Centre has a 16-bed capacity, and serves an annual
average of 50 people through an interdisciplinary team consisting of two physicians (specialized in medical rehabilitation), a head nurse, an occupational therapist, a physical
therapist, a psychologist and a social worker. Every week
the team makes rounds to the inpatients and meets six outpatients in order to assess them throughout the subacute
process of their rehabilitation; active participation of the
families is encouraged at all stages of the rehabilitation
process. The team counts on the help of a staff respiratory
and speech therapist.
The patient population is composed of patients who
were over 12 years of age at the moment of the lesion and
who sustained severe traumatic head injuries, as well as
patients with non-traumatic brain damage. The following
services are offered.

Low-level rehabilitation for comatose and slow-to-recover patients, who are referred as soon as their medical condition is stable. They receive structured stimulation, in the
form of physical and occupational therapy. Nutritional and
feeding requirements are evaluated and installed. Families
receive psychological support and advice, orientation in attention protocol, and advice in areas such as feeding, nursing care, positioning, and prevention and care of pressure
ulcers. Home visits are scheduled in order to offer advice
on eliminating architectural barriers and to give training to
family members in their own environment.
Full rehabilitation. Once patients have recovered complete consciousness, cognitive sequelae are evaluated and
treated and physical sequelae are further evaluated and
treated. Both can be done as inpatients or outpatients, depending on the distance between the Centre and the patient’s place of residence. A formal, structured cognitive retraining programme will be implemented in the near future.
Patients and their families are supported throughout their
subacute and chronic phases of recovery by all team members, and services are offered when needed in an open
manner as well as through structured appointments.

neurological disorders: a public health approach

COSTS
Any information that is available about the economic consequences of TBI is mostly related to
costs of hospitalization, which probably constitute only a relatively small part of the total costs.
According to Berg and colleagues (10), TBI-associated costs can be subdivided as follows:
■ direct costs: hospitalization, outpatient care, rehabilitation;
■ indirect costs: lost productivity, in particular after moderate or severe injuries;
■ intangible costs to patients, families and friends: related to death or reduced
quality of life.

PREVENTION AND EDUCATION
Prevention of road trafﬁc accidents
Road trafﬁc accidents are the major cause of TBIs on a global scale. Although their mortality rates
have decreased substantially in many industrialized countries during the past two decades, there
is increasing concern about a rising epidemic of RTA injuries in developing countries. By 2020,
it is estimated that road trafﬁc crashes will have moved from ninth to third place in the world
ranking of the burden of disease and will be in second place in developing countries. To quote an
article in the British Medical Journal: “… sleepiness among drivers may account for nearly a ﬁfth
of road trafﬁc crashes. Similarly, if the international public health community continues to sleep
through the global road trauma pandemic it will be accountable for many millions of avoidable
deaths and injuries” (12).
The frequency and severity of RTAs are related to the following factors:
■ The number of cars and motorcycles.
■ The design and condition of motor vehicles:
› use of seat belts lowers risk;
› functioning brakes and adequate tyres lower the risk of RTAs.
■ The quality and design of the road:
› shared road use by motor vehicles and unprotected road users increases the risk of injury;
› speed cameras are effective in lowering the risk;
› speed reduction through road design effectively reduces the risk.

Box 3.10.2 Rehabilitation after traumatic brain injury: a case-study
Vera is a 34-year-old administrator who was head of personnel in a government training ofﬁce for many years.
She sustained a severe head injury in 1999, which did not
produce any physical limitation but severely affected her
memory and, to a lesser extent, speech. After evaluation it
was evident that Vera had important intellectual limitations.
She was given memory compensation techniques to use at
home and at work, and it was suggested she relocate to a
less demanding position. Vera refused to change her job;
she asked the team not to visit her superiors and tried in
vain to maintain her position at work without letting anybody know her condition. After some months she eventually
resigned from her job, very depressed because her staff
no longer trusted her and had lost respect for her authority — she constantly made mistakes, could not remember
what she had asked for days before, etc. Vera decided to

enrol in some of the training courses her ofﬁce offered
to the public, but she failed again and again. Her former
subordinates made fun of her failure, which depressed her
further. When last seen, Vera was receiving treatment for
severe depression, but insisted she wanted to recuperate
and could recover her former capacities and employment.
Comment: The consequences of TBI — in the form of
memory impairment (as in Vera’s case), attention problems,
mild to severe intellectual deﬁciency, lack of concentration
and limited ability to learn — can result in impossibility
to return to work, affect emotional stability, and limit performance at work and at home. All of these problems will
affect the person’s emotional status, as well as his or her
family and friends. It can also mean social isolation in the
long term, further aggravating depression.

171

172

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
■ Road safety laws and trafﬁc conditions:
› poor enforcement of trafﬁc safety regulations increases risk;
› helmets dramatically reduce the risk of TBI in motorcyclists and cyclists (63–88% reduction
of TBI risk in cyclists; 50% reduction of fatalities from motorcycles in the United States
from 1982 to 1992);
› speed is a major killer (5% of pedestrians will die if hit by a car at 32 km/h, while 85% will
die if hit at 64 km/h (26));
› alcohol increases the risk of RTA for drivers, pedestrians and cyclists;
› discouraging the use of cars and heavy vehicles in cities will lower risk;
› safe public transport incurs fewer deaths per km than travel by private car;
› dedicated urban spaces for walking and cycling will reduce risk.
■ Population density.
■ The education of all road users and the general public about safe driving and transport.
A locally relevant evidence base is an urgent requirement for prevention of RTAs. Public health
authorities need to acquire more knowledge about the epidemiology of RTAs and the main local
causes, especially when injuries are fatal. They should also know that road trafﬁc injuries are
preventable and that some measures are very effective. With reliable data about the epidemiology of the “war on the roads”, a sense of urgency can be established among policy-makers and
effective preventive measures can be designed that are tailored to local trafﬁc conditions and take
account of regional data on external causes and risk factors (12).
Structural measures have proven to be the most efﬁcient approaches in the prevention of RTAs.
Examples are physical measures to separate motor vehicles from pedestrians, speed bumps,
speed cameras, strict speed limits and alcohol check-ups.
Educational programmes may be a useful supplement in adults, but there is no evidence that
education of pedestrians reduces the risk of motor vehicle collisions involving children on foot
(12).
Community-based activities (such as American Association of Neurological Surgeons “Think
ﬁrst” and “Group at risk” designed programmes), as well as interaction with motor vehicle companies, are important elements in prevention programmes. Realities in both developed and developing countries must be taken into account to make sure the programmes will be acceptable
and efﬁcient.

Prevention of brain injuries from other causes
Prevention of TBIs from falls, violence, sports, work-related accidents, etc. must also be based on
a thorough knowledge of regional epidemiology, causes and risk factors. In some countries, for
example the United States, the use of ﬁrearms accounts for the majority of deaths attributed to
TBI. Improved medical treatment would not have much impact in such cases, since most gunshot
wounds to the head are fatal. There is a need for more efﬁcient prevention, starting with speciﬁc
legislation to regulate the use of ﬁrearms (16).

Education
Educational activities should comprise age-oriented educational programmes including personal
computer games, medical and paramedical training in neurotrauma, development of an Advanced
Life Support in Brain Injury® (ALSBI), and multimedia educational campaigns on safety of motor
vehicles. The creation of foundations for the relatives of victims of injuries or associations for
education and the prevention of TBI should be strengthened.
The ALSBI® course objectives could be summarized as follows:
■ educate pre-hospital and emergency service physicians in the care of acute neurological patients;

neurological disorders: a public health approach
■ promote the “time is brain” concept by emphasizing the importance of the initial management
of TBI, stroke and other brain disorders;
■ avoid secondary neurological damage;
■ improve survival and quality of life of head-injured victims;
■ spread this knowledge all over the world.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND HUMAN RESOURCES FOR CARE
Taking care of patients with TBI does not differ from any other trauma care. In fact, a large proportion of moderately or severely head-injured patients will have concomitant injuries of the spine,
chest, abdomen or extremities.
In densely populated areas of developed countries a complete trauma centre includes:
■ a fully staffed and equipped emergencies and admissions unit;
■ easy access to radiology services, including an technologically advanced all-body CT scanner;
■ operating theatre;
■ intensive care unit;
■ anesthesiologists, trauma surgeons, neurosurgeons and specialized nurses available 24 hours
a day, seven days a week.
In remote areas and in developing countries the situation may be different.

RESEARCH
Research in the ﬁeld of TBI should cover the following subjects:
■ Epidemiology, with particular emphasis on more standardized measures, to allow comparisons
between regions and a valid evaluation of care and prevention.
■ The management of TBI patients with pre-hospital care, in-hospital care and rehabilitation.
Such studies should range from logistics, quality of life studies, pathophysiology, etc. to evaluation of various aspects of multidisciplinary rehabilitation.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1

Research in epidemiology and management has led to better prevention and treatment
in some parts of the world during the past two or three decades. Health policy-makers,
doctors, nurses and paramedics should be proud of their achievements and join forces to
organize a worldwide ﬁght against the silent and neglected epidemic of traumatic brain
injury.

There is an urgent need for the development of global and national policies in order
to minimize the risks and the consequences of road trafﬁc accidents, particularly in
the developing countries. This should be a joint effort between different government
agencies, medical societies, motor vehicle manufacturers and nongovernmental
organizations.

Policies to improve the outcome of TBIs and strengthen road trafﬁc safety must
aim primarily at improving the research-based knowledge of regional epidemiology,
preventive programmes and the acute management of TBI in pre-hospital and inpatient
settings.

Prevention will have a greater impact if based upon robust data on causes and risk
factors involved in TBI and upon knowledge of the efﬁciency of the various preventive
measures.

173

174

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

REFERENCES
1. Thornhill S et al. Disability in young people and adults one year after head injury: prospective cohort study.
BMJ, 2000, 320:1631–1635.
2. Thiruppathy SP, Muthukumar N. Mild head injury: revisited. Acta Neurochirugica, 2004, 146:1075–1082.
3. Rimel RW et al. Moderate head injury: completing the clinical spectrum of brain trauma. Neurosurgery, 1982,
11:344–351.
4. Masson F et al. Epidemiology of traumatic comas: a prospective population-based study. Brain Injury, 2003,
17:279–293.
5. Tagliaferri F et al. A systematic review of brain injury epidemiology in Europe. Acta Neurochirugica, 2006,
148:255–268.
6. Kelly DF, Becker DP. Advances in management of neurosurgical trauma: USA and Canada. World Journal of
Surgery, 2001, 25:1179–1185.
7. Fakhry SM et al. Management of brain-injured patients by an evidence-based medicine protocol improves
outcomes and decreases hospital charges. Journal of Trauma, 2004, 56:492–500.
8. Fleminger S, Ponsford J. Long term outcome after traumatic brain injury. BMJ, 2005, 331:1419–1420.
9. Jennett B, Lindsay KW. An introduction to neurosurgery, 5th ed. Oxford, Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd., 1994.
10. Berg J, Tagliaferri F, Servadei F. Cost of trauma in Europe. European Journal of Neurology, 2005, 12(Suppl.
1):85–90.
11. Sundstrøm T, Sollid S, Wester K. Deaths from traumatic brain injury in the Nordic countries, 1987–2000.
Tidsskrift for den Norske laegeforening, 2005, 125:1310–1312.
12. Roberts I, Mohan D, Abassi K. War on the roads. BMJ, 2002, 324:1107–1108.
13. Nantulya VM, Reich MR. The neglected epidemic: road trafﬁc injuries in developing countries. BMJ, 2002,
324:1139–1141.
14. Iftikhar AR, Vohra AH, Ahmed M. Neurotrauma in Pakistan. World Journal of Surgery, 2001, 25:1230–1237.
15. Adekoya N et al. Surveillance for traumatic brain injury deaths – United States, 1989–1998. MMWR CDC
Surveillance Summaries, 2002, 51:1–14.
16. Stone JL, Lichtor T, Fitzgerald L. Gunshot wounds to the head in civilian practice. Neurosurgery, 1996,
37:1104–1112.
17. Basso A et al. Advances in management of neurosurgical trauma in different continents. World Journal of
Surgery, 2001, 25:1174–1178.
18. Durkin MS et al. The epidemiology of urban pediatric neurological trauma: evaluation of, and implications for,
injury prevention programs. Neurosurgery, 1998, 42:300–310.
19. Servadei F, Teasdale G, Merry G. Deﬁning acute mild head injury in adults: a proposal based on prognostic
factors; diagnosis, and management. Journal of Neurotrauma, 2001, 18:657–664.
20. Norlund A et al. Immediate computed tomography or admission for observation after mild head injury: cost
comparison in randomised controlled trial. BMJ, 2006, 333:469.
21. Watts DD et al. An evaluation of the use of guidelines in prehospital management of brain injury. Prehospital
Emergency Care, 2004, 8:254–261.
22. Kay A, Teasdale G. Head injury in the United Kingdom. World Journal of Surgery, 2001, 25:1210–1220.
23. Diringer MN. What do we really understand about head injury? Neurocritical Care, 2005, 2:3.
24. Taricco M, Liberati A. Rehabilitation of traumatic brain injury. Europa Medicophysica, 2006, 42:69–71.
25. Turner-Stokes L et al. Multi-disciplinary rehabilitation for acquired brain injury in adults of working age.
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2005, 3:CD004170.
26. Dora C. A different route to health: implications for transport policies. BMJ, 1999, 318:1686–1689.

neurological disorders: a public health approach

RECOMMENDED READING
■ Berg J, Tagliaferri F, Servadei F. Cost of trauma in Europe. European Journal of Neurology, 2005, 12(Suppl.
1):85–90.
■ Cooper PR, Golﬁnos J, eds. Head injury, 4th ed. New York, McGraw Hill, 2000.
■ Ingebrigtsen T, Romner B, Kock-Jensen C. Scandinavian guidelines for initial management of minimal,
mild, and moderate head injuries. The Scandinavian Neurotrauma Committee. Journal of Trauma, 2000,
48:760–766.
■ Tagliaferri F et al. A systematic review of brain injury epidemiology in Europe. Acta Neurochirugica, 2006,
148:255–268.
■ Turner-Stokes L et al. Multi-disciplinary rehabilitation for acquired brain injury in adults of working age.
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2005, 3:CD004170.
■ Guidelines for prehospital management of traumatic brain injuries. New York, Brain Trauma Foundation,
2000 (http://www2.braintrauma.org/guidelines/index.php).
■ Management and prognosis of severe traumatic brain injuries. New York, Brain Trauma Foundation, 2000
(http://www2.braintrauma.org/guidelines/index.php).

175

176

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

177

CHAPTER 4

conclusions
and
recommendations
in this chapter

The relationship between neurology and public health has not been adequately explored to
date. This report provides considerable detail
179 Recommendations for action
about the increasing global public health
importance of various common neurological disorders. Public health interventions
that may be applied in an attempt to reduce their occurrence and consequences
have been considered. A clear message emerges: unless immediate action is taken
globally, the neurological burden is expected to become an even more serious and
unmanageable threat to public health.

177 Evidence on which to base a public health
framework for neurological disorders

This ﬁnal chapter highlights a number of overall patterns and
themes that cut across the neurological disorders discussed in the
previous chapters. It reiterates what is known about neurological
disorders and makes the case for a public health approach; it
then considers what can be done and provides a set of recommendations for decision-makers and health-care providers.

EVIDENCE ON WHICH TO BASE A
PUBLIC HEALTH FRAMEWORK FOR
NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS
The burden is already high and is increasing
further
Neurological disorders and their sequelae are currently estimated
to affect as many as a billion people worldwide. These disorders
are found among all age groups and in all geographical regions.
Increased life expectancy and reduced fertility have resulted in
a demographical transition from predominantly youthful popula-

tions to older and ageing ones, causing increases
in the neurological disorders such as Alzheimer
and other dementias and Parkinson’s disease. As a
consequence, many low income countries face the
double burden of a continuing high level of infections — including some that result in neurological
disorders (e.g. HIV and malaria) — and increases in
noncommunicable diseases. The number of people
with neurological disorders is estimated to increase
considerably in years to come. It is forecast that the
number of people affected by dementia (already
counted in tens of millions) will double every 20
years. While predictions point to higher risk among
poor people, children, adolescents and elderly persons, no population group is immune to neurological
disorders.
Because most of the neurological disorders result in long-term disability and many have an early
age of onset, measures of prevalence and mortality

178

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
vastly understate the disability they cause. Pain is a signiﬁcant symptom in several neurological
disorders and adds signiﬁcantly to emotional suffering and disability. Even burden estimates
combining mortality and disability do not take into account the suffering and social and economic
losses affecting patients, their families and the community. The socioeconomic demands of care,
treatment and rehabilitation put a strain on entire families, seriously diminishing their productivity
and quality of life.
A study conducted in Europe estimated that the annual economic cost of neurological diseases
(dementia, epilepsy, migraine and other headaches, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease and stroke)
amounted to € 139 billion (approximately US$ 180 billion) in 2004. This study only partially included
direct non-medical costs (e.g. community care and informal care) and indirect costs and omitted intangible costs. The results also demonstrated that the cost of dementia increases by 25% when informal
care is included and the cost of multiple sclerosis increases by at least 50% when intangible costs are
included. In the same study, the annual cost of traumatic brain injuries was estimated as € 3 billion;
this ﬁgure is, however, a gross underestimate as it was based only on hospitalization attributable to
trauma and omitted rehabilitation and lost workdays and production, which are substantially higher.
Unfortunately, no equivalent estimates are available for developing countries.

Stigma and discrimination are associated with most of these
disorders
The stigma often associated with neurological disorders adds to the social and economic burden.
One of the most damaging results of stigmatization is that affected individuals or those responsible for their care may not seek treatment, hoping to avoid the negative social consequences of
diagnosis. Indeed, in some communities, the stigma leads to the denial of basic human rights.
Stigma aggravates the vicious cycle of illness and social negative reaction and leads to social
exclusion and discrimination.
Epilepsy, one of the most common neurological conditions, is well understood and accepted
in many societies. Yet in many others, particularly in developing countries, epilepsy is considered
contagious or the sign of a curse or possession, with blame for the condition attached to the family
as well as to the patient. The direct and indirect discriminatory behaviour and factual choices by
others cause substantial reduction in societal opportunities such as education, marriage or work,
or may result in being excluded from community activities. Fortunately, stigma and its negative
effect on quality of life can be substantially reduced by better seizure control, highlighting the
need for effective treatment.

Cost-effective interventions are available
For many of the neurological disorders there are inexpensive but effective interventions that could
be applied on a large scale through primary care. Phenobarbital for the treatment of epilepsy is
one such cost-effective intervention: up to 70% of people with epilepsy could become seizure
free with antiepileptic drug treatment, but the proportion who remain untreated at any given time
is greater than 80% in most low income countries. This massive treatment gap is attributable to
a paucity of epilepsy services, trained personnel and antiepileptic drugs.
Aspirin is by far the most cost-effective intervention both for treating acute stroke and for preventing a recurrence. It is easily available in developing countries, even in rural areas. Nevertheless,
the coverage of the affected population with this inexpensive treatment is still extremely low.

Many neurological disorders can be prevented and treated
One of the important actions required by the health sector is an immunization programme for
the prevention of neuroinfections, such as poliomyelitis, and the neurological consequences of
infections (e.g. Hemophilus inﬂuenzae type B (Hib)). Meningitis caused by Hib has been nearly
eliminated in the industrialized world since routine vaccination with the H. inﬂuenzae type B con-

neurological disorders: conclusions and recommendations
jugate vaccine was initiated. BCG vaccination does not prevent transmission of tuberculosis but
is still recommended because of its high protective efﬁcacy against serious forms of the disease
in children (73% for meningitis and 77% for miliary tuberculosis).
A number of strategies implemented at policy level by governments through legislation, tax or
ﬁnancial incentives can reduce risks to health. For example, in the area of road safety, a signiﬁcant
number of people might not choose to drive safely or to use seatbelts or motorcycle helmets, but
government action can encourage them to do so, thereby preventing injuries to themselves and
to other people. This would also result in prevention of other disorders secondary to trauma such
as epilepsy.
Control of cardiovascular diseases including stroke can be handled through a comprehensive
approach taking account of a variety of interrelated risk factors including blood pressure, cholesterol, smoking, body mass index, low levels of physical activity, diet and diabetes. A comprehensive national strategy thus combining prevention, community-based health promotion and access
to treatment can substantially decrease the burden associated with cardiovascular diseases,
including stroke.
Disability consequent to neurological disorders can be decreased by rehabilitation programmes
and policies. For example, building ramps and other facilities to improve access by disabled people
falls beyond the purview of the health sector but is nevertheless very important for comprehensive
management of people with disability.

