Factors associated with COVID-19-related death using OpenSAFELY.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly affected mortality worldwide1. There is unprecedented urgency to understand who is most at risk of severe outcomes, and this requires new approaches for the timely analysis of large datasets. Working on behalf of NHS England, we created OpenSAFELY-a secure health analytics platform that covers 40% of all patients in England and holds patient data within the existing data centre of a major vendor of primary care electronic health records. Here we used OpenSAFELY to examine factors associated with COVID-19-related death. Primary care records of 17,278,392 adults were pseudonymously linked to 10,926 COVID-19-related deaths. COVID-19-related death was associated with: being male (hazard ratio (HR) 1.59 (95% confidence interval 1.53-1.65)); greater age and deprivation (both with a strong gradient); diabetes; severe asthma; and various other medical conditions. Compared with people of white ethnicity, Black and South Asian people were at higher risk, even after adjustment for other factors (HR 1.48 (1.29-1.69) and 1.45 (1.32-1.58), respectively). We have quantified a range of clinical factors associated with COVID-19-related death in one of the largest cohort studies on this topic so far. More patient records are rapidly being added to OpenSAFELY, we will update and extend our results regularly.

Prevalence of Alpha, Beta, and Gamma Human Papillomaviruses in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer and Noncancer Controls and Relation to Behavioral Factors.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomaviruses (HPVs) cause head and neck cancer (HNC), which is increasing in incidence in developed countries. We investigated the prevalence of alpha (α), beta (ß), and gamma (γ) HPVs among HNC cases and controls, and their relationship with sociodemographic, behavioral, and oral health factors. METHODS: We obtained oral rinse and brush samples from incident HNC cases (n = 369) and hospital-based controls (n = 439) and tumor samples for a subsample of cases (n = 121). We genotyped samples using polymerase chain reaction with PGMY09-PGMY11 primers and linear array for α-HPV and type-specific multiplex genotyping assay for ß-HPV and γ-HPV. Sociodemographic and behavioral data were obtained from interviews. RESULTS: The prevalence of α-, ß-, and γ-HPV among controls was 14%, 56%, and 24%, respectively, whereas prevalence among cases was 42%, 50%, and 33%, respectively. Prevalence of α- and γ-HPV, but not ß-HPV, increased with increase in sexual activity, smoking, and drinking habits. No HPV genus was associated with oral health. Tumor samples included HPV genotypes exclusively from the α-genus, mostly HPV-16, in 80% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: The distribution of α- and γ-HPV, but not ß-HPV, seems to vary based on sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics. We did not observe the presence of cutaneous HPV in tumor tissues.

OpenSAFELY: The impact of COVID-19 on azathioprine, leflunomide and methotrexate monitoring, and factors associated with change in monitoring rate.

AIMS: The COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented pressure on healthcare services. This study investigates whether disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) safety monitoring was affected during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A population-based cohort study was conducted using the OpenSAFELY platform to access electronic health record data from 24.2 million patients registered at general practices using TPP's SystmOne software. Patients were included for further analysis if prescribed azathioprine, leflunomide or methotrexate between November 2019 and July 2022. Outcomes were assessed as monthly trends and variation between various sociodemographic and clinical groups for adherence with standard safety monitoring recommendations. RESULTS: An acute increase in the rate of missed monitoring occurred across the study population (+12.4 percentage points) when lockdown measures were implemented in March 2020. This increase was more pronounced for some patient groups (70-79 year-olds: +13.7 percentage points; females: +12.8 percentage points), regions (North West: +17.0 percentage points), medications (leflunomide: +20.7 percentage points) and monitoring tests (blood pressure: +24.5 percentage points). Missed monitoring rates decreased substantially for all groups by July 2022. Consistent differences were observed in overall missed monitoring rates between several groups throughout the study. CONCLUSION: DMARD monitoring rates temporarily deteriorated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Deterioration coincided with the onset of lockdown measures, with monitoring rates recovering rapidly as lockdown measures were eased. Differences observed in monitoring rates between medications, tests, regions and patient groups highlight opportunities to tackle potential inequalities in the provision or uptake of monitoring services. Further research should evaluate the causes of the differences identified between groups.

