RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Betacoronavirus/patogenicidad , Infecciones por Coronavirus/mortalidad , Neumonía Viral/mortalidad , Adolescente , Adulto , Distribución por Edad , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Envejecimiento , Pueblo Asiatico/estadística & datos numéricos , Asma/epidemiología , Población Negra/estadística & datos numéricos , COVID-19 , Estudios de Cohortes , Infecciones por Coronavirus/prevención & control , Infecciones por Coronavirus/virología , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Hipertensión/epidemiología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pandemias/prevención & control , Neumonía Viral/prevención & control , Neumonía Viral/virología , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Medición de Riesgo , SARS-CoV-2 , Caracteres Sexuales , Fumar/epidemiología , Medicina Estatal , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Routinely collected electronic health records (EHR) offer a valuable opportunity to carry out research on immunization uptake, effectiveness, and safety, using large and representative samples of the population. In contrast to other drugs, vaccines do not require electronic prescription in many settings, which may lead to ambiguous coding of vaccination status and timing. METHODOLOGY: We propose a comprehensive algorithm to identifying childhood immunizations in routinely collected EHR. In order to deal with ambiguous coding, over-recording, and backdating in EHR, we suggest an approach combining a wide range of medical codes in combination to identify vaccination events and using appropriate wash-out periods and quality checks. We illustrate this approach on a cohort of children born between 2006 and 2014 followed up to the age of five in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum, a UK primary care dataset of EHR, and validate the results against national estimates of vaccine coverage by NHS Digital and Public Health England. RESULTS: Our algorithm reproduced estimates of vaccination coverage, which are comparable to official national estimates and allows to approximate the age at vaccination. Electronic prescription data only do not cover vaccination events sufficiently. CONCLUSION: Our new proposed method could be used to provide a more accurate estimation of vaccination coverage and timing of vaccination for researchers and policymakers using EHR. As with all observational research using real-world data, it is important that researchers understand the context of the used dataset used and the clinical practice of recording.
Asunto(s)
Algoritmos , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Humanos , Registros Electrónicos de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Reino Unido , Preescolar , Lactante , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Cobertura de Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Inmunización/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Recién Nacido , Vacunas/administración & dosificación , Estudios de CohortesRESUMEN
The COVID-19 vaccines were developed and rigorously evaluated in randomized trials during 2020. However, important questions, such as the magnitude and duration of protection, their effectiveness against new virus variants, and the effectiveness of booster vaccination, could not be answered by randomized trials and have therefore been addressed in observational studies. Analyses of observational data can be biased because of confounding and because of inadequate design that does not consider the evolution of the pandemic over time and the rapid uptake of vaccination. Emulating a hypothetical "target trial" using observational data assembled during vaccine rollouts can help manage such potential sources of bias. This article describes 2 approaches to target trial emulation. In the sequential approach, on each day, eligible persons who have not yet been vaccinated are matched to a vaccinated person. The single-trial approach sets a single baseline at the start of the rollout and considers vaccination as a time-varying variable. The nature of the confounding depends on the analysis strategy: Estimating "per-protocol" effects (accounting for vaccination of initially unvaccinated persons after baseline) may require adjustment for both baseline and "time-varying" confounders. These issues are illustrated by using observational data from 2 780 931 persons in the United Kingdom aged 70 years or older to estimate the effect of a first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Addressing the issues discussed in this article should help authors of observational studies provide robust evidence to guide clinical and policy decisions.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Vacunas , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Inmunización Secundaria , VacunaciónRESUMEN