Resources are inadequate and inequitably distributed
Despite the huge burden they cause, neurological conditions are largely absent from the international health agenda. Moreover, country health plans frequently do not cover neurological
disorders at the same level as other illnesses, creating signiﬁcant economic difﬁculties for patients
and their families. In all but the least developed countries of the world, poor people are much more
likely than the wealthy to develop neurological disorders, and everywhere they are more likely to
die as a result. Thus poverty and neurological disorders tend to reinforce each other; this vicious
cycle is frequently exacerbated by gender inequalities.
A large survey undertaken by WHO/WFN to collect expert information on aspects of neurological care provision around the world (analysis of which was published as the Atlas of Country
Resources for Neurological Disorders) found that, on average, there was one neurologist per
100 000 population worldwide in the reporting countries, ranging from one per 20 000 population in the European Region of WHO to one per three million population in the African Region. Not
only are resources inadequately allocated for neurological services, there is also inequity in their
distribution across countries and populations. This is particularly true for people living in low and
middle income countries as well as for poor population groups in high income countries.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION
This report offers health professionals and planners the opportunity to assess the burden caused
by neurological disorders in their country and to take appropriate action. All the following recommendations need to be implemented across a wide range of sectors and disciplines if they are to
achieve success. They are not a universal blueprint, however, and will have to be adapted to local
conditions and capacities. The actions recommended can be beneﬁcial directly — by decreasing the mortality, morbidity and disability caused by neurological disorders — and indirectly by
improving the functioning and quality of life of patients and their families.
In certain low income and middle income countries with limited human and ﬁnancial resources,
it may be difﬁcult for governments to apply some of these recommendations on their own. In these
circumstances, it is suggested that countries work with international agencies, nongovernmental
organizations or other partners to put their plans into practice.

179

180

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
1. Gain commitment from decision-makers
Much of the success of public health efforts in countries ultimately depends upon the degree of
political commitment they receive. Support from decision-makers is not only necessary to ensure
proper funding and effective legislation and policies, but also to give prevention efforts increased
legitimacy and a higher proﬁle in the public consciousness.
Public health professionals have an important contribution to make to the process of gaining
political support, by providing decision-makers with solid information on the prevalence, consequences and burden of neurological disorders, and by carefully documenting the proven and
promising interventions that can lead to their prevention or management. Information on population
needs must be synthesized and disseminated in a way that encourages commitment from decisionmakers. Communication methods such as media features and the identiﬁcation and engagement of
community leaders can be used to help build alliances between different stakeholders.

2. Increase public and professional awareness
Public and professional awareness of public health aspects of neurological disorders needs to
be raised through the launch of global and local campaigns and initiatives that target health
professionals, general practitioners and primary care physicians, specialists in public health,
neurologists, health planners, health economists, the media and the general public. Another route
of sensitization is the development of educational programmes on the public health aspects of
neurology (taking into account local practices and traditions) and including them in the teaching
and training curricula of all institutions where neurology is taught.
Self-help groups, patient information programmes and basic educational and training interventions for caregivers need to be encouraged and facilitated. Patients, their families and carers
should be represented and fully involved in the development and implementation of policies and
services for people with neurological disorders.

3. Minimize stigma and eradicate discrimination
Stigma and discrimination against people with neurological disorders (including epilepsy, dementia, Parkinson’s disease, AIDS-related conditions and other neurological disorders) exist globally
and need to be eliminated through public education, global and local campaigns and a variety of
public health actions involving governments, health professionals, patients, carers and the mass
media. The ultimate goal of all such efforts should be to prevent the isolation of patients with neurological disorders and their families and to facilitate their social integration. The dignity of people
with neurological disorders needs to be preserved and their quality of life improved. Development
of social and health policies for minimizing stigma must take into consideration such key issues
as access to care and ﬁnancing health care, as well as basic human rights. Driving privileges for
people with controlled epilepsy indicates practical needs for policy to examine not just personal
and public safety, but also how stigma, culture, liability and ethics interact.
Legislation represents an important means of dealing with these problems and challenges.
Governments can reinforce the efforts with laws that protect people with brain disorders and their
families from abusive practices and prevent discrimination in education, employment, housing
and other opportunities. Legislation can help, but ample evidence exists to show that alone it is
not enough.
The kind of intervention needed to mitigate stigma varies with the condition. For example,
efforts to alleviate the stigma of epilepsy need to be focused on helping individuals acknowledge
and adjust to life with treatable disease in a large number of cases. Information, education and
communication and social marketing campaigns need to enhance compassion and reduce blame.
In the case of other diseases, for example leprosy, the control programme can be made effective
by use of a simple message that leprosy can be cured with medicines.

neurological disorders: conclusions and recommendations
4. Strengthen neurological care within the existing health systems
The most promising approach for reducing the burden of neurological disorders in developing
countries is a comprehensive system of primary health care: primary care services supported
by secondary and tertiary care facilities, physicians and specialists. Primary care is the point of
entry for the vast majority of people seeking medical care — indeed, for many people it is their
sole access to medicine. Moreover, because primary care teams work in the community, they are
well placed to recognize factors such as stigma, family problems and cultural factors that affect
treatment for neurological disorders. Thus, primary care is the logical setting in which neurological
disorders need to be dealt with. The important role of primary care is also founded on recognition
that decisions in primary care take account of patient-related factors — family medical history
and patients’ individual expectations and values — of which the continuity and long-term relationships of primary care generate awareness, while promoting trust and satisfaction among patients.
For example, effective management of headache disorders can be provided in primary care for
all but a very small minority of patients, as the common headache disorders require no special
investigation and they can be diagnosed and managed with skills generally available to health-care
professionals working in primary care settings.
A careful analysis is required of what is and what is not possible for the treatment and care of
neurological disorders at different levels of care. It is thus very important to establish a referral
system for management of severe cases and patients requiring access to diagnostic and technological expertise. What is needed is a continuing, seamless care approach to handle the long-term
nature of neurological disorders and the call for ongoing care.

5. Incorporate rehabilitation into the key strategies
Rehabilitation complements the other key strategies, promotion, prevention and treatment. While
prevention involves targeting risk factors of disease and treatment is dealing with health conditions, rehabilitation targets human functioning. Though rooted in the health sector, rehabilitation
is also a relevant strategy that brings together other sectors such as education, labour and social
affairs. It is thus a most relevant strategy in the community.
There is a wide range of rehabilitation interventions, programmes and services that have been
shown to be effective in contributing to optimal functioning of people with neurological conditions.
Rehabilitation services need to be made available to all people with disabilities, and this includes
people with disabilities attributable to neurological disorders. Accessible public transport and
other facilities must be provided for them.
Multidisciplinary rehabilitation is considered to be beneﬁcial in early recovery of stroke and
traumatic brain injury patients. Although options for treatment of multiple sclerosis are relatively
limited, sufferers can gain signiﬁcant improvements in quality of life with neurorehabilitation.
Since community-based rehabilitation programmes are a low-cost way to coordinate medical
guidance and community resources in the rehabilitation of disabled people, they need to be encouraged. The programmes should be linked to and supported by institutional and hospital-based
care, where appropriate, thus creating a comprehensive rehabilitation service.

6. Develop national capacity and international collaboration
The international implications of dealing with neurological disorders in low and middle income
countries are similar to those for a variety of other health concerns. Building capacity in these
countries to reduce the burden of neurological disorders will require international contributions of
expertise and resources. Examples of such collaboration are the global campaigns against epilepsy
(www.who.int/mental_health/management/globalepilepsycampaign/) and headache disorders
(www.who.int/mental_health/neurology/headache/), which have been launched by WHO in
partnership with leading international nongovernmental organizations working in these areas.

181

182

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
The donor community urgently needs to dedicate more of its resources to help low and middle
income countries improve services for the prevention and management of neurological disorders.
Nongovernmental organizations have an important role to play in this regard, and they should
be encouraged to give greater support to their initiatives. Partnerships between health policymakers, health-care providers and people affected by neurological disorders and their advocacy
groups may be the best vehicle for determining, and bringing about, the changes that people with
neurological disorders need.

7. Establish links to other sectors
The risk factors and strategies for prevention for many of the neurological disorders lie beyond the
health sector, necessitating the participation of other sectors such as education, transport, welfare, housing and legislation; these sectors need to be fully involved in improving the programmes
and services for people with neurological disorders. Partnerships are advantageous in enhancing
the effectiveness of interventions, increasing the resources available through joint actions and
avoiding a duplication of efforts. Sometimes different sectors may have different and even conﬂicting priorities; in such situations, the health sector needs the capacity to provide leadership and
informed reasoning and to adapt to the agendas and priorities of other sectors.
Road trafﬁc injury prevention and management strategies include the design of vehicles, the
design of road networks and roads, urban and rural planning, the introduction and enforcement
of road safety legislation and the care and treatment of crash survivors. These are some of the
relevant areas for interventions to prevent neurological consequences of road trafﬁc injuries,
which are divided among many different sectors and groups.

8. Deﬁne priorities for research
The research agenda for developing countries, including operational research, needs to be developed to gain better understanding of the problem so that appropriate responses can be developed and evaluated. Speciﬁc areas for research and development could include conducting
population-based epidemiological studies in developing countries where insufﬁcient data limit
evidence-based planning. It is also necessary to develop and evaluate simple models of care
for management of neurological disorders by existing community-based health-care providers.
Many currently available medications have signiﬁcant side-effects and are too expensive for most
patients in developing countries. Newer medications need to be developed with lower costs, fewer
side-effects, better efﬁcacy, and less frequent dose schedules. Multicentre epidemiological studies and trials of novel treatments should be facilitated through better funding, multidisciplinary
approaches and international collaboration.

This report endeavours to contribute to the knowledge
base regarding public health aspects of neurological
disorders. It is hoped that it will inspire and facilitate
increased cooperation, innovation and commitment in
preventing neurological disorders and providing the
best possible care for people suffering from them.

annexes

Annex 1

List of Member States
by WHO region
and mortality stratum

To aid in cause of death and burden of disease analyses, the Member States of the World Health
Organization (WHO) have been divided into ﬁve mortality strata on the basis of their levels of
mortality of children under ﬁve years of age (5q0) and of males 15–59 years old (45q15). The
classiﬁcation of WHO Member States into mortality strata was carried out using population estimates for 1999 (from the United Nations Population Division, 1998) and estimates of 5q0 and
45q15 based on WHO analyses of mortality rates for 1999.
Quintiles of the distribution of 5q0 (both sexes combined) were used to deﬁne a very low child
mortality group (1st quintile), a low child mortality group (2nd and 3rd quintiles) and a high child
mortality group (4th and 5th quintiles). Adult mortality 45q15 was regressed on 5q0 and the
regression line used to divide countries with high child mortality into high adult mortality (stratum
D) and very high adult mortality (stratum E). Stratum E includes the countries in sub-Saharan
Africa where HIV/AIDS has had a very substantial impact.
The following table summarizes the ﬁve mortality strata. When these mortality strata are
applied to the six WHO regions, they produce 14 subregions, which are used throughout this document and its Annexes to present results. The mortality strata to which WHO Member States are
classiﬁed are listed below. This classiﬁcation has no ofﬁcial status and is for analytical purposes
only.

Deﬁnitions of mortality strata used to deﬁne subregions
Mortality stratum

Child mortality

Adult mortality

Very low

Low

High

Very high

The total number of WHO Member States rose to 193 in 2006 with the addition of the Republic
of Montenegro.

183

184

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

WHO Member States, by region and mortality stratum
WHO region

Mortality
stratum

Africa (AFR)

Americas
(AMR)

Description

Broad group

WHO Member States

Afr-D

Africa with high
child and high adult
mortality

High mortality
developing

Afr-E

Africa with high child
and very high adult
mortality

High mortality
developing

Amr-A

Americas with very
low child and very low
adult mortality
Americas with low
child and low adult
mortality

Developed

Algeria, Angola, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Cape
Verde, Chad, Comoros, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon,
Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia,
Madagascar, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Niger,
Nigeria, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles,
Sierra Leone, Togo
Botswana, Burundi, Central African Republic,
Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the
Congo, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi,
Mozambique, Namibia, Rwanda, South Africa,
Swaziland, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania,
Zambia, Zimbabwe
Canada, Cuba, United States of America

Amr-B

Amr-D
South-East
Asia (SEAR)

Americas with high
child and high adult
mortality
South-East Asia with
low child and low adult
mortality
South-East Asia with
high child and high
adult mortality
Europe with very low
child and very low
adult mortality

High mortality
developing

Eur-B

Europe with low child
and low adult mortality

Developed

Eur-C

Europe with low
child and high adult
mortality
Eastern Mediterranean
with low child and low
adult mortality

Developed

Sear-B
Sear-D

Europe (EUR)

Eastern
Mediterranean
(EMR)

Eur-A

Emr-B

Emr-D
Western Paciﬁc
(WPR)

Low mortality
developing

Wpr-A
Wpr-B

Eastern Mediterranean
with high child and
high adult mortality
Western Paciﬁc with
very low child and very
low adult mortality
Western Paciﬁc with
low child and low adult
mortality

Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas,
Barbados, Belize, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa
Rica, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador,
Grenada, Guyana, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico,
Panama, Paraguay, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint
Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname,
Trinidad and Tobago, Uruguay, Venezuela (Bolivarian
Republic of)
Bolivia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Haiti, Nicaragua, Peru

Low mortality
developing

Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Thailand

High mortality
developing

Bangladesh, Bhutan, Democratic People’s Republic
of Korea, India, Maldives, Myanmar, Nepal, TimorLeste
Andorra, Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech
Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany,
Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg,
Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal,
San Marino, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland,
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan,
Montenegro, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia,
Tajikistan, The former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan
Belarus, Estonia, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Latvia,
Lithuania, Republic of Moldova, Russian Federation,
Ukraine
Bahrain, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Jordan, Kuwait,
Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Oman, Qatar,
Saudi Arabia, Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, United
Arab Emirates
Afghanistan, Djibouti, Egypt,* Iraq, Morocco,
Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen

Developed

Low mortality
developing
High mortality
developing
Developed

Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Japan, New Zealand,
Singapore

Low mortality
developing

Cambodia,** China, Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati,
Lao People’s Democratic Republic,** Malaysia,
Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of),
Mongolia, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea,**
Philippines, Republic of Korea, Samoa, Solomon
Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, Viet Nam

* Following improvements in child mortality over recent years, Egypt meets criteria for inclusion in subregion Emr-B with low child and low adult
mortality. Egypt has been included in Emr-D for the presentation of subregional totals for mortality and burden to ensure comparability with The
World Health Report and other WHO publications.
** Although Cambodia, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic and Papua New Guinea meet criteria for high child mortality, they have been included
in the Wpr-B subregion with other developing countries of the Western Paciﬁc Region for reporting purposes.

annexes

Annex 2

Country income groups
used for reporting
estimates and projections

Income category

Countries

High

Andorra, Aruba, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Belgium, Bermuda, Brunei Darussalam, Canada,
Cayman Islands, Channel Islands, Cyprus, Denmark, Faeroe Islands, Finland, France, French Polynesia,
Germany, Greece, Greenland, Guam, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kuwait, Liechtenstein,
Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, Netherlands Antilles, New Caledonia, New Zealand,
Northern Mariana Islands, Norway, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, San Marino, Singapore,
Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom,
United States of America, United States Virgin Islands

Upper middle

American Samoa, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Barbados, Botswana, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica,
Croatia, Czech Republic, Dominica, Estonia, Gabon, Grenada, Hungary, Isle of Man, Latvia, Lebanon,
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Lithuania, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Oman, Palau, Panama, Poland,
Puerto Rico, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Seychelles, Slovakia, Trinidad and
Tobago, Uruguay, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)

Lower middle

Albania, Algeria, Belarus, Belize, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Cape Verde, China,
Colombia, Cuba, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Fiji, Guatemala, Guyana,
Honduras, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Maldives,
Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Morocco, Namibia, Occupied Palestinian Territory,
Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa,
Serbia and Montenegro, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand,
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Tonga, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Vanuatu

Low

Afghanistan, Angola, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, Burundi,
Cambodia, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire,
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea,
Ethiopia, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan,
Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mongolia,
Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea,
Republic of Moldova, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands,
Somalia, Sudan, Tajikistan, Timor-Leste, Togo, Uganda, Ukraine, United Republic of Tanzania,
Uzbekistan, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe

Not included

Anguilla, British Virgin Islands, Cook Islands, Falkland Islands (Malvinas), French Guiana, Gibraltar,
Guadeloupe, Holy See, Martinique, Montserrat, Nauru, Niue, Pitcairn, Réunion, Saint Helena,
Saint Pierre et Miquelon, Tokelau, Turks and Caicos Islands, Tuvalu, Wallis and Futuna Islands,
Western Sahara

Note: Categories are based on the income categories published in 2003 World development indicators (Washington, DC, The World Bank, 2003).
Countries are divided according to 2001 GNI per capita, calculated using the World Bank Atlas method. The groups are: low income, US$ 745 or
less; lower middle income, US$ 746–2975; upper middle income, US$ 2976–9205; and high income, US$ 9206 or more. This differs from the list
currently available on the World Bank web site because that list has been recently amended.

185

186

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

Annex 3

Global Burden of Disease
cause categories, sequelae
and case definitions for
neurological disorders

For the purpose of calculation of global burden of disease (GBD) estimates for this document, the
neurological disorders were included from two categories: neurological disorders within the neuropsychiatric category, and neurological disorders from other categories. Neurological disorders
within the neuropsychiatric category refer to the cause category listed in Group II under neuropsychiatric disorders and include epilepsy, Alzheimer and other dementias, Parkinson’s disease,
multiple sclerosis and migraine. Neurological disorders from other categories include diseases
and injuries which have neurological sequelae and are listed elsewhere in cause category Groups
I, II and III. The table below provides the complete list used for calculation of GBD estimates for
neurological disorders.

GBD cause category

Sequelae

Case deﬁnition

Neurological disorders in the neuropsychiatric category
Epilepsy

Cases

Cases meeting ILAE deﬁnition
Cases meeting ICD-10 criteria for alcohol dependence and harmful use
(F10.1 and F10.2), excluding cases with comorbid depressive episode

Alzheimer and other
dementias

Cases

Mild, moderate and severe Alzheimer’s disease, senile and other dementias

Parkinson’s disease

Cases

Cases meeting clinical criteria for Parkinson’s disease

Multiple sclerosis

Cases

Cases of chronic or intermittent relapsing multiple sclerosis

Migraine

Cases

Cases meeting IHS deﬁnition for migraine

Neurological disorders in other categories
Cerebrovascular disease

First-ever stroke cases

Long-term stroke survivors

First-ever stroke according to WHO deﬁnition (includes subarachnoid
haemorrhage but excludes transient ischaemic attacks, subdural
haematoma, and haemorrhage or infarction attributable to infection or
tumour).
Persons who survive more than 28 days after ﬁrst-ever stroke.