The impact of COVID-19 on medication reviews in English primary care. An OpenSAFELY-TPP analysis of 20 million adult electronic health records.

AIMS: The COVID-19 pandemic caused significant disruption to routine activity in primary care. Medication reviews are an important primary care activity ensuring safety and appropriateness of prescribing. A disruption could have significant negative implications for patient care. Using routinely collected data, our aim was first to describe codes used to record medication review activity and then to report the impact of COVID-19 on the rates of medication reviews. METHODS: With the approval of NHS England, we conducted a cohort study of 20 million adult patient records in general practice, in-situ using the OpenSAFELY platform. For each month, between April 2019 and March 2022, we report the percentage of patients with a medication review coded monthly and in the previous 12 months with breakdowns by regional, clinical and demographic subgroups and those prescribed high-risk medications. RESULTS: In April 2019, 32.3% of patients had a medication review coded in the previous 12 months. During the first COVID-19 lockdown, monthly activity decreased (-21.1% April 2020), but the 12-month rate was not substantially impacted (-10.5% March 2021). The rate of structured medication review in the last 12 months reached 2.9% by March 2022, with higher percentages in high-risk groups (care home residents 34.1%, age 90+ years 13.1%, high-risk medications 10.2%). The most used medication review code was Medication review done 314530002 (59.5%). CONCLUSIONS: There was a substantial reduction in the monthly rate of medication reviews during the pandemic but rates recovered by the end of the study period. Structured medication reviews were prioritized for high-risk patients.

Inequalities in access to prenatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic: Analysis of a population-based cohort.

BACKGROUND: Before the COVID-19 pandemic, access to prenatal care was lower among some socio-demographic groups. This pandemic caused disruptions to routine preventative care, which could have increased inequalities. OBJECTIVES: To investigate if the COVID-19 pandemic increased inequalities in access to prenatal care among those who are younger, live in rural areas, have a lower socio-economic situation (SES) and are recent immigrants. METHODS: We used linked administrative datasets from ICES to identify a population-based cohort of 455,245 deliveries in Ontario from January 2018 to December 2021. Our outcomes were first-trimester prenatal visits, first-trimester ultrasound and adequacy of prenatal care. We used joinpoint analysis to examine outcome time trends and identify trend change points. We stratified analyses by age, rural residence, SES and recent immigration, and examined risk differences (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) between groups at the beginning and end of the study period. RESULTS: For all outcomes, we noted disruptions to care beginning in March or April 2020 and returning to previous trends by November 2020. Inequalities were stable across groups, except recent immigrants. In July 2017, 65.0% and 69.8% of recent immigrants and non-immigrants, respectively, received ultrasounds in the first trimester (RD -4.8%, 95% CI -8.0, -1.5). By October 2020, this had increased to 75.4%, with no difference with non-immigrants (RD 0.4%, 95% CI -2.4, 3.2). Adequacy of prenatal care showed more intensive care as of November 2020, reflecting a higher number of visits. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that inequalities between socio-economic groups that existed prior to the pandemic worsened after March 2020. The pandemic may be associated with increased access to care for recent immigrants. The introduction of virtual visits may have resulted in a higher number of prenatal care visits.

