Sex-stratified genome-wide association study of multisite chronic pain in UK Biobank.

Chronic pain is highly prevalent worldwide and imparts a significant socioeconomic and public health burden. Factors influencing susceptibility to, and mechanisms of, chronic pain development, are not fully understood, but sex is thought to play a significant role, and chronic pain is more prevalent in women than in men. To investigate sex differences in chronic pain, we carried out a sex-stratified genome-wide association study of Multisite Chronic Pain (MCP), a derived chronic pain phenotype, in UK Biobank on 178,556 men and 209,093 women, as well as investigating sex-specific genetic correlations with a range of psychiatric, autoimmune and anthropometric phenotypes and the relationship between sex-specific polygenic risk scores for MCP and chronic widespread pain. We also assessed whether MCP-associated genes showed expression pattern enrichment across tissues. A total of 123 SNPs at five independent loci were significantly associated with MCP in men. In women, a total of 286 genome-wide significant SNPs at ten independent loci were discovered. Meta-analysis of sex-stratified GWAS outputs revealed a further 87 independent associated SNPs. Gene-level analyses revealed sex-specific MCP associations, with 31 genes significantly associated in females, 37 genes associated in males, and a single gene, DCC, associated in both sexes. We found evidence for sex-specific pleiotropy and risk for MCP was found to be associated with chronic widespread pain in a sex-differential manner. Male and female MCP were highly genetically correlated, but at an rg of significantly less than 1 (0.92). All 37 male MCP-associated genes and all but one of 31 female MCP-associated genes were found to be expressed in the dorsal root ganglion, and there was a degree of enrichment for expression in sex-specific tissues. Overall, the findings indicate that sex differences in chronic pain exist at the SNP, gene and transcript abundance level, and highlight possible sex-specific pleiotropy for MCP. Results support the proposition of a strong central nervous-system component to chronic pain in both sexes, additionally highlighting a potential role for the DRG and nociception.

Personalised lung cancer risk stratification and lung cancer screening: do general practice electronic medical records have a role?

BACKGROUND: In the United Kingdom (UK), cancer screening invitations are based on general practice (GP) registrations. We hypothesize that GP electronic medical records (EMR) can be utilised to calculate a lung cancer risk score with good accuracy/clinical utility. METHODS: The development cohort was Secure Anonymised Information Linkage-SAIL (2.3 million GP EMR) and the validation cohort was UK Biobank-UKB (N = 211,597 with GP-EMR availability). Fast backward method was applied for variable selection and area under the curve (AUC) evaluated discrimination. RESULTS: Age 55-75 were included (SAIL: N = 574,196; UKB: N = 137,918). Six-year lung cancer incidence was 1.1% (6430) in SAIL and 0.48% (656) in UKB. The final model included 17/56 variables in SAIL for the EMR-derived score: age, sex, socioeconomic status, smoking status, family history, body mass index (BMI), BMI:smoking interaction, alcohol misuse, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary heart disease, dementia, hypertension, painful condition, stroke, peripheral vascular disease and history of previous cancer and previous pneumonia. The GP-EMR-derived score had AUC of 80.4% in SAIL and 74.4% in UKB and outperformed ever-smoked criteria (currently the first step in UK lung cancer screening pilots). DISCUSSION: A GP-EMR-derived score may have a role in UK lung cancer screening by accurately targeting high-risk individuals without requiring patient contact.

Social connection and mortality in UK Biobank: a prospective cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Components of social connection are associated with mortality, but research examining their independent and combined effects in the same dataset is lacking. This study aimed to examine the independent and combined associations between functional and structural components of social connection and mortality. METHODS: Analysis of 458,146 participants with full data from the UK Biobank cohort linked to mortality registers. Social connection was assessed using two functional (frequency of ability to confide in someone close and often feeling lonely) and three structural (frequency of friends/family visits, weekly group activities, and living alone) component measures. Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine the associations with all-cause and cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality. RESULTS: Over a median of 12.6 years (IQR 11.9-13.3) follow-up, 33,135 (7.2%) participants died, including 5112 (1.1%) CVD deaths. All social connection measures were independently associated with both outcomes. Friends/family visit frequencies < monthly were associated with a higher risk of mortality indicating a threshold effect. There were interactions between living alone and friends/family visits and between living alone and weekly group activity. For example, compared with daily friends/family visits-not living alone, there was higher all-cause mortality for daily visits-living alone (HR 1.19 [95% CI 1.12-1.26]), for never having visits-not living alone (1.33 [1.22-1.46]), and for never having visits-living alone (1.77 [1.61-1.95]). Never having friends/family visits whilst living alone potentially counteracted benefits from other components as mortality risks were highest for those reporting both never having visits and living alone regardless of weekly group activity or functional components. When all measures were combined into overall functional and structural components, there was an interaction between components: compared with participants defined as not isolated by both components, those considered isolated by both components had higher CVD mortality (HR 1.63 [1.51-1.76]) than each component alone (functional isolation 1.17 [1.06-1.29]; structural isolation 1.27 [1.18-1.36]). CONCLUSIONS: This work suggests (1) a potential threshold effect for friends/family visits, (2) that those who live alone with additional concurrent markers of structural isolation may represent a high-risk population, (3) that beneficial associations for some types of social connection might not be felt when other types of social connection are absent, and (4) considering both functional and structural components of social connection may help to identify the most isolated in society.