AIMS: Previous studies show a reduced incidence of first myocardial infarction and stroke 1-3 months after influenza vaccination, but it is unclear how underlying cardiovascular risk impacts the association. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study used linked Clinical Practice Research Datalink, Hospital Episode Statistics Admitted Patient Care and Office for National Statistics mortality data from England between 1 September 2008 and 31 August 2019. From the data, individuals aged 40-84 years with a first acute cardiovascular event and influenza vaccination occurring within 12 months of each September were selected. Using a self-controlled case series analysis, season-adjusted cardiovascular risk stratified incidence ratios (IRs) for cardiovascular events after vaccination compared with baseline time before and >120 days after vaccination were generated. 193 900 individuals with a first acute cardiovascular event and influenza vaccine were included. 105 539 had hypertension and 172 050 had a QRISK2 score ≥10%. In main analysis, acute cardiovascular event risk was reduced in the 15-28 days after vaccination [IR 0.72 (95% CI 0.70-0.74)] and, while the effect size tapered, remained reduced to 91-120 days after vaccination [0.83 (0.81-0.88)]. Reduced cardiovascular events were seen after vaccination among individuals of all age groups and with raised and low cardiovascular risk. CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccine may offer cardiovascular benefit among individuals at varying cardiovascular risk. Further studies are needed to characterize the populations who could derive the most cardiovascular benefits from vaccination.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Infarto del Miocardio , Accidente Cerebrovascular , Humanos , Vacunas contra la Influenza/uso terapéutico , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Accidente Cerebrovascular/epidemiología , Accidente Cerebrovascular/prevención & control , Accidente Cerebrovascular/tratamiento farmacológico , Infarto del Miocardio/epidemiología , Infarto del Miocardio/prevención & control , Infarto del Miocardio/complicaciones , Vacunación/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer survival has improved in recent decades but there are concerns that survivors may develop kidney problems due to adverse effects of cancer treatment or complications of the cancer itself. We quantified the risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) in colorectal cancer survivors compared to people with no prior cancer. METHODS: Retrospective matched cohort study using electronic health record primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD linked to hospital data in England (HES-APC). Individuals with colorectal cancer between 1997-2018 were individually matched on age, sex, and GP practice to people with no prior cancer. We used Cox models to estimate hazard ratios for an incident hospital diagnosis of AKI in colorectal cancer survivors compared to individuals without cancer, overall and stratified by time since diagnosis adjusted for other individual-level factors (adj-HR). RESULTS: Twenty thousand three hundred forty colorectal cancer survivors were matched to 100,058 cancer-free individuals. Colorectal cancer survivors were at increased risk of developing AKI compared to people without cancer (adj-HR = 2.16; 95%CI 2.05-2.27). The HR was highest in the year after diagnosis (adj-HR 7.47, 6.66-8.37), and attenuated over time, but there was still increased AKI risk > 5 years after diagnosis (adj-HR = 1.26, 1.17-1.37). The association between colorectal cancer and AKI was greater for younger people, men, and those with pre-existing chronic kidney disease. CONCLUSIONS: Colorectal cancer survivors were at increased risk of AKI for several years after cancer diagnosis, suggesting a need to prioritise monitoring, prevention, and management of kidney problems in this group of cancer survivors.
Asunto(s)
Lesión Renal Aguda , Supervivientes de Cáncer , Neoplasias Colorrectales , Masculino , Humanos , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios Retrospectivos , Sobrevivientes , Lesión Renal Aguda/epidemiología , Lesión Renal Aguda/etiología , Neoplasias Colorrectales/complicaciones , Neoplasias Colorrectales/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Vaccination is an essential public health intervention to reduce morbidity and mortality from infectious diseases. Despite being at higher at risk of infectious diseases, health inequalities towards vaccine uptake in people with mental health issues have not been systematically appraised. METHODS: We searched 7 databases from 1994 to 26/03/2021. We included all studies with a relative measure of effect comparing a group with a mental health issue to a control group. All studies covering any mental health issue were eligible with no constraints to study population, vaccine type or region, provided in a high-income country for comparability of health care systems. The study outcomes were synthesised by study population, mental health issue and type of vaccine. RESULTS: From 4,069 titles, 23 eligible studies from 12 different countries were identified, focusing on adults (n = 13) or children (n = 4) with mental health issues, siblings of children with mental health issues (n = 2), and mothers with mental health issue and vaccine uptake in their children (n = 6). Most studies focused on depression (n = 12), autism, anxiety, or alcoholism (n = 4 respectively). Many studies were at high risk of selection bias. DISCUSSION: Mental health issues were associated with considerably lower vaccine uptake in some contexts such as substance use disorder, but findings were heterogeneous overall and by age, mental health issue or types of vaccine. Only individuals with mental health issues and physical comorbidities had consistently higher uptake in comparison to other adults. Mental health should be considered as a health inequality for vaccine uptake but more context specific research is needed focusing more on specific mental health issues and subgroups of the population to understand who misses vaccination and why.