Antenatal corticosteroids and newborn respiratory outcomes in twins: A regression discontinuity study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of antenatal corticosteroids on newborn respiratory morbidity in twins. DESIGN: Regression discontinuity applied to population-based birth registry data. SETTING: British Columbia, Canada, 2008-2018. POPULATION: Twin pregnancies admitted for birth between 31+0 and 36+6 weeks of gestation. METHODS: During our study period, Canadian clinical practice guidelines recommended antenatal corticosteroid administration for imminent preterm birth up to 33+6 weeks. We used a logistic model to compare the predicted risks of our outcomes among pregnancies admitted for birth immediately before this clinical cut-point (higher probability of exposure to antenatal corticosteroids) versus immediately after it (lower probability). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Our primary outcome was a composite of newborn respiratory distress or in-hospital death. Our secondary outcome was a composite of newborn respiratory intervention or in-hospital death. RESULTS: Among 2524 pregnancies (5035 liveborn twins), 47% of admissions before 34+0 weeks of gestation were exposed to antenatal corticosteroids but only 4.2% of admissions after this cut-point were exposed. The risk of newborn respiratory distress or in-hospital mortality increased abruptly at 34+0 weeks, corresponding to a protective effect of treatment (risk ratio [RR] 0.69, 95% CI 0.53-0.90; risk difference [RD] -12 cases per 100 births, 95% CI -20 to -4.1). There was no clear evidence for or against an effect on newborn respiratory intervention or in-hospital death (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.70-1.13; RD -4.2 per 100, 95% CI -13 to +4.2). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide evidence for the effectiveness of antenatal corticosteroids in preventing adverse newborn respiratory outcomes in twins.

Subgroup effects should be examined using both relative and absolute effect measures.

Treatment effects can be measured on the relative scale (eg, risk ratios, odds ratios) or the absolute scale (eg, risk differences). If the baseline risk of an outcome is different between subgroups, the effect of the treatment will differ between subgroups on at least one scale (relative, absolute, or both). We illustrate this using two examples from the literature where only relative effects were estimated, but conclusions about subgroup differences would likely have changed had absolute effects also been considered. To identify all meaningful subgroup differences, researchers and clinicians should compare effects on the relative and absolute scale.

Severity of Severe Acute Respiratory System Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Alpha Variant (B.1.1.7) in England.

BACKGROUND: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) alpha variant (B.1.1.7) is associated with higher transmissibility than wild-type virus, becoming the dominant variant in England by January 2021. We aimed to describe the severity of the alpha variant in terms of the pathway of disease from testing positive to hospital admission and death. METHODS: With the approval of NHS England, we linked individual-level data from primary care with SARS-CoV-2 community testing, hospital admission, and Office for National Statistics all-cause death data. We used testing data with S-gene target failure as a proxy for distinguishing alpha and wild-type cases, and stratified Cox proportional hazards regression to compare the relative severity of alpha cases with wild-type diagnosed from 16 November 2020 to 11 January 2021. RESULTS: Using data from 185 234 people who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in the community (alpha = 93 153; wild-type = 92 081), in fully adjusted analysis accounting for individual-level demographics and comorbidities as well as regional variation in infection incidence, we found alpha associated with 73% higher hazards of all-cause death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.41-2.13; P < .0001) and 62% higher hazards of hospital admission (1.62; 1.48-1.78; P < .0001) compared with wild-type virus. Among patients already admitted to the intensive care unit, the association between alpha and increased all-cause mortality was smaller and the CI included the null (aHR: 1.20; 95% CI: .74-1.95; P = .45). CONCLUSIONS: The SARS-CoV-2 alpha variant is associated with an increased risk of both hospitalization and mortality than wild-type virus.

Health care services use, stillbirth, and neonatal and infant survival following implementation of the Maternal Health Voucher Scheme in Bangladesh: A difference-in-differences analysis of Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey data, 2000 to 2016.

