Practical Class Instructions:
This document contains four interactive scenarios designed for group work in epidemiology and public health workshops. Each group will analyze a specific case study to calculate burden of disease indicators, evaluate health-related quality of life, and debate the social and ethical implications of health resource allocation.
Reference Material
This assignment is based on the reading material: The Burden of Disease: Concepts, Measurement, and the Bulgarian Context. All calculations and interpretations must reference the definitions and metrics established in this text.
General Instructions for Students
Each group will independently solve a distinct burden of disease problem. Your task is to:
- Perform the Calculations: Calculate the requested metrics (YLL, YLD, DALY, QALY) using the provided data and formulas. Show your working.
- Evaluate the Public Health Impact: Interpret what the numbers mean for the affected community and the healthcare system.
- Participate in the “Battle” Presentation: Prepare a brief defense of your position on the assigned “Battle Point” for a class-wide debate.
Scenario 1: The Pediatric Outbreak (YLL & YLD Focus)
The Context: In the region of Equatoria, an outbreak of a vaccine-preventable paralytic disease occurs among children under age five. Local health officials need to present the “social cost” of this outbreak to justify an emergency mass-immunization budget.
The Data:
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Total Cases | 600 children |
| Deaths | 40 children (Avg. age: 2 years) |
| Survivors with Permanent Paralysis | 560 children |
| Disability Duration | 60 years |
| Disability Weight (DW) | 0.25 (25% disabled) |
| Standard Life Expectancy at age 2 | 80 years |
Your Task:
- Calculate YLL (Years of Life Lost): \(Deaths \times (Life Expectancy - Age at Death)\).
- Calculate YLD (Years Lived with Disability): \(Cases \times Duration \times Disability Weight\).
- Calculate Total DALYs (Disability-Adjusted Life Years): Sum of YLL and YLD.
Discussion Hints & “Battle” Points:
- The Weight of the Young: Discuss why infectious diseases in children often generate significantly more DALYs than chronic diseases in the elderly. Consider the “life unlived” component.
- Battle Point: One group argues that YLL (death) is the only “true” loss, while another argues that YLD (disability) is a heavier social burden because it requires lifelong healthcare and social support.
- Guidance: Use the “Health Gap” concept to defend your position—how far does the reality fall from the ideal of full biological potential?
Scenario 2: The Chronic Heart Initiative (DALY & HRQL Focus)
The Context: A high-income nation is comparing two districts. District A has high rates of Ischemic Heart Disease (IHD), while District B has high rates of Depressive Disorders. The Ministry of Health can only fund one major screening program.
The Data:
| District | Primary Condition | Mortality (Deaths/Year) | Survival Context |
|---|---|---|---|
| District A | Ischemic Heart Disease | 500 | Survivors have high HRQL scores (0.85 on SF-36) |
| District B | Depressive Disorders | 10 (Suicides) | 2,000 people live with “Severe Depression” (DW = 0.65) |
Your Task:
- Interpret the Burden: Based on the data, identify which district likely carries more YLLs and which carries more YLDs.
- Mortality vs. DALY: Explain why conditions like IHD, which often cause high mortality in older populations, might account for a higher percentage of total deaths than of total YLL.
- HRQL Assessment: Review the SF-36 concepts (vitality, social functioning, mental health). Describe how a patient with IHD might score differently across these domains compared to a patient with severe depression.
Discussion Hints & “Battle” Points:
- The Mortality Bias: Discuss why traditional “death rates” would strongly favor funding District A, while DALY metrics might shift the focus toward the chronic suffering in District B.
- Battle Point: Argue whether “Quality of Life” is too subjective to be used in national budget allocations.
- Guidance: Should we rely solely on expert-derived disability weights (used in DALY) or on patient-reported outcomes (used in HRQL tools like SF-36)? Which is more “democratic”?
Scenario 3: Choosing the Treatment (QALY & Utility Focus)
The Context: A hospital board must decide between two treatments for a chronic condition. Treatment X is a surgery that provides an immediate return to full health but carries a 5% mortality risk. Treatment Y is a safe long-term medication that leaves the patient in a suboptimal health state.
The Data:
| Treatment | Expected Outcome | Utility Elicitation (TTO Method) | Cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment X | 10 years of “Perfect Health” | Utility (Q) = 1.0 | $50,000 |
| Treatment Y | 12 years of “Suboptimal State” | Indifferent between 12y with condition vs 6y perfect | $20,000 |
Your Task:
- Calculate the Utility Value (Q): Use the Time Trade-Off results: \(Years_{Perfect} / Years_{Condition}\).
- Calculate QALYs (Quality-Adjusted Life Years): Multiply Expected Years of Life by the Utility Value (Q).
- Cost-Utility Analysis: Calculate the Average Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ACER) per QALY for both treatments. (\(Cost / QALYs\)).
Discussion Hints & “Battle” Points:
- Extra-Welfarism: Discuss the Extra-welfarist approach. How does this view differ from simply maximizing individual happiness?
- Battle Point: One group defends Treatment X because it provides a higher number of QALYs on average. The other group attacks it on the grounds of Equity and Ethics, arguing that the 5% mortality risk is unacceptable even if the mathematical average is superior.
- Guidance: If the patient dies during surgery, they get 0 QALYs. Is “Expected Value” a fair way to treat individual human lives?
Evaluation Criteria:
- Mathematical Accuracy (40%): Correct application of YLL, YLD, DALY, and QALY formulas.
- Public Health Interpretation (30%): Clear explanation of the difference between mortality-only measures and burden-of-disease measures.
- Critical Synthesis (20%): Depth of engagement with the “Battle Points” and ethical dilemmas.
- Professional Communication (10%): Clarity of the group’s presentation during the class debate.