OpenSAFELY: impact of national guidance on switching anticoagulant therapy during COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, the National Health Service (NHS) recommended that appropriate patients anticoagulated with warfarin should be switched to direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs), requiring less frequent blood testing. Subsequently, a national safety alert was issued regarding patients being inappropriately coprescribed two anticoagulants following a medication change and associated monitoring. OBJECTIVE: To describe which people were switched from warfarin to DOACs; identify potentially unsafe coprescribing of anticoagulants; and assess whether abnormal clotting results have become more frequent during the pandemic. METHODS: With the approval of NHS England, we conducted a cohort study using routine clinical data from 24 million NHS patients in England. RESULTS: 20 000 of 164 000 warfarin patients (12.2%) switched to DOACs between March and May 2020, most commonly to edoxaban and apixaban. Factors associated with switching included: older age, recent renal function test, higher number of recent INR tests recorded, atrial fibrillation diagnosis and care home residency. There was a sharp rise in coprescribing of warfarin and DOACs from typically 50-100 per month to 246 in April 2020, 0.06% of all people receiving a DOAC or warfarin. International normalised ratio (INR) testing fell by 14% to 506.8 patients tested per 1000 warfarin patients each month. We observed a very small increase in elevated INRs (n=470) during April compared with January (n=420). CONCLUSIONS: Increased switching of anticoagulants from warfarin to DOACs was observed at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic in England following national guidance. There was a small but substantial number of people coprescribed warfarin and DOACs during this period. Despite a national safety alert on the issue, a widespread rise in elevated INR test results was not found. Primary care has responded rapidly to changes in patient care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and risk of death from COVID-19: an OpenSAFELY cohort analysis based on two cohorts.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the association between routinely prescribed non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and deaths from COVID-19 using OpenSAFELY, a secure analytical platform. METHODS: We conducted two cohort studies from 1 March to 14 June 2020. Working on behalf of National Health Service England, we used routine clinical data in England linked to death data. In study 1, we identified people with an NSAID prescription in the last 3 years from the general population. In study 2, we identified people with rheumatoid arthritis/osteoarthritis. We defined exposure as current NSAID prescription within the 4 months before 1 March 2020. We used Cox regression to estimate HRs for COVID-19 related death in people currently prescribed NSAIDs, compared with those not currently prescribed NSAIDs, accounting for age, sex, comorbidities, other medications and geographical region. RESULTS: In study 1, we included 536 423 current NSAID users and 1 927 284 non-users in the general population. We observed no evidence of difference in risk of COVID-19 related death associated with current use (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.14) in the multivariable-adjusted model. In study 2, we included 1 708 781 people with rheumatoid arthritis/osteoarthritis, of whom 175 495 (10%) were current NSAID users. In the multivariable-adjusted model, we observed a lower risk of COVID-19 related death (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.94) associated with current use of NSAID versus non-use. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence of a harmful effect of routinely prescribed NSAIDs on COVID-19 related deaths. Risks of COVID-19 do not need to influence decisions about the routine therapeutic use of NSAIDs.

A comprehensive high cost drugs dataset from the NHS in England - An OpenSAFELY-TPP Short Data Report.

Background: At the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was no routine comprehensive hospital medicines data from the UK available to researchers. These records can be important for many analyses including the effect of certain medicines on the risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes. With the approval of NHS England, we set out to obtain data on one specific group of medicines, "high-cost drugs" (HCD) which are typically specialist medicines for the management of long-term conditions, prescribed by hospitals to patients. Additionally, we aimed to make these data available to all approved researchers in OpenSAFELY-TPP. This report is intended to support all studies carried out in OpenSAFELY-TPP, and those elsewhere, working with this dataset or similar data. Methods: Working with the North East Commissioning Support Unit and NHS Digital, we arranged for collation of a single national HCD dataset to help inform responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. The dataset was developed from payment submissions from hospitals to commissioners. Results: In the financial year (FY) 2018/19 there were 2.8 million submissions for 1.1 million unique patient IDs recorded in the HCD. The average number of submissions per patient over the year was 2.6. In FY 2019/20 there were 4.0 million submissions for 1.3 million unique patient IDs. The average number of submissions per patient over the year was 3.1. Of the 21 variables in the dataset, three are now available for analysis in OpenSafely-TPP: Financial year and month of drug being dispensed; drug name; and a description of the drug dispensed. Conclusions: We have described the process for sourcing a national HCD dataset, making these data available for COVID-19-related analysis through OpenSAFELY-TPP and provided information on the variables included in the dataset, data coverage and an initial descriptive analysis.