Associations between multimorbidity and adverse health outcomes in UK Biobank and the SAIL Databank: A comparison of longitudinal cohort studies.

BACKGROUND: Cohorts such as UK Biobank are increasingly used to study multimorbidity; however, there are concerns that lack of representativeness may lead to biased results. This study aims to compare associations between multimorbidity and adverse health outcomes in UK Biobank and a nationally representative sample. METHODS AND FINDINGS: These are observational analyses of cohorts identified from linked routine healthcare data from UK Biobank participants (n = 211,597 from England, Scotland, and Wales with linked primary care data, age 40 to 70, mean age 56.5 years, 54.6% women, baseline assessment 2006 to 2010) and from the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) databank (n = 852,055 from Wales, age 40 to 70, mean age 54.2, 50.0% women, baseline January 2011). Multimorbidity (n = 40 long-term conditions [LTCs]) was identified from primary care Read codes and quantified using a simple count and a weighted score. Individual LTCs and LTC combinations were also assessed. Associations with all-cause mortality, unscheduled hospitalisation, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) were assessed using Weibull or negative binomial models adjusted for age, sex, and socioeconomic status, over 7.5 years follow-up for both datasets. Multimorbidity was less common in UK Biobank than SAIL (26.9% and 33.0% with ≥2 LTCs in UK Biobank and SAIL, respectively). This difference was attenuated, but persisted, after standardising by age, sex, and socioeconomic status. The association between increasing multimorbidity count and mortality, hospitalisation, and MACE was similar between both datasets at LTC counts of ≤3; however, above this level, UK Biobank underestimated the risk associated with multimorbidity (e.g., mortality hazard ratio for 2 LTCs 1.62 (95% confidence interval 1.57 to 1.68) in SAIL and 1.51 (1.43 to 1.59) in UK Biobank, hazard ratio for 5 LTCs was 3.46 (3.31 to 3.61) in SAIL and 2.88 (2.63 to 3.15) in UK Biobank). Absolute risk of mortality, hospitalisation, and MACE, at all levels of multimorbidity, was lower in UK Biobank than SAIL (adjusting for age, sex, and socioeconomic status). Both cohorts produced similar hazard ratios for some LTCs (e.g., hypertension and coronary heart disease), but UK Biobank underestimated the risk for others (e.g., alcohol-related disorders or mental health conditions). Hazard ratios for some LTC combinations were similar between the cohorts (e.g., cardiovascular conditions); however, UK Biobank underestimated the risk for combinations including other conditions (e.g., mental health conditions). The main limitations are that SAIL databank represents only part of the UK (Wales only) and that in both cohorts we lacked data on severity of the LTCs included. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that UK Biobank accurately estimates relative risk of mortality, unscheduled hospitalisation, and MACE associated with LTC counts ≤3. However, for counts ≥4, and for some LTC combinations, estimates of magnitude of association from UK Biobank are likely to be conservative. Researchers should be mindful of these limitations of UK Biobank when conducting and interpreting analyses of multimorbidity. Nonetheless, the richness of data available in UK Biobank does offers opportunities to better understand multimorbidity, particularly where complementary data sources less susceptible to selection bias can be used to inform and qualify analyses of UK Biobank.

Multimorbidity and co-occurring musculoskeletal pain do not modify the effect of the SELFBACK app on low back pain-related disability.

BACKGROUND: SELFBACK, an artificial intelligence (AI)-based app delivering evidence-based tailored self-management support to people with low back pain (LBP), has been shown to reduce LBP-related disability when added to usual care. LBP commonly co-occurs with multimorbidity (≥ 2 long-term conditions) or pain at other musculoskeletal sites, so this study explores if these factors modify the effect of the SELFBACK app or influence outcome trajectories over time. METHODS: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial with 9-month follow-up. Primary outcome is as follows: LBP-related disability (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, RMDQ). Secondary outcomes are as follows: stress/depression/illness perception/self-efficacy/general health/quality of life/physical activity/global perceived effect. We used linear mixed models for continuous outcomes and logistic generalized estimating equation for binary outcomes. Analyses were stratified to assess effect modification, whereas control (n = 229) and intervention (n = 232) groups were pooled in analyses of outcome trajectories. RESULTS: Baseline multimorbidity and co-occurring musculoskeletal pain sites did not modify the effect of the SELFBACK app. The effect was somewhat stronger in people with multimorbidity than among those with LBP only (difference in RMDQ due to interaction, - 0.9[95 % CI - 2.5 to 0.6]). Participants with a greater number of long-term conditions and more co-occurring musculoskeletal pain had higher levels of baseline disability (RMDQ 11.3 for ≥ 2 long-term conditions vs 9.5 for LBP only; 11.3 for ≥ 4 musculoskeletal pain sites vs 10.2 for ≤ 1 additional musculoskeletal pain site); along with higher baseline scores for stress/depression/illness perception and poorer pain self-efficacy/general health ratings. In the pooled sample, LBP-related disability improved slightly less over time for people with ≥ 2 long-term conditions additional to LBP compared to no multimorbidity and for those with ≥4 co-occurring musculoskeletal pain sites compared to ≤ 1 additional musculoskeletal pain site (difference in mean change at 9 months = 1.5 and 2.2, respectively). All groups reported little improvement in secondary outcomes over time. CONCLUSIONS: Multimorbidity or co-occurring musculoskeletal pain does not modify the effect of the selfBACK app on LBP-related disability or other secondary outcomes. Although people with these health problems have worse scores both at baseline and 9 months, the AI-based selfBACK app appears to be helpful for those with multimorbidity or co-occurring musculoskeletal pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03798288 . Date of registration: 9 January 2019.

