Multimorbidity-associated emergency hospital admissions: a "screen and link" strategy to improve outcomes for high-risk patients in sub-Saharan Africa: a prospective multicentre cohort study protocol.

Background: The prevalence of multimorbidity (the presence of two or more chronic health conditions) is rapidly increasing in sub-Saharan Africa. Hospital care pathways that focus on single presenting complaints do not address this pressing problem. This has the potential to precipitate frequent hospital readmissions, increase health system and out-of-pocket expenses, and may lead to premature disability and death. We aim to present a description of inpatient multimorbidity in a multicentre prospective cohort study in Malawi and Tanzania. Primary objectives: Clinical: Determine prevalence of multimorbid disease among adult medical admissions and measure patient outcomes. Health Economic: Measure economic costs incurred and changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at 90 days post-admission. Situation analysis: Qualitatively describe pathways of patients with multimorbidity through the health system. Secondary objectives: Clinical: Determine hospital readmission free survival and markers of disease control 90 days after admission. Health Economic: Present economic costs from patient and health system perspective, sub-analyse costs and HRQoL according to presence of different diseases. Situation analysis: Understand health literacy related to their own diseases and experience of care for patients with multimorbidity and their caregivers. Methods: This is a prospective longitudinal cohort study of adult (≥18 years) acute medical hospital admissions with nested health economic and situation analysis in four hospitals: 1) Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital, Blantyre, Malawi; 2) Chiradzulu District Hospital, Malawi; 3) Hai District Hospital, Boma Ng'ombe, Tanzania; 4) Muhimbili National Hospital, Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania. Follow-up duration will be 90 days from hospital admission. We will use consecutive recruitment within 24 hours of emergency presentation and stratified recruitment across four sites. We will use point-of-care tests to refine estimates of disease pathology. We will conduct qualitative interviews with patients, caregivers, healthcare providers and policymakers; focus group discussions with patients and caregivers, and observations of hospital care pathways.

Background: In sub-Saharan Africa, multimorbidity (defined as people living with two or more chronic health conditions) is increasing due to high infectious ( e.g., human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)) and non-communicable ( e.g., high blood pressure and diabetes) disease burdens. Multimorbidity increases as people live longer and can be worsened by HIV and HIV-medications. Patients delay seeking help until they are severely ill, meaning hospitals are key to healthcare delivery for chronic diseases, however hospital clinicians often focus on a single disease. Failure to identify and treat multimorbidity may lead to frequent readmissions, high costs, preventable disability and death. Aim: This cohort study is the first in a three-phase study with the overarching goal to design and test a system to identify patients suffering from multimorbidity when they seek emergency care in sub-Saharan African hospitals. This could improve early disease treatment (reducing death), ensure better follow-up and prevent disability, readmission and excess costs. The cohort study aims to determine multimorbidity prevalence, outcomes and costs. The results will help us co-create with key stakeholders the most cost-effective way to deliver improved care for patients before testing this strategy in a randomised trial. Methods in Brief: In Malawi and Tanzania, we will identify multimorbidity among patients admitted to hospital (focusing on high blood pressure, diabetes, HIV and chronic kidney disease), by enhancing diagnostic tests in hospital departments treating acutely admitted medical patients. With the help of healthcare professional, patients and community groups we will find how best to link patients to long-term care and improve self-management. After mapping health system pathways, we will work with stakeholders (policymakers, healthcare worker representatives, community and patient groups) to co-develop an intervention to improve outcomes for patients with multimorbidity. This study will allow us to collect clinical, health economic and health system data to inform this process.

Causes, outcomes and diagnosis of acute breathlessness hospital admissions in Malawi: protocol for a multicentre prospective cohort study.

