How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected the delivery of preventive healthcare? An interrupted time series analysis of adults in English primary care from 2018 to 2022.

OBJECTIVE: Offering advice and support for smoking, obesity, excess alcohol, and physical inactivity is an evidence-based component of primary care. The objective was to quantify the impact of the pandemic on the rate of advice or referral for these four risk factors. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using primary care data from 1847 practices in England and 21,191,389 patients contributing to the Oxford Clinical Informatics Digital Hub. An interrupted time series analysis was undertaken with a single change point (March 2020). Monthly trends were modelled from 1st January 2018 - 30th June 2022 using segmented linear regression. RESULTS: There was an initial step reduction in advice and referrals for smoking, obesity, excess alcohol, and physical inactivity in March 2020. By June 2022, advice on smoking (slope change -0.02 events per hundred patient years/month (EPH/month); 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.17, 0.21), obesity (0.06 EPH/month; 95% CI 0.01, 0.12), alcohol (0.02 EPH/month; 95% CI -0.01, 0.05) and physical inactivity (0.05 EPH/month; 95% CI 0.01, 0.09) had not returned to pre-pandemic levels. Similarly, smoking cessation referral remained lower (0.01 EPH/month; 95% CI -0.01, 0.09), excess alcohol referral returned to similar levels (0.0005 EPH/month; 95% CI 0.0002, 0.0008), while referral for obesity (0.14 EPH/month; 95% CI 0.10, 0.19) and physical inactivity (0.01 EPH/month; 95% CI 0.01, 0.02) increased relative to pre-pandemic rates. CONCLUSION: Advice and support for smoking, and advice for weight, excess alcohol and physical inactivity have not returned to pre-pandemic levels. Clinicians and policy makers should prioritise preventive care in COVID-19 recovery plans.

The association between restricted activity and patient outcomes in older adults: systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Restricted activity is a potential early marker of declining health in older adults. Previous studies of this association with patient outcomes have been inconclusive. This review aimed to evaluate the extent to which restricted activity is associated with decline in health. METHODS: A search was conducted for studies including people over 65 years old which investigated the association between measures of restricted activity and hospitalisation, cognitive decline, and mortality. Following data extraction by two reviewers, eligible studies were summarised using Inverse Variance Heterogeneity meta-analysis. RESULTS: The search identified 8,434 unique publications, with 11 eligible studies. Three measures of restricted activity were identified: bed rest, restricted movement, and dependency for activities of daily living (ADL). Three studies looked at hospitalisations, with two finding a significant association with bed rest or restricted movement and one showing no evidence of an association. Restricted activity was associated with a significant increase in mortality across all three measures (bed rest odds ratio [OR] 6.34, 95%CI 2.51-16.02, I2 = 76%; restricted movement OR 5.38 95%CI 2.60-11.13, I2 = 69%; general ADL dependency OR 4.65 95%CI 2.25-9.26, I2 = 84%). The significant heterogeneity observed could not be explained by restricting the analysis by length of follow-up, or measure of restricted activity. No meta-analysis was conducted on the limited evidence for cognitive decline outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Limited studies have considered the prognostic value of restricted activity in terms of predicting future declining health. Current evidence suggests restricted activity is associated with hospitalisation and mortality, and therefore could identify a group for whom early intervention might be possible.

Comparison of clinic and home blood pressure readings in higher risk pregnancies - Secondary analysis of the BUMP 1 trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare clinic and home blood pressure readings in higher risk pregnancies in the antenatal period from 20 weeks gestation, and to evaluate differences between the two modalities. STUDY DESIGN: A cohort study comprising a secondary analysis of a large randomised controlled trial (BUMP 1). POPULATION: Normotensive women at higher risk of pregnancy hypertension randomised to self-monitoring of blood pressure. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the overall mean difference between clinic and home readings for systolic blood pressure (sBP) and diastolic blood pressure (dBP). Blood pressure readings were averaged across each gestational week for each participant and compared within the same gestational week. Calculations of the overall differences were based on the average difference for each week for each participant. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 925 participants. In total, 92 (10 %) developed a hypertensive disorder during the pregnancy. A significant difference in the overall mean sBP (clinic - home) of 1.1 mmHg (0.5-1.6 95 %CI) was noted, whereas no significant difference for the overall mean dBP was found (0.0 mmHg (-0.4-0.4 95 %CI)). No tendency of proportional bias was noted based on Bland-Altman plots. Increasing body mass index in general increased the difference (clinic - home) for both sBP and dBP in a multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: No clinically significant difference was found between clinic and home blood pressure readings in normotensive higher risk pregnancies from gestational week 20+0 until 40+0. Clinic and home blood pressure readings might be considered equal during pregnancy in women who are normotensive at baseline.

Evaluating the efficacy and mechanisms of a ketogenic diet as adjunctive treatment for people with treatment-resistant depression: A protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: One-third of people with depression do not respond to antidepressants, and, after two adequate courses of antidepressants, are classified as having treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Some case reports suggest that ketogenic diets (KDs) may improve some mental illnesses, and preclinical data indicate that KDs can influence brain reward signalling, anhedonia, cortisol, and gut microbiome which are associated with depression. To date, no trials have examined the clinical effect of a KD on TRD. METHODS: This is a proof-of-concept randomised controlled trial to investigate the efficacy of a six-week programme of weekly dietitian counselling plus provision of KD meals, compared with an intervention involving similar dietetic contact time and promoting a healthy diet with increased vegetable consumption and reduction in saturated fat, plus food vouchers to purchase healthier items. At 12 weeks we will assess whether participants have continued to follow the assigned diet. The primary outcome is the difference between groups in the change in Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) score from baseline to 6 weeks. PHQ-9 will be measured at weeks 2, 4, 6 and 12. The secondary outcomes are the differences between groups in the change in remission of depression, change in anxiety score, functioning ability, quality of life, cognitive performance, reward sensitivity, and anhedonia from baseline to 6 and 12 weeks. We will also assess whether changes in reward sensitivity, anhedonia, cortisol awakening response and gut microbiome may explain any changes in depression severity. DISCUSSION: This study will test whether a ketogenic diet is an effective intervention to reduce the severity of depression, anxiety and improve quality of life and functioning ability for people with treatment-resistant depression.