Poliomyelitis

Cases: lameness

Viral infection characterized by acute ﬂaccid paralysis and proven by
isolation of poliovirus from stool

Tetanus

Episodes

Neonatal: infection with Clostridium tetani in infants less than 30 days
old with progressive difﬁculty and inability to feed because of trismus,
generalized stiffness, spasms and opisthotonus
Non-neonatal: infection with Clostridium tetani in non-neonates with
initial localized spasms leading to general rigidity, opisthotonus and “risus
sardonicus”

annexes
GBD cause category

Sequelae

Case deﬁnition

Seizure disorder

Acute bacterial disease with sudden onset and fever, intense headache,
nausea, vomiting, neck stiffness and – in meningococcal disease – petechial
rash with pink macules; the disease must be accompanied by laboratory
evidence (in cerebrospinal ﬂuid or blood) of Neisseria meningitidis,
Streptococcus pneumoniae or Haemophilus inﬂuenzae type B
Seizures of any type that were present at least six months after
hospitalization, RESULTING from meningitis
Motor deﬁcit spasticity or paresis of one or more limbs, RESULTING from
meningitis
IQ of 70 or below RESULTING from meningitis

Meningitis

Motor deﬁcit
Mental retardation
Japanese encephalitis

Neurological sequelae

Mosquito-borne encephalitis caused by JE virus
Reduced cognitive function resulting from encephalitis attributable to JE
virus
Neurological deﬁcits resulting from encephalitis attributable to JE virus

Tertiary – neurological

Acute and chronic infection with Treponema pallidum
Late stage of the disease with varied neurological manifestations

Cognitive impairment

Syphilis
Pertussis
Encephalopathy
Diphtheria
Neurological complications

Acute bacterial infection of the respiratory tract with Bordetella pertussis or
parapertussis
Degenerative disease of the brain, which in pertussis is usually a result of
hypoxia, leading to mental retardation
Acute disease caused by toxin-producing Corynebacterium diphtheriae
Polyneuritis involving both cranial and peripheral nerve palsies, which are
largely reversible

Neurological sequelae

Infectious disease caused by protozoa of the genus Plasmodium
Includes hemiplegia, aphasia, ataxia and cortical blindness

Disabling leprosy

Chronic disease resulting from infection with Mycobacterium leprae
Grade 1 and 2 of WHO grades of disability for leprosy

Malaria
Leprosy
Diabetes mellitus

Neuropathy

Loss of reﬂexes and of vibration; damage and dysfunction of sensory, motor
or autonomic nerves attributable to diabetes

Protein–energy
malnutrition

Developmental disability

Limited physical and mental ability to perform most activities in all of the
following areas: recreation, education, procreation or occupation

Iodine deﬁciency

Mild developmental disability

Any of the following attributable to iodine deﬁciency:
bilateral hearing loss, delay of walking ability, mild intellectual impairment
Hypothyroid cretinism: hypothyroidism and stunting as a RESULT of iodine
deﬁciency
Neurological cretinism: mental deﬁciency (IQ below 70), deaf-mutism, and
spastic paralysis as a RESULT of iodine deﬁciency
Some but not all features of full cretinism as a RESULT of iodine deﬁciency

Cretinoidism

Cretinism

Includes crashes and pedestrian injuries attributable to motor vehicles

Road trafﬁc accidents
Fractured skull – long-term
Spinal cord injury – long-term
Intracranial injury – long-term
Injured nerves – long-term
Poisonings

Only one outcome is included for poisonings
Fractured skull – long-term
Spinal cord injury – long-term
Intracranial injury – long-term
Injured nerves – long-term
Includes falls resulting from osteoporotic fractures

Falls
Fractured skull – long-term
Spinal cord injury – long-term
Intracranial injury – long-term
Injured nerves – long-term
Fires
Fractured skull – long-term
Spinal cord injury – long-term
Intracranial injury – long-term
Injured nerves – long-term

Most of the sequelae of ﬁres are the result of burns. Some individuals,
however, jump from buildings or are otherwise injured during ﬁres.

187

188

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
GBD cause category

Sequelae

Drownings
Fractured skull – long-term
Spinal cord injury – long-term
Intracranial injury – long-term
Injured nerves – long-term
Other unintentional
injuries

Fractured skull – long-term
Spinal cord injury – long-term
Intracranial injury – long-term
Injured nerves – long-term

Case deﬁnition
Other than drowning and near-drowning rates, the only other major
disabling sequela from near-drowning included is quadriplegia

This is not a residual category, but includes injuries attributable to
environmental factors, machinery and electrical equipment, cutting and
piercing implements, and various other external causes of unintentional
injury
Suicide attempts, whether or not resulting in death

Self-inﬂicted injuries
Fractured skull – long-term
Spinal cord injury – long-term
Intracranial injury – long-term
Injured nerves – long-term

Interpersonal violence, including assault and homicide

Violence
Fractured skull – long-term
Spinal cord injury – long-term
Intracranial injury – long-term
Injured nerves – long-term
War
Fractured skull – long-term
Spinal cord injury – long-term
Intracranial injury – long-term
Injured nerves – long-term

War injuries and deaths directly attributable to war in combatants and noncombatants; e.g. the estimates of mortality include deaths to children and
adults from landmines

Other intentional injuries
Fractured skull – long-term
Spinal cord injury – long-term
Intracranial injury – long-term
Injured nerves – long-term
Source: Mathers CD et al. Deaths and disease burden by cause: global burden of disease estimates for 2001 by World Bank country groups.
Washington, DC, World Health Organization/World Bank/Fogarty International Center, United States National Institutes of Health, 2004
(Disease Control Priorities in Developing Countries (DCPP) Working Papers Series, No. 18; http://www.ﬁc.nih.gov/dcpp/wps.html, accessed
25 July 2005).

annexes

Annex 4

Table A.4.1 Burden of neurological disorders, in DALYs, by cause, WHO region and mortality
stratum, projections for 2005, 2015 and 2030
%
total

DALYs

per
100 000

%
total

DALYs

per
100 000

%
total

DALYs

per
100 000

WORLD
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

2005
6 441 919 466
1 469 610 066
7 307 975
11 077 525
1 616 523
1 509 696
7 659 687
50 784 770
115 167
6 422 611
5 336 882
561 038
92 391 874

0.50
0.75
0.11
0.10
0.52
3.46
0.01
0.44
0.36
0.04
6.29

2015
7 103 297 899
113.44
171.96
25.09
23.44
118.90
788.35
1.79
99.70
82.85
8.71
1 434.23

1 481 400 233
7 419 365
13 539 653
1 762 344
1 585 932
7 736 261
53 814 944
46 946
4 870 770
3 527 560
304 123
94 607 898

0.50
0.91
0.12
0.11
0.52
3.63
0.00
0.33
0.24
0.02
6.39

2030
7 917 115 397
104.45
190.61
24.81
22.33
108.91
757.61
0.66
68.57
49.66
4.28
1 331.89

AFRICA (HIGH CHILD, HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
2015
335 459 111
419 571 880
162 560 000
733 354
178 867
38 555
60 711
206 278
1 923 353
8 389
1 618 496
387 081
0
5 155 084

0.45
0.11
0.02
0.04
0.13
1.18
0.01
1.00
0.24
0.00
3.17

218.61
53.32
11.49
18.10
61.49
573.35
2.50
482.47
115.39
0.00
1 536.73

177 805 056
885 376
221 661
47 146
78 674
255 460
2 456 636
3 669
1 556 776
380 001
0
5 885 400

0.50
0.12
0.03
0.04
0.14
1.38
0.00
0.88
0.21
0.00
3.31

1 526 745 574
7 441 536
18 394 267
2 015 065
1 648 303
7 596 089
60 864 051
13 261
3 173 636
2 038 968
149 931
103 335 108

0.49
1.20
0.13
0.11
0.50
3.99
0.00
0.21
0.13
0.01
6.77

93.99
232.34
25.45
20.82
95.95
768.77
0.17
40.09
25.75
1.89
1 305.21

2030
550 082 900
211.02
52.83
11.24
18.75
60.89
585.51
0.87
371.04
90.57
0.00
1 402.72

193 570 528
1 064 481
303 739
66 606
105 590
315 904
3 520 676
1 171
1 205 282
316 542
0
6 899 990

0.55
0.16
0.03
0.05
0.16
1.82
0.00
0.62
0.16
0.00
3.56

193.51
55.22
12.11
19.20
57.43
640.03
0.21
219.11
57.54
0.00
1 254.35

AFRICA (HIGH CHILD, VERY HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

382 647 820
199 234 864
913 291
0.46
188 677
0.09
43 020
0.02
47 853
0.02
267 571
0.13
2 089 458
1.05
2 718
0.00
1 176 583
0.59
480 234
0.24
0
0.00
5 209 404
2.61

2015

238.68
49.31
11.24
12.51
69.93
546.05
0.71
307.48
125.50
0.00
1 361.41

478 419 411
215 301 104
1 066 122
0.50
233 292
0.11
50 089
0.02
62 378
0.03
321 413
0.15
2 535 342
1.18
1 118
0.00
1 123 088
0.52
428 421
0.20
0
0.00
5 821 262
2.70

2030

222.84
48.76
10.47
13.04
67.18
529.94
0.23
234.75
89.55
0.00
1 216.77

628 734 321
241 062 592
1 272 664
0.53
299 644
0.12
66 823
0.03
86 962
0.04
391 515
0.16
3 443 274
1.43
253
0.00
903 202
0.37
328 982
0.14
0
0.00
6 793 320
2.82

202.42
47.66
10.63
13.83
62.27
547.65
0.04
143.65
52.32
0.00
1 080.48

189

190

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
DALYs

%
total

per
100 000

DALYs

%
total

per
100 000

DALYs

%
total

per
100 000

THE AMERICAS (VERY LOW CHILD, VERY LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

343 363 701
47 523 900
174 560
0.37
1 380 277
2.90
257 841
0.54
121 061
0.25
511 142
1.08
1 684 842
3.55
2 539
0.01
27
0.00
36 770
0.08
0
0.00
4 169 059
8.77

2015

50.84
401.99
75.09
35.26
148.86
490.69
0.74
0.01
10.71
0.00
1 214.18

372 395 661
49 441 160
175 647
0.36
1 634 372
3.31
286 838
0.58
123 772
0.25
526 028
1.06
1 717 559
3.47
2 225
0.00
27
0.00
23 206
0.05
0
0.00
4 489 676
9.08

2030

47.17
438.88
77.03
33.24
141.26
461.22
0.60
0.01
6.23
0.00
1 205.62

413 323 652
49 995 588
175 616
0.35
2 303 611
4.61
331 246
0.66
124 004
0.25
559 602
1.12
1 750 879
3.50
1 886
0.00
28
0.00
12 285
0.02
0
0.00
5 259 157
10.52

149.70
179.27
13.14
22.43
153.19
545.51
0.32
0.56
29.51
0.00
1 093.63

560 127 320
90 204 248
735 674
0.82
1 397 744
1.55
83 103
0.09
117 098
0.13
759 916
0.84
3 129 619
3.47
415
0.00
1 230
0.00
57 834
0.06
0
0.00
6 282 632
6.96

42.49
557.34
80.14
30.00
135.39
423.61
0.46
0.01
2.97
0.00
1 272.41

THE AMERICAS (LOW CHILD, LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

463 707 779
83 157 544
752 259
0.90
705 683
0.85
56 623
0.07
107 378
0.13
760 969
0.92
2 577 873
3.10
4 184
0.01
5 406
0.01
295 286
0.36
0
0.00
5 265 661
6.33

2015

162.23
152.18
12.21
23.16
164.11
555.93
0.90
1.17
63.68
0.00
1 135.56

511 277 519
86 918 680
765 363
0.88
916 569
1.05
67 157
0.08
114 704
0.13
783 250
0.90
2 789 067
3.21
1 656
0.00
2 851
0.00
150 869
0.17
0
0.00
5 591 485
6.43

2030

131.34
249.54
14.84
20.91
135.67
558.73
0.07
0.22
10.33
0.00
1 121.64

THE AMERICAS (HIGH CHILD, HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

77 739 657
16 806 174
147 253
0.88
82 158
0.49
7 735
0.05
16 503
0.10
155 043
0.92
307 344
1.83
633
0.00
6 869
0.04
249 051
1.48
0
0.00
972 590
5.79

2015

189.42
105.68
9.95
21.23
199.44
395.35
0.81
8.84
320.37
0.00
1 251.09

90 194 020
17 120 126
161 116
0.94
103 267
0.60
9 333
0.05
19 298
0.11
165 994
0.97
372 199
2.17
256
0.00
4 545
0.03
168 327
0.98
0
0.00
1 004 336
5.87

2030

178.63
114.49
10.35
21.40
184.04
412.66
0.28
5.04
186.63
0.00
1 113.53

106 740 220
17 995 520
168 515
0.94
155 670
0.87
13 082
0.07
22 093
0.12
171 234
0.95
482 702
2.68
60
0.00
2 176
0.01
84 756
0.47
0
0.00
1 100 287
6.11

157.87
145.84
12.26
20.70
160.42
452.22
0.06
2.04
79.40
0.00
1 030.81

SOUTH-EAST ASIA (LOW CHILD, LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

308 761 163
61 585 292
361 414
0.59
400 013
0.65
38 298
0.06
64 734
0.11
339 628
0.55
1 760 298
2.86
6 454
0.01
190 414
0.31
179 622
0.29
23 641
0.04
3 364 516
5.46

2015

117.05
129.55
12.40
20.97
110.00
570.12
2.09
61.67
58.18
7.66
1 089.68

336 961 332
59 738 224
338 893
0.57
529 452
0.89
44 291
0.07
67 543
0.11
329 367
0.55
1 924 622
3.22
2 345
0.00
67 754
0.11
97 609
0.16
11 891
0.02
3 413 767
5.71

2030

100.57
157.13
13.14
20.04
97.75
571.17
0.70
20.11
28.97
3.53
1 013.10

364 048 380
61 457 480
303 458
0.49
789 056
1.28
49 351
0.08
67 080
0.11
305 781
0.50
2 165 135
3.52
479
0.00
14 159
0.02
44 339
0.07
4 636
0.01
3 743 473
6.09

83.36
216.74
13.56
18.43
83.99
594.74
0.13
3.89
12.18
1.27
1 028.29

annexes
DALYs

%
total

per
100 000

DALYs

%
total

per
100 000

DALYs

%
total

per
100 000

SOUTH-EAST ASIA (HIGH CHILD, HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

1 352 957 715
350 334 880
1 846 603
0.53
1 313 584
0.37
222 096
0.06
290 158
0.08
1 756 274
0.50
9 309 524
2.66
42 889
0.01
2 023 976
0.58
1 591 141
0.45
235 243
0.07
18 631 487
5.32

2015

136.49
97.09
16.42
21.45
129.81
688.09
3.17
149.60
117.60
17.39
1 377.09

1 525 318 552
334 051 808
1 755 114
0.53
1 629 104
0.49
256 981
0.08
329 272
0.10
1 793 948
0.54
10 744 744
3.22
17 555
0.01
1 119 986
0.34
932 822
0.28
142 203
0.04
18 721 728
5.60

2030

115.07
106.80
16.85
21.59
117.61
704.43
1.15
73.43
61.16
9.32
1 227.40

1 718 832 463
334 625 216
1 596 885
0.48
2 271 094
0.68
324 249
0.10
360 861
0.11
1 783 945
0.53
13 685 517
4.09
4 456
0.00
480 138
0.14
494 587
0.15
78 097
0.02
21 079 828
6.30

92.91
132.13
18.86
20.99
103.79
796.21
0.26
27.93
28.77
4.54
1 226.40

EUROPE (VERY LOW CHILD, VERY LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

417 799 202
51 143 804
239 993
0.47
2 090 437
4.09
291 838
0.57
154 835
0.30
721 342
1.41
2 559 576
5.00
1 130
0.00
429
0.00
55 054
0.11
0
0.00
6 114 632
11.96

2015

57.44
500.34
69.85
37.06
172.65
612.63
0.27
0.10
13.18
0.00
1 463.53

417 841 350
49 025 240
220 376
0.45
2 422 371
4.94
300 765
0.61
144 594
0.29
670 731
1.37
2 389 485
4.87
854
0.00
301
0.00
30 142
0.06
0
0.00
6 179 619
12.60

2030

52.74
579.73
71.98
34.61
160.52
571.86
0.20
0.07
7.21
0.00
1 478.94

411 754 930
44 716 336
193 205
0.43
2 875 209
6.43
302 935
0.68
125 997
0.28
600 497
1.34
2 178 577
4.87
588
0.00
209
0.00
14 196
0.03
0
0.00
6 291 414
14.07

76.43
202.82
30.02
26.47
98.60
1 059.80
0.18
0.31
47.92
0.00
1 542.55

243 016 939
35 907 916
163 317
0.45
601 148
1.67
75 668
0.21
58 444
0.16
207 238
0.58
2 577 873
7.18
95
0.00
254
0.00
40 438
0.11
0
0.00
3 724 475
10.37

64.17
270.17
35.86
33.17
84.85
2 330.23
0.04
0.11
13.12
0.00
2 831.72

175 407 940
38 508 288
94 739
0.25
571 909
1.49
60 079
0.16
51 033
0.13
127 749
0.33
3 716 728
9.65
29
0.00
142
0.00
10 201
0.03
0
0.00
4 632 609
12.03

46.92
698.28
73.57
30.60
145.84
529.10
0.14
0.05
3.45
0.00
1 527.95

EUROPE (LOW CHILD, LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

227 350 229
37 466 008
187 986
0.50
416 799
1.11
69 244
0.18
63 435
0.17
250 906
0.67
2 549 285
6.80
1 135
0.00
1 744
0.00
245 592
0.66
0
0.00
3 786 125
10.11

2015

82.69
183.33
30.46
27.90
110.36
1 121.30
0.50
0.77
108.02
0.00
1 665.33

236 868 370
36 742 964
181 046
0.49
480 419
1.31
71 106
0.19
62 695
0.17
233 551
0.64
2 510 333
6.83
435
0.00
722
0.00
113 510
0.31
0
0.00
3 653 819
9.94

2030

67.20
247.37
31.14
24.05
85.28
1 060.78
0.04
0.10
16.64
0.00
1 532.60

EUROPE (LOW CHILD, HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

235 511 792
60 788 080
173 504
0.29
547 330
0.90
89 160
0.15
83 868
0.14
225 793
0.37
5 697 447
9.37
166
0.00
390
0.00
59 808
0.10
0
0.00
6 877 466
11.31

2015

73.67
232.40
37.86
35.61
95.87
2 419.18
0.07
0.17
25.40
0.00
2 920.22

206 753 120
50 205 500
132 677
0.26
558 594
1.11
74 137
0.15
68 588
0.14
175 429
0.35
4 817 814
9.60
76
0.00
232
0.00
27 120
0.05
0
0.00
5 854 665
11.66

2030

54.01
326.04
34.25
29.09
72.83
2 118.91
0.02
0.08
5.82
0.00
2 641.05

191

192

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
DALYs

%
total

per
100 000

DALYs

%
total

per
100 000

DALYs

%
total

per
100 000

EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN (LOW CHILD, LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

150 452 139
24 617 306
123 278
0.50
109 755
0.45
41 032
0.17
37 457
0.15
131 573
0.53
609 782
2.48
3 073
0.01
3 689
0.01
69 506
0.28
0
0.00
1 129 145
4.59

2015

81.94
72.95
27.27
24.90
87.45
405.30
2.04
2.45
46.20
0.00
750.50

2030

176 204 370
26 572 560
128 471
0.48
143 648
0.54
45 034
0.17
41 969
0.16
137 927
0.52
719 923
2.71
1 205
0.00
1 810
0.01
35 406
0.13
0
0.00
1 255 392
4.72

72.91
81.52
25.56
23.82
78.28
408.57
0.68
1.03
20.09
0.00
712.46

207 555 239
29 720 006
131 638
0.44
233 023
0.78
53 874
0.18
46 541
0.16
135 035
0.45
966 963
3.25
275
0.00
534
0.00
13 153
0.04
0
0.00
1 581 036
5.32

63.42
112.27
25.96
22.42
65.06
465.88
0.13
0.26
6.34
0.00
761.74

EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN (HIGH CHILD, HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

388 102 585
115 736 624
518 728
0.45
261 563
0.23
62 573
0.05
80 277
0.07
440 044
0.38
2 100 098
1.81
9 809
0.01
1 126 181
0.97
1 070 558
0.92
75 600
0.07
5 745 431
4.96

2015

133.66
67.40
16.12
20.68
113.38
541.12
2.53
290.18
275.84
19.48
1 480.39

488 304 210
120 818 488
582 379
0.48
342 501
0.28
72 760
0.06
101 462
0.08
538 081
0.45
2 535 459
2.10
4 378
0.00
877 700
0.73
823 949
0.68
56 599
0.05
5 935 268
4.91

2030

119.27
70.14
14.90
20.78
110.19
519.24
0.90
179.74
168.74
11.59
1 215.49

638 188 559
129 212 256
641 906
0.50
509 229
0.39
92 341
0.07
135 640
0.10
640 098
0.50
3 377 608
2.61
1 233
0.00
524 966
0.41
482 625
0.37
32 109
0.02
6 437 755
4.98

100.58
79.79
14.47
21.25
100.30
529.25
0.19
82.26
75.62
5.03
1 008.75

WESTERN PACIFIC (VERY LOW CHILD, VERY LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

156 684 271
16 471 606
63 026
0.38
838 385
5.09
118 451
0.72
28 761
0.17
143 723
0.87
1 215 436
7.38
342
0.00
50
0.00
9 649
0.06
248
0.00
2 418 071
14.68

