Rapid systematic review on risks and outcomes of sepsis: the influence of risk factors associated with health inequalities.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Sepsis is a serious and life-threatening condition caused by a dysregulated immune response to an infection. Recent guidance issued in the UK gave recommendations around recognition and antibiotic treatment of sepsis, but did not consider factors relating to health inequalities. The aim of this study was to summarise the literature investigating associations between health inequalities and sepsis. METHODS: Searches were conducted in Embase for peer-reviewed articles published since 2010 that included sepsis in combination with one of the following five areas: socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, community factors, medical needs and pregnancy/maternity. RESULTS: Five searches identified 1,402 studies, with 50 unique studies included in the review after screening (13 sociodemographic, 14 race/ethnicity, 3 community, 3 care/medical needs and 20 pregnancy/maternity; 3 papers examined multiple health inequalities). Most of the studies were conducted in the USA (31/50), with only four studies using UK data (all pregnancy related). Socioeconomic factors associated with increased sepsis incidence included lower socioeconomic status, unemployment and lower education level, although findings were not consistent across studies. For ethnicity, mixed results were reported. Living in a medically underserved area or being resident in a nursing home increased risk of sepsis. Mortality rates after sepsis were found to be higher in people living in rural areas or in those discharged to skilled nursing facilities while associations with ethnicity were mixed. Complications during delivery, caesarean-section delivery, increased deprivation and black and other ethnic minority race were associated with post-partum sepsis. CONCLUSION: There are clear correlations between sepsis morbidity and mortality and the presence of factors associated with health inequalities. To inform local guidance and drive public health measures, there is a need for studies conducted across more diverse setting and countries.

Drug therapy for alcohol dependence in primary care in the UK: A Clinical Practice Research Datalink study.

AIM: To evaluate drug therapy for alcohol dependence in the 12 months after first diagnosis in UK primary care. DESIGN: Open cohort study. SETTING: General practices contributing data to the UK Clinical Practice Research Database. PARTICIPANTS: 39,980 people with an incident diagnosis of alcohol dependence aged 16 years or older between 1 January 1990 and 31 December 2013. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Use of pharmacotherapy (acamprosate, disulfiram, naltrexone, baclofen and topiramate) to promote abstinence from alcohol or reduce drinking to safe levels in the first 12 months after a recorded diagnosis of alcohol dependence. FINDINGS: Only 4,677 (11.7%) of the cohort received relevant pharmacotherapy in the 12 months following diagnosis. Of the 35,303 that did not receive pharmacotherapy, 3,255 (9.2%) received psychosocial support. The remaining 32,048 (80.2%) did not receive either mode of treatment in the first 12 months. Factors that independently reduced the likelihood of receiving pharmacotherapy included: being male (Odds Ratio [OR] 0.74; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.78); older (65-74 years: OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.49 to 0.77); being from a practice based in the most deprived quintile (OR 0.58; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.64); and being located in Northern Ireland (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.91). The median duration to initiation of pharmacotherapy was 0.80 months (95% CI 0.70 to 1.00) for acamprosate and 0.60 months (95% CI 0.43 to 0.73) for disulfiram. Persistence analysis for those receiving acamprosate and disulfiram revealed that many patients never received a repeat prescription; persistence at 6 months was 27.7% for acomprosate and 33.2% for disulfiram. The median duration of therapy was 2.10 months (95% CI 1.87 to 2.53) for acamprosate and 3.13 months (95% CI 2.77 to 3.36) for disulfiram. CONCLUSION: Drug therapy to promote abstinence in alcohol dependent patients was low, with the majority of patients receiving no therapy, either psychological or pharmacological. When drug therapy was prescribed, persistence was low with most patients receiving only one prescription. Our data show that treatment for alcohol dependence is haphazard, and there is an urgent need to explore strategies for improving clinical management of this patient group.

Epidemiology of fractures in the United Kingdom 1988-2012: Variation with age, sex, geography, ethnicity and socioeconomic status.

