Risk factors for asthma-related hospital and intensive care admissions in children, adolescents and adults: a cohort study using primary and secondary care data.

BACKGROUND: Asthma remains a common cause of hospital admissions across the life course. We estimated the contribution of key risk factors to asthma-related hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions in children, adolescents and adults. METHODS: This was a UK-based cohort study using linked primary care (Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum) and secondary care (Hospital Episode Statistics Admitted Patient Care) data. Patients were eligible if they were aged 5 years and older and had been diagnosed with asthma. This included 90 989 children aged 5-11 years, 114 927 adolescents aged 12-17 years and 1 179 410 adults aged 18 years or older. The primary outcome was asthma-related hospital admissions from 1 January 2017 to 31 December 2019. The secondary outcome was asthma-related ICU admissions. Incidence rate ratios adjusted for demographic and clinical risk factors were estimated using negative binomial models. Population attributable fraction (PAF) was estimated for modifiable risk factors. RESULTS: Younger age groups, females and those from ethnic minority and lower socioeconomic backgrounds had an increased risk of asthma-related hospital admissions. Increasing medication burden, including excessive use of short-acting bronchodilators, was also strongly associated with the primary outcome. Similar risk factors were observed for asthma-related ICU admissions. The key potentially modifiable or treatable risk factors were smoking in adolescents and adults (PAF 6.8%, 95% CI 0.9% to 12.3% and 4.3%, 95% CI 3.0% to 5.7%, respectively), and obesity (PAF 23.3%, 95% CI 20.5% to 26.1%), depression (11.1%, 95% CI 9.1% to 13.1%), gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (2.3%, 95% CI 1.2% to 3.4%), anxiety (2.0%, 95% CI 0.5% to 3.6%) and chronic rhinosinusitis (0.8%, 95% CI 0.3% to 1.3%) in adults. CONCLUSIONS: There are significant sociodemographic inequalities in the rates of asthma-related hospital and ICU admissions. Treating age-specific modifiable risk factors should be considered an integral part of asthma management, which could potentially reduce the rate of avoidable hospital admissions.

"Will anybody listen?" parents' views on childhood asthma care: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is the most common chronic disease in children, resulting in considerable morbidity and health care utilisation, especially in geographical areas with high deprivation. Parents play a pivotal role in children's asthma management. AIM: To explore the views of parents whose children have asthma, regarding barriers and facilitators to receiving adequate asthma care. DESIGN & SETTING: A qualitative study conducted in an urban, multi-ethnic setting with high socioeconomic deprivation and paediatric asthma related hospital admissions. METHOD: The study used a pragmatic approach underpinned by a perspective of critical realism. Parents of children with asthma were recruited through purposive and convenience sampling and data collected through semi-structured interviews. Transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis, facilitated by NVivo software. RESULTS: 10 parents participated in nine interviews. Six themes were identified relating to: (1) the establishment of a new life dynamic following a diagnosis of asthma; (2) the turbulent and drawn-out process of asthma diagnosis; (3) the roles and expectations of the partnership established between parents and healthcare services; (4) the importance of schools in asthma management; (5) sources and access to relevant information; and (6) the importance of social support networks. Parents frequently felt unsupported and misunderstood, particularly during the diagnostic process. CONCLUSION: Unmet parental educational and emotional needs, particularly around the time of diagnosis were identified as a key barrier to adequate asthma management. Deeper understanding of gaps in support can instruct asthma care delivery and inform co-produced interventions, thus improving asthma outcomes in children.

The Time to Inflammatory Bowel Disease Diagnosis for Patients Presenting with Abdominal Symptoms in Primary Care and its Association with Emergency Hospital Admissions and Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) presenting to primary care may experience diagnostic delays. We aimed to evaluate this and assess whether time to diagnosis is associated with clinical outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using English primary care data from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2019, linked to hospital admission data was undertaken. Patients were followed from the first IBD-related presentation in primary care to IBD diagnosis. Associations of time to diagnosis exceeding a year were assessed using a Robust Poisson regression model. Associations between time to diagnosis and IBD-related emergency hospital admissions and surgery were assessed using Poisson and Cox proportional hazards models, respectively. RESULTS: Of 28 092 IBD patients, 60% had ulcerative colitis (UC) and 40% had Crohn's disease (CD). The median age was 43 (interquartile range, 30-58) years and 51.9% were female. Median time to diagnosis was 15.6 (interquartile range, 4.3-28.1) months. Factors associated with more than a year to diagnosis included female sex (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.23; 95% CI, 1.21-1.26), older age (aRR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.10; comparing >70 years of age with 18-30 years of age), obesity (aRR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.00-1.06), smoking (aRR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.08), CD compared with UC (aRR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.11-1.16), and a fecal calprotectin over 500 µg/g (aRR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.82-0.95). The highest quartile of time to diagnosis compared with the lowest was associated with IBD-related emergency admissions (incidence rate ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.11). CONCLUSION: Longer times to IBD diagnoses were associated with being female, advanced age, obesity, smoking, and Crohn's disease. More IBD-related emergency admissions were observed in patients with a prolonged time to diagnosis.