The association between a lifestyle score, socioeconomic status, and COVID-19 outcomes within the UK Biobank cohort.

BACKGROUND: Infection with SARS-CoV-2 virus (COVID-19) impacts disadvantaged groups most. Lifestyle factors are also associated with adverse COVID-19 outcomes. To inform COVID-19 policy and interventions, we explored effect modification of socioeconomic-status (SES) on associations between lifestyle and COVID-19 outcomes. METHODS: Using data from UK-Biobank, a large prospective cohort of 502,536 participants aged 37-73 years recruited between 2006 and 2010, we assigned participants a lifestyle score comprising nine factors. Poisson regression models with penalised splines were used to analyse associations between lifestyle score, deprivation (Townsend), and COVID-19 mortality and severe COVID-19. Associations between each exposure and outcome were examined independently before participants were dichotomised by deprivation to examine exposures jointly. Models were adjusted for sociodemographic/health factors. RESULTS: Of 343,850 participants (mean age > 60 years) with complete data, 707 (0.21%) died from COVID-19 and 2506 (0.76%) had severe COVID-19. There was evidence of a nonlinear association between lifestyle score and COVID-19 mortality but limited evidence for nonlinearity between lifestyle score and severe COVID-19 and between deprivation and COVID-19 outcomes. Compared with low deprivation, participants in the high deprivation group had higher risk of COVID-19 outcomes across the lifestyle score. There was evidence for an additive interaction between lifestyle score and deprivation. Compared with participants with the healthiest lifestyle score in the low deprivation group, COVID-19 mortality risk ratios (95% CIs) for those with less healthy scores in low versus high deprivation groups were 5.09 (1.39-25.20) and 9.60 (4.70-21.44), respectively. Equivalent figures for severe COVID-19 were 5.17 (2.46-12.01) and 6.02 (4.72-7.71). Alternative SES measures produced similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Unhealthy lifestyles are associated with higher risk of adverse COVID-19, but risks are highest in the most disadvantaged, suggesting an additive influence between SES and lifestyle. COVID-19 policy and interventions should consider both lifestyle and SES. The greatest public health benefit from lifestyle focussed COVID-19 policy and interventions is likely to be seen when greatest support for healthy living is provided to the most disadvantaged groups.

Genome-wide association study of multisite chronic pain in UK Biobank.

Chronic pain is highly prevalent worldwide and represents a significant socioeconomic and public health burden. Several aspects of chronic pain, for example back pain and a severity-related phenotype 'chronic pain grade', have been shown previously to be complex heritable traits with a polygenic component. Additional pain-related phenotypes capturing aspects of an individual's overall sensitivity to experiencing and reporting chronic pain have also been suggested as a focus for investigation. We made use of a measure of the number of sites of chronic pain in individuals within the UK general population. This measure, termed Multisite Chronic Pain (MCP), is a complex trait and its genetic architecture has not previously been investigated. To address this, we carried out a large-scale genome-wide association study (GWAS) of MCP in ~380,000 UK Biobank participants. Our findings were consistent with MCP having a significant polygenic component, with a Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) heritability of 10.2%. In total 76 independent lead SNPs at 39 risk loci were associated with MCP. Additional gene-level association analyses identified neurogenesis, synaptic plasticity, nervous system development, cell-cycle progression and apoptosis genes as enriched for genetic association with MCP. Genetic correlations were observed between MCP and a range of psychiatric, autoimmune and anthropometric traits, including major depressive disorder (MDD), asthma and Body Mass Index (BMI). Furthermore, in Mendelian randomisation (MR) analyses a causal effect of MCP on MDD was observed. Additionally, a polygenic risk score (PRS) for MCP was found to significantly predict chronic widespread pain (pain all over the body), indicating the existence of genetic variants contributing to both of these pain phenotypes. Overall, our findings support the proposition that chronic pain involves a strong nervous system component with implications for our understanding of the physiology of chronic pain. These discoveries may also inform the future development of novel treatment approaches.

Using Intervention Mapping to Develop a Decision Support System-Based Smartphone App (selfBACK) to Support Self-management of Nonspecific Low Back Pain: Development and Usability Study.

BACKGROUND: International guidelines consistently endorse the promotion of self-management for people with low back pain (LBP); however, implementation of these guidelines remains a challenge. Digital health interventions, such as those that can be provided by smartphone apps, have been proposed as a promising mode of supporting self-management in people with chronic conditions, including LBP. However, the evidence base for digital health interventions to support self-management of LBP is weak, and detailed descriptions and documentation of the interventions are lacking. Structured intervention mapping (IM) constitutes a 6-step process that can be used to guide the development of complex interventions. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to describe the IM process for designing and creating an app-based intervention designed to support self-management of nonspecific LBP to reduce pain-related disability. METHODS: The first 5 steps of the IM process were systematically applied. The core processes included literature reviews, brainstorming and group discussions, and the inclusion of stakeholders and representatives from the target population. Over a period of >2 years, the intervention content and the technical features of delivery were created, tested, and revised through user tests, feasibility studies, and a pilot study. RESULTS: A behavioral outcome was identified as a proxy for reaching the overall program goal, that is, increased use of evidence-based self-management strategies. Physical exercises, education, and physical activity were the main components of the self-management intervention and were designed and produced to be delivered via a smartphone app. All intervention content was theoretically underpinned by the behavior change theory and the normalization process theory. CONCLUSIONS: We describe a detailed example of the application of the IM approach for the development of a theory-driven, complex, and digital intervention designed to support self-management of LBP. This description provides transparency in the developmental process of the intervention and can be a possible blueprint for designing and creating future digital health interventions for self-management.