Background: Hospital admission due to breathlessness carries a significant burden to patients and healthcare systems, particularly impacting people in low-income countries. Prompt appropriate treatment is vital to improve outcomes, but this relies on accurate diagnostic tests which are of limited availability in resource-constrained settings. We will provide an accurate description of acute breathlessness presentations in a multicentre prospective cohort study in Malawi, a low resource setting in Southern Africa, and explore approaches to strengthen diagnostic capacity. Objectives: Primary objective: Delineate between causes of breathlessness among adults admitted to hospital in Malawi and report disease prevalence. Secondary objectives : Determine patient outcomes, including mortality and hospital readmission 90 days after admission; determine the diagnostic accuracy of biomarkers to differentiate between heart failure and respiratory infections (such as pneumonia) including brain natriuretic peptides, procalcitonin and C-reactive protein. Methods: This is a prospective longitudinal cohort study of adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital with breathlessness across two hospitals: 1) Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital, Blantyre, Malawi; 2) Chiradzulu District Hospital, Chiradzulu, Malawi. Patients will be consecutively recruited within 24 hours of emergency presentation and followed-up until 90 days from hospital admission. We will conduct enhanced diagnostic tests with robust quality assurance and quality control to determine estimates of disease pathology. Diagnostic case definitions were selected following a systematic literature search. Discussion: This study will provide detailed epidemiological description of adult hospital admissions due to breathlessness in low-income settings, which is currently poorly understood. We will delineate between causes using established case definitions and conduct nested diagnostic evaluation. The results have the potential to facilitate development of interventions targeted to strengthen diagnostic capacity, enable prompt and appropriate treatment, and ultimately improve both patient care and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: People admitted to hospital with symptoms of breathlessness are often severely ill and need quick, accurate assessment to facilitate timely initiation of appropriate treatments. In low resource settings, such as Malawi, limited access to diagnostic equipment impedes patient assessment. Failure to identify and treat the underlying diagnosis may lead to preventable death. AIMS: This cohort study aims to delineate between common, treatable causes of breathlessness among adult patients admitted to hospital in Malawi and measure survival. We will also evaluate the performance of blood markers to diagnose and differentiate between conditions. The results will help us develop context-appropriate diagnostic and treatment algorithms based on resources available in the health system Methods in brief: We will recruit adult patients who present to hospital with breathlessness in a central national referral hospital (Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital, Blantyre), and a district hospital (Chiradzulu District Hospital, Chiradzulu). We will conduct enhanced diagnostic tests to determine causes of breathlessness against internationally accepted diagnostic guidelines. Patients will be followed up throughout their hospital admission and after discharge, until 90 days. INTERPRETATION: This study aligns with World Health Assembly resolutions on 'Strengthening diagnostics capacity' and on 'Integrated emergency, critical and operative care for universal health coverage and protection from health emergencies'. The results of this study will have the potential to facilitate development of interventions targeted to strengthen diagnostic capacity, enable prompt and appropriate treatment, and ultimately improve care and outcomes for acutely unwell patients.

The cost-effectiveness of procalcitonin for guiding antibiotic prescribing in individuals hospitalized with COVID-19: part of the PEACH study.

BACKGROUND: Many hospitals introduced procalcitonin (PCT) testing to help diagnose bacterial coinfection in individuals with COVID-19, and guide antibiotic decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. OBJECTIVES: Evaluating cost-effectiveness of using PCT to guide antibiotic decisions in individuals hospitalized with COVID-19, as part of a wider research programme. METHODS: Retrospective individual-level data on patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were collected from 11 NHS acute hospital Trusts and Health Boards from England and Wales, which varied in their use of baseline PCT testing during the first COVID-19 pandemic wave. A matched analysis (part of a wider analysis reported elsewhere) created groups of patients whose PCT was/was not tested at baseline. A model was created with combined decision tree/Markov phases, parameterized with quality-of-life/unit cost estimates from the literature, and used to estimate costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Cost-effectiveness was judged at a £20 000/QALY threshold. Uncertainty was characterized using bootstrapping. RESULTS: People who had baseline PCT testing had shorter general ward/ICU stays and spent less time on antibiotics, though with overlap between the groups' 95% CIs. Those with baseline PCT testing accrued more QALYs (8.76 versus 8.62) and lower costs (£9830 versus £10 700). The point estimate was baseline PCT testing being dominant over no baseline testing, though with uncertainty: the probability of cost-effectiveness was 0.579 with a 1 year horizon and 0.872 with a lifetime horizon. CONCLUSIONS: Using PCT to guide antibiotic therapy in individuals hospitalized with COVID-19 is more likely to be cost-effective than not, albeit with uncertainty.

Sepsis and case fatality rates and associations with deprivation, ethnicity, and clinical characteristics: population-based case-control study with linked primary care and hospital data in England.