Asunto(s)
Salud Mental , Vacunas , Niño , Femenino , Adulto , Humanos , Países Desarrollados , Disparidades en el Estado de Salud , MadresRESUMEN
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 (alphaâ =â 93 153; wild-typeâ =â 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; Pâ <â .0001) and 62% higher hazards of hospital admission (1.62; 1.48-1.78; Pâ <â .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; Pâ =â .45). CONCLUSIONS: The SARS-CoV-2 alpha variant is associated with an increased risk of both hospitalization and mortality than wild-type virus.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiología , Hospitalización , Humanos , Sistema Respiratorio , SARS-CoV-2/genéticaRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19/mortalidad , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , COVID-19/complicaciones , COVID-19/terapia , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Causas de Muerte , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Almacenamiento y Recuperación de la Información , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Atención Primaria de Salud , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Sistema de Registros , Factores de Riesgo , Atención Secundaria de Salud , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19/etnología , Etnicidad/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Admisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/mortalidad , Estudios de Cohortes , Inglaterra , Humanos , Estudios Observacionales como Asunto , Análisis de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Available evidence indicates that seasonal inactivated influenza vaccination during pregnancy protects both the mother and her newborn and is safe. Nevertheless, ongoing safety assessments are important in sustaining vaccine uptake. Few studies have explored safety in relation to major congenital malformations (MCMs), particularly in the first trimester when most organogenesis occurs. METHODS: Anonymized UK primary care data (the Clinical Practice Research Datalink), including a recently developed Pregnancy Register, were used to identify live-born singletons delivered between 2010 and 2016. Maternal influenza vaccination was determined using primary care records and stratified by trimester. Ascertainment of MCMs from infant primary care records was maximized by linkage to hospitalization data and death certificates. The relationship between vaccination and MCMs recorded in the year after delivery and in early childhood was then assessed using multivariable Cox regression. RESULTS: A total of 78 150 live-birth pregnancies were identified: 6872 (8.8%) were vaccinated in the first trimester, 11 678 (14.9%) in the second, and 12 931 (16.5%) in the third. Overall, 5707 live births resulted in an infant with an MCM recorded in the year after delivery and the adjusted hazard ratio when comparing first-trimester vaccination to no vaccination was 1.06 (99% CI, .94-1.19; P = .2). Results were similar for second- and third-trimester vaccination and for analyses considering MCMs recorded beyond the first birthday. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, population-based historical cohort study there was no evidence to suggest that seasonal influenza vaccine was associated with MCMs when given in the first trimester or subsequently in pregnancy.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Preescolar , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Humanos , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Vacunas contra la Influenza/efectos adversos , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Nacimiento Vivo , Embarazo , Estaciones del Año , VacunaciónRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Antiinflamatorios no Esteroideos/efectos adversos , Artritis Reumatoide/tratamiento farmacológico , COVID-19/mortalidad , Osteoartritis/tratamiento farmacológico , SARS-CoV-2 , Adulto , Anciano , Artritis Reumatoide/virología , COVID-19/complicaciones , Estudios de Cohortes , Prescripciones de Medicamentos/estadística & datos numéricos , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Osteoartritis/virología , Factores de Riesgo , Medicina EstatalRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Characterising the size and distribution of the population at risk of severe COVID-19 is vital for effective policy and planning. Older age, and underlying health conditions, are associated with higher risk of death from COVID-19. This study aimed to describe the population at risk of severe COVID-19 due to underlying health conditions across the United Kingdom. METHODS: We used anonymised electronic health records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD to estimate the point prevalence on 5 March 2019 of the at-risk population following national guidance. Prevalence for any risk condition and for each individual condition is given overall and stratified by age and region with binomial exact confidence intervals. We repeated the analysis on 5 March 2014 for full regional representation and to describe prevalence of underlying health conditions in pregnancy. We additionally described the population of cancer survivors, and assessed the value of linked secondary care records for ascertaining COVID-19 at-risk status. RESULTS: On 5 March 2019, 24.4% of the UK population were at risk due to a record of at least one underlying health condition, including 8.3% of school-aged children, 19.6% of working-aged adults, and 66.2% of individuals aged 70 years or more. 7.1% of the population had multimorbidity. The size of the at-risk population was stable over time comparing 2014 to 2019, despite increases in chronic liver disease and diabetes and decreases in chronic kidney disease and current asthma. Separately, 1.6% of the population had a new diagnosis of cancer in the past 5 y. CONCLUSIONS: The population at risk of severe COVID-19 (defined as either aged ≥70 years, or younger with an underlying health condition) comprises 18.5 million individuals in the UK, including a considerable proportion of school-aged and working-aged individuals. Our national estimates broadly support the use of Global Burden of Disease modelled estimates in other countries. We provide age- and region- stratified prevalence for each condition to support effective modelling of public health interventions and planning of vaccine resource allocation. The high prevalence of health conditions among older age groups suggests that age-targeted vaccination strategies may efficiently target individuals at higher risk of severe COVID-19.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19/epidemiología , Estado de Salud , Adolescente , Adulto , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Niño , Enfermedad Crónica/epidemiología , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Multimorbilidad , Embarazo , Prevalencia , Salud Pública , Factores de Riesgo , Reino Unido/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
The SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 variant of concern (VOC) is increasing in prevalence across Europe. Accurate estimation of disease severity associated with this VOC is critical for pandemic planning. We found increased risk of death for VOC compared with non-VOC cases in England (hazard ratio: 1.67; 95% confidence interval: 1.34-2.09; p < 0.0001). Absolute risk of death by 28 days increased with age and comorbidities. This VOC has potential to spread faster with higher mortality than the pandemic to date.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19/mortalidad , SARS-CoV-2/patogenicidad , Factores de Edad , Comorbilidad , Inglaterra/epidemiología , HumanosRESUMEN
Using electronic health records, we assessed the early impact of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on routine childhood vaccination in England by 26 April 2020. Measles-mumps-rubella vaccination counts fell from February 2020, and in the 3 weeks after introduction of physical distancing measures were 19.8% lower (95% confidence interval: -20.7 to -18.9) than the same period in 2019, before improving in mid-April. A gradual decline in hexavalent vaccination counts throughout 2020 was not accentuated by physical distancing.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Coronavirus , Brotes de Enfermedades/prevención & control , Vacuna contra el Sarampión-Parotiditis-Rubéola , Pandemias , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Preescolar , Inglaterra , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Humanos , Lactante , Sarampión/prevención & control , Paperas/prevención & control , Cuarentena , Rubéola (Sarampión Alemán)/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
PURPOSE: People with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have an increased prevalence of depression, anxiety, and neuropathic pain. We examined prevalence, incidence, indication for, and choice of antidepressants among patients with and without CKD. METHODS: Using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, we identified patients with CKD (two measurements of estimated glomerular filtration rate < 60 mL/min/1.73m2 for ≥3 months) between April 2004 and March 2014. We compared those with CKD to a general population cohort without CKD (matched on age, sex, general practice, and calendar time [index date]). We identified any antidepressant prescribing in the six months prior to index date (prevalence), the first prescription after index date among non-prevalent users (incidence), and recorded diagnoses (indication). We compared antidepressant choice between patients with and without CKD among patients with a diagnosis of depression. RESULTS: There were 242 349 matched patients (median age 76 [interquartile range 70-82], male 39.3%) with and without CKD. Prevalence of antidepressant prescribing was 16.3 and 11.9%, and incidence was 57.2 and 42.4/1000 person-years, in patients with and without CKD, respectively. After adjusting for confounders, CKD remained associated with higher prevalence and incidence of antidepressant prescription. Regardless of CKD status, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors were predominantly prescribed for depression or anxiety, while tricyclic antidepressants were prescribed for neuropathic pain or other reasons. Antidepressant choice was similar in depressed patients with and without CKD. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of antidepressant prescribing was nearly one and a half times higher among people with CKD than in the general population. © 2017 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology & Drug Safety Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Asunto(s)
Antidepresivos/clasificación , Antidepresivos/uso terapéutico , Trastorno Depresivo/tratamiento farmacológico , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Antidepresivos/administración & dosificación , Estudios de Cohortes , Bases de Datos Factuales , Trastorno Depresivo/epidemiología , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/epidemiología , Reino Unido/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is being increasingly recognised in ageing populations. There are a paucity of data about AKI risk factors among older individuals with diabetes and infections, who are at particularly high risk of AKI. The objective of this study was to evaluate the risk factors for developing acute kidney injury (AKI) amongst older patients with diabetes and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in England, and whether the impact of underlying kidney function varied with age. METHODS: This was a population-based retrospective cohort study over 7 years (01/04/2004-31/3/2011) using electronic health records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to Hospital Episode Statistics. The study population comprised individuals with diabetes aged ≥65 years with CAP. Associations between demographic, lifestyle factors, co-morbidities and medications and development of AKI within 28 days of CAP were explored in a logistic regression model. RESULTS: Among 3471 patients with CAP and complete covariate data, 298 patients developed subsequent AKI. In multivariable analyses, factors found to be independently associated with AKI included: male sex (adjusted odds ratio, aOR: 1.56 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.20-2.04), hypertension (aOR1.36 95% CI 1.01-1.85), being prescribed either angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin-II-receptor-blockers (aOR: 1.59 95% CI: 1.19-2.13), or insulin (aOR: 2.27 95% CI: 1.27-4.05), presence of proteinuria (aOR 1.27 95% CI 0.98-1.63), and low estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The odds of AKI were more graded amongst older participants aged ≥80 years compared to those of younger age: for eGFR of ≤29 mL/min/1.73m2 (vs 60 ml/min/1.73m2) aOR: 5.51 95% CI 3.28-9.27 and for eGFR 30-59 mL/min/1.73m2 1.96 95% CI 1.30-2.96, whilst any eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73m2 was associated with approximately 3-fold increase in the odds of AKI amongst younger individuals (p-value for interaction = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: The identified risk factors should help primary care and hospital providers identify high risk patients in need of urgent management including more intensive monitoring, and prevention of AKI following pneumonia.