Association between patterns of alcohol consumption (beverage type, frequency and consumption with food) and risk of adverse health outcomes: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol consumption is a leading contributor to death and disability worldwide, but previous research has not examined the effects of different patterns of alcohol consumption. The study objective was to understand the relationship between different alcohol consumption patterns and adverse health outcomes risk, adjusting for average amount consumed among regular drinkers. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of UK Biobank (UKB) participants. Abstainers, infrequent alcohol consumers or those with previous cancer, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke or liver cirrhosis were excluded. We used beverage type, consumption with food and consumption frequency as exposures and adjusted for potential confounding. All-cause mortality, major cardiovascular events-MACE (MI/stroke/cardiovascular death), accidents/injuries, liver cirrhosis, all-cause and alcohol-related cancer incidence over 9-year median follow-up period were outcomes of interest. RESULTS: The final sample size for analysis was N = 309,123 (61.5% of UKB sample). Spirit drinking was associated with higher adjusted mortality (hazard ratio (HR) 1.25; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.14-1.38), MACE (HR 1.31; 95% CI 1.15-1.50), cirrhosis (HR 1.48; 95% CI 1.08-2.03) and accident/injuries (HR 1.10; 95% CI 1.03-1.19) risk compared to red wine drinking, after adjusting for the average weekly alcohol consumption amounts. Beer/cider drinkers were also at a higher risk of mortality (HR 1.18; 95% CI 1.10-1.27), MACE (HR 1.16; 95% CI 1.05-1.27), cirrhosis (HR 1.36; 95% CI 1.06-1.74) and accidents/injuries (HR 1.11; 95% CI 1.06-1.17). Alcohol consumption without food was associated with higher adjusted mortality (HR 1.10; 95% CI 1.02-1.17) risk, compared to consumption with food. Alcohol consumption over 1-2 times/week had higher adjusted mortality (HR 1.09; 95% CI 1.03-1.16) and MACE (HR 1.14; 95% CI 1.06-1.23) risk, compared to 3-4 times/week, adjusting for the amount of alcohol consumed. CONCLUSION: Red wine drinking, consumption with food and spreading alcohol intake over 3-4 days were associated with lower risk of mortality and vascular events among regular alcohol drinkers, after adjusting for the effects of average amount consumed. Selection bias and residual confounding are important possible limitations. These findings, if replicated and validated, have the potential to influence policy and practice advice on less harmful patterns of alcohol consumption.

Hospitalisation events in people with chronic kidney disease as a component of multimorbidity: parallel cohort studies in research and routine care settings.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) typically co-exists with multimorbidity (presence of 2 or more long-term conditions: LTCs). The associations between CKD, multimorbidity and hospitalisation rates are not known. The aim of this study was to examine hospitalisation rates in people with multimorbidity with and without CKD. Amongst people with CKD, the aim was to identify risk factors for hospitalisation. METHODS: Two cohorts were studied in parallel: UK Biobank (a prospective research study: 2006-2020) and Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank (SAIL: a routine care database, Wales, UK: 2011-2018). Adults were included if their kidney function was measured at baseline. Nine categories of participants were used: zero LTCs; one, two, three and four or more LTCs excluding CKD; and one, two, three and four or more LTCs including CKD. Emergency hospitalisation events were obtained from linked hospital records. RESULTS: Amongst 469,339 UK Biobank participants, those without CKD had a median of 1 LTC and those with CKD had a median of 3 LTCs. Amongst 1,620,490 SAIL participants, those without CKD had a median of 1 LTC and those with CKD had a median of 5 LTCs. Compared to those with zero LTCs, participants with four or more LTCs (excluding CKD) had high event rates (rate ratios UK Biobank 4.95 (95% confidence interval 4.82-5.08)/SAIL 3.77 (3.71-3.82)) with higher rates if CKD was one of the LTCs (rate ratios UK Biobank 7.83 (7.42-8.25)/SAIL 9.92 (9.75-10.09)). Amongst people with CKD, risk factors for hospitalisation were advanced CKD, age over 60, multiple cardiometabolic LTCs, combined physical and mental LTCs and complex patterns of multimorbidity (LTCs in three or more body systems). CONCLUSIONS: People with multimorbidity have high rates of hospitalisation. Importantly, the rates are two to three times higher when CKD is one of the multimorbid conditions. Further research is needed into the mechanism underpinning this to inform strategies to prevent hospitalisation in this very high-risk group.

Multimorbidity, mortality, and HbA1c in type 2 diabetes: A cohort study with UK and Taiwanese cohorts.