BACKGROUND: Starting in 2006 to 2007, the Government of Bangladesh implemented the Maternal Health Voucher Scheme (MHVS). This program provides pregnant women with vouchers that can be exchanged for health services from eligible public and private sector providers. In this study, we examined whether access to the MHVS was associated with maternal health services utilization, stillbirth, and neonatal and infant mortality. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used information on pregnancies and live births between 2000 to 2016 reported by women 15 to 49 years of age surveyed as part of the Bangladesh Demographic and Health Surveys. Our analytic sample included 23,275 pregnancies lasting at least 7 months for analyses of stillbirth and between 15,125 and 21,668 live births for analyses of health services use, neonatal, and infant mortality. With respect to live births occurring prior to the introduction of the MHVS, 31.3%, 14.1%, and 18.0% of women, respectively, reported receiving at least 3 antenatal care visits, delivering in a health institution, and having a skilled birth attendant at delivery. Rates of neonatal and infant mortality during this period were 40 and 63 per 1,000 live births, respectively, and there were 32 stillbirths per 1,000 pregnancies lasting at least 7 months. We applied a difference-in-differences design to estimate the effect of providing subdistrict-level access to the MHVS program, with inverse probability of treatment weights to address selection into the program. The introduction of the MHVS program was associated with a lagged improvement in the probability of delivering in a health facility, one of the primary targets of the program, although associations with other health services were less evident. After 6 years of access to the MHVS, the probabilities of reporting at least 3 antenatal care visits, delivering in a health facility, and having a skilled birth attendant present increased by 3.0 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) = -4.8, 10.7], 6.5 (95% CI = -0.6, 13.6), and 5.8 (95% CI = -1.8, 13.3) percentage points, respectively. We did not observe evidence consistent with the program improving health outcomes, with probabilities of stillbirth, neonatal mortality, and infant mortality decreasing by 0.7 (95% CI = -1.3, 2.6), 0.8 (95% CI = -1.7, 3.4), and 1.3 (95% CI = -2.5, 5.1) percentage points, respectively, after 6 years of access to the MHVS. The sample size was insufficient to detect smaller associations with adequate precision. Additionally, we cannot rule out the possibility of measurement error, although it was likely nondifferential by treatment group, or unmeasured confounding by concomitant interventions that were implemented differentially in treated and control areas. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that the introduction of the MHVS was positively associated with the probability of delivering in a health facility, but despite a longer period of follow-up than most extant evaluations, we did not observe attendant reductions in stillbirth, neonatal mortality, or infant mortality. Further work and engagement with stakeholders is needed to assess if the MHVS has affected the quality of care and health inequalities and whether the design and eligibility of the program should be modified to improve maternal and neonatal health outcomes.

Overall and cause-specific hospitalisation and death after COVID-19 hospitalisation in England: A cohort study using linked primary care, secondary care, and death registration data in the OpenSAFELY platform.

BACKGROUND: There is concern about medium to long-term adverse outcomes following acute Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), but little relevant evidence exists. We aimed to investigate whether risks of hospital admission and death, overall and by specific cause, are raised following discharge from a COVID-19 hospitalisation. METHODS AND FINDINGS: With the approval of NHS-England, we conducted a cohort study, using linked primary care and hospital data in OpenSAFELY to compare risks of hospital admission and death, overall and by specific cause, between people discharged from COVID-19 hospitalisation (February to December 2020) and surviving at least 1 week, and (i) demographically matched controls from the 2019 general population; and (ii) people discharged from influenza hospitalisation in 2017 to 2019. We used Cox regression adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, obesity, smoking status, deprivation, and comorbidities considered potential risk factors for severe COVID-19 outcomes. We included 24,673 postdischarge COVID-19 patients, 123,362 general population controls, and 16,058 influenza controls, followed for ≤315 days. COVID-19 patients had median age of 66 years, 13,733 (56%) were male, and 19,061 (77%) were of white ethnicity. Overall risk of hospitalisation or death (30,968 events) was higher in the COVID-19 group than general population controls (fully adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.22, 2.14 to 2.30, p < 0.001) but slightly lower than the influenza group (aHR 0.95, 0.91 to 0.98, p = 0.004). All-cause mortality (7,439 events) was highest in the COVID-19 group (aHR 4.82, 4.48 to 5.19 versus general population controls [p < 0.001] and 1.74, 1.61 to 1.88 versus influenza controls [p < 0.001]). Risks for cause-specific outcomes were higher in COVID-19 survivors than in general population controls and largely similar or lower in COVID-19 compared with influenza patients. However, COVID-19 patients were more likely than influenza patients to be readmitted or die due to their initial infection or other lower respiratory tract infection (aHR 1.37, 1.22 to 1.54, p < 0.001) and to experience mental health or cognitive-related admission or death (aHR 1.37, 1.02 to 1.84, p = 0.039); in particular, COVID-19 survivors with preexisting dementia had higher risk of dementia hospitalisation or death (age- and sex-adjusted HR 2.47, 1.37 to 4.44, p = 0.002). Limitations of our study were that reasons for hospitalisation or death may have been misclassified in some cases due to inconsistent use of codes, and we did not have data to distinguish COVID-19 variants. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that people discharged from a COVID-19 hospital admission had markedly higher risks for rehospitalisation and death than the general population, suggesting a substantial extra burden on healthcare. Most risks were similar to those observed after influenza hospitalisations, but COVID-19 patients had higher risks of all-cause mortality, readmission or death due to the initial infection, and dementia death, highlighting the importance of postdischarge monitoring.