UNLABELLED: Rates of fracture worldwide are changing. Using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), age, and gender, geographical, ethnic and socioeconomic trends in fracture rates across the United Kingdom were studied over a 24-year period 1988-2012. Previously observed patterns in fracture incidence by age and fracture site were evident. New data on the influence of geographic location, ethnic group and socioeconomic status were obtained. INTRODUCTION: With secular changes in age- and sex-specific fracture incidence observed in many populations, and global shifts towards an elderly demography, it is vital for health care planners to have an accurate understanding of fracture incidence nationally. We aimed to present up to date fracture incidence data in the UK, stratified by age, sex, geographic location, ethnicity and socioeconomic status. METHODS: The Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) contains anonymised electronic health records for approximately 6.9% of the UK population. Information comes from General Practitioners, and covers 11.3 million people from 674 practices across the UK, demonstrated to be representative of the national population. The study population consisted of all permanently registered individuals aged ≥18years. Validated data on fracture incidence were obtained from their medical records, as was information on socioeconomic deprivation, ethnicity and geographic location. Age- and sex-specific fracture incidence rates were calculated. RESULTS: Fracture incidence rates by age and sex were comparable to those documented in previous studies and demonstrated a bimodal distribution. Substantial geographic heterogeneity in age- and sex adjusted fracture incidence was observed, with rates in Scotland almost 50% greater than those in London and South East England. Lowest rates of fracture were observed in black individuals of both sexes; rates of fragility fracture in white women were 4.7 times greater than in black women. Strong associations between deprivation and fracture risk were observed in hip fracture in men, with a relative risk of 1.3 (95% CI 1.21-1.41) in Index of Multiple Deprivation category 5 (representing the most deprived) compared to category 1. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents robust estimates of fracture incidence across the UK, which will aid decisions regarding allocation of healthcare provision to populations of greatest need. It will also assist the implementation and design of strategies to reduce fracture incidence and its personal and financial impact on individuals and health services.

Performance of prior event rate ratio adjustment method in pharmacoepidemiology: a simulation study.

PURPOSE: Prior event rate ratio (PERR) adjustment method has been proposed to control for unmeasured confounding. We aimed to assess the performance of the PERR method in realistic pharmacoepidemiological settings. METHODS: Simulation studies were performed with varying effects of prior events on the probability of subsequent exposure and post-events, incidence rates, effects of confounders, and rate of mortality/dropout. Exposure effects were estimated using conventional rate ratio (RR) and PERR adjustment method (i.e. ratio of RR post-exposure initiation and RR prior to initiation of exposure). RESULTS: In the presence of unmeasured confounding, both conventional and the PERR method may yield biased estimates, but PERR estimates appear generally less biased estimates than the conventional method. However, when prior events strongly influence the probability of subsequent exposure, the exposure effect from the PERR method was more biased than the conventional method. For instance, when the effect of prior events on the exposure was RR = 1.60, the effect estimate from the PERR method was RR = 1.13 and from the conventional method was RR = 2.48 (true exposure effect, RR = 2). In all settings, the variation of the estimates was larger for the PERR method than for the conventional method. CONCLUSION: The PERR adjustment method can be applied to reduce bias as a result of unmeasured confounding. However, only in particular situations, it can completely remove the bias as a result of unmeasured confounding. When applying this method, theoretical justification using available clinical knowledge for assumptions of the PERR method should be provided.

Benefit-risk assessment in a post-market setting: a case study integrating real-life experience into benefit-risk methodology.