2015

40.22
535.08
75.60
18.36
91.73
775.72
0.22
0.03
6.16
0.16
1 543.28

154 795 439
16 072 011
57 128
0.36
1 053 026
6.55
119 030
0.74
26 463
0.16
127 925
0.80
1 142 950
7.11
232
0.00
43
0.00
5 796
0.04
116
0.00
2 532 708
15.76

2030

36.91
680.27
76.89
17.10
82.64
738.36
0.15
0.03
3.74
0.07
1 636.16

145 921 920
14 289 616
48 395
0.34
1 230 880
8.61
106 668
0.75
22 753
0.16
112 524
0.79
953 952
6.68
149
0.00
30
0.00
2 881
0.02
59
0.00
2 478 290
17.34

33.16
843.52
73.10
15.59
77.11
653.74
0.10
0.02
1.97
0.04
1 698.37

WESTERN PACIFIC (LOW CHILD, LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

1 601 382 302
242 183 984
1 072 726
0.44
2 563 998
1.06
280 059
0.12
352 664
0.15
1 749 402
0.72
16 400 456
6.77
31 706
0.01
268 357
0.11
607 530
0.25
226 304
0.09
23 553 201
9.73

2015

66.99
160.11
17.49
22.02
109.24
1 024.14
1.98
16.76
37.94
14.13
1 470.80

1 688 392 664
241 587 312
969 657
0.40
3 271 378
1.35
317 676
0.13
344 518
0.14
1 677 157
0.69
17 158 812
7.10
10 943
0.00
114 934
0.05
310 381
0.13
93 314
0.04
24 268 771
10.05

2030

57.43
193.76
18.82
20.41
99.33
1 016.28
0.65
6.81
18.38
5.53
1 437.39

1 753 380 614
245 479 984
851 044
0.35
4 852 313
1.98
389 041
0.16
324 207
0.13
1 485 053
0.60
18 914 550
7.71
2 173
0.00
41 286
0.02
136 147
0.06
35 030
0.01
27 030 841
11.01

48.54
276.74
22.19
18.49
84.70
1 078.75
0.12
2.35
7.76
2.00
1 541.64

annexes

Table A.4.2 Burden of neurological disorders, in DALYs, by cause and country income
category, projections for 2005, 2015 and 2030
DALYs

%
total

per
100 000

DALYs

%
total

per
100 000

DALYs

%
total

per
100 000

LOW INCOME
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

2005
2 698 990 297
863 355 456
4 272 843
0.49
2 447 944
0.28
407 152
0.05
542 866
0.06
3 075 717
0.36
17 881 426
2.07
68 690
0.01
6 169 162
0.71
3 865 716
0.45
350 279
0.04
39 081 794
4.53

Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

2005
2 267 665 265
396 248 352
1 813 961
0.46
3 417 084
0.86
446 605
0.11
527 563
0.13
2 421 814
0.61
24 063 276
6.07
36 435
0.01
245 781
0.06
1 159 835
0.29
203 368
0.05
34 335 721
8.67

Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

2005
528 081 304
91 247 080
734 826
0.81
881 181
0.97
92 265
0.10
131 579
0.14
776 542
0.85
3 232 834
3.54
4 860
0.01
6 993
0.01
209 522
0.23
1 824
0.00
6 072 426
6.65

Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

2005
947 138 427
118 750 184
486 287
0.41
4 331 265
3.65
670 491
0.56
307 679
0.26
1 385 579
1.17
5 606 824
4.72
5 180
0.00
673
0.00
101 685
0.09
5 563
0.00
12 901 225
10.86

158.31
90.70
15.09
20.11
113.96
662.52
2.55
228.57
143.23
12.98
1 448.02

2015
3 157 941 695
878 944 512
4 520 584
0.51
3 015 554
0.34
468 466
0.05
633 335
0.07
3 292 940
0.37
20 698 738
2.35
28 491
0.00
4 772 255
0.54
2 745 058
0.31
222 037
0.03
40 397 457
4.60

143.15
95.49
14.83
20.06
104.27
655.45
0.90
151.12
86.93
7.03
1 279.23

2030
3 786 445 271
928 855 040
4 769 515
0.51
4 178 842
0.45
592 196
0.06
742 842
0.08
3 484 761
0.38
26 672 044
2.87
7 468
0.00
3 144 548
0.34
1 696 933
0.18
121 899
0.01
45 411 047
4.89

125.96
110.36
15.64
19.62
92.03
704.41
0.20
83.05
44.82
3.22
1 199.31

70.92
178.05
20.16
21.64
97.07
1 018.40
0.53
3.93
25.81
3.28
1 439.77

2030
2 504 674 883
388 888 288
1 542 638
0.40
6 133 343
1.58
560 720
0.14
493 924
0.13
2 085 111
0.54
25 586 734
6.58
2 574
0.00
26 771
0.01
270 382
0.07
26 320
0.01
36 728 516
9.44

61.59
244.88
22.39
19.72
83.25
1 021.56
0.10
1.07
10.80
1.05
1 466.40

128.68
193.22
17.63
23.78
136.20
584.78
0.34
0.70
18.24
0.16
1 103.75

2030
622 970 241
96 092 552
704 562
0.73
1 586 853
1.65
114 497
0.12
135 916
0.14
744 397
0.77
3 570 041
3.72
499
0.00
1 959
0.00
41 624
0.04
405
0.00
6 900 753
7.18

113.10
254.72
18.38
21.82
119.49
573.07
0.08
0.31
6.68
0.07
1 107.72

47.22
527.71
72.74
30.52
136.90
550.10
0.38
0.05
6.09
0.27
1 371.98

2030
1 002 892 462
112 894 104
424 689
0.38
6 495 107
5.75
747 640
0.66
275 597
0.24
1 281 723
1.14
5 034 698
4.46
2 719
0.00
353
0.00
29 921
0.03
1 303
0.00
14 293 750
12.66

42.35
647.64
74.55
27.48
127.80
502.02
0.27
0.04
2.98
0.13
1 425.25

LOWER MIDDLE INCOME

79.99
150.69
19.69
23.26
106.80
1 061.15
1.61
10.84
51.15
8.97
1 514.14

2015
2 394 506 774
390 254 624
1 698 068
0.44
4 263 380
1.09
482 673
0.12
518 073
0.13
2 324 256
0.60
24 385 588
6.25
12 774
0.00
93 989
0.02
618 082
0.16
78 458
0.02
34 475 340
8.83

UPPER MIDDLE INCOME

139.15
166.86
17.47
24.92
147.05
612.18
0.92
1.32
39.68
0.35
1 149.90

2015
574 892 329
93 943 736
739 788
0.79
1 110 803
1.18
101 366
0.11
136 702
0.15
783 032
0.83
3 361 867
3.58
1 957
0.00
4 032
0.00
104 866
0.11
945
0.00
6 345 357
6.75

HIGH INCOME

51.34
457.30
70.79
32.49
146.29
591.98
0.55
0.07
10.74
0.59
1 362.13

2015
975 884 050
118 245 712
460 841
0.39
5 149 842
4.36
709 829
0.60
297 810
0.25
1 335 981
1.13
5 368 321
4.54
3 723
0.00
489
0.00
59 427
0.05
2 680
0.00
13 388 941
11.32

193

194

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

Table A.4.3 Deaths attributable to neurological disorders, by cause, WHO region and mortality
stratum, projections for 2005, 2015 and 2030
Deaths

%
total

per
100 000

Deaths

%
total

per
100 000

Deaths

%
total

per
100 000

WORLD
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

6 441 919 466
58 028 152
126 096
0.22
425 331
0.73
105 012
0.18
16 275
0.03
0
0.00
5 745 748
9.90
774
0.00
191 592
0.33
152 004
0.26
11 625
0.02
6 774 457
11.67

2015

1.96
6.60
1.63
0.25
0.00
89.19
0.01
2.97
2.36
0.18
105.16

7 103 297 899
63 458 962
130 569
0.21
513 230
0.81
127 293
0.20
16 669
0.03
0
0.00
6 466 232
10.19
654
0.00
145 640
0.23
106 372
0.17
7 282
0.01
7 513 942
11.84

2030

1.84
7.23
1.79
0.23
0.00
91.03
0.01
2.05
1.50
0.10
105.78

7 917 115 397
73 247 767
139 276
0.19
671 372
0.92
165 418
0.23
17 012
0.02
0
0.00
7 787 656
10.63
577
0.00
95 587
0.13
69 946
0.10
4 318
0.01
8 951 162
12.22

5.64
1.05
0.80
0.04
0.00
57.42
0.00
10.94
1.96
0.00
77.85

550 082 900
6 219 324
30 834
0.50
5 877
0.09
4 501
0.07
251
0.00
0
0.00
340 954
5.48
15
0.00
35 731
0.57
7 203
0.12
0
0.00
425 366
6,84

5.22
1.06
0.79
0.04
0.00
53.37
0.00
6.96
2.14
0.00
69.58

628 734 321
7 914 237
31 346
0.40
6 401
0.08
4 860
0.06
274
0.00
0
0.00
340 351
4.30
0
0.00
26 878
0.34
8 462
0.11
0
0.00
418 572
5,29

1.76
8.48
2.09
0.21
0.00
98.36
0.01
1.21
0.88
0.05
113.06

AFRICA (HIGH CHILD, HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

335 459 111
4 784 001
19 203
0.40
3 462
0.07
2 610
0.05
144
0.00
0
0.00
186 783
3.90
22
0.00
47 653
1.00
8 225
0.17
0
0.00
268 102
5,60

2015

5.72
1.03
0.78
0.04
0.00
55.68
0.01
14.21
2.45
0.00
79.92

419 571 880
5 361 866
23 662
0.44
4 403
0.08
3 344
0.06
180
0.00
0
0.00
240 909
4.49
20
0.00
45 915
0.86
8 212
0.15
0
0.00
326 645
6,09

2030

5.61
1.07
0.82
0.05
0.00
61.98
0.00
6.50
1.31
0.00
77.33

382 647 820
6 097 012
21 099
0.35
3 975
0.07
2 956
0.05
183
0.00
0
0.00
203 945
3.35
0
0.00
34 832
0.57
11 250
0.18
0
0.00
278 240
4,56

2015

5.51
1.04
0.77
0.05
0.00
53.30
0.00
9.10
2.94
0.00
72.71

478 419 411
6 767 650
24 959
0.37
5 051
0.07
3 801
0.06
214
0.00
0
0.00
255 352
3.77
0
0.00
33 288
0.49
10 233
0.15
0
0.00
332 899
4,92

2030

4.99
1.02
0.77
0.04
0.00
54.13
0.00
4.27
1.35
0.00
66.57

343 363 701
2 805 833
1 863
0.07
111 596
3.98
20 348
0.73
3 735
0.13
0
0.00
192 402
6.86
369
0.01
5
0.00
1 186
0.04
0
0.00
331 503
11.81

2015

0.54
32.50
5.93
1.09
0.00
56.03
0.11
0.00
0.35
0.00
96.55

372 395 661
2 999 574
1 870
0.06
123 880
4.13
23 466
0.78
3 896
0.13
0
0.00
200 803
6.69
355
0.01
6
0.00
941
0.03
0
0.00
355 216
11.84

2030

0.50
33.27
6.30
1.05
0.00
53.92
0.10
0.00
0.25
0.00
95.39

413 323 652
3 450 260
1 904
0.06
170 499
4.94
32 175
0.93
3 910
0.11
0
0.00
243 062
7.04
369
0.01
6
0.00
747
0.02
0
0.00
452 671
13.12

0.46
41.25
7.78
0.95
0.00
58.81
0.09
0.00
0.18
0.00
109.52

annexes

Deaths

%
total

per
100 000

Deaths

%
total

per
100 000

Deaths

%
total

per
100 000

463 707 779
2 869 172
6 045
0.21
12 463
0.43
4 281
0.15
903
0.03
0
0.00
248 042
8.65
14
0.00
226
0.01
6 986
0.24
0
0.00
278 960
9.72

2015

1.30
2.69
0.92
0.19
0.00
53.49
0.00
0.05
1.51
0.00
60.16

511 277 519
3 406 656
6 268
0.18
15 929
0.47
5 479
0.16
1 058
0.03
0
0.00
285 390
8.38
10
0.00
146
0.00
4 086
0.12
0
0.00
318 365
9.35

2030

1.23
3.12
1.07
0.21
0.00
55.82
0.00
0.03
0.80
0.00
62.27

560 127 320
4 251 795
6 334
0.15
22 295
0.52
7 933
0.19
1 291
0.03
0
0.00
371 920
8.75
5
0.00
96
0.00
2 130
0.05
0
0.00
412 003
9.69

1.94
0.79
0.96
0.05
0.00
38.54
0.00
0.17
5.97
0.00
48.41

106 740 220
724 097
1 931
0.27
1 011
0.14
1 286
0.18
55
0.01
0
0.00
48 277
6.67
0
0.00
79
0.01
3 064
0.42
0
0.00
55 704
7.69

1.38
4.10
0.64
0.05
0.00
64.13
0.00
0.62
1.60
0.04
72.57

364 048 380
3 083 806
4 155
0.13
19 577
0.63
3 110
0.10
224
0.01
0
0.00
274 913
8.91
0
0.00
481
0.02
3 521
0.11
80
0.00
306 062
9.92

1.68
7.12
0.79
0.09
0.00
76.46
0.01
2.22
2.50
0.31
91.17

1 718 832 463
14 999 705
23 277
0.16
148 917
0.99
16 467
0.11
1 725
0.01
0
0.00
1 568 600
10.46
34
0.00
14 848
0.10
25 629
0.17
2 954
0.02
1 802 452
12.02

1.13
3.98
1.42
0.23
0.00
66.40
0.00
0.02
0.38
0.00
73.56

77 739 657
543 838
1 568
0.29
600
0.11
699
0.13
37
0.01
0
0.00
28 472
5.24
0
0.00
221
0.04
7 676
1.41
0
0.00
39 271
7.22

2015

2.02
0.77
0.90
0.05
0.00
36.62
0.00
0.28
9.87
0.00
50.52

90 194 020
591 295
1 749
0.30
713
0.12
864
0.15
44
0.01
0
0.00
34 757
5.88
0
0.00
150
0.03
5 381
0.91
0
0.00
43 659
7.38

2030

1.81
0.95
1.20
0.05
0.00
45.23
0.00
0.07
2.87
0.00
52.19

308 761 163
2 220 363
5 031
0.23
9 836
0.44
1 551
0.07
148
0.01
0
0.00
172 702
7.78
0
0.00
5 735
0.26
8 049
0.36
195
0.01
203 248
9.15

2015

1.63
3.19
0.50
0.05
0.00
55.93
0.00
1.86
2.61
0.06
65.83

336 961 332
2 492 408
4 641
0.19
13 829
0.55
2 168
0.09
183
0.01
0
0.00
216 099
8.67
0
0.00
2 086
0.08
5 398
0.22
129
0.01
244 534
9.81

2030

1.14
5.38
0.85
0.06
0.00
75.52
0.00
0.13
0.97
0.02
84.07

1 352 957 715
12 368 446
27 634
0.22
86 338
0.70
9 598
0.08
1 230
0.01
0
0.00
963 383
7.79
143
0.00
60 687
0.49
56 178
0.45
7 233
0.06
1 212 424
9.80

2015

2.04
6.38
0.71
0.09
0.00
71.21
0.01
4.49
4.15
0.53
89.61

1 525 318 552
12 943 856
25 583
0.20
108 673
0.84
12 086
0.09
1 417
0.01
0
0.00
1 166 198
9.01
79
0.00
33 875
0.26
38 059
0.29
4 735
0.04
1 390 705
10.74

2030

1.35
8.66
0.96
0.10
0.00
91.26
0.00
0.86
1.49
0.17
104.86

195

196

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
Deaths

%
total

per
100 000

Deaths

%
total

per
100 000

Deaths

%
total

per
100 000

417 799 202
4 019 118
6 061
0.15
102 492
2.55
23 516
0.59
4 071
0.10
0
0.00
410 165
10.21
161
0.00
74
0.00
2 011
0.05
0
0.00
548 551
13.65

2015

1.45
24.53
5.63
0.97
0.00
98.17
0.04
0.02
0.48
0.00
131.30

417 841 350
4 364 652
6 033
0.14
122 786
2.81
28 938
0.66
3 974
0.09
0
0.00
427 915
9.80
139
0.00
61
0.00
1 440
0.03
0
0.00
591 287
13.55

2030

1.44
29.39
6.93
0.95
0.00
102.41
0.03
0.01
0.34
0.00
141.51

411 754 930
4 356 278
5 647
0.13
138 128
3.17
32 551
0.75
3 554
0.08
0
0.00
420 472
9.65
116
0.00
49
0.00
978
0.02
0
0.00
601 496
13.81

1.73
1.65
0.82
0.58
0.00
138.60
0.00
0.02
1.65
0.00
145.06

243 016 939
2 282 373
3 909
0.17
4 286
0.19
2 138
0.09
1 448
0.06
0
0.00
350 321
15.35
1
0.00
30
0.00
1 726
0.08
0
0.00
363 860
15.94

1.56
2.96
0.70
0.89
0.00
363.83
0.00
0.01
0.65
0.00
370.61

175 407 940
2 904 723
2 238
0.08
5 439
0.19
1 274
0.04
1 359
0.05
0
0.00
633 833
21.82
1
0.00
22
0.00
641
0.02
0
0.00
644 807
22.20

1.37
33.55
7.91
0.86
0.00
102.12
0.03
0.01
0.24
0.00
146.08

227 350 229
1 937 483
4 147
0.21
3 577
0.18
1 837
0.09
1 362
0.07
0
0.00
298 450
15.40
2
0.00
82
0.00
7 760
0.40
0
0.00
317 216
16.37

2015

1.82
1.57
0.81
0.60
0.00
131.27
0.00
0.04
3.41
0.00
139.53

236 868 370
2 125 833
4 104
0.19
3 906
0.18
1 951
0.09
1 383
0.07
0
0.00
328 305
15.44
1
0.00
49
0.00
3 902
0.18
0
0.00
343 601
16.16

2030

1.61
1.76
0.88
0.60
0.00
144.15
0.00
0.01
0.71
0.00
149.73

235 511 792
3 819 475
4 319
0.11
6 406
0.17
1 504
0.04
2 293
0.06
0
0.00
766 147
20.06
7
0.00
44
0.00
2 649
0.07
0
0.00
783 370
20.51

2015

1.83
2.72
0.64
0.97
0.00
325.31
0.00
0.02
1.12
0.00
332.62

206 753 120
3 566 264
3 223
0.09
6 120
0.17
1 438
0.04
1 844
0.05
0
0.00
752 231
21.09
3
0.00
30
0.00
1 351
0.04
0
0.00
766 239
21.49

2030

1.28
3.10
0.73
0.77
0.00
361.35
0.00
0.01
0.37
0.00
367.60

150 452 139
740 590
1 853
0.25
2 186
0.30
1 803
0.24
272
0.04
0
0.00
58 439
7.89
0
0.00
112
0.02
1 831
0.25
0
0.00
66 497
8.98

2015

1.23
1.45
1.20
0.18
0.00
38.84
0.00
0.07
1.22
0.00
44.20

176 204 370
876 987
1 953
0.22
2 977
0.34
2 203
0.25
326
0.04
0
0.00
72 354
8.25
0
0.00
56
0.01
1 014
0.12
0
0.00
80 882
9.22

2030

1.11
1.69
1.25
0.19
0.00
41.06
0.00
0.03
0.58
0.00
45.90

207 555 239
1 191 727
2 158
0.18
4 690
0.39
3 164
0.27
433
0.04
0
0.00
107 995
9.06
0
0.00
18
0.00
480
0.04
0
0.00
118 939
9.98

1.04
2.26
1.52
0.21
0.00
52.03
0.00
0.01
0.23
0.00
57.30

annexes
Deaths

%
total

per
100 000

Deaths

%
total

per
100 000

Deaths

%
total

per
100 000

388 102 585
3 522 774
8 704
0.25
10 072
0.29
1 682
0.05
493
0.01
0
0.00
186 281
5.29
11
0.00
33 662
0.96
21 861
0.62
2 169
0.06
264 936
7.52