BACKGROUND: There is emerging interest in multimorbidity in type 2 diabetes (T2D), which can be either concordant (T2D related) or discordant (unrelated), as a way of understanding the burden of disease in T2D. Current diabetes guidelines acknowledge the complex nature of multimorbidity, the management of which should be based on the patient's individual clinical needs and comorbidities. However, although associations between multimorbidity, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), and mortality in people with T2D have been studied to some extent, significant gaps remain, particularly regarding different patterns of multimorbidity, including concordant and discordant conditions. This study explores associations between multimorbidity (total condition counts/concordant/discordant/different combinations of conditions), baseline HbA1c, and all-cause mortality in T2D. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We studied two longitudinal cohorts of people with T2D using the UK Biobank (n = 20,569) and the Taiwan National Diabetes Care Management Program (NDCMP) (n = 59,657). The number of conditions in addition to T2D was used to quantify total multimorbidity, concordant, and discordant counts, and the effects of different combinations of conditions were also studied. Outcomes of interest were baseline HbA1c and all-cause mortality. For the UK Biobank and Taiwan NDCMP, mean (SD) ages were 60.2 (6.8) years and 60.8 (11.3) years; 7,579 (36.8%) and 31,339 (52.5%) were female; body mass index (BMI) medians (IQR) were 30.8 (27.7, 34.8) kg/m2 and 25.6 (23.5, 28.7) kg/m2; and 2,197 (10.8%) and 9,423 (15.8) were current smokers, respectively. Increasing total and discordant multimorbidity counts were associated with lower HbA1c and increased mortality in both datasets. In Taiwan NDCMP, for those with four or more additional conditions compared with T2D only, the mean difference (95% CI) in HbA1c was -0.82% (-0.88, -0.76) p < 0.001. In UK Biobank, hazard ratios (HRs) (95% CI) for all-cause mortality in people with T2D and one, two, three, and four or more additional conditions compared with those without comorbidity were 1.20 (0.91-1.56) p < 0.001, 1.75 (1.35-2.27) p < 0.001, 2.17 (1.67-2.81) p < 0.001, and 3.14 (2.43-4.03) p < 0.001, respectively. Both concordant/discordant conditions were significantly associated with mortality; however, HRs were largest for concordant conditions. Those with four or more concordant conditions had >5 times the mortality (5.83 [4.28-7.93] p <0.001). HRs for NDCMP were similar to those from UK Biobank for all multimorbidity counts. For those with two conditions in addition to T2D, cardiovascular diseases featured in 18 of the top 20 combinations most highly associated with mortality in UK Biobank and 12 of the top combinations in the Taiwan NDCMP. In UK Biobank, a combination of coronary heart disease and heart failure in addition to T2D had the largest effect size on mortality, with a HR (95% CI) of 4.37 (3.59-5.32) p < 0.001, whereas in the Taiwan NDCMP, a combination of painful conditions and alcohol problems had the largest effect size on mortality, with an HR (95% CI) of 4.02 (3.08-5.23) p < 0.001. One limitation to note is that we were unable to model for changes in multimorbidity during our study period. CONCLUSIONS: Multimorbidity patterns associated with the highest mortality differed between UK Biobank (a population predominantly comprising people of European descent) and the Taiwan NDCMP, a predominantly ethnic Chinese population. Future research should explore the mechanisms underpinning the observed relationship between increasing multimorbidity count and reduced HbA1c alongside increased mortality in people with T2D and further examine the implications of different patterns of multimorbidity across different ethnic groups. Better understanding of these issues, especially effects of condition type, will enable more effective personalisation of care.

Comparison of two different frailty measurements and risk of hospitalisation or death from COVID-19: findings from UK Biobank.

BACKGROUND: Frailty has been associated with worse prognosis following COVID-19 infection. While several studies have reported the association between frailty and COVID-19 mortality or length of hospital stay, there have been no community-based studies on the association between frailty and risk of severe infection. Considering that different definitions have been identified to assess frailty, this study aimed to compare the association between frailty and severe COVID-19 infection in UK Biobank using two frailty classifications: the frailty phenotype and the frailty index. METHODS: A total of 383,845 UK Biobank participants recruited 2006-2010 in England (211,310 [55.1%] women, baseline age 37-73 years) were included. COVID-19 test data were provided by Public Health England (available up to 28 June 2020). An adapted version of the frailty phenotype derived by Fried et al. was used to define frailty phenotype (robust, pre-frail, or frail). A previously validated frailty index was derived from 49 self-reported questionnaire items related to health, disease and disability, and mental wellbeing (robust, mild frailty, and moderate/severe frailty). Both classifications were derived from baseline data (2006-2010). Poisson regression models with robust standard errors were used to analyse the associations between both frailty classifications and severe COVID-19 infection (resulting in hospital admission or death), adjusted for sociodemographic and lifestyle factors. RESULTS: Of UK Biobank participants included, 802 were admitted to hospital with and/or died from COVID19 (323 deaths and 479 hospitalisations). After analyses were adjusted for sociodemographic and lifestyle factors, a higher risk of COVID-19 was observed for pre-frail (risk ratio (RR) 1.47 [95% CI 1.26; 1.71]) and frail (RR 2.66 [95% CI 2.04; 3.47]) individuals compared to those classified as robust using the frailty phenotype. Similar results were observed when the frailty index was used (RR mildly frail 1.46 [95% CI 1.26; 1.71] and RR moderate/severe frailty 2.43 [95% CI 1.91; 3.10]). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty was associated with a higher risk of severe COVID-19 infection resulting in hospital admission or death, irrespective of how it was measured and independent of sociodemographic and lifestyle factors. Public health strategies need to consider the additional risk that COVID-19 poses in individuals with frailty, including which additional preventive measures might be required.

Ethnic and socioeconomic differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection: prospective cohort study using UK Biobank.