On average, patients with inflammatory bowel disease experience a 16-month diagnostic delay from symptom onset in primary care. Fecal calprotectin testing expedited diagnosis. Longer diagnostic periods were associated with an increased risk of emergency hospital admissions but not with inflammatory bowel disease­related surgery.

Prodromal symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis in a primary care database: variation by ethnicity and socioeconomic status.

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether prodromal symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), as recorded in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum (CPRD) database of English primary care records, differ by ethnicity and socioeconomic status. METHODS: A cross-sectional study to determine the coding of common symptoms (≥0.1% in the sample) in the 24 months preceding RA diagnosis in CPRD Aurum, recorded between January 1st 2004 to May 1st 2022. Eligible cases were adults with a code for RA diagnosis. For each symptom, a logistic regression was performed with the symptom as dependent variable, and ethnicity and socioeconomic status as independent variables. Results were adjusted for sex, age, BMI, and smoking status. White ethnicity and the highest socioeconomic quintile were comparators. RESULTS: In total, 70115 cases were eligible for inclusion, of which 66.4% female. Twenty-one symptoms were coded in > 0.1% of cases so were included in the analysis. Patients of South Asian ethnicity had higher frequency of codes for several symptoms, with the largest difference by odds ratio being muscle cramps (OR 1.71, 1.44-2.57) and shoulder pain (1.44, 1.25-1.66). Patients of Black ethnicity had higher prevalence of several codes including unintended weight loss (2.02, 1.25-3.28) and ankle pain (1.51, 1.02-2.23). Low socioeconomic status was associated with morning stiffness (1.74, 1.08-2.80) and falls (1.37, 2.03-1.82). CONCLUSION: There are significant differences in coded symptoms between demographic groups, which must be considered in clinical practice in diverse populations and to avoid algorithmic bias in prediction tools derived from routinely collected healthcare data.

Post-hospitalisation asthma management in primary care: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines recommend that patients admitted to hospital for asthma attacks are reviewed in primary care following hospital discharge. AIM: To evaluate asthma management in primary care following a hospital admission for asthma and its associations with patient characteristics. DESIGN AND SETTING: A retrospective cohort study using English primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum database and linked Hospital Episode Statistics Admitted Patient Care data. METHOD: Patients with asthma aged ≥5 years who had at least one asthma-related hospital admission from 1 January 2017 to 31 December 2019 were included. The primary outcome was a composite of any of the following delivered in primary care within 28 days from hospital discharge: asthma review, asthma management plan, asthma medication prescriptions, demonstration of inhaler technique, or smoking cessation counselling. The association between patient characteristics and delivery of clinical care was assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS: The study included 17 457 patients. A total of 10 515 (60.2%) patients received the primary outcome within 28 days of hospital discharge. There were 2311 (13.2%) who received an asthma review, 1459 (8.4%) an asthma management plan, 9996 (57.3%) an asthma medication, 1500 (8.6%) a demonstration of inhaler technique, and 52 (1.2% of smokers) had smoking cessation counselling. Patients from Black ethnic minority groups received less of this care (27%-54% lower odds, depending on age). However, short-acting bronchodilator prescriptions in the previous year were associated with an increased likelihood of the primary outcome. CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of patients do not receive timely follow-up in primary care following asthma-related admissions to hospital, particularly among Black ethnic minority groups.

Perceptions on artificial intelligence-based decision-making for coexisting multiple long-term health conditions: protocol for a qualitative study with patients and healthcare professionals.

INTRODUCTION: Coexisting multiple health conditions is common among older people, a population that is increasing globally. The potential for polypharmacy, adverse events, drug interactions and development of additional health conditions complicates prescribing decisions for these patients. Artificial intelligence (AI)-generated decision-making tools may help guide clinical decisions in the context of multiple health conditions, by determining which of the multiple medication options is best. This study aims to explore the perceptions of healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients on the use of AI in the management of multiple health conditions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A qualitative study will be conducted using semistructured interviews. Adults (≥18 years) with multiple health conditions living in the West Midlands of England and HCPs with experience in caring for patients with multiple health conditions will be eligible and purposively sampled. Patients will be identified from Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum; CPRD will contact general practitioners who will in turn, send a letter to patients inviting them to take part. Eligible HCPs will be recruited through British HCP bodies and known contacts. Up to 30 patients and 30 HCPs will be recruited, until data saturation is achieved. Interviews will be in-person or virtual, audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. The topic guide is designed to explore participants' attitudes towards AI-informed clinical decision-making to augment clinician-directed decision-making, the perceived advantages and disadvantages of both methods and attitudes towards risk management. Case vignettes comprising a common decision pathway for patients with multiple health conditions will be presented during each interview to invite participants' opinions on how their experiences compare. Data will be analysed thematically using the Framework Method. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the National Health Service Research Ethics Committee (Reference: 22/SC/0210). Written informed consent or verbal consent will be obtained prior to each interview. The findings from this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conferences and lay summaries.