2015

2.24
2.60
0.43
0.13
0.00
48.00
0.00
8.67
5.63
0.56
68.26

488 304 210
3 867 656
9 518
0.25
13 189
0.34
2 120
0.05
621
0.02
0
0.00
238 972
6.18
8
0.00
26 309
0.68
16 787
0.43
1 650
0.04
309 174
7.99

2030

1.95
2.70
0.43
0.13
0.00
48.94
0.00
5.39
3.44
0.34
63.32

638 188 559
4 577 913
10 283
0.22
20 151
0.44
3 044
0.07
861
0.02
0
0.00
344 667
7.53
4
0.00
15 885
0.35
9 925
0.22
986
0.02
405 805
8.86

1.61
3.16
0.48
0.13
0.00
54.01
0.00
2.49
1.56
0.15
63.59

156 684 271
1 224 679
878
0.07
11 140
0.91
4 745
0.39
225
0.02
0
0.00
154 475
12.61
34
0.00
12
0.00
401
0.03
1
0.00
171 910
14.04

2015

0.56
7.11
3.03
0.14
0.00
98.59
0.02
0.01
0.26
0.00
109.72

154 795 439
1 435 189
862
0.06
14 497
1.01
6 049
0.42
235
0.02
0
0.00
176 628
12.31
30
0.00
12
0.00
344
0.02
1
0.00
198 660
13.84

2030

0.56
9.37
3.91
0.15
0.00
114.10
0.02
0.01
0.22
0.00
128.34

145 921 920
1 443 363
787
0.05
18 527
1.28
6 913
0.48
239
0.02
0
0.00
175 495
12.16
27
0.00
11
0.00
260
0.02
1
0.00
202 259
14.01

0.96
4.58
1.98
0.08
0.00
122.62
0.00
0.22
0.55
0.05
131.02

1 753 380 614
15 848 165
14 471
0.13
105 573
0.61
46 002
0.26
1 389
0.01
0
0.00
2 566 796
16.35
5
0.00
1 453
0.03
5 180
0.07
297
0.01
2 741 165
17.47

0.54
12.70
4.74
0.16
0.00
120.27
0.02
0.01
0.18
0.00
138.61

1 601 382 302
11 075 368
17 690
0.16
61 187
0.55
27 882
0.25
1 179
0.01
0
0.00
1 876 062
16.94
12
0.00
8 247
0.07
15 941
0.14
2 027
0.02
2 010 227
18.15

2015

1.10
3.82
1.74
0.07
0.00
117.15
0.00
0.51
1.00
0.13
125.53

1 688 392 664
12 659 077
16 143
0.13
77 277
0.61
33 387
0.26
1 294
0.01
0
0.00
2 070 319
16.35
8
0.00
3 657
0.03
9 224
0.07
766
0.01
2 212 076
17.47

2030

0.83
6.02
2.62
0.08
0.00
146.39
0.00
0.08
0.30
0.02
156.34

197

198

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

Table A.4.4 Deaths attributable to neurological disorders, by cause and country income
category, projections for 2005, 2015 and 2030
Deaths

%
total

per
100 000

Deaths

%
total

per
100 000

Deaths

%
total

per
100 000

2005
2 698 990 297
28 672 778
79 248
0.28
117 006
0.41
18 481
0.06
2 557
0.01
0
0.00
1 839 308
6.41
177
0.00
183 622
0.64
110 589
0.39
10 003
0.03
2 360 989
8.23

Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

2005
2 267 665 265
17 652 714
30 565
0.17
60 684
0.34
31 952
0.18
4 124
0.02
0
0.00
2 791 658
15.81
12
0.00
7 584
0.04
32 066
0.18
1 620
0.01
2 960 266
16.77

Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

2005
528 081 304
3 566 059
7 115
0.20
16 506
0.46
5 439
0.15
1 736
0.05
0
0.00
343 741
9.64
16
0.00
284
0.01
5 750
0.16
1
0.00
380 587
10.67

Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Poliomyelitis
Tetanus
Meningitis
Japanese encephalitis
Total

2005
947 138 427
8 136 260
9 168
0.11
231 134
2.84
49 139
0.60
7 857
0.10
0
0.00
771 010
9.48
570
0.01
103
0.00
3 595
0.04
1
0.00
1 072 577
13.18

2.94
4.34
0.68
0.09
0.00
68.15
0.01
6.80
4.10
0.37
87.48

2015
3 157 941 695
30 854 969
85 525
0.28
147 611
0.48
23 210
0.08
2 848
0.01
0
0.00
2 212 111
7.17
108
0.00
142 332
0.46
81 490
0.26
6 800
0.02
2 702 035
8.76

2.71
4.67
0.73
0.09
0.00
70.05
0.00
4.51
2.58
0.22
85.56

2030
3 786 445 271
35 900 272
96 579
0.27
203 293
0.57
31 322
0.09
3 377
0.01
0
0.00
2 926 235
8.15
53
0.00
94 390
0.26
55 933
0.16
4 209
0.01
3 415 391
9.51

2.55
5.37
0.83
0.09
0.00
77.28
0.00
2.49
1.48
0.11
90.20

1.20
3.12
1.59
0.17
0.00
127.20
0.00
0.13
0.78
0.02
134.21

2030
2 504 674 883
22 973 178
26 985
0.12
100 342
0.44
51 958
0.23
4 154
0.02
0
0.00
3 537 725
15.40
5
0.00
994
0.00
10 009
0.04
109
0.00
3 732 280
16.25

1.08
4.01
2.07
0.17
0.00
141.24
0.00
0.04
0.40
0.00
149.01

1.25
3.55
1.18
0.31
0.00
67.82
0.00
0.03
0.61
0.00
74.76

2030
622 970 241
4 903 171
6 984
0.14
27 069
0.55
9 432
0.19
1 909
0.04
0
0.00
464 680
9.48
7
0.00
124
0.00
2 013
0.04
0
0.00
512 219
10.45

1.12
4.35
1.51
0.31
0.00
74.59
0.00
0.02
0.32
0.00
82.22

LOWER MIDDLE INCOME

1.35
2.68
1.41
0.18
0.00
123.11
0.00
0.33
1.41
0.07
130.54

2015
2 394 506 774
19 527 556
28 746
0.15
74 768
0.38
38 119
0.20
4 088
0.02
0
0.00
3 045 869
15.60
8
0.00
3 027
0.02
18 680
0.10
481
0.00
3 213 785
16.46

UPPER MIDDLE INCOME

1.35
3.13
1.03
0.33
0.00
65.09
0.00
0.05
1.09
0.00
72.07

2015
574 892 329
4 137 547
7 168
0.17
20 434
0.49
6 807
0.16
1 796
0.04
0
0.00
389 884
9.42
12
0.00
190
0.00
3 481
0.08
0
0.00
429 773
10.39

HIGH INCOME

0.97
24.40
5.19
0.83
0.00
81.40
0.06
0.01
0.38
0.00
113.24

2015
975 884 050
8 938 508
9 129
0.10
270 416
3.03
59 155
0.66
7 938
0.09
0
0.00
818 338
9.16
527
0.01
90
0.00
2 718
0.03
1
0.00
1 168 312
13.07

0.94
27.71
6.06
0.81
0.00
83.86
0.05
0.01
0.28
0.00
119.72

2030
1 002 892 462
9 470 662
8 725
0.09
340 667
3.60
72 704
0.77
7 572
0.08
0
0.00
858 977
9.07
512
0.01
78
0.00
1 988
0.02
1
0.00
1 291 225
13.63

0.87
33.97
7.25
0.76
0.00
85.65
0.05
0.01
0.20
0.00
128.75

annexes

Table A.4.5 Burden of neurological disorders, in YLDs, by cause, WHO region and mortality
stratum, projections for 2005, 2015 and 2030
YLDs

%
total

per
100 000

YLDs

%
total

per
100 000

YLDs

%
total

per
100 000

WORLD
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries
Total

6 441 919 466
570 766 387
4 167 285
0.73
9 494 517
1.66
1 137 991
0.20
1 286 458
0.23
7 659 687
1.34
11 389 442
2.00
6 337 373
1.11
12 557 068
2.20
27 402 985
4.80
81 432 806
14.27

2015

64.69
147.39
17.67
19.97
118.90
176.80
98.38
194.93
425.39
1 264.11

7 103 297 899
592 406 432
4 323 495
0.73
11 750 573
1.98
1 228 128
0.21
1 371 367
0.23
7 736 261
1.31
12 423 121
2.10
5 099 627
0.86
12 381 343
2.09
27 952 326
4.72
84 266 242
14.22

2030

60.87
165.42
17.29
19.31
108.91
174.89
71.79
174.30
393.51
1 186.30

7 917 115 397
620 989 911
4 402 862
0.71
16 144 423
2.60
1 353 366
0.22
1 453 083
0.23
7 596 089
1.22
14 073 668
2.27
3 613 205
0.58
10 603 690
1.71
28 566 683
4.60
87 807 069
14.14

81.12
44.68
7.25
17.97
60.89
61.59
426.03
307.03
597.44
1 603.99

550 082 900
55 477 689
391 907
0.71
259 332
0.47
43 450
0.08
101 149
0.18
315 904
0.57
386 282
0.70
1 388 398
2.50
1 198 182
2.16
3 281 196
5.91
7 365 799
13.28

100.37
40.86
6.57
12.23
67.18
49.92
373.66
371.20
422.37
1 444.37

628 734 321
62 319 016
567 435
0.91
253 632
0.41
43 185
0.07
82 066
0.13
391 515
0.63
335 577
0.54
1 412 743
2.27
1 552 311
2.49
2 729 220
4.38
7 367 685
11.82

55.61
203.92
17.09
18.35
95.95
177.76
45.64
133.93
360.82
1 109.08

AFRICA (HIGH CHILD, HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries
Total

335 459 111
39 757 166
283 212
0.71
150 597
0.38
25 093
0.06
58 067
0.15
206 278
0.52
201 642
0.51
1 883 305
4.74
1 234 252
3.10
1 993 030
5.01
6 035 477
15.18

2015

84.43
44.89
7.48
17.31
61.49
60.11
561.41
367.93
594.12
1 799.17

419 571 880
46 874 383
340 342
0.73
187 472
0.40
30 415
0.06
75 385
0.16
255 460
0.54
258 428
0.55
1 787 505
3.81
1 288 195
2.75
2 506 683
5.35
6 729 886
14.36

2030

71.25
47.14
7.90
18.39
57.43
70.22
252.40
217.82
596.49
1 339.03

AFRICA (HIGH CHILD, VERY HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries
Total

382 647 820
45 155 172
409 059
0.91
156 813
0.35
27 746
0.06
44 545
0.10
267 571
0.59
197 776
0.44
1 896 016
4.20
1 792 207
3.97
1 608 254
3.56
6 399 986
14.17

2015

106.90
40.98
7.25
11.64
69.93
51.69
495.50
468.37
420.30
1 672.55

478 419 411
52 429 855
480 175
0.92
195 498
0.37
31 434
0.06
58 521
0.11
321 413
0.61
238 846
0.46
1 787 682
3.41
1 775 869
3.39
2 020 694
3.85
6 910 130
13.18

2030

90.25
40.34
6.87
13.05
62.27
53.37
224.70
246.89
434.08
1 171.83

THE AMERICAS (VERY LOW CHILD, VERY LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries
Total

343 363 701
27 424 860
142 844
0.52
1 098 397
4.01
193 420
0.71
74 882
0.27
511 142
1.86
800 860
2.92
53 322
0.19
439 068
1.60
629 861
2.30
3 943 797
14.38

2015

41.60
319.89
56.33
21.81
148.86
233.24
15.53
127.87
183.44
1 148.58

372 395 661
29 218 777
145 672
0.50
1 321 126
4.52
213 375
0.73
78 170
0.27
526 028
1.80
844 620
2.89
28 613
0.10
764 411
2.62
578 786
1.98
4 500 801
15.40

2030

39.12
354.76
57.30
20.99
141.26
226.81
7.68
205.27
155.42
1 208.61

413 323 652
30 362 527
148 862
0.49
1 881 645
6.20
233 076
0.77
83 615
0.28
559 602
1.84
852 316
2.81
11 942
0.04
723 902
2.38
507 043
1.67
5 002 001
16.47

36.02
455.25
56.39
20.23
135.39
206.21
2.89
175.14
122.67
1 210.19

199

200

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
YLDs

%
total

per
100 000

YLDs

%
total

per
100 000

YLDs

%
total

123.31
166.96
8.44
19.90
153.19
156.06
24.22
123.24
646.76
1 422.09

560 127 320
48 413 568
616 295
1.27
1 315 578
2.72
50 015
0.10
103 463
0.21
759 916
1.57
935 815
1.93
58 135
0.12
619 622
1.28
3 424 932
7.07
7 883 770
16.28

per
100 000

THE AMERICAS (LOW CHILD, LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries
Total

463 707 779
45 054 114
612 176
1.36
652 387
1.45
36 931
0.08
95 617
0.21
760 969
1.69
691 265
1.53
231 993
0.51
461 022
1.02
3 112 433
6.91
6 654 794
14.77

2015

132.02
140.69
7.96
20.62
164.11
149.07
50.03
99.42
671.21
1 435.13

511 277 519
46 814 643
630 457
1.35
853 641
1.82
43 162
0.09
101 743
0.22
783 250
1.67
797 905
1.70
123 838
0.26
630 089
1.35
3 306 741
7.06
7 270 826
15.53

2030

110.03
234.87
8.93
18.47
135.67
167.07
10.38
110.62
611.46
1 407.50

THE AMERICAS (HIGH CHILD, HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries
Total

77 739 657
7 526 243
107 611
1.43
78 281
1.04
4 058
0.05
15 849
0.21
155 043
2.06
59 933
0.80
53 657
0.71
94 844
1.26
379 972
5.05
949 248
12.61

2015

138.42
100.70
5.22
20.39
199.44
77.09
69.02
122.00
488.77
1 221.06

90 194 020
8 100 445
118 806
1.47
98 776
1.22
4 791
0.06
18 521
0.23
165 994
2.05
75 746
0.94
35 231
0.43
121 415
1.50
423 553
5.23
1 062 833
13.12

2030

131.72
109.51
5.31
20.53
184.04
83.98
39.06
134.61
469.60
1 178.38

106 740 220
8 797 225
125 913
1.43
149 912
1.70
6 185
0.07
21 164
0.24
171 234
1.95
104 519
1.19
17 348
0.20
121 256
1.38
455 172
5.17
1 172 703
13.33

117.96
140.45
5.79
19.83
160.42
97.92
16.25
113.60
426.43
1 098.65

SOUTH-EAST ASIA (LOW CHILD, LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries
Total

308 761 163
29 192 942
230 664
0.79
342 972
1.17
29 751
0.10
62 728
0.21
339 628
1.16
358 648
1.23
148 955
0.51
705 161
2.42
1 159 558
3.97
3 378 064
11.57

2015

74.71
111.08
9.64
20.32
110.00
116.16
48.24
228.38
375.55
1 094.07

336 961 332
29 559 126
228 970
0.77
461 668
1.56
33 833
0.11
65 397
0.22
329 367
1.11
417 908
1.41
65 463
0.22
650 504
2.20
1 141 632
3.86
3 394 742
11.48

2030

67.95
137.01
10.04
19.41
97.75
124.02
19.43
193.05
338.80
1 007.46

364 048 380
30 625 968
219 000
0.72
702 335
2.29
35 286
0.12
64 881
0.21
305 781
1.00
506 734
1.65
23 302
0.08
534 179
1.74
1 055 000
3.44
3 446 499
11.25

60.16
192.92
9.69
17.82
83.99
139.19
6.40
146.73
289.80
946.71

SOUTH-EAST ASIA (HIGH CHILD, HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries
Total

1 352 957 715
131 383 680
1 035 382
0.79
947 241
0.72
180 689
0.14
270 885
0.21
1 756 274
1.34
1 693 829
1.29
670 551
0.51
2 996 430
2.28
7 357 484
5.60
16 908 766
12.87

2015

76.53
70.01
13.36
20.02
129.81
125.19
49.56
221.47
543.81
1 249.76

1 525 318 552
134 080 889
1 048 587
0.78
1 195 702
0.89
207 974
0.16
308 778
0.23
1 793 948
1.34
2 016 085
1.50
390 475
0.29
2 565 498
1.91
7 407 802
5.52
16 934 850
12.63

2030

68.75
78.39
13.63
20.24
117.61
132.17
25.60
168.19
485.66
1 110.25

1 718 832 463
138 967 789
1 024 835
0.74
1 680 655
1.21
257 984
0.19
338 732
0.24
1 783 945
1.28
2 646 134
1.90
192 850
0.14
2 075 062
1.49
7 250 907
5.22
17 251 104
12.41

59.62
97.78
15.01
19.71
103.79
153.95
11.22
120.73
421.85
1 003.65

annexes
YLDs

%
total

per
100 000

YLDs

%
total

per
100 000

YLDs

%
total

per
100 000

EUROPE (VERY LOW CHILD, VERY LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries
Total

417 799 202
27 610 816
155 845
0.56
1 803 137
6.53
214 964
0.78
106 037
0.38
721 342
2.61
964 090
3.49
75 613
0.27
281 902
1.02
626 253
2.27
4 949 182
17.92

2015

37.30
431.58
51.45
25.38
172.65
230.75
18.10
67.47
149.89
1 184.58

417 841 350
26 642 716
146 958
0.55
2 106 469
7.91
215 201
0.81
99 719
0.37
670 731
2.52
922 228
3.46
57 040
0.21
305 417
1.15
517 606
1.94
5 041 370
18.92

2030

35.17
504.13
51.50
23.87
160.52
220.71
13.65
73.09
123.88
1 206.53

411 754 930
24 777 376
134 248
0.54
2 529 668
10.21
209 109
0.84
90 370
0.36
600 497
2.42
865 531
3.49
46 731
0.19
269 085
1.09
384 566
1.55
5 129 805
20.70

35.68
187.29
22.75
19.54
98.60
232.91
13.23
116.72
263.23
989.95

243 016 939
16 773 659
78 059
0.47
564 896
3.37
58 399
0.35
43 580
0.26
207 238
1.24
599 220
3.57
17 841
0.11
205 173
1.22
506 991
3.02
2 281 396
13.60

30.36
246.67
31.05
18.09
84.85
426.43
10.83
152.05
532.53
1 532.85

175 407 940
13 902 539
47 892
0.34
534 153
3.84
52 110
0.37
29 180
0.21
127 749
0.92
715 286
5.15
19 462
0.14
174 053
1.25
832 680
5.99
2 532 566
18.22

32.60
614.36
50.78
21.95
145.84
210.21
11.35
65.35
93.40
1 245.84

EUROPE (LOW CHILD, LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries
Total

227 350 229
17 678 271
87 172
0.49
379 974
2.15
51 897
0.29
45 790
0.26
250 906
1.42
534 109
3.02
52 903
0.30
362 898
2.05
702 802
3.98
2 468 450
13.96

2015

38.34
167.13
22.83
20.14
110.36
234.93
23.27
159.62
309.13
1 085.75

236 868 370
17 368 886
84 516
0.49
443 628
2.55
53 876
0.31
46 291
0.27
233 551
1.34
551 693
3.18
31 345
0.18
276 475
1.59
623 501
3.59
2 344 876
13.50

2030

32.12
232.45
24.03
17.93
85.28
246.58
7.34
84.43
208.62
938.78

EUROPE (LOW CHILD, HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries
Total

235 511 792
22 197 055
78 380
0.35
487 307
2.20
77 078
0.35
44 105
0.20
225 793
1.02
1 023 157
4.61
28 055
0.13
466 319
2.10
1 401 926
6.32
3 832 120
17.26

2015

33.28
206.91
32.73
18.73
95.87
434.44
11.91
198.00
595.27
1 627.15

206 753 120
17 666 220
62 765
0.36
509 996
2.89
64 187
0.36
37 404
0.21
175 429
0.99
881 652
4.99
22 393
0.13
314 373
1.78
1 101 024
6.23
3 169 224
17.94

2030

27.30
304.52
29.71
16.64
72.83
407.78
11.10
99.23
474.71
1 443.81

EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN (LOW CHILD, LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries
Total

150 452 139
13 501 935
76 282
0.56
97 087
0.72
15 562
0.12
32 689
0.24
131 573
0.97
150 006
1.11
44 447
0.33
297 321
2.20
1 029 319
7.62
1 874 287
13.88