Ethnic differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19-related hospitalisation, intensive care unit admission, and death in 17 million adults in England: an observational cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platform.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has disproportionately affected minority ethnic populations in the UK. Our aim was to quantify ethnic differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 outcomes during the first and second waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in England. METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort study of adults (aged ≥18 years) registered with primary care practices in England for whom electronic health records were available through the OpenSAFELY platform, and who had at least 1 year of continuous registration at the start of each study period (Feb 1 to Aug 3, 2020 [wave 1], and Sept 1 to Dec 31, 2020 [wave 2]). Individual-level primary care data were linked to data from other sources on the outcomes of interest: SARS-CoV-2 testing and positive test results and COVID-19-related hospital admissions, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and death. The exposure was self-reported ethnicity as captured on the primary care record, grouped into five high-level census categories (White, South Asian, Black, other, and mixed) and 16 subcategories across these five categories, as well as an unknown ethnicity category. We used multivariable Cox regression to examine ethnic differences in the outcomes of interest. Models were adjusted for age, sex, deprivation, clinical factors and comorbidities, and household size, with stratification by geographical region. FINDINGS: Of 17 288 532 adults included in the study (excluding care home residents), 10 877 978 (62·9%) were White, 1 025 319 (5·9%) were South Asian, 340 912 (2·0%) were Black, 170 484 (1·0%) were of mixed ethnicity, 320 788 (1·9%) were of other ethnicity, and 4 553 051 (26·3%) were of unknown ethnicity. In wave 1, the likelihood of being tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection was slightly higher in the South Asian group (adjusted hazard ratio 1·08 [95% CI 1·07-1·09]), Black group (1·08 [1·06-1·09]), and mixed ethnicity group (1·04 [1·02-1·05]) and was decreased in the other ethnicity group (0·77 [0·76-0·78]) relative to the White group. The risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection was higher in the South Asian group (1·99 [1·94-2·04]), Black group (1·69 [1·62-1·77]), mixed ethnicity group (1·49 [1·39-1·59]), and other ethnicity group (1·20 [1·14-1·28]). Compared with the White group, the four remaining high-level ethnic groups had an increased risk of COVID-19-related hospitalisation (South Asian group 1·48 [1·41-1·55], Black group 1·78 [1·67-1·90], mixed ethnicity group 1·63 [1·45-1·83], other ethnicity group 1·54 [1·41-1·69]), COVID-19-related ICU admission (2·18 [1·92-2·48], 3·12 [2·65-3·67], 2·96 [2·26-3·87], 3·18 [2·58-3·93]), and death (1·26 [1·15-1·37], 1·51 [1·31-1·71], 1·41 [1·11-1·81], 1·22 [1·00-1·48]). In wave 2, the risks of hospitalisation, ICU admission, and death relative to the White group were increased in the South Asian group but attenuated for the Black group compared with these risks in wave 1. Disaggregation into 16 ethnicity groups showed important heterogeneity within the five broader categories. INTERPRETATION: Some minority ethnic populations in England have excess risks of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 and of adverse COVID-19 outcomes compared with the White population, even after accounting for differences in sociodemographic, clinical, and household characteristics. Causes are likely to be multifactorial, and delineating the exact mechanisms is crucial. Tackling ethnic inequalities will require action across many fronts, including reducing structural inequalities, addressing barriers to equitable care, and improving uptake of testing and vaccination. FUNDING: Medical Research Council.