BACKGROUND: Understanding of the role of ethnicity and socioeconomic position in the risk of developing SARS-CoV-2 infection is limited. We investigated this in the UK Biobank study. METHODS: The UK Biobank study recruited 40-70-year-olds in 2006-2010 from the general population, collecting information about self-defined ethnicity and socioeconomic variables (including area-level socioeconomic deprivation and educational attainment). SARS-CoV-2 test results from Public Health England were linked to baseline UK Biobank data. Poisson regression with robust standard errors was used to assess risk ratios (RRs) between the exposures and dichotomous variables for being tested, having a positive test and testing positive in hospital. We also investigated whether ethnicity and socioeconomic position were associated with having a positive test amongst those tested. We adjusted for covariates including age, sex, social variables (including healthcare work and household size), behavioural risk factors and baseline health. RESULTS: Amongst 392,116 participants in England, 2658 had been tested for SARS-CoV-2 and 948 tested positive (726 in hospital) between 16 March and 3 May 2020. Black and south Asian groups were more likely to test positive (RR 3.35 (95% CI 2.48-4.53) and RR 2.42 (95% CI 1.75-3.36) respectively), with Pakistani ethnicity at highest risk within the south Asian group (RR 3.24 (95% CI 1.73-6.07)). These ethnic groups were more likely to be hospital cases compared to the white British. Adjustment for baseline health and behavioural risk factors led to little change, with only modest attenuation when accounting for socioeconomic variables. Socioeconomic deprivation and having no qualifications were consistently associated with a higher risk of confirmed infection (RR 2.19 for most deprived quartile vs least (95% CI 1.80-2.66) and RR 2.00 for no qualifications vs degree (95% CI 1.66-2.42)). CONCLUSIONS: Some minority ethnic groups have a higher risk of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the UK Biobank study, which was not accounted for by differences in socioeconomic conditions, baseline self-reported health or behavioural risk factors. An urgent response to addressing these elevated risks is required.

Assessing Risks of Polypharmacy Involving Medications With Anticholinergic Properties.

PURPOSE: Anticholinergic burden (ACB), the cumulative effect of anticholinergic medications, is associated with adverse outcomes in older people but is less studied in middle-aged populations. Numerous scales exist to quantify ACB. The aims of this study were to quantify ACB in a large cohort using the 10 most common anticholinergic scales, to assess the association of each scale with adverse outcomes, and to assess overlap in populations identified by each scale. METHODS: We performed a longitudinal analysis of the UK Biobank community cohort (502,538 participants, baseline age: 37-73 years, median years of follow-up: 6.2). The ACB was calculated at baseline using 10 scales. Baseline data were linked to national mortality register records and hospital episode statistics. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE). Secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, MACE, hospital admission for fall/fracture, and hospital admission with dementia/delirium. Cox proportional hazards models (hazard ratio [HR], 95% CI) quantified associations between ACB scales and outcomes adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic status, body mass index, smoking status, alcohol use, physical activity, and morbidity count. RESULTS: Anticholinergic medication use varied from 8% to 17.6% depending on the scale used. For the primary outcome, ACB was significantly associated with all-cause mortality/MACE for each scale. The Anticholinergic Drug Scale was most strongly associated with mortality/MACE (HR = 1.12; 95% CI, 1.11-1.14 per 1-point increase in score). The ACB was significantly associated with all secondary outcomes. The Anticholinergic Effect on Cognition scale was most strongly associated with dementia/delirium (HR = 1.45; 95% CI, 1.3-1.61 per 1-point increase). CONCLUSIONS: The ACB was associated with adverse outcomes in a middle- to older-aged population. Populations identified and effect size differed between scales. Scale choice influenced the population identified as potentially requiring reduction in ACB in clinical practice or intervention trials.

Occupation and risk of severe COVID-19: prospective cohort study of 120 075 UK Biobank participants.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate severe COVID-19 risk by occupational group. METHODS: Baseline UK Biobank data (2006-10) for England were linked to SARS-CoV-2 test results from Public Health England (16 March to 26 July 2020). Included participants were employed or self-employed at baseline, alive and aged <65 years in 2020. Poisson regression models were adjusted sequentially for baseline demographic, socioeconomic, work-related, health, and lifestyle-related risk factors to assess risk ratios (RRs) for testing positive in hospital or death due to COVID-19 by three occupational classification schemes (including Standard Occupation Classification (SOC) 2000). RESULTS: Of 120 075 participants, 271 had severe COVID-19. Relative to non-essential workers, healthcare workers (RR 7.43, 95% CI 5.52 to 10.00), social and education workers (RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.82) and other essential workers (RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.45) had a higher risk of severe COVID-19. Using more detailed groupings, medical support staff (RR 8.70, 95% CI 4.87 to 15.55), social care (RR 2.46, 95% CI 1.47 to 4.14) and transport workers (RR 2.20, 95% CI 1.21 to 4.00) had the highest risk within the broader groups. Compared with white non-essential workers, non-white non-essential workers had a higher risk (RR 3.27, 95% CI 1.90 to 5.62) and non-white essential workers had the highest risk (RR 8.34, 95% CI 5.17 to 13.47). Using SOC 2000 major groups, associate professional and technical occupations, personal service occupations and plant and machine operatives had a higher risk, compared with managers and senior officials. CONCLUSIONS: Essential workers have a higher risk of severe COVID-19. These findings underscore the need for national and organisational policies and practices that protect and support workers with an elevated risk of severe COVID-19.