Zoster vaccination inequalities: A population based cohort study using linked data from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify inequalities in zoster vaccine uptake by determining its association with socio-demographic factors: age, gender, ethnicity, immigration status, deprivation (at Lower-layer Super Output Area-level), care home residence and living arrangements. METHOD: This population-based cohort study utilised anonymised primary care electronic health records from England (Clinical Practice Research Datalink) linked to deprivation and hospitalisation data. Data from 35,333 individuals from 277 general practices in England and eligible for zoster vaccination during the two-year period (2013-2015) after vaccine introduction were analysed. Logistic regression was used to obtain adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for the association of socio-demographic factors with zoster vaccine uptake for adults aged 70 years (main target group) and adults aged 79 years (catch-up group). RESULTS: Amongst those eligible for vaccination, 52.4% (n = 18,499) received the vaccine. Socio-demographic factors independently associated with lower zoster vaccine uptake in multivariable analyses were: being older (catch-up group: aged 79 years) aOR = 0.89 (95% confidence interval (CI):0.85-0.93), care home residence (aOR = 0.64 (95%CI: 0.57-0.73)) and living alone (aOR = 0.85 (95%CI: 0.81-0.90)). Uptake decreased with increasing levels of deprivation (p-value for trend<0.0001; aOR most deprived versus least deprived areas = 0.69 (95%CI: 0.64-0.75)). Uptake was also lower amongst those of non-White ethnicities (for example, Black versus White ethnicity: aOR = 0.61 (95%CI: 0.49-0.75)) but was not lower among immigrants after adjusting for ethnicity. Lower uptake was also seen amongst females compared to men in the catch-up group. CONCLUSIONS: Inequalities in zoster vaccine uptake exist in England; with lower uptake among those of non-White ethnicities, and among those living alone, in a care home and in more deprived areas. Tailored interventions to increase uptake in these social groups should assist in realising the aim of mitigating vaccination inequalities. As care home residents are also at higher risk of zoster, improving the uptake of zoster vaccination in this group will also mitigate inequalities in zoster burden.

Effectiveness of herpes zoster vaccination in an older United Kingdom population.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination against herpes zoster was introduced in the United Kingdom in 2013 for individuals aged 70 years, with a phased catch-up campaign for 71-79 year olds. Vaccine introduction has resulted in a marked fall in incident herpes zoster and in post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN), but formal evaluation of vaccine effectiveness is needed. METHODS: In a population-based cohort study of older individuals born between 1933 and 1946, we used linked UK anonymised primary care health records for the first three years of the vaccination programme (01/09/2013-31/08/2016) and multivariable Poisson regression to obtain incidence rates and vaccine effectiveness (VE) against zoster and PHN. RESULTS: Among 516,547 individuals, 21% were vaccinated. Incidence of zoster was 3.15/1000 person-years in vaccinees and 8.80/1000 person-years in unvaccinated individuals. After adjustment, VE was 64% (95%CI = 60-68%) against incident zoster and 81% (95%CI = 61-91%) against PHN, with very similar VE estimates in the routine and catch-up cohorts. VE against zoster was lower in those with a previous history of zoster: 47% (95%CI = 31-58%) versus 64% (95%CI = 60-68%) in those without previous zoster. There was evidence of waning VE over time, from 69% (95%CI = 65-74%) in the first year after vaccination to 45% (95%CI = 29-57%) by the third year. CONCLUSION: This first formal assessment of VE in the UK zoster vaccination programme demonstrates good effectiveness of zoster vaccine, and very good protection against PHN. The findings provide evidence that VE is similar across the age groups targeted for vaccination in the UK, and on duration of protection of the vaccine in public health use. The study provides key information for decision-makers about the future direction of UK zoster vaccination programme, indicating that the live zoster vaccine may be more cost-effective than estimated previously. It also supports efforts to communicate the benefits of zoster vaccination to address the declining coverage observed across the UK.

The impact of the conflicts of Iraq and Afghanistan: a UK perspective.

Concerns about the mental health of military personnel deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan has led to a new generation of research. This review is an examination of the UK literature on the mental health consequences of deployment of armed forces personnel to Iraq and Afghanistan. As yet, deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan has not been associated with a general increase in mental health problems for the UK Armed Forces. However, research has highlighted certain problems that continue to need to be addressed. Whilst, the rate of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is low in the UK Armed Forces (1.6-6%), deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan is associated with an increased risk of PTSD for reserve personnel. In contrast to PTSD, the rate of alcohol misuse is high in the UK Armed Forces (between 16-20%), and has been associated with deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan for regular personnel. As the UK military engagement in Afghanistan continues and more personnel are deployed, the demand for help from military health services, the NHS and the service charities will increase.