Describing the population experiencing COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough following second vaccination in England: a cohort study from OpenSAFELY.

BACKGROUND: While the vaccines against COVID-19 are highly effective, COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough is possible despite being fully vaccinated. With SARS-CoV-2 variants still circulating, describing the characteristics of individuals who have experienced COVID-19 vaccine breakthroughs could be hugely important in helping to determine who may be at greatest risk. METHODS: With the approval of NHS England, we conducted a retrospective cohort study using routine clinical data from the OpenSAFELY-TPP database of fully vaccinated individuals, linked to secondary care and death registry data and described the characteristics of those experiencing COVID-19 vaccine breakthroughs. RESULTS: As of 1st November 2021, a total of 15,501,550 individuals were identified as being fully vaccinated against COVID-19, with a median follow-up time of 149 days (IQR: ​107-179). From within this population, a total of 579,780 (<4%) individuals reported a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. For every 1000 years of patient follow-up time, the corresponding incidence rate (IR) was 98.06 (95% CI 97.93-98.19). There were 28,580 COVID-19-related hospital admissions, 1980 COVID-19-related critical care admissions and 6435 COVID-19-related deaths; corresponding IRs 4.77 (95% CI 4.74-4.80), 0.33 (95% CI 0.32-0.34) and 1.07 (95% CI 1.06-1.09), respectively. The highest rates of breakthrough COVID-19 were seen in those in care homes and in patients with chronic kidney disease, dialysis, transplant, haematological malignancy or who were immunocompromised. CONCLUSIONS: While the majority of COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough cases in England were mild, some differences in rates of breakthrough cases have been identified in several clinical groups. While it is important to note that these findings are simply descriptive and cannot be used to answer why certain groups have higher rates of COVID-19 breakthrough than others, the emergence of the Omicron variant of COVID-19 coupled with the number of positive SARS-CoV-2 tests still occurring is concerning and as numbers of fully vaccinated (and boosted) individuals increases and as follow-up time lengthens, so too will the number of COVID-19 breakthrough cases. Additional analyses, to assess vaccine waning and rates of breakthrough COVID-19 between different variants, aimed at identifying individuals at higher risk, are needed.

Antenatal corticosteroid administration and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in childhood: a regression discontinuity study.

BACKGROUND: Antenatal corticosteroids reduce respiratory morbidity in preterm infants, but their use during late preterm gestation (34-36 weeks) is limited because their safety for longer-term child neurodevelopment is unclear. We sought to determine if fetuses with higher probability of exposure to antenatal corticosteroids had increased rates of prescriptions for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medication in childhood, using a quasiexperimental design that better controls for confounding than existing observational studies. METHODS: We identified 16 358 children whose birthing parents were admitted for delivery between 31 + 0 (31 weeks, 0 days) and 36 + 6 weeks' gestation in 2000-2013, using a perinatal data registry from British Columbia, Canada, and linked their records with population-based child ADHD medication data (2000-2018). We used a regression discontinuity design to capitalize on the fact that pregnancies presenting for delivery immediately before and immediately after the clinical cut-off for antenatal corticosteroid administration of 34 + 0 weeks' gestation have very different levels of exposure to corticosteroids, but are otherwise similar with respect to confounders. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up period of 9 years, 892 (5.5%) children had 1 or more dispensations of ADHD medication. Children whose birthing parents were admitted for delivery just before the corticosteroid clinical cut-off of 34 + 0 weeks' gestation did not appear to be more likely to be prescribed ADHD medication than those admitted just after the cut-off (rate ratio 1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.8 to 1.6; 1.3 excess cases per 100 children, 95% CI -2.5 to 5.7). INTERPRETATION: We found little evidence that children with higher probability of exposure to antenatal corticosteroids have higher rates of ADHD prescriptions in childhood, supporting the safety of antenatal corticosteroids for this neurodevelopmental outcome.

Socioeconomic and Demographic Associations with Wintertime Air Pollution Exposures at Household, Community, and District Scales in Rural Beijing, China.