2015

50.70
64.53
10.34
21.73
87.45
99.70
29.54
197.62
684.15
1 245.77

176 204 370
14 650 861
83 269
0.57
128 325
0.88
19 169
0.13
36 823
0.25
137 927
0.94
190 911
1.30
21 587
0.15
316 784
2.16
1 048 314
7.16
1 983 110
13.54

2030

47.26
72.83
10.88
20.90
78.28
108.35
12.25
179.78
594.94
1 125.46

207 555 239
16 286 148
89 420
0.55
210 609
1.29
25 826
0.16
40 810
0.25
135 035
0.83
267 892
1.64
7 131
0.04
303 130
1.86
1 034 270
6.35
2 114 125
12.98

43.08
101.47
12.44
19.66
65.06
129.07
3.44
146.05
498.31
1 018.58

201

202

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
YLDs

%
total

per
100 000

YLDs

%
total

per
100 000

YLDs

%
total

per
100 000

EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN (HIGH CHILD, HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries
Total

388 102 585
39 623 952
265 587
0.67
215 420
0.54
45 050
0.11
74 124
0.19
440 044
1.11
303 348
0.77
612 629
1.55
1 437 613
3.63
2 238 881
5.65
5 632 695
14.22

2015

68.43
55.51
11.61
19.10
113.38
78.16
157.85
370.42
576.88
1 451.34

488 304 210
44 895 159
314 334
0.70
284 474
0.63
52 644
0.12
94 108
0.21
538 081
1.20
384 625
0.86
480 754
1.07
1 408 013
3.14
2 677 914
5.96
6 234 948
13.89

2030

64.37
58.26
10.78
19.27
110.19
78.77
98.45
288.35
548.41
1 276.86

638 188 559
53 022 485
373 064
0.70
423 140
0.80
67 919
0.13
126 171
0.24
640 098
1.21
553 881
1.04
298 203
0.56
1 239 083
2.34
3 285 653
6.20
7 007 211
13.22

58.46
66.30
10.64
19.77
100.30
86.79
46.73
194.16
514.84
1 097.98

WESTERN PACIFIC (VERY LOW CHILD, VERY LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries
Total

156 684 271
9 224 931
47 370
0.51
805 387
8.73
100 793
1.09
26 219
0.28
143 723
1.56
555 167
6.02
36 368
0.39
138 728
1.50
208 128
2.26
2 061 882
22.35

2015

30.23
514.02
64.33
16.73
91.73
354.32
23.21
88.54
132.83
1 315.95

154 795 439
8 950 894
43 636
0.49
1 014 704
11.34
99 312
1.11
24 018
0.27
127 925
1.43
524 231
5.86
33 492
0.37
137 362
1.53
171 403
1.91
2 176 082
24.31

2030

28.19
655.51
64.16
15.52
82.64
338.66
21.64
88.74
110.73
1 405.78

145 921 920
8 121 455
37 984
0.47
1 186 645
14.61
86 543
1.07
20 623
0.25
112 524
1.39
441 683
5.44
31 667
0.39
114 520
1.41
122 436
1.51
2 154 625
26.53

26.03
813.21
59.31
14.13
77.11
302.68
21.70
78.48
83.91
1 476.56

WESTERN PACIFIC (LOW CHILD, LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries
Total

1 601 382 302
115 435 250
635 699
0.55
2 279 518
1.97
134 959
0.12
334 921
0.29
1 749 402
1.52
3 855 611
3.34
549 560
0.48
1 849 303
1.60
4 955 084
4.29
16 344 057
14.16

2015

39.70
142.35
8.43
20.91
109.24
240.77
34.32
115.48
309.43
1 020.62

1 688 392 664
115 153 579
595 008
0.52
2 949 094
2.56
158 755
0.14
326 490
0.28
1 677 157
1.46
4 318 244
3.75
234 210
0.20
1 826 936
1.59
4 426 671
3.84
16 512 565
14.34

2030

35.24
174.67
9.40
19.34
99.33
255.76
13.87
108.21
262.18
978.01

1 753 380 614
113 142 467
547 946
0.48
4 452 224
3.94
184 281
0.16
307 278
0.27
1 485 052
1.31
4 862 796
4.30
87 453
0.08
1 474 133
1.30
3 696 617
3.27
17 097 780
15.11

31.25
253.92
10.51
17.52
84.70
277.34
4.99
84.07
210.83
975.13

annexes

Table A.4.6 Burden of neurological disorders, in YLDs, by cause and country income category,
projections for 2005, 2015 and 2030
YLDs

%
total

per
100 000

YLDs

%
total

per
100 000

YLDs

%
total

per
100 000

LOW INCOME
Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological Injuries
Total

2005
2 698 990 297
274 869 775
2 162 379
0.79
1 887 847
0.69
308 756
0.11
501 366
0.18
3 075 717
1.12
2 961 840
1.08
5 178 007
1.88
7 806 618
2.84
13 836 513
5.03
37 719 043
13.72

Population
TOTAL DALYs
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological Injuries
Total

2005
2 267 665 265
180 841 215
1 083 085
0.60
3 092 955
1.71
255 194
0.14
464 515
0.26
2 421 813
1.34
5 256 334
2.91
773 549
0.43
3 277 499
1.81
9 200 404
5.09
25 825 349
14.28

2005
528 081 304
48 512 303
574 453
1.18
804 632
1.66
66 408
0.14
108 140
0.22
776 542
1.60
841 607
1.73
207 991
0.43
540 532
1.11
2 831 533
5.84
6 751 839
13.92

2005
947 138 427
66 539 151
347 335
0.52
3 709 039
5.57
507 626
0.76
212 428
0.32
1 385 579
2.08
2 329 596
3.50
177 788
0.27
932 307
1.40
1 534 400
2.31
11 136 099
16.74

80.12
69.95
11.44
18.58
113.96
109.74
191.85
289.24
512.66
1 397.52

2015
3 157 941 695
296 212 785
2 345 818
0.79
2 358 215
0.80
353 265
0.12
590 060
0.20
3 292 940
1.11
3 497 473
1.18
4 484 971
1.51
7 321 821
2.47
15 166 127
5.12
39 410 691
13.30

74.28
74.68
11.19
18.68
104.27
110.75
142.02
231.85
480.25
1 247.99

2030
3 786 445 271
327 825 374
2 508 911
0.77
3 298 981
1.01
441 287
0.13
696 371
0.21
3 484 761
1.06
4 623 403
1.41
3 295 399
1.01
6 284 158
1.92
16 970 828
5.18
41 604 099
12.69

66.26
87.13
11.65
18.39
92.03
122.10
87.03
165.96
448.20
1 098.76

43.91
163.41
11.57
19.23
97.07
237.96
15.49
127.18
355.86
1 071.68

2030
2 504 674 883
176 548 919
996 999
0.56
5 720 544
3.24
307 805
0.17
443 061
0.25
2 085 110
1.18
6 238 042
3.53
159 203
0.09
2 424 744
1.37
7 594 651
4.30
25 970 159
14.71

39.81
228.39
12.29
17.69
83.25
249.06
6.36
96.81
303.22
1 036.87

102.29
178.37
12.39
19.80
136.20
161.07
20.04
123.01
513.94
1 267.11

2030
622 970 241
51 204 031
573 146
1.12
1 483 308
2.90
75 045
0.15
114 563
0.22
744 397
1.45
1 030 004
2.01
60 222
0.12
698 714
1.36
2 963 659
5.79
7 743 058
15.12

92.00
238.10
12.05
18.39
119.49
165.34
9.67
112.16
475.73
1 242.93

LOWER MIDDLE INCOME

47.76
136.39
11.25
20.48
106.80
231.79
34.11
144.53
405.72
1 138.85

2015
2 394 506 774
179 114 557
1 051 524
0.59
3 912 760
2.18
277 039
0.15
460 503
0.26
2 324 256
1.30
5 698 033
3.18
370 936
0.21
3 045 262
1.70
8 521 185
4.76
25 661 498
14.33

UPPER MIDDLE INCOME

108.78
152.37
12.58
20.48
147.05
159.37
39.39
102.36
536.19
1 278.56

2015
574 892 329
50 027 602
588 084
1.18
1 025 454
2.05
71 217
0.14
113 803
0.23
783 032
1.57
925 989
1.85
115 195
0.23
707 179
1.41
2 954 590
5.91
7 284 542
14.56

HIGH INCOME

36.67
391.60
53.60
22.43
146.29
245.96
18.77
98.43
162.00
1 175.76

2015
975 884 050
67 046 328
338 021
0.50
4 454 081
6.64
526 601
0.79
206 989
0.31
1 335 981
1.99
2 301 556
3.43
128 477
0.19
1 306 923
1.95
1 310 269
1.95
11 908 897
17.76

34.64
456.41
53.96
21.21
136.90
235.84
13.17
133.92
134.26
1 220.32

2030
1 002 892 462
65 404 060
323 722
0.49
5 641 486
8.63
529 223
0.81
199 064
0.30
1 281 723
1.96
2 182 130
3.34
98 343
0.15
1 195 901
1.83
1 037 296
1.59
12 488 887
19.09

32.28
562.52
52.77
19.85
127.80
217.58
9.81
119.25
103.43
1 245.29

203

204

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

Table A.4.7 Prevalence (per 1000) of neurological disorders, by cause, WHO region
and mortality stratum, projections for 2005, 2015 and 2030
per
1 000

Number

per
1 000

Number

per
1 000

Number

WORLD
Population

2005

2015

2030

6 441 919 466

7 103 297 899

7 917 115 397

Epilepsy

39 891 898

6.19

44 568 780

6.27

50 503 933

6.38

Alzheimer and other dementias

24 446 651

3.79

31 318 923

4.41

44 016 718

5.56

Parkinson’s disease

5 223 897

0.81

5 967 673

0.84

7 236 712

0.91

Multiple sclerosis

2 492 385

0.39

2 823 092

0.40

3 279 199

0.41

326 196 121

50.64

364 432 879

51.30

412 894 420

52.15

Cerebrovascular disease

61 537 499

9.55

67 212 050

9.46

76 826 249

9.70

Neuroinfections

18 169 479

2.82

15 714 399

2.21

13 290 180

1.68

Nutritional and neuropathies

352 494 535

54.72

321 738 424

45.29

285 369 403

36.04

Neurological injuries

170 382 211

26.45

197 627 526

27.82

242 728 912

30.66

Migraine

AFRICA (HIGH CHILD, HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
Population
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease

2005

2015

2030

335 459 111

419 571 880

550 082 900

3 887 787

11.59

4 887 589

11.65

6 425 567

301 529

0.90

390 872

0.93

558 471

11.68
1.02

77 310

0.23

96 484

0.23

139 094

0.25

90 125

0.27

118 905

0.28

171 479

0.31

5 301 369

15.80

6 958 945

16.59

10 049 321

18.27

922 165

2.75

1 177 212

2.81

1 752 287

3.19

3 429 358

10.22

3 455 514

8.24

3 063 637

5.57

Nutritional and neuropathies

34 447 298

102.69

37 749 963

89.97

37 452 942

68.09

Neurological injuries

13 046 081

38.89

16 885 887

40.25

24 827 838

45.13

9.36
0.87
0.21
0.23
18.46
2.21
7.11
83.89
31.22

628 734 321
5 826 652
9.27
560 199
0.89
132 208
0.21
161 820
0.26
12 309 881
19.58
1 468 215
2.34
3 021 709
4.81
39 426 363
62.71
21 909 861
34.85

Neuroinfections

AFRICA (HIGH CHILD, VERY HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
2005
Population
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries

2015

382 647 820
3 572 218
9.34
320 683
0.84
83 143
0.22
85 170
0.22
6 889 476
18.00
875 178
2.29
3 547 669
9.27
39 641 466
103.60
11 528 595
30.13

478 419 411
4 476 346
416 691
98 722
109 363
8 829 595
1 058 100
3 400 301
40 133 334
14 935 805

2030

THE AMERICAS (VERY LOW CHILD, VERY LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
Population

2005

2015

2030

343 363 701

372 395 661

413 323 652

Epilepsy

1 830 517

5.33

1 960 485

5.26

2 157 642

5.22

Alzheimer and other dementias

3 236 120

9.42

3 809 436

10.23

5 630 271

13.62

Parkinson’s disease

1 042 640

3.04

1 180 495

3.17

1 543 063

3.73

181 870

0.53

199 324

0.54

220 144

0.53

29 434 637

85.72

32 303 593

86.75

35 115 150

84.96

5 181 015

15.09

5 514 921

14.81

5 762 804

13.94

331 319

0.96

297 476

0.80

273 074

0.66

Nutritional and neuropathies

8 470 890

24.67

14 078 189

37.80

15 706 201

38.00

Neurological injuries

3 761 512

10.95

3 838 293

10.31

3 950 758

9.56

Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections

annexes

Prevalence (per 1000) of neurological disorders by cause by WHO region and
mortality stratum projections for 2005 2015 and 2030
per
1 000

Number

per
1 000

Number

per
1 000

Number

THE AMERICAS (LOW CHILD, LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
Population

2005

2015

2030

463 707 779

511 277 519

560 127 320

Epilepsy

5 995 062

12.93

6 483 590

12.68

6 950 211

12.41

Alzheimer and other dementias

1 563 720

3.37

2 111 608

4.13

3 382 089

6.04

Parkinson’s disease

131 149

0.28

162 062

0.32

219 316

0.39

Multiple sclerosis

169 790

0.37

199 298

0.39

235 538

0.42

26 424 577

56.99

31 327 545

61.27

37 412 092

66.79
9.00

Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease

3 579 817

7.72

4 173 211

8.16

5 039 977

Neuroinfections

1 130 487

2.44

803 085

1.57

589 365

1.05

Nutritional and neuropathies

10 977 028

23.67

12 455 700

24.36

12 609 273

22.51

Neurological injuries

18 428 772

39.74

22 348 470

43.71

27 329 074

48.79

THE AMERICAS (HIGH CHILD, HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
Population

2005

2015

2030

77 739 657

90 194 020

106 740 220

Epilepsy

836 072

10.75

966 534

10.72

1 130 346

Alzheimer and other dementias

177 298

2.28

228 977

2.54

364 489

3.41

14 415

0.19

17 608

0.20

25 160

0.24

Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine

10.59

25 390

0.33

31 655

0.35

41 305

0.39

4 664 146

60.00

5 713 736

63.35

7 277 075

68.18
4.88

Cerebrovascular disease

295 893

3.81

373 202

4.14

521 080

Neuroinfections

222 767

2.87

178 873

1.98

133 484

1.25

Nutritional and neuropathies

1 747 300

22.48

2 006 469

22.25

2 049 464

19.20

Neurological injuries

2 451 434

31.53

3 055 072

33.87

4 002 293

37.50

SOUTH-EAST ASIA (LOW CHILD, LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
Population
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries

2005

2015

2030

308 761 163

336 961 332

364 048 380

1 716 803

5.56

1 869 945

5.55

2 030 893

750 947

2.43

1 109 965

3.29

1 758 876

5.58
4.83

83 755

0.27

101 189

0.30

127 726

0.35

115 420

0.37

133 396

0.40

155 365

0.43

12 452 696

40.33

14 276 937

42.37

16 357 388

44.93

1 753 574

5.68

2 069 695

6.14

2 577 753

7.08

603 533

1.95

489 621

1.45

414 406

1.14

23 486 575

76.07

19 023 347

56.46

15 013 037

41.24

6 360 357

20.60

7 562 330

22.44

9 000 303

24.72

SOUTH-EAST ASIA (HIGH CHILD, HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
Population

2005

2015

2030

1 352 957 715

1 525 318 552

1 718 832 463

Epilepsy

7 949 495

5.88

8 852 768

5.80

9 751 328

5.67

Alzheimer and other dementias

2 109 176

1.56

2 830 478

1.86

4 151 049

2.42

Parkinson’s disease

601 514

0.44

748 737

0.49

1 043 266

0.61

Multiple sclerosis

467 985

0.35

559 474

0.37

685 168

0.40
48.51

Migraine

58 123 761

42.96

68 872 969

45.15

83 386 832

Cerebrovascular disease

8 080 667

5.97

9 654 382

6.33

12 810 896

7.45

Neuroinfections

2 700 495

2.00

2 106 911

1.38

1 712 605

1.00

Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries

102 584 258

75.82

82 871 325

54.33

65 739 960

38.25

48 694 670

35.99

56 565 467

37.08

68 317 201

39.75

205

206

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
per
1 000

Number

per
1 000

Number

per
1 000

Number

EUROPE (VERY LOW CHILD, VERY LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
Population

2005

2015

2030

417 799 202

417 841 350

411 754 930

Epilepsy

2 145 979

5.14

2 161 029

5.17

2 158 279

5.24

Alzheimer and other dementias

5 362 157

12.83

6 611 650

15.82

8 053 138

19.56

Parkinson’s disease

1 365 849

3.27

1 512 916

3.62

1 614 797

3.92

259 275

0.62

262 457

0.63

254 097

0.62

53 492 555

128.03

54 275 528

129.90

53 586 117

130.14

6 278 185

15.03

6 116 704

14.64

5 887 278

14.30

530 651

1.27

472 683

1.13

438 486

1.06

6 659 295

15.94

7 554 085

18.08

7 564 726

18.37

3 856 936

9.23

3 670 108

8.78

3 290 918

7.99

Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries

EUROPE (LOW CHILD, LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
Population

2005

2015

2030

227 350 229

236 868 370

243 016 939

Epilepsy

955 206

4.20

995 872

4.20

1 023 780

4.21

Alzheimer and other dementias

987 308

4.34

1 233 107

5.21

1 558 168

6.41

Parkinson’s disease

250 849

1.10

275 108

1.16

319 164

1.31

91 104

0.40

98 909

0.42

107 864

0.44

11 127 627

48.94

12 009 067

50.70

12 923 428

53.18

2 909 121

12.80

3 011 979

12.72

3 314 164

13.64

Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries

288 785

1.27

258 413

1.09

239 714

0.99

5 806 482

25.54

5 018 573

21.19

4 397 770

18.10

4 654 920

20.47

4 931 436

20.82

5 161 201

21.24

EUROPE (LOW CHILD, HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
Population
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries

2005

2015

2030

235 511 792

206 753 120

175 407 940

986 267

4.19

874 450

4.23

749 294

1 385 473

5.88

1 558 787

7.54

1 650 510

4.27
9.41

338 403

1.44

305 100

1.48

270 942

1.54

110 444

0.47

98 774

0.48

86 042

0.49

12 519 404

53.16

11 380 891

55.05

9 993 768

56.97

5 578 425

23.69

4 899 001

23.69

4 094 427

23.34

214 736

0.91

189 090

0.91

176 088

1.00

7 706 356

32.72

5 309 161

25.68

3 544 585

20.21

8 121 815

34.49

7 053 326

34.11

5 848 082

33.34

EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN (LOW CHILD, LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
Population

2005

2015

2030

150 452 139

176 204 370

207 555 239

Epilepsy

612 616

4.07

713 756

4.05

833 149

4.01

Alzheimer and other dementias

207 025

1.38

284 456

1.61

488 949

2.36

Parkinson’s disease

52 892

0.35

66 868

0.38

105 629

0.51

Multiple sclerosis

50 491

0.34

63 382

0.36

83 451

0.40
32.57

Migraine

4 486 529

29.82

5 414 528

30.73

6 760 297

Cerebrovascular disease

758 271

5.04

963 285

5.47

1 381 731

6.66

Neuroinfections

187 741

1.25

140 870

0.80

111 484

0.54

Nutritional and neuropathies

4 325 183

28.75

4 648 624

26.38

5 094 358

24.54

Neurological injuries

5 661 387

37.63

6 874 140

39.01

8 985 853

43.29

annexes
per
1 000

Number

per
1 000

Number

per
1 000

Number

EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN (HIGH CHILD, HIGH ADULT MORTALITY)
Population

2005

2015

2030

388 102 585

488 304 210

638 188 559

2 307 484

5.95

2 905 715

5.95

3 780 009

Alzheimer and other dementias

433 980

1.12

599 142

1.23

949 710

1.49

Parkinson’s disease

153 850

0.40

187 726

0.38

260 147

0.41

Epilepsy

Multiple sclerosis
Migraine

5.92

118 755

0.31

154 093

0.32

220 508

0.35

12 122 159

31.23

15 724 788

32.20

22 272 136

34.90

Cerebrovascular disease

1 449 886

3.74

1 843 680

3.78

2 674 703

4.19

Neuroinfections

2 040 970

5.26

1 738 470

3.56

1 324 728

2.08

Nutritional and neuropathies

29 803 040

76.79

28 239 576

57.83

25 847 645

40.50

Neurological injuries

14 044 340

36.19

18 063 186

36.99

25 714 352

40.29

WESTERN PACIFIC (VERY LOW CHILD, VERY LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
Population
Epilepsy
Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological injuries