Correlates of type 2 diabetes and glycaemic control in adults in Saudi Arabia a secondary data analysis of the Saudi health interview survey.

BACKGROUND: There is evidence that type 2 diabetes self-management programmes may have a positive impact on health outcomes of adults living in Gulf countries. However, none of the programmes evaluated were developed using evidence about the specific needs of adults with Type 2 diabetes living in the Gulf countries. This study is part of a wider programme of research, which uses a cultural adaptation framework to generate information on how to tailor type 2 diabetes self-management to the Saudi context. METHODS: Secondary data analysis of the Saudi Health Interview Survey (SHIS) (N = 10,821) was conducted. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression modelling assessed factors associated with type 2 diabetes and its control / self-management including sociodemographic factors (e.g. age, gender), lifestyle (e.g. diet, physical activity), and health seeking behaviours (e.g. chronic illnesses, health services). RESULTS: 7% (N = 808) of all participants had type 2 diabetes (59% male), however it represents 35% at or above 55 years. In multivariate analysis at older age, being overweight or obese, male, having hypertension, and reporting a reduction in health status in the 12 months prior to questionnaire completion, were significantly associated with having type 2 diabetes. Participants who reported walking for more than 10 min per day were less likely to report type 2 diabetes. Unexpectedly there was a significant association between type 2 diabetes and lower frequency of fast food intake, while increased fruit and vegetable intake was associated with poor glycaemic control. CONCLUSIONS: Being overweight and/or hypertensive are concomitant with type 2 diabetes in Saudi Arabia. Any self-management programmes for type 2 diabetes patients with either of these conditions should be tailored accordingly. Walking behaviours should be prioritised in Saudi self-management programmes. Prediabetes management programmes may be of special importance to the Saudi community.

Relationship between multimorbidity, demographic factors and mortality: findings from the UK Biobank cohort.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity is associated with higher mortality, but the relationship with cancer and cardiovascular mortality is unclear. The influence of demographics and type of condition on the relationship of multimorbidity with mortality remains unknown. We examine the relationship between multimorbidity (number/type) and cause of mortality and the impact of demographic factors on this relationship. METHODS: Data source: the UK Biobank; 500,769 participants; 37-73 years; 53.7% female. Exposure variables: number and type of long-term conditions (LTCs) (N = 43) at baseline, modelled separately. Cox regression models were used to study the impact of LTCs on all-cause/vascular/cancer mortality during median 7-year follow-up. All-cause mortality regression models were stratified by age/sex/socioeconomic status. RESULTS: All-cause mortality is 2.9% (14,348 participants). Of all deaths, 8350 (58.2%) were cancer deaths and 2985 (20.8%) vascular deaths. Dose-response relationship is observed between the increasing number of LTCs and all-cause/cancer/vascular mortality. A strong association is observed between cardiometabolic multimorbidity and all three clinical outcomes; non-cardiometabolic multimorbidity (excluding cancer) is associated with all-cause/vascular mortality. All-cause mortality risk for those with ≥ 4 LTCs was nearly 3 times higher than those with no LTCs (HR 2.79, CI 2.61-2.98); for ≥ 4 cardiometabolic conditions, it was > 3 times higher (HR 3.20, CI 2.56-4.00); and for ≥ 4 non-cardiometabolic conditions (excluding cancer), it was 50% more (HR 1.50, CI 1.36-1.67). For those with ≥ 4 LTCs, morbidity combinations that included cardiometabolic conditions, chronic kidney disease, cancer, epilepsy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression, osteoporosis and connective tissue disorders had the greatest impact on all-cause mortality. In the stratified model by age/sex, absolute all-cause mortality was higher among the 60-73 age group with an increasing number of LTCs; however, the relative effect size of the increasing number of LTCs on higher mortality risk was larger among those 37-49 years, especially men. While socioeconomic status was a significant predictor of all-cause mortality, mortality risk with increasing number of LTCs remained constant across different socioeconomic gradients. CONCLUSIONS: Multimorbidity is associated with higher all-cause/cancer/vascular mortality. Type, as opposed to number, of LTCs may have an important role in understanding the relationship between multimorbidity and mortality. Multimorbidity had a greater relative impact on all-cause mortality in middle-aged as opposed to older populations, particularly males, which deserves exploration.

Multimorbidity and co-morbidity in atrial fibrillation and effects on survival: findings from UK Biobank cohort.

Aims: To examine the number and type of co-morbid long-term health conditions (LTCs) and their associations with all-cause mortality in an atrial fibrillation (AF) population. Methods and results: Community cohort participants (UK Biobank n = 502 637) aged 37-73 years were recruited between 2006 and 2010. Self-reported LTCs (n = 42) identified in people with AF at baseline. All-cause mortality was available for a median follow-up of 7 years (interquartile range 76-93 months). Hazard ratios (HRs) examined associations between number and type of co-morbid LTC and all-cause mortality, adjusting for age, sex, socio-economic status, smoking, and anticoagulation status. Three thousand six hundred fifty-one participants (0.7% of the study population) reported AF; mean age was 61.9 years. The all-cause mortality rate was 6.7% (248 participants) at 7 years. Atrial fibrillation participants with ≥4 co-morbidities had a six-fold higher risk of mortality compared to participants without any LTC. Co-morbid heart failure was associated with higher risk of mortality [HR 2.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.83-4.80], whereas the presence of co-morbid stroke did not have a significant association. Among non-cardiometabolic conditions, presence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR 3.31, 95% CI 2.14-5.11) and osteoporosis (HR 3.13, 95% CI 1.63-6.01) was associated with a higher risk of mortality. Conclusion: Survival in middle-aged to older individuals with self-reported AF is strongly correlated with level of multimorbidity. This group should be targeted for interventions to optimize their management, which in turn may potentially reduce the impact of their co-morbidities on survival. Future AF clinical guidelines need to place greater emphasis on the issue of co-morbidity.