PURPOSE: Difficulties may be encountered when undertaking a benefit-risk assessment for an older product with well-established use but with a benefit-risk balance that may have changed over time. This case study investigates this specific situation by applying a formal benefit-risk framework to assess the benefit-risk balance of warfarin for primary prevention of patients with atrial fibrillation. METHODS: We used the qualitative framework BRAT as the starting point of the benefit-risk analysis, bringing together the relevant available evidence. We explored the use of a quantitative method (stochastic multi-criteria acceptability analysis) to demonstrate how uncertainties and preferences on multiple criteria can be integrated into a single measure to reduce cognitive burden and increase transparency in decision making. RESULTS: Our benefit-risk model found that warfarin is favourable compared with placebo for the primary prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. This favourable benefit-risk balance is fairly robust to differences in preferences. The probability of a favourable benefit-risk for warfarin against placebo is high (0.99) in our model despite the high uncertainty of randomised clinical trial data. In this case study, we identified major challenges related to the identification of relevant benefit-risk criteria and taking into account the diversity and quality of evidence available to inform the benefit-risk assessment. CONCLUSION: The main challenges in applying formal methods for medical benefit-risk assessment for a marketed drug are related to outcome definitions and data availability. Data exist from many different sources (both randomised clinical trials and observational studies), and the variability in the studies is large.

Point-of-care cluster randomized trial in stroke secondary prevention using electronic health records.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the remote introduction of electronic decision support tools into family practices improves risk factor control after first stroke. This study also aimed to develop methods to implement cluster randomized trials in stroke using electronic health records. METHODS: Family practices were recruited from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink and allocated to intervention and control trial arms by minimization. Remotely installed, electronic decision support tools promoted intensified secondary prevention for 12 months with last measure of systolic blood pressure as the primary outcome. Outcome data from electronic health records were analyzed using marginal models. RESULTS: There were 106 Clinical Practice Research Datalink family practices allocated (intervention, 53; control, 53), with 11 391 (control, 5516; intervention, 5875) participants with acute stroke ever diagnosed. Participants at trial practices had similar characteristics as 47,887 patients with stroke at nontrial practices. During the intervention period, blood pressure values were recorded in the electronic health records for 90% and cholesterol values for 84% of participants. After intervention, the latest mean systolic blood pressure was 131.7 (SD, 16.8) mm Hg in the control trial arm and 131.4 (16.7) mm Hg in the intervention trial arm, and adjusted mean difference was -0.56 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, -1.38 to 0.26; P=0.183). The financial cost of the trial was approximately US $22 per participant, or US $2400 per family practice allocated. CONCLUSIONS: Large pragmatic intervention studies may be implemented at low cost by using electronic health records. The intervention used in this trial was not found to be effective, and further research is needed to develop more effective intervention strategies. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.controlled-trials.com. Current Controlled Trials identifier: ISRCTN35701810.

Resource utilization and outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation: a case control study.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained disorder of cardiac rhythm. Various new anticoagulation and antiarrythmic treatments are being investigated for the treatment of AF. Before novel treatments can be used widely in actual clinical practice, the cost effectiveness of such novel treatments may need to be determined. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of the study were to describe resource utilization for AF and control patients, and estimate the incidence of mortality. METHODS: This case control study evaluated 6 months of primary and secondary care resource utilization and mortality rates for patients within the period 01 April 2001 to 31 March 2006. Cases included 15 373 adults with a record of AF in the General Practice Research Database (GPRD) within the study period. The index date was randomly selected between 6 months after the AF record and end of data collection. Cases were matched to controls by age, gender, general practice and time. RESULTS: AF patients had significantly higher resource utilization than controls. Resource utilization increased with greater National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) stroke risk strata (graded as low, moderate or high based on associated risk factors). Both current warfarin and aspirin users had higher resource utilization than control patients. Resource utilization remained high amongst AF patients who discontinued therapy. The mortality rate was significantly higher in AF patients than controls, deaths due to circulatory system disease were increased 4-fold and cancer deaths were doubled. All-cause and circulatory mortality rates, as well as rates of clinical outcomes, were related to the NICE stroke risk schema. CONCLUSIONS: There was large heterogeneity in resource utilization between AF patients, although overall, this was still higher than controls without AF. Higher resource utilization was evident in patients at higher risk of stroke, and remained where antithrombotic therapy was discontinued. The mortality risk in AF was increased substantially, both for cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular causes of death, indicating a large unmet medical need.