2005

2015

2030

156 684 271

154 795 439

145 921 920

868 123

5.54

865 621

5.59

826 117

5.66

2 184 654

13.94

2 996 308

19.36

3 794 924

26.01

511 384

3.26

603 106

3.90

626 385

4.29

72 700

0.46

72 033

0.47

67 012

0.46

11 547 332

73.70

11 488 613

74.22

10 715 929

73.44

3 792 785

24.21

3 667 047

23.69

3 178 620

21.78

257 304

1.64

245 428

1.59

237 127

1.63

3 347 308

21.36

3 552 062

22.95

3 333 547

22.84

1 491 604

9.52

1 495 519

9.66

1 342 770

9.20

WESTERN PACIFIC (LOW CHILD, LOW ADULT MORTALITY)
Population

2005

2015

2030

1 601 382 302

1 688 392 664

1 753 380 614

Epilepsy

6 228 270

3.89

6 555 079

3.88

6 860 667

3.91

Alzheimer and other dementias

5 426 580

3.39

7 137 446

4.23

11 115 873

6.34

Parkinson’s disease

516 744

0.32

611 552

0.36

809 814

0.46

Multiple sclerosis

653 867

0.41

722 028

0.43

789 406

0.45

Migraine

77 609 852

48.46

85 856 144

50.85

94 735 006

54.03

Cerebrovascular disease

20 082 517

12.54

22 689 633

13.44

26 362 316

15.04

2 683 663

1.68

1 937 664

1.15

1 554 271

0.89

Nutritional and neuropathies

73 492 056

45.89

59 098 014

35.00

47 589 533

27.14

Neurological injuries

28 279 787

17.66

30 348 487

17.97

33 048 410

18.85

Neuroinfections

207

208

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

Table A.4.8 Prevalence (per 1000) of neurological disorders, by cause and country
income category, projections for 2005, 2015 and 2030
Number

Population
Epilepsy

per
1 000

LOW INCOME
2005
2 698 990 297

per
1 000

Number

2015
3 157 941 695

Number

per
1 000

2030
3 786 445 271

18 767 673

6.95

22 219 076

7.04

26 963 317

7.12

Alzheimer and other dementias

4 187 247

1.55

5 519 844

1.75

7 941 472

2.10

Parkinson’s disease

1 026 261

0.38

1 236 644

0.39

1 679 946

0.44

861 399

0.32

1 050 073

0.33

1 356 892

0.36

Migraine

97 386 421

36.08

117 150 189

37.10

147 040 876

38.83

Cerebrovascular disease

14 233 869

5.27

16 804 274

5.32

22 324 143

5.90

Neuroinfections

12 219 114

4.53

11 095 507

3.51

9 461 215

2.50

229 490 905

85.03

206 778 850

65.48

181 940 616

48.05

90 262 196

33.44

109 630 501

34.72

143 849 509

37.99

Multiple sclerosis

Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological Injuries

Population
Epilepsy

LOWER MIDDLE INCOME
2005
2015
2 267 665 265
2 394 506 774

2030
2 504 674 883

10 651 319

4.70

11 308 222

4.72

11 942 124

4.77

Alzheimer and other dementias

7 498 331

3.31

9 730 403

4.06

14 587 111

5.82

Parkinson’s disease

1 016 623

0.45

1 134 671

0.47

1 399 970

0.56

905 993

0.40

997 151

0.42

1 101 687

0.44

104 870 967

46.25

115 096 758

48.07

126 818 106

50.63

27 616 112

12.18

30 176 588

12.60

33 975 321

13.56

3 822 412

1.69

2 835 263

1.18

2 262 956

0.90

Nutritional and neuropathies

89 556 278

39.49

73 313 524

30.62

60 403 913

24.12

Neurological Injuries

54 090 897

23.85

59 112 199

24.69

66 769 005

26.66

Multiple sclerosis
Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections

Population

UPPER MIDDLE
2005
528 081 304

2015
574 892 329

2030
622 970 241

Epilepsy

5 636 336

10.67

6 057 319

10.54

6 449 477

10.35

Alzheimer and other dementias

2 002 209

3.79

2 656 367

4.62

3 952 642

6.34

Parkinson’s disease

282 273

0.53

320 603

0.56

381 415

0.61

Multiple sclerosis

201 706

0.38

230 675

0.40

266 357

0.43

29 450 329

55.77

33 885 778

58.94

39 155 596

62.85

4 482 667

8.49

4 965 600

8.64

5 651 784

9.07

956 305

1.81

724 346

1.26

578 551

0.93

Migraine
Cerebrovascular disease
Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies

13 267 582

25.12

14 561 442

25.33

14 555 473

23.36

Neurological Injuries

16 551 721

31.34

19 589 370

34.07

23 272 762

37.36

Population
Epilepsy

HIGH INCOME
2005
947 138 427

2015
975 884 050

2030
1 002 892 462

4 836 322

5.11

4 983 733

5.11

5 148 237

5.13

10 758 768

11.36

13 412 189

13.74

17 535 293

17.48

2 898 718

3.06

3 275 732

3.36

3 775 357

3.76

523 272

0.55

545 176

0.56

554 231

0.55

Migraine

94 487 271

99.76

98 298 715

100.73

99 877 490

99.59

Cerebrovascular disease

15 204 544

16.05

15 265 253

15.64

14 874 570

14.83

1 171 502

1.24

1 059 129

1.09

987 315

0.98

20 177 668

21.30

27 082 158

27.75

28 466 544

28.38

9 476 767

10.01

9 294 786

9.52

8 836 820

8.81

Alzheimer and other dementias
Parkinson’s disease
Multiple sclerosis

Neuroinfections
Nutritional and neuropathies
Neurological Injuries

annexes

Annex 5

Organization

International
nongovernmental
organizations working in
neurological disorders

Contact details

Mission statement, scope of activity or purpose

International
Child Neurology
Association (ICNA)

Pediatric Neurology
University of Rome
Tor Vergata
P. le Umanesimo 10
144 Rome
Italy
tel: +39 335 834 89 21
fax:+39 06 941 14 63
e-mail: curatolo@uniroma2.it
web site: http://www.child-neuro.net

The general purpose of ICNA is:
■ to create a non-proﬁt association of child neurologists and
members of allied professions from all parts of the world dedicated
to promoting clinical and scientiﬁc research in the ﬁeld of child
neurology and encouraging the recognition of child neurologists’
competence and scope of practice;
■ to provide, at an international level, an outlet for interchange
of scientiﬁc and professional opinions for the beneﬁt and
advancement of the neurological sciences in infancy and childhood;
■ to establish international scientiﬁc meetings, international
cooperative studies, publications, translations, audio-visual
material and to encourage international exchange of teachers and
students in the ﬁeld of child neurology.

World Federation of
Neurology (WFN)

12 Chandos Street
London W1G 9DR
England
tel: +44 20 7323 4011
fax:+44 20 7323 4012
e-mail: WFNLondon@aol.com
web site: http://www.wfneurology.org

It is the purpose of WFN to improve human health worldwide by
promoting prevention and the care of persons with disorders of the
entire nervous system by:
■ fostering the best standards of neurological practice;
■ educating, in collaboration with neuroscience and other
international public and private organizations;
■ facilitating research through its Research Groups and other means.

European
Federation of
Neurological
Societies (EFNS)

EFNS Head Ofﬁce
Breite Gasse 4–8
1070 Vienna
Austria
tel: +43 1 889 05 03
fax: +43 1 889 05 03 13
e-mail: headofﬁce@efns.org
web site: http://www.efns.org

EFNS is an organization that unites and supports neurologists across
the whole of Europe. It aims:
to broaden the base of clinical neurology in Europe; raise public
awareness about the importance of the brain and its disorders;
to strengthen the standard, availability and uniformity of neurological
services in Europe;
to create and maintain continuing medical education guidelines and
accreditation; support and encourage European clinical neuroscience
research programmes;
to strengthen the standard, quantity and equality of pre-graduate and
postgraduate teaching and training;
to strengthen WFN, EU and WHO relations;
to strengthen collaboration with related professional and lay
organizations; organize European Neurology Congresses and
Neurological Teaching Courses;
to publish the European Journal of Neurology.

European
Neurology Societies
(ENS)

ENS Administrative Secretariat
c/o AKM Congress Service
P.O. Box
4005 Basel
Switzerland
tel: +41 61 686 77 77
fax: +41 61 686 77 88
e-mail: info@akm.ch
web site: http://www.ensinfo.com

The aims of ENS are to provide continuing education in all ﬁelds
of neurology, to create a scientiﬁc forum for the presentation of
original research work for all the neurologists, to guarantee a high
level of scientiﬁc standard, and to support the younger generation by
continuing promotions such as travel grants, fellowships stipends or
the new neurologist in training offer.

GENERAL

209

210

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
Organization

Contact details

Mission statement, scope of activity or purpose

64 Great Suffolk Street
London SE1 0BL
England
tel: +44 20 7981 0880
fax: +44 20 7928 2357
e-mail: info@alz.co.uk
web site: http://www.alz.co.uk/

ADI is the umbrella organization of Alzheimer associations around the
world. It aims to help establish and strengthen Alzheimer associations
throughout the world and to raise global awareness about Alzheimer’s
disease and all other causes of dementia.

International
Bureau for Epilepsy
(IBE)

International Bureau for Epilepsy
Unit 4 Hillview House
Bracken Road
Sandyford
Dublin 18
Ireland
tel: +353 1 293 4961
fax: +353 1 293 4963
e-mail: ibedublin@eircom.net
web site: http://www.ibe-epilepsy.org

IBE is an organization of lay persons and professionals interested in
the medical and non-medical aspects of epilepsy. It addresses such
social problems as education, employment, insurance, driving-licence
restrictions and public awareness. It provides assistance by offering
international support, by creating means for worldwide exchange of
information and, where possible, by setting standards that provide an
international policy focus and identity for all persons with epilepsy. IBE
works in close liaison with the International League against Epilepsy.

International
League Against
Epilepsy (ILAE)

204 avenue Marcel Thiry
1200 Brussels
Belgium
tel: + 32 (0) 2 774 9547
fax: + 32 (0) 2 774 9690
e-mail: dsartiux@ilae.org
web site: http://www.ilae-epilepsy.org

ILAE is the world’s pre-eminent association of physicians and other
health professionals working towards a world where no persons’ life is
limited by epilepsy. Its mission is to provide the highest quality of care
and wellbeing for those afﬂicted with the condition and other related
seizure disorders. The League aims to advance and disseminate
knowledge about epilepsy, to promote research, education and training
and to improve services and care for patients, especially by prevention,
diagnosis and treatment.

DEMENTIA
Alzheimer’s
Disease
International (ADI)

EPILEPSY

HEADACHE DISORDERS
International
Headache Society
(IHS)

c/o Grifﬁn Stone, Moscrop and Co.
41 Welbeck Street
London W1G 8EA
England
e-mail: info@i-h-s.org
web site: http:// www.i-h-s.org

A worldwide professional society, the mission of IHS is to work with
others to reduce the world burden of headache.
The web site includes all published guidelines and recommendations of
the IHS, and professional educational pages are planned.

World Headache
Alliance (WHA)

c/o Grifﬁn Stone, Moscrop and Co
41 Welbeck Street
London W1G 8EA
England
e-mail: info@w-h-a.org
web site: http://www.w-h-a.org

A worldwide lay alliance, WHA exists to relieve the suffering of people
affected by headache throughout the world, in particular by sharing
information among headache organizations and by increasing the
awareness and understanding of headache as a public health concern
with profound social and economic impact.
The web site includes a regularly updated source of detailed and
quality-controlled information on headache for the general public, with
many useful links.

European Headache
Federation (EHF)

c/o Kenes International
17 rue du Cendrier
PO Box 1726
1211 Geneva 1
Switzerland.
tel: +41 22 906 9154
fax: +41 22 732 2852
e-mail: info@ehf-org.org
web site: http://www.ehf-org.org

A European professional federation, EHF dedicates its efforts to
improving awareness among governments, health-care providers and
consumers across Europe of headache disorders and their personal
and socioeconomic impact.
Ultimately EHF seeks to create the optimal environment for headache
sufferers and their carers across all Europe, so that they have access
to appropriate treatment and therefore enjoy a better quality of life.

annexes
Organization

Contact details

Mission statement, scope of activity or purpose

Multiple Sclerosis
International
Federation (MSIF)

200 Union Street
London SE1 0LX
England
tel: +44 20 7620 1911
fax: +44 20 7620 1922
e-mail: info@msif.org
web site: http://www.msif.org

MSIF was established in 1967 as an international body linking the
activities of national multiple sclerosis societies around the world.
MSIF seeks to work in worldwide partnership with member societies
and the international scientiﬁc community to eliminate multiple
sclerosis and its consequences, and to speak out globally on behalf
of those affected by multiple sclerosis. MSIF works to achieve this
through the following key priorities:
international research;
development of new and existing societies;
exchange of information;
advocacy.

European Multiple
Sclerosis Platform
(EMSP)

144/8 rue Auguste Lambiotte
1030 Brussels
Belgium
tel: +32 2 305 80 12
fax: +32 2 305 80 11
e-mail: ms-in-europe@pandora.be
web site: http://www.ms-in-europe.com

The mission of EMSP is to exchange and disseminate information
relating to multiple sclerosis, considering all issues relevant to people
affected by it:
to encourage research of all kinds that is appropriate to multiple
sclerosis through recognized medical and other organizations;
to promote the development of joint action programmes with the
participation of national multiple sclerosis societies in Europe, aimed at
improving the quality of their activities and services;
to act as focal point for liaison with the institutions of the European
Union, the Council of Europe and other European organizations, in
order to study and propose measures to improve the autonomy of
handicapped persons and promote their full participation in society.

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS

PAIN ASSOCIATED WITH NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS
The International
Association for the
Study of Pain (IASP)

Queen Anne Avenue N, Suite 501
Seattle, WA 98109 – 4955
United States of America
tel: +1 206 283 0311
fax: +1 206 283 9403
e-mail: iaspdesk@iasp-pain.org
web site: http://www.iasp-pain.org

To foster and encourage research of pain mechanisms and pain
syndromes and to help improve the management of patients with acute
and chronic pain by bringing together basic scientists, physicians and
other health professionals of various disciplines and backgrounds who
have an interest in pain research and management.

The European
Federation of
IASP-Chapters
(EFIC)

Mrs Sarah Wheeler
Executive Ofﬁcer
Foukithidou 2
16343 Iliopoulis, Athens
Greece
tel: +30 210 992 6335
mobile: + 30 694 447 8978
fax: + 30 210 992 6382
e-mail: eﬁc@internet.gr
web site: http://www.eﬁc.org

To promote research, education, and the clinical management of pain,
to create a forum for European collaboration on pain issues and to
encourage communication at a European level between IASP Chapters,
and also with other bodies interested or involved in the ﬁelds of pain
research and therapy.

PARKINSON’S DISEASE
Asian and Paciﬁc
Parkinson’s
Association (APPA)

PO Box 12042
50766 Kuala Lumpur
Malaysia
tel: +603 2454648
fax: +603 2454649
e-mail.: appda@po.jaring.my

The objectives of APPA are:
to establish and operate projects rendering service to persons suffering
from Parkinson’s disease;
to encourage and promote research and other activities relating to the
prevention, diagnosis, causes and treatment of Parkinson’s disease;
to cooperate with all relevant public and private agencies in services
for persons suffering from Parkinson’s disease;
to collect, compile and disseminate information on causes, prevention,
research programmes and available aids to combat Parkinson’s
disease, and to carry on a vigorous general public education
programme within this ﬁeld;
generally to do what may be required to give effect and carry forward
the purposes of APPA without discriminating against any person or
organization because of race or religion.

European
Parkinson’s
Disease
Association (EPDA)

4 Golding Road
Sevenoaks
Kent TN13 3NJ
England
tel/fax: +44 17 3245 7683
e-mail: lizzie@epda.eu.com
web site: http://www.epda.eu.com

Formed in 1992, EPDA now has a membership of 36 European
organizations and eight associates. It is non-political, non-religious
and non-proﬁt making, concerned with the health and welfare of
people with Parkinson’s disease and their families. Collaboration
with European patient and neurological organizations, the European
Commission, WHO, WFN and the pharmaceutical industry has resulted
in the development of quality of life research projects, education
materials and multidisciplinary conferences.

211

212

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
Organization

Contact details

Mission statement, scope of activity or purpose

Dr Takenori Yamaguchi, Acting
President
National Cardiovascular Centre
5-7-1 Fujishirodai, Suita City
Osaka 565-8565
Japan
tel: +81 6 6833 5012
fax: +81 6 4863 7052
e-mail: tyamaguc@hsp.ncvc.go.jp
web site: http://www.
internationalstroke.org

The mission of ISS is to provide access to stroke care and to promote
research and teaching in this area that will improve the care of stroke
victims by:
promoting prevention and care of persons with stroke and/or dementia;
fostering the best standards of practice;
educating, in collaboration with other international, public and private
organizations;
facilitating clinical research.

