Morbidity Data

Understanding the course of a fatal disease can broaden our understanding of morbidity rates. A disease can demonstrate numerous symptoms throughout its course, some of which can make it difficult to diagnose the illness. Brain tumors can appear to be headaches in the beginning stages. Being able to identify the disease in its early stages would increase our accuracy in identifying morbidity. Morbidity data can be gathered from numerous sources. “Our study has demonstrated that morbidity data collected by GPs in active data collection methods, as described in the AMTS, provide a reliable overview of the morbidity managed in general practice” (Britt, 1998 pgs 54-55). These sources include hospitals, doctors and thorough research studies. Morbidity can also be measured through incidence and prevalence statistics. As incidence statistics can indicate the chances of an individual getting a disease morbidity data can be gathered through determining what kinds of traits are needed for an individual to get a disease. Smokers may be more likely to get lung cancer and disease than other individuals.  Prevalence statistics can determine the chances of getting a disease within a population which can also contribute to morbidity data as it can demonstrate which individuals have a higher likelihood of getting a disease. Individuals who live near highways may be more likely to get asthma. The gathering of morbidity data can be improved by increasing the data that is gathered from hospitals. This could be developed through a national data gathering system.

Screening tools such as breast cancer screenings can be used to detect diseases in the early stages. Self-checks and mammograms are utilized in these screenings to detect any possible abnormalities that could result in breast cancer.  The advantages of breast cancer screenings are that deadly disease can be detected early on which would promote environmental changes and save the lives of many women. “Fair-quality, relatively consistent evidence suggests that mammography screening reduces breast cancer death among women 40 to 74 years of age” (Humphrey, 2002 pg 360). However, a disadvantage of mammograms could be that the screening is not as effective as it can be and the costs of the procedure may not be worth it. Diagnostic tools, on the other hand, are utilized after the disease to determine the course of the disease. Diagnostic testing can be beneficial for determining the best treatment for the disease. However, the testing can be too late to be effective as the disease may have advanced too far. The blend of screening and diagnostic tools would be beneficial in saving lives. This could be done by incorporating diagnostic measures within screening tools so that individuals who are screened can be diagnosed right away. The pros of how many lives are saved cannot be compared to any cons.

References

Britt, H., Angelis, M., & Harris, E. (1998). The reliability and validity of doctor-recorded 

morbidity data in active data collection systems. Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 16(1), 50-55.

Humphrey, L. L., Helfand, M., Chan, B. K., & Woolf, S. H. (2002). Breast cancer screening: a 

summary of the evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Annals of internal medicine, 137(5_Part_1), 347-360.