The Chinese government implemented a national household energy transition program that replaced residential coal heating stoves with electricity-powered heat pumps for space heating in northern China. As part of a baseline assessment of the program, this study investigated variability in personal air pollution exposures within villages and between villages and evaluated exposure patterns by sociodemographic factors. We randomly recruited 446 participants in 50 villages in four districts in rural Beijing and measured 24 h personal exposures to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and black carbon (BC). The geometric mean personal exposure to PM2.5 and BC was 72 and 2.5 µg/m3, respectively. The variability in PM2.5 and BC exposures was greater within villages than between villages. Study participants who used traditional stoves as their dominant source of space heating were exposed to the highest levels of PM2.5 and BC. Wealthier households tended to burn more coal for space heating, whereas less wealthy households used more biomass. PM2.5 and BC exposures were almost uniformly distributed by socioeconomic status. Future work that combines these results with PM2.5 chemical composition analysis will shed light on whether air pollution source contributors (e.g., industrial, traffic, and household solid fuel burning) follow similar distributions.

The effects of supported housing for individuals with mental disorders.

Societies face the challenge of providing appropriate arrangements for individuals who need living support due to their mental disorders. We estimate the effects of eligibility to the Dutch supported housing program (Beschermd Wonen), which offers a structured living environment in the community as an intermediate alternative to independent housing and inpatient care. For this, we use exogenous variation in eligibility based on conditionally random assignment of applications to assessors, and the universe of applications to supported housing in the Netherlands, linked to rich administrative data. Supported housing eligibility increases the probability of moving into supported housing and decreases the use of home care, resulting in higher total care expenditures. This increase is primarily due to the costs of supported housing, but potentially also higher consumption of curative mental health care. Supported housing eligibility reduces the total personal income and income from work. Findings do also suggest lower participation in the labor market by the individuals granted eligibility, but the labor participation of their parents increases in the long-run. Our study highlights the trade-offs of access to supported housing for those at the margin of eligibility, informing the design of long-term mental health care systems around the world.

Field measurements of indoor and community air quality in rural Beijing before, during, and after the COVID-19 lockdown.

The coronavirus (COVID-19) lockdown in China is thought to have reduced air pollution emissions due to reduced human mobility and economic activities. Few studies have assessed the impacts of COVID-19 on community and indoor air quality in environments with diverse socioeconomic and household energy use patterns. The main goal of this study was to evaluate whether indoor and community air pollution differed before, during, and after the COVID-19 lockdown in homes with different energy use patterns. Using calibrated real-time PM2.5 sensors, we measured indoor and community air quality in 147 homes from 30 villages in Beijing over 4 months including periods before, during, and after the COVID-19 lockdown. Community pollution was higher during the lockdown (61 ± 47 µg/m3 ) compared with before (45 ± 35 µg/m3 , p < 0.001) and after (47 ± 37 µg/m3 , p < 0.001) the lockdown. However, we did not observe significantly increased indoor PM2.5 during the COVID-19 lockdown. Indoor-generated PM2.5 in homes using clean energy for heating without smokers was the lowest compared with those using solid fuel with/without smokers, implying air pollutant emissions are reduced in homes using clean energy. Indoor air quality may not have been impacted by the COVID-19 lockdown in rural settings in China and appeared to be more impacted by the household energy choice and indoor smoking than the COVID-19 lockdown. As clean energy transitions occurred in rural households in northern China, our work highlights the importance of understanding multiple possible indoor sources to interpret the impacts of interventions, intended or otherwise.

Recording of 'COVID-19 vaccine declined': a cohort study on 57.9 million National Health Service patients' records in situ using OpenSAFELY, England, 8 December 2020 to 25 May 2021.