STROKE
International Stroke
Society (ISS)

Dr Bo Norrving, Secretary
Department of Neurology
University Hospital
221 85 Lund
Sweden
tel: +46 4617 1466
fax: +46 4615 89 19
e-mail: bo.norrving@neurol.lu.se
TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURIES
World Federation
of Neurosurgical
Societies

5 rue du Marché
1260 Nyon
Switzerland
tel: +41 22 362 4303
tax: +41 22 362 4352
e-mail: janjoseph@wfns.ch
web site: http://www.wfns.org

To advance neurological surgery in all its aspects by facilitating the
personal association of neurosurgeons throughout the world; to aid in
the exchange and dissemination of knowledge and ideas in the ﬁeld of
neurosurgery; to encourage research and investigation in neurosurgery
and allied sciences.

index

Index
As all countries in the WHO Member States are included in Annex 1 (p. 183–4),
speciﬁc country references to the Annexes are not included in the index. A list
of abbreviations used in the text can be found in page xi of the preface.

acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin) 78, 134, 159
acquired immunodeﬁciency syndrome
(AIDS)
highly active antiretroviral therapy
(HAART) 97–8
HIV linked tuberculosis 100
mortality strata 31
neurological complications 96–7
neurological immune restoration
inﬂammatory syndrome (NIRIS) 97
progression 96
Toxoplasma encephalitis 104
acyclovir 99
African trypanosomiasis (sleeping sickness)
105–6
alcohol-related neurological disorders
120–1
alcohol-related epilepsy 121
alcohol-related polyneuropathy 121
fetal alcohol syndrome 120
Wernicke’s encephalopathy 115, 121
Alzheimer’s disease see dementia
Alzheimer’s Disease International (ADI) 210
American trypanosomiasis (Chagas
disease) 105
amitriptyline 79
Anopheles mosquito 104
anticholinesterase therapies, AD 47
antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) 57–8, 79
antiretroviral agents 97
apolipoprotein E (apoE ) e4 43
artemisinin 104
Asian and Paciﬁc Parkinson’s Association
(APPA) 211
aspirin see acetylsalicylic acid
ataxic polyneuropathy syndromes 119
Atlas of Country Resources for Neurological
Disorders, WHO/WFN 2, 147
Atlas of Epilepsy Care in the World 66

bacterial meningitis 101–2
conjugate meningococcal vaccine 102
Bangkok Charter for Health Promotion in a
Globalized World 10
BCG vaccination 101
behavioural and psychological symptoms of
dementia (BPSD) 42
benzimidazole 107
beri-beri 115
beta-blockers 79
“brain drain” problem 23
brain haemorrhage see stroke
brain ischaemia see stroke
Brazil
dementia case study 54
Trypanosoma control programme 105
burden of disease see global burden of
disease

cassava 119
causes and cause categories
death, attributable to neurological
disorders 198
disability-adjusted life year (DALY)
189–92, 193
global burden of disease 29–30, 186–8
neurological disorders 29–30
prevalence of neurological disorders 208
stroke 152
traumatic brain injury (TBI) 168
viral encephalitis 98
years of healthy life lost to disability
(YLD) 203
cerebral malaria 104
cerebrovascular disease, GBD sequelae and
case deﬁnitions 186
Chagas disease 105
children
developmental quotients vs nutrition 114
World Summit for Children 1990 117
cholinesterase inhibitors 46
chronic pain, signs and symptoms 132

clopidogrel 159
Clostridium tetani 102
cluster headaches 72, 73
follow-up and referral 80
therapeutic intervention 79
cobalamine (vitamin B12) deﬁciency 116
complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS)
129–30
computerized tomography (CT) 151
Controlled Medications Programmes 134
Costa Rica, traumatic brain injury
rehabilitation 170
country income groups 185
cretinism 116–17
Cuba, oral polio vaccine 99
cycle helmet, wearing see motorcycle
helmet, wearing
cystic hydatidosis (echinococcosis) 106–7
cysticercosis 103–4

data presentation 30–7
death, attributable to neurological disorders
30, 35
by cause 198
by country income category 198
projections 194–7, 198
rates 36
by region 194–7
delirium tremens 121
dementia
Alzheimer’s Disease International (ADI)
210
anticholinesterase therapies, AD 47
background 42–3
care delivery 49–50
case studies
Brazil 54
India 55
Nigeria 55
course and outcome 43–4
10/66 Dementia Research Group: key
ﬁndings 47
disability 45
epidemiology and burden 44–6

213

214

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
etiology and risk factors 42–3
GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions 186
public health framework 50
recommendations
general 52
World Health Report 2001 50–1
resources and prevention 47–9
stages 44
symptoms 42–3
treatment and care 46–7
developmental quotients vs nutrition,
children 114
diabetes mellitus, GBD sequelae and case
deﬁnitions 187
diphtheria, GBD sequelae and case
deﬁnitions 187
dipyridamole 159
disability 16
disability-adjusted life year (DALY) 9, 28
years of healthy life lost to disability (YLD)
27–8, 30
see also speciﬁc conditions
disability-adjusted life year (DALY) 9, 28,
30
by cause 189–92, 193
by income category 32, 193
malnutrition 111
neurological disorder groupings 31
occurrence rates 32–4
projections 32–3, 35, 189–92, 193
regional variation 34, 189–92
stroke 156
see also global burden of disease;
years of healthy life lost to disability
(YLD)
DisMod, mathematical model 27
domperidone 78
dopamine agonists 143
dopamine transporter imaging, (DATSPECT) 141
drowning, GBD sequelae and case
deﬁnitions 188

echinococcosis 106–7
Echinococcus
E. granulosus 106–7
E. multilocularis 106
E. oligarthrus 106
E. vogeli 106
education and training see training
epidemiology and burden 9
epilepsy
Atlas of Epilepsy Care in the World 66
background 56
burden 59–60
avertable 61–2
global 60
national 61
course and outcome 57–8
education and training programmes 64
etiology and risk factors 56–7
GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions 186
Global Campaign Against Epilepsy,
ILAE/IBE/WHO 65
incidence 58

International Bureau for Epilepsy (IBE)
210
International League Against Epilepsy
(ILAE) 210
mortality 59
prevalence 59
prevention 62–3
public health framework 65–6
recommendations 67
research 63–4
seizure types 57
threshold 56–7
treatment, rehabilitation and cost 62–3
equine encephalitis 99
ergotamine tartrate 78
European Epileptology Certiﬁcation 64
European Federation of IASP-Chapters
(EFIC) 211
European Federation of Neurological
Societies (EFNS) 209
European Headache Federation (EHF) 210
European Multiple Sclerosis Platform
(EMSP) 211
European Neurology Societies (ENS) 209
European Parkinson’s Disease Association
(EPDA) 146, 211
Expanded Disability Status Scale 91

falls, GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions
187
fetal alcohol syndrome 120
ﬁres, GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions
187
folate deﬁciency 115–16
food compounds, toxic 114

Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), brain injury
165
Glasgow Outcome Scale, brain injury
disability 167
global burden of disease
cause categories 29–30, 186–8
data presentation 30
GBD 1990 27–8
GBD 2000 28
GBD 2002 28
Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study 1,
9, 27–9, 111
malnutrition 111
methodology 30
projections 28–9, 189–92
sequelae 186–8
see also disability-adjusted life year
(DALY); years of healthy life lost to
disability (YLD)
Global Campaign Against Epilepsy (ILAE/
IBE/WHO) 65–6
Global Polio Eradication Initiative, WHO 99
Glossina spp. 105
goitre 116–17

Haemophilus inﬂuenzae type B 102
Harvard School of Public Health 1, 9, 27
headache disorders
background 70–1, 130
barriers to care 75–6
classiﬁcation 72
diagnosis 76–7
epidemiology and burden 74–5
European Headache Federation (EHF)
10
follow-up and referral 80
health-care policy 80–1
International Headache Society (IHS) 210
‘Lifting the Burden’ campaign, WHO 81
management 77–8
over-diagnosis 74
population-based epidemiological
studies 71
primary 70, 72, 73–4
recommendations 82
research 81
secondary 70, 72, 74
therapeutic interventions 78–80
trigger factors 77–8
World Headache Alliance (WHA) 210
see also speciﬁc headache types
health, deﬁnition 8
health promotion
deﬁnition 9–10
nature and scope 10
hemispherectomy 58
hemispherotomy 58
herpes simplex encephalitis (HSE) 98–9
high-density lipoprotein (HDL) 152
highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART)
97–8
hippocampal sclerosis 57
historical perspective 1–3
human immunodeﬁciency virus (HIV) see
acquired immunodeﬁciency syndrome
(AIDS)
human T-lymphotropic virus type I
(HTLV–I), HTLV-I associated myelopathy
120
hydatidosis 106–7
hypothyroidism 117

ibuprofen 78, 134
income categories 31, 185
India, dementia case study 55
injuries, GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions
self-inﬂicted 188
unintentional 188
International Association for the Study of
Pain (IASP) 211
International Bureau for Epilepsy (IBE) 65,
210
International Child Neurology Association
(ICNA) 209
International Classiﬁcation of Functioning,
Disability and Health (ICF) 16
International Headache Society (IHS) 210

index
International League Against Epilepsy
(ILAE) 64, 210
European Epilepsy Academy (EUREPA)
64
Global Campaign Against Epilepsy
(ILAE/IBE/WHO) 65–6
international nongovernmental
organizations (NGOs) 209–12
International Stroke Society (ISS) 212
iodine deﬁciency disorders 116–17
GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions 187
iron deﬁciency
anaemia 117–18
gross domestic product (GDP) loss 119

Japanese encephalitis 98–9
GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions 187

K
L

konzo 120

Lathyrus sativus 119–20
Lennox-Gastaut syndrome 58
leprosy neuropathy 101
GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions 187
multidrug therapy (MDT) 101
levodopa 143–4
lithium therapy 80

macronutrient deﬁciency 112
magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) 151
malaria 104
GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions 187
malnutrition-related neurological disorders
background 111
developmental quotients vs nutrition,
children 114
etiology, risk factors and burden 111–12
GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions 187
long-term effects 112
macronutrient deﬁciency 112
micronutrient deﬁciencies 114–18
iodine deﬁciency disorders 116–17
iron deﬁciency anaemia 117–18
selenium deﬁciency 118
vitamin A deﬁciency 114–15
vitamin B complex deﬁciencies
115–16
zinc deﬁciency 118
nutrient deﬁciency 112
prevention 121–3
public health framework 123
recommendations 124
severe malnutrition, treatment of 112–13
toxic food compounds 112
see also toxiconutritional disorders
McDonald criteria, MS 85–6
McGill Pain Questionnaire, Short-Form 130

medication-overuse headache 72, 73–4
follow-up and referral 80
therapeutic intervention 79
megaloblastic anaemia 115–16
meningitis 101–2
GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions 187
meningococcal disease 102
methysergide 79
metoclopramide 78
micronutrient deﬁciencies 114–18
iodine deﬁciency disorders 116–17
iron deﬁciency anaemia 117–18
selenium deﬁciency 118
vitamin A deﬁciency 114–15
vitamin B complex deﬁciencies 115–16
zinc deﬁciency 118
migraine
etiology and symptoms 72
follow-up and referral 80
GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions 186
menstruation-related 79
population-based epidemiological
studies 70
therapeutic intervention 78–9
YLD 75
see also headache disorders
Monitoring Trends and Determinants in
Cardiovascular Disease (MONICA) 155
mortality
acquired immunodeﬁciency syndrome
(AIDS) 31
death, attributable to neurological
disorders 194–7
epilepsy 59
premature mortality 27–8
prevalence of neurological disorders
204–7
regional variation 183–4
stroke 156–7
traumatic brain injury (TBI) 166–7
years of healthy life lost to disability
(YLD) 199–202
mortality strata 31, 183
by WHO region 183–4
see also deaths
motorcycle helmet, wearing 11, 12
multiple sclerosis (MS)
autoimmune nature 85
benign MS 87
childhood MS 88–9
diagnosis and classiﬁcation 85
etiology and risk factors 87–8
European Code of Good Practice 90
European Multiple Sclerosis Platform
(EMSP) 211
GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions 186
global and regional distribution 88
impacts 89–90
McDonald criteria 85–6
Multiple Sclerosis International
Federation (MSIF) 91, 211
neurorehabilitation 90–1
prevention and treatment 90
primary progressive MS 87
prognostic factors 87
progression patterns 86
quality of life issues 92

relapsing/remitting MS 86
research 92–3
secondary progressive MS 87
training 93
Multiple Sclerosis International Federation
(MSIF) 91, 211
muscle rigidity pain 129
mycobacterial and other bacterial diseases
100–2
see also speciﬁc diseases
Mycobacterium leprae 101

National Institute for Clinical Excellence 91
Neisseria meningitidis 102
neurocysticercosis 103–4
neuroinfections 95–108
see also speciﬁc disorders
neuroleptics 46
neurological disorders
cause categories 29–30
international nongovernmental
organizations (NGOs) 209–12
neurological immune restoration
inﬂammatory syndrome (NIRIS) 97
neuropathic pain 127, 128–9
niacin (vitamin B3) deﬁciency 115
Nigeria, dementia case study 55
nociceptive pain 127
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs),
international 209–12
non-steroidal anti-inﬂammatory (NSAID)
drugs 134

Obasanjo, Olusegun (President of Nigeria)
123
opioids 134
beta-N-oxalylamino-L-alanine 119
oxamniquine 106
Oxfordshire Community Stroke Project
classiﬁcation 152

pain associated with neurological disorders
chronic pain, signs and symptoms 132
complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS)
129–30
Controlled Medications Programmes 134
disability and burden 133
European Federation of IASP-Chapters
(EFIC) 211
European Parkinson’s Disease
Association (EPDA) 211
headache and facial pain 130
International Association for the Study of
Pain (IASP) 211
management 134–6
muscle rigidity pain 129
neuropathic pain 127, 128–9
nociceptive pain 127
public health framework 131–3
recommendations 137

215

216

Neurological disorders: public health challenges
research 136
treatment services 133–6
deﬁnitions 135
delivery 135–6
specialist training 136
types 128–30
paracetamol 134
parasitic diseases 103–8
implications 107
prevention 107
recommendations 108
see also speciﬁc diseases
Parkinson’s disease (PD)
Asian and Paciﬁc Parkinson’s
Association (APPA) 211
burden on patients, families and
communities 142–3
care 146
Charter for People with Parkinson’s
Disease 146
course and outcome 142
diagnosis 140–1
epidemiology 141–2
etiology and risk factors 141
GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions 186
prevention 144–5
progression 145
recommendations 148
research 147
training 147–8
treatment and management 143–4
Parkinson’s Disease Society in the United
Kingdom 140–1
pellagra 115
pertussis, GBD sequelae and case
deﬁnitions 187
Plasmodium falciparum 104
point prevalence 30
poisonings, GBD sequelae and case
deﬁnitions 187
poliomyelitis
GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions 187
Global Polio Eradication Initiative 99
National Immunization Days 99–100
spread 99
positron emission tomography (PET) 151
ﬂuorodopa PET (FDOPA-PET) 141
post-herpetic neuralgia 134
praziquantel 106, 107
premature mortality
years of life lost (YLL) 27–8
prevalence of neurological disorders
by cause 208
by income category 208
projections 204–7, 208
by region 204–7
preventive strategies
health policy 12–14
interventions 12
mass approaches 11–12
primary 10, 11, 14–16
secondary 10, 11, 14–16
tertiary 10, 11, 16
see also service provision
public health
core functions 23
framework evidence base 177–9

burden 177–8
cost-effective interventions 178
prevention and treatment 178–9
resources 179
stigma and discrimination 178
goals 8
principles 7–9
socioeconomic factors 8, 28–9
pyridoxine (vitamin B6) deﬁciency 115

Q
R

quinine 104

rabies 100
recommendations for action 179–82
decision-makers commitment 180
links to other sectors 182
national and international collaboration
181–2
neurological care 181
priorities for research 182
public and professional awareness 180
rehabilitation 181
stigma and discrimination 180
regional variation
death, attributable to neurological
disorders 194–7
disability-adjusted life year (DALY) 34,
189–92
mortality strata 183–4
multiple sclerosis 88
prevalence of neurological disorders
204–7
traumatic brain injury 168
years of healthy life lost to disability
(YLD) 199–202
rehabilitation
case-studies
Giovanni 18
Juan 19
costs 19–20
deﬁnition 16–17
neurological disorders 18–19
Rehab-CYCLE 17–18
strategy 17–18
risk assessment 11–12
CVD Risk Management Package, WHO
12, 13
road trafﬁc accidents
GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions 187
motorcycle helmet, wearing 11, 12
prevention 171–2
Rotary International 99

salt iodization 117
Schistosoma
S. haematobium 106
S. intercalatum 106
S. japonicum 106
S. mansoni 106
S. mekongi 106

schistosomiasis 106
secondary headaches, serious 74
therapeutic intervention 80
secondary progressive MS 87
selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI)
antidepressants 46–7
selenium deﬁciency 118
service provision
delivery of care 15–16
health systems 14–15
see also preventive strategies
single photon emission tomography
(SPECT) 151
dopamine transporter imaging, (DATSPECT) 141
sleeping sickness 105–6
spasticity pain 129
stigma
characteristics 21
deﬁnition 20
dimensions of 20
Strachan’s syndrome 119
Streptococcus pneumoniae 102
stroke
causes 152
costs 152
course and outcome 153–4
diagnosis and classiﬁcation 151
frequency, different populations 156
haemorrhagic 151
health-care services 160
in developing countries 160–1
incidence 154, 155
International Stroke Society (ISS) 212
ischaemic, causes 152
mortality, disability and burden 156–7
Oxfordshire Community Stroke Project
classiﬁcation 152
recommendations 162
rehabilitation 159
research 161
risk factors and prevention strategies
152–3
secondary prevention strategies 159–60
subtypes, proportional frequency 156
treatment and management 157–8
in resource-poor countries 158
studies, trials and surveys
10/66 Dementia Research Group,
caregiver pilot study 47
EUROCARE study 49
Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study 1,
9, 27–9, 111
National Head and Spinal Cord Injury
Survey 19
Stroke Unit Trialist’s Collaboration 157
Survey of Country Resources for
Neurological Disorders 2
sub-Saharan Africa
meningitis belt 102
sleeping sickness risk 105
syphilis, GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions
187

index

Taenia solium 103–4
Tanzania see United Republic of Tanzania
tension-type headache 72, 73
follow-up and referral 80
therapeutic intervention 79
tetanus 102–3
GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions 186
neonatal 102
thiamine (vitamin B1) deﬁciency 115
toxic food compounds 114
toxic optic neuropathy 120
toxiconutritional disorders
alcohol-related neurological disorders
120
ataxic polyneuropathy syndromes 119
background 118–19
spastic paraparesis syndromes 119–20
toxic food compounds 114
toxic optic neuropathy 120
see also malnutrition-related
neurological disorders
Toxoplasma gondii 104–5
toxoplasmosis 104–5
AIDS-related encephalitis 104
training
physicians 22–3
primary care providers 22
traumatic brain injury (TBI)
acute management 169–70
causes, regional variation 168
costs 171
deﬁnition and outcome 164–5
diagnosis and classiﬁcation 165
Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) 165
triage 165
disability 167
Glasgow Outcome Scale 167
education 172–3
etiology and risk factors 168
incidence 166
mortality rates 166–7
prevalence 166
prevention of road trafﬁc accidents
171–2
recommendations 173
recovery 167
rehabilitation 170
case-study 171
research 173
World Federation of Neurosurgical
Societies 212
tricyclic antidepressants 46
trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias 73
triptans 78
tropical myeloneuropathies see
toxiconutritional disorders
tropical spastic paraparesis 120
Trypanosoma
T. brucei gambiense 105
T. brucei rhodesiense 105
T. cruzi 105
trypanosomiasis
African (sleeping sickness) 105–6
American (Chagas disease) 105
tsetse ﬂies (Glossina spp.) 105

tuberculosis
BCG vaccination 101
HIV link 100
international control strategy (DOTS) 101
International Standards for Tuberculosis
Care 101
meningeal tuberculosis 100–1

United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) 99
United Nations Educational, Scientiﬁc and
Cultural Organization (UNESCO) 64
United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)
103
United Republic of Tanzania
AIDS intensive prevention programmes
98
United States Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC) 99

vascular dementia (VaD) see dementia
vidarabine 99
violence, GBD sequelae and case
deﬁnitions 188
viral diseases 96–100
see also speciﬁc diseases
viral encephalitis
causes 98
prevention 99
symptoms and sequelae 99
vitamin A deﬁciency 114–15
vitamin B complex deﬁciencies 115–16
folate 115–16
vitamin B1 (thiamine) 115
vitamin B3 (niacin) 115
vitamin B6 (pyridoxine) 115
vitamin B12 (cobalamine) 116
vitamin C 118

war, GBD sequelae and case deﬁnitions
188
Wernicke’s encephalopathy
alcohol-related 121
vitamin B1 deﬁciency 115
West Nile virus 99
West syndrome 58
World Bank 1, 9, 27, 33, 35–7, 64
country income groups 185
World Federation of Neurology (WFN) 2,
209
World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies
212
World Headache Alliance (WHA) 81, 210
World Health Organization (WHO)
Access to Controlled Medications
Programme 134
Atlas of Country Resources for
Neurological Disorders 2, 147
Charter for People with Parkinson’s
Disease 146
CVD Risk Management Package 12, 13

Expanded Programme on Immunization
(EPI) 101
Global Campaign to Reduce the Burden
of Headache Worldwide 81
Global Polio Eradication Initiative 99
leprosy multidrug therapy (MDT) 101
Member States 183–4
Monitoring Trends and Determinants in
Cardiovascular Disease (MONICA) 155
regions 31
responsibilities 1–2
Stop TB campaign 101
Working Group on Parkinson’s Disease
146
World Health Report 2000 14
World Summit for Children 1990 117

years of healthy life lost to disability (YLD)
27–8, 30
by cause 203
estimates 36–7
by income category 37, 203
by mortality stratum 199–202
neurological disorder groupings 31
projections 199–202, 203
by region 199–202
see also disability-adjusted life year
(DALY); global burden of disease

zinc deﬁciency 118

217

218

Neurological disorders: public health challenges

Source Exif Data:

File Type                       : PDF
File Type Extension             : pdf
MIME Type                       : application/pdf
PDF Version                     : 1.6
Linearized                      : No
Page Count                      : 232
Has XFA                         : No
XMP Toolkit                     : XMP toolkit 2.9.1-13, framework 1.6
About                           : uuid:5c1542c9-5a31-41c1-8fc7-f2dbd10ad62a
Producer                        : Creo Normalizer JTP
Modify Date                     : 2007:02:27 18:02:13+01:00
Create Date                     : 2007:02:20 13:51:02+01:00
Metadata Date                   : 2007:02:27 18:02:13+01:00
Creator Tool                    : Adobe Acrobat 7.0
Document ID                     : uuid:f8403a16-af4b-4588-be07-fd7006444422
Instance ID                     : uuid:0844eb97-4951-42b3-aeb3-eaf6b2189810
Format                          : application/pdf
Creator                         : Adobe Acrobat 7.0

EXIF Metadata provided by EXIF.tools

Organisation Mondiale De La Santé Neurological Disorders Report Web

Navigation menu

Versions of this User Manual:

Views

Navigation