Asunto(s)
Lesión Renal Aguda/epidemiología , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/epidemiología , Complicaciones de la Diabetes/epidemiología , Neumonía/epidemiología , Lesión Renal Aguda/diagnóstico , Distribución por Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Causalidad , Estudios de Cohortes , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/diagnóstico , Comorbilidad , Complicaciones de la Diabetes/diagnóstico , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Neumonía/diagnóstico por imagen , Estudios Retrospectivos , Distribución por Sexo , Reino Unido/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Research regarding chronic kidney disease (CKD) and acute kidney injury (AKI) using routinely collected data presents particular challenges. The availability, consistency, and quality of renal data in electronic health records has changed over time with developments in policy, practice incentives, clinical knowledge, and associated guideline changes. Epidemiologic research may be affected by patchy data resulting in an unrepresentative sample, selection bias, misclassification, and confounding by factors associated with testing for and recognition of reduced kidney function. We systematically explore the issues that may arise in study design and interpretation when using routine data sources for CKD and AKI research. First, we discuss how access to health care and management of patients with CKD may have an impact on defining the target population for epidemiologic study. We then consider how testing and recognition of CKD and AKI may lead to biases and how to potentially mitigate against these. Illustrative examples from our own research within the UK are used to clarify key points. Any research using routine renal data has to consider the local clinical context to achieve meaningful interpretation of the study findings.
Asunto(s)
Lesión Renal Aguda , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica , Proyectos de Investigación , HumanosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Hospital admissions for community-acquired infection are increasing rapidly in the United Kingdom, particularly among older individuals, possibly reflecting an increasing prevalence of comorbid conditions such as chronic kidney disease (CKD). This study describes associations between CKD (excluding patients treated by dialysis or transplantation) and community-acquired infection incidence among older people with diabetes mellitus. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using primary care records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to Hospital Episode Statistics admissions data. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 191,709 patients 65 years or older with diabetes mellitus and no history of renal replacement therapy, United Kingdom, 1997 to 2011. PREDICTOR: Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and history of proteinuria. OUTCOMES: Incidence of community-acquired lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs, with pneumonia as a subset) and sepsis, diagnosed in primary or secondary care, excluding hospital admissions from time at risk. MEASUREMENTS: Poisson regression was used to calculate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) adjusted for age, sex, smoking status, comorbid conditions, and characteristics of diabetes. Estimates for associations of eGFR with infection were adjusted for proteinuria, and vice versa. RESULTS: Strong graded associations between lower eGFRs and infection were observed. Compared with patients with eGFRs≥60mL/min/1.73m(2), fully adjusted IRRs for pneumonia among those with eGFRs<15, 15 to 29, 30 to 44, and 45 to 59mL/min/1.73m(2) were 3.04 (95% CI, 2.42-3.83), 1.73 (95% CI, 1.57-1.92), 1.19 (95% CI, 1.11-1.28), and 0.95 (95% CI, 0.89-1.01), respectively. Associations between lower eGFRs and sepsis were stronger, with fully adjusted IRRs up to 5.56 (95% CI, 3.90-7.94). Those associations with LRTI were weaker but still clinically relevant at up to 1.47 (95% CI, 1.34-1.62). In fully adjusted models, a history of proteinuria remained an independent marker of increased infection risk for LRTI, pneumonia, and sepsis (IRRs of 1.07 [95% CI, 1.05-1.09], 1.26 [95% CI, 1.19-1.33], and 1.33 [95% CI, 1.20-1.47]). LIMITATIONS: Patients without creatinine results were excluded. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies to prevent infection among people with CKD are needed.