BackgroundPriority patients in England were offered COVID-19 vaccination by mid-April 2021. Codes in clinical record systems can denote the vaccine being declined.AimWe describe records of COVID-19 vaccines being declined, according to clinical and demographic factors.MethodsWith the approval of NHS England, we conducted a retrospective cohort study between 8 December 2020 and 25 May 2021 with primary care records for 57.9 million patients using OpenSAFELY, a secure health analytics platform. COVID-19 vaccination priority patients were those aged ≥ 50 years or ≥ 16 years clinically extremely vulnerable (CEV) or 'at risk'. We describe the proportion recorded as declining vaccination for each group and stratified by clinical and demographic subgroups, subsequent vaccination and distribution of clinical code usage across general practices.ResultsOf 24.5 million priority patients, 663,033 (2.7%) had a decline recorded, while 2,155,076 (8.8%) had neither a vaccine nor decline recorded. Those recorded as declining, who were subsequently vaccinated (n = 125,587; 18.9%) were overrepresented in the South Asian population (32.3% vs 22.8% for other ethnicities aged ≥ 65 years). The proportion of declining unvaccinated patients was highest in CEV (3.3%), varied strongly with ethnicity (black 15.3%, South Asian 5.6%, white 1.5% for ≥ 80 years) and correlated positively with increasing deprivation.ConclusionsClinical codes indicative of COVID-19 vaccinations being declined are commonly used in England, but substantially more common among black and South Asian people, and in more deprived areas. Qualitative research is needed to determine typical reasons for recorded declines, including to what extent they reflect patients actively declining.

Declining Life Expectancy in the United States: Missing the Trees for the Forest.

In recent years, life expectancy in the United States has stagnated, followed by three consecutive years of decline. The decline is small in absolute terms but is unprecedented and has generated considerable research interest and theorizing about potential causes. Recent trends show that the decline has affected nearly all race/ethnic and gender groups, and the proximate causes of the decline are increases in opioid overdose deaths, suicide, homicide, and Alzheimer's disease. A slowdown in the long-term decline in mortality from cardiovascular diseases has also prevented life expectancy from improving further. Although a popular explanation for the decline is the cumulative decline in living standards across generations, recent trends suggest that distinct mechanisms for specific causes of death are more plausible explanations. Interventions to stem the increase in overdose deaths, reduce access to mechanisms that contribute to violent deaths, and decrease cardiovascular risk over the life course are urgently needed to improve mortality in the United States.

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.

Spatiotemporal distribution and socioeconomic disparities of dengue, chikungunya and Zika in two Latin American cities from 2007 to 2017.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the presence, pattern and magnitude of socioeconomic inequalities on dengue, chikungunya and Zika in Latin America, accounting for their spatiotemporal distribution. METHODS: Using longitudinal surveillance data (reported arboviruses) from Fortaleza, Brazil and Medellin, Colombia (2007-2017), we fit Bayesian hierarchical models with structured random effects to estimate: (i) spatiotemporally adjusted incidence rates; (ii) Relative Concentration Index and Absolute Concentration Index of inequality; (iii) temporal trends in RCIs; and (iv) socioeconomic-specific estimates of disease distribution. The spatial analysis was conducted at the neighbourhood level (urban settings). The socioeconomic measures were the median monthly household income (MMHI) for Brazil and the Socio-Economic Strata index (SES) in Colombia. RESULTS: There were 281 426 notified arboviral cases in Fortaleza and 40 887 in Medellin. We observed greater concentration of dengue among residents of low socioeconomic neighbourhoods in both cities: Relative Concentration Index = -0.12 (95% CI = -0.13, -0.10) in Fortaleza and Relative Concentration Index = -0.04 (95% CI = -0.05, -0.03) in Medellin. The magnitude of inequalities varied over time across sites and was larger during outbreaks. We identified a non-monotonic association between disease rates and socioeconomic measures, especially for chikungunya, that changed over time. The Relative Concentration Index and Absolute Concentration Index showed few if any inequalities for Zika. The socioeconomic-specific model showed increased disease rates at MMHI below US$400 in Brazil and at SES-index below level four, in Colombia. CONCLUSIONS: We provide robust quantitative estimates of socioeconomic inequalities in arboviruses for two Latin American cities. Our findings could inform policymaking by identifying spatial hotspots for arboviruses and targeting strategies to decrease disparities at the local level.