The effects of implementing a point-of-care electronic template to prompt routine anxiety and depression screening in patients consulting for osteoarthritis (the Primary Care Osteoarthritis Trial): A cluster randomised trial in primary care.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate whether prompting general practitioners (GPs) to routinely assess and manage anxiety and depression in patients consulting with osteoarthritis (OA) improves pain outcomes. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a cluster randomised controlled trial involving 45 English general practices. In intervention practices, patients aged ≥45 y consulting with OA received point-of-care anxiety and depression screening by the GP, prompted by an automated electronic template comprising five questions (a two-item Patient Health Questionnaire-2 for depression, a two-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder-2 questionnaire for anxiety, and a question about current pain intensity [0-10 numerical rating scale]). The template signposted GPs to follow National Institute for Health and Care Excellence clinical guidelines for anxiety, depression, and OA and was supported by a brief training package. The template in control practices prompted GPs to ask the pain intensity question only. The primary outcome was patient-reported current pain intensity post-consultation and at 3-, 6-, and 12-mo follow-up. Secondary outcomes included pain-related disability, anxiety, depression, and general health. During the trial period, 7,279 patients aged ≥45 y consulted with a relevant OA-related code, and 4,240 patients were deemed potentially eligible by participating GPs. Templates were completed for 2,042 patients (1,339 [31.6%] in the control arm and 703 [23.1%] in the intervention arm). Of these 2,042 patients, 1,412 returned questionnaires (501 [71.3%] from 20 intervention practices, 911 [68.0%] from 24 control practices). Follow-up rates were similar in both arms, totalling 1,093 (77.4%) at 3 mo, 1,064 (75.4%) at 6 mo, and 1,017 (72.0%) at 12 mo. For the primary endpoint, multilevel modelling yielded significantly higher average pain intensity across follow-up to 12 mo in the intervention group than the control group (adjusted mean difference 0.31; 95% CI 0.04, 0.59). Secondary outcomes were consistent with the primary outcome measure in reflecting better outcomes as a whole for the control group than the intervention group. Anxiety and depression scores did not reduce following the intervention. The main limitations of this study are two potential sources of bias: an imbalance in cluster size (mean practice size 7,397 [intervention] versus 5,850 [control]) and a difference in the proportion of patients for whom the GP deactivated the template (33.6% [intervention] versus 27.8% [control]). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed no beneficial effect on pain outcomes of prompting GPs to routinely screen for and manage comorbid anxiety and depression in patients presenting with symptoms due to OA, with those in the intervention group reporting statistically significantly higher average pain scores over the four follow-up time points than those in the control group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN40721988.

Digital Support Interventions for the Self-Management of Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a common cause of disability and is ranked as the most burdensome health condition globally. Self-management, including components on increased knowledge, monitoring of symptoms, and physical activity, are consistently recommended in clinical guidelines as cost-effective strategies for LBP management and there is increasing interest in the potential role of digital health. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to synthesize and critically appraise published evidence concerning the use of interactive digital interventions to support self-management of LBP. The following specific questions were examined: (1) What are the key components of digital self-management interventions for LBP, including theoretical underpinnings? (2) What outcome measures have been used in randomized trials of digital self-management interventions in LBP and what effect, if any, did the intervention have on these? and (3) What specific characteristics or components, if any, of interventions appear to be associated with beneficial outcomes? METHODS: Bibliographic databases searched from 2000 to March 2016 included Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, DoPHER and TRoPHI, Social Science Citation Index, and Science Citation Index. Reference and citation searching was also undertaken. Search strategy combined the following concepts: (1) back pain, (2) digital intervention, and (3) self-management. Only randomized controlled trial (RCT) protocols or completed RCTs involving adults with LBP published in peer-reviewed journals were included. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, full-text articles, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using Cochrane risk of bias tool. An independent third reviewer adjudicated on disagreements. Data were synthesized narratively. RESULTS: Of the total 7014 references identified, 11 were included, describing 9 studies: 6 completed RCTs and 3 protocols for future RCTs. The completed RCTs included a total of 2706 participants (range of 114-1343 participants per study) and varied considerably in the nature and delivery of the interventions, the duration/definition of LBP, the outcomes measured, and the effectiveness of the interventions. Participants were generally white, middle aged, and in 5 of 6 RCT reports, the majority were female and most reported educational level as time at college or higher. Only one study reported between-group differences in favor of the digital intervention. There was considerable variation in the extent of reporting the characteristics, components, and theories underpinning each intervention. None of the studies showed evidence of harm. CONCLUSIONS: The literature is extremely heterogeneous, making it difficult to understand what might work best, for whom, and in what circumstances. Participants were predominantly female, white, well educated, and middle aged, and thus the wider applicability of digital self-management interventions remains uncertain. No information on cost-effectiveness was reported. The evidence base for interactive digital interventions to support patient self-management of LBP remains weak.