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/epidemiología , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/epidemiología , Comorbilidad , Demencia/epidemiología , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Tasa de Filtración Glomerular , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Admisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Neumonía/epidemiología , Proteinuria/epidemiología , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/fisiopatología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Sepsis/etiología , Fumar/epidemiología , Reino Unido/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We aimed to examine whether pre-existing impaired estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and proteinuria were associated with mortality following community-acquired pneumonia or sepsis among people aged ≥ 65 years with diabetes mellitus, without end-stage renal disease. METHODS: Patients were followed up from onset of first community-acquired pneumonia or sepsis episode in a cohort study using large, linked electronic health databases. Follow-up was for up to 90 days, unlimited by hospital discharge. We used generalized linear models with log link, normal distribution and robust standard errors to calculate risk ratios (RRs) for all-cause 28- and 90-day mortality according to two markers of chronic kidney disease: eGFR and proteinuria. RESULTS: All-cause mortality among the 4743 patients with pneumonia was 29.6% after 28 days and 37.4% after 90 days. Among the 1058 patients with sepsis, all-cause 28- and 90-day mortality were 35.6 and 44.2%, respectively. eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m(2) was a risk marker of higher 28-day mortality for pneumonia (RR 1.27: 95% CI 1.12-1.43) and sepsis (RR 1.32: 95% CI 1.07-1.64), adjusted for age, sex, socio-economic status, smoking status and co-morbidities. Neither moderately impaired eGFR nor proteinuria were associated with short-term mortality following either infection. CONCLUSIONS: People with pre-existing low eGFR but not on dialysis are at higher risk of death following pneumonia and sepsis. This association was not explained by existing co-morbidities. These patients need to be carefully monitored to prevent modifiable causes of death.
Asunto(s)
Biomarcadores/análisis , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/complicaciones , Diabetes Mellitus/fisiopatología , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Fallo Renal Crónico/mortalidad , Neumonía/complicaciones , Proteinuria/mortalidad , Sepsis/complicaciones , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios de Cohortes , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/mortalidad , Comorbilidad , Femenino , Humanos , Fallo Renal Crónico/diagnóstico , Fallo Renal Crónico/etiología , Masculino , Neumonía/mortalidad , Proteinuria/etiología , Diálisis Renal/efectos adversos , Factores de Riesgo , Sepsis/mortalidad , Tasa de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
Background: Health-seeking behavior and health care access (HSB/HCA) are recognized confounders in many observational studies but are not directly measurable in electronic health records. We used proxy markers of HSB/HCA to quantify and adjust for confounding in observational studies of influenza and COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE). Methods: This cohort study used primary care data prelinked to secondary care and death data in England. We included individuals aged ≥66 years on 1 September 2019 and assessed influenza VE in the 2019-2020 season and early COVID-19 VE (December 2020-March 2021). VE was estimated with sequential adjustment for demographics, comorbidities, and 14 markers of HSB/HCA. Influenza vaccination in the 2019-2020 season was also considered a negative control exposure against COVID-19 before COVID-19 vaccine rollout. Results: We included 1 991 284, 1 796 667, and 1 946 943 individuals in the influenza, COVID-19, and negative control exposure populations, respectively. Markers of HSB/HCA were positively correlated with influenza and COVID-19 vaccine uptake. For influenza, adjusting for HSB/HCA markers in addition to demographics and comorbidities increased VE against influenza-like illness from -1.5% (95% CI, -3.2% to .1%) to 7.1% (95% CI, 5.4%-8.7%) with a less apparent trend for more severe outcomes. For COVID-19, adjusting for HSB/HCA markers did not change VE estimates against infection or severe disease (eg, 2 doses of BNT162b2 against infection: 82.8% [95% CI, 78.4%-86.3%] to 83.1% [95% CI, 78.7%-86.5%]). Adjusting for HSB/HCA markers removed bias in the negative control exposure analysis (-7.5% [95% CI, -10.6% to -4.5%] vs -2.1% [95% CI, -6.0% to 1.7%] before vs after adjusting for HSB/HCA markers). Conclusions: Markers of HSB/HCA can be used to quantify and account for confounding in observational vaccine studies.