PURPOSE: Sepsis is a life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by dysregulated host response to infection. The purpose of the study was to measure the associations of specific exposures (deprivation, ethnicity, and clinical characteristics) with incident sepsis and case fatality. METHODS: Two research databases in England were used including anonymized patient-level records from primary care linked to hospital admission, death certificate, and small-area deprivation. Sepsis cases aged 65-100 years were matched to up to six controls. Predictors for sepsis (including 60 clinical conditions) were evaluated using logistic and random forest models; case fatality rates were analyzed using logistic models. RESULTS: 108,317 community-acquired sepsis cases were analyzed. Severe frailty was strongly associated with the risk of developing sepsis (crude odds ratio [OR] 14.93; 95% confidence interval [CI] 14.37-15.52). The quintile with most deprived patients showed an increased sepsis risk (crude OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.45-1.51) compared to least deprived quintile. Strong predictors for sepsis included antibiotic exposure in prior 2 months, being house bound, having cancer, learning disability, and diabetes mellitus. Severely frail patients had a case fatality rate of 42.0% compared to 24.0% in non-frail patients (adjusted OR 1.53; 95% CI 1.41-1.65). Sepsis cases with recent prior antibiotic exposure died less frequently compared to non-users (adjusted OR 0.7; 95% CI 0.72-0.76). Case fatality strongly decreased over calendar time. CONCLUSION: Given the variety of predictors and their level of associations for developing sepsis, there is a need for prediction models for risk of developing sepsis that can help to target preventative antibiotic therapy.

Covariates in population pharmacokinetic studies of critically ill adults receiving ß-lactam antimicrobials: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

Introduction: Population pharmacokinetic studies of ß-lactam antimicrobials in critically ill patients derive models that inform their dosing. In non-linear mixed-effects modelling, covariates are often used to improve model fit and explain variability. We aimed to investigate which covariates are most commonly assessed and which are found to be significant, along with global patterns of publication. Methods: We conducted a systematic review, searching MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and Web of Science on 01 March 2023, including studies of critically ill adults receiving ß-lactam antimicrobials who underwent blood sampling for population pharmacokinetic studies. We extracted and categorized all reported covariates and assessed reporting quality using the ClinPK checklist. Results: Our search identified 151 studies with 6018 participants. Most studies reported observational cohorts (120 studies, 80%), with the majority conducted in high-income settings (136 studies, 90%). Of the 1083 identified covariate instances, 237 were unique; the most common categories were patient characteristics (n = 404), biomarkers (n = 206) and physiological parameters (n = 163). Only seven distinct commonly reported covariates (CLCR, weight, glomerular filtration rate, diuresis, need for renal replacement, serum albumin and C-reactive protein) were significant more than 20% of the time. Conclusions: Covariates are most commonly chosen based on biological plausibility, with patient characteristics and biomarkers the most frequently investigated. We developed an openly accessible database of reported covariates to aid investigators with covariate selection when designing population pharmacokinetic studies. Novel covariates, such as sepsis subphenotypes, have not been explored yet, leaving a research gap for future work.

Developing a model for decision-making around antibiotic prescribing for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia in acute NHS hospitals during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: qualitative results from the Procalcitonin Evaluation of Antibiotic use in COVID-19 Hospitalised patients (PEACH Study).

OBJECTIVE: To explore and model factors affecting antibiotic prescribing decision-making early in the pandemic. DESIGN: Semistructured qualitative interview study. SETTING: National Health Service (NHS) trusts/health boards in England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: Clinicians from NHS trusts/health boards in England and Wales. METHOD: Individual semistructured interviews were conducted with clinicians in six NHS trusts/health boards in England and Wales as part of the Procalcitonin Evaluation of Antibiotic use in COVID-19 Hospitalised patients study, a wider study that included statistical analysis of procalcitonin (PCT) use in hospitals during the first wave of the pandemic. Thematic analysis was used to identify key factors influencing antibiotic prescribing decisions for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia during the first wave of the pandemic (March to May 2020), including how much influence PCT test results had on these decisions. RESULTS: During the first wave of the pandemic, recommendations to prescribe antibiotics for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia were based on concerns about secondary bacterial infections. However, as clinicians gained more experience with COVID-19, they reported increasing confidence in their ability to distinguish between symptoms and signs caused by SARS-CoV-2 viral infection alone, and secondary bacterial infections. Antibiotic prescribing decisions were influenced by factors such as clinician experience, confidence, senior support, situational factors and organisational influences. A decision-making model was developed. CONCLUSION: This study provides insight into the decision-making process around antibiotic prescribing for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia during the first wave of the pandemic. The importance of clinician experience and of senior review of decisions as factors in optimising antibiotic stewardship is highlighted. In addition, situational and organisational factors were identified that could be optimised. The model presented in the study can be used as a tool to aid understanding of the complexity of the decision-making process around antibiotic prescribing and planning antimicrobial stewardship support in the context of a pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN66682918.

Clinical and health inequality risk factors for non-COVID-related sepsis during the global COVID-19 pandemic: a national case-control and cohort study.

Background: Sepsis, characterised by significant morbidity and mortality, is intricately linked to socioeconomic disparities and pre-admission clinical histories. This study aspires to elucidate the association between non-COVID-19 related sepsis and health inequality risk factors amidst the pandemic in England, with a secondary focus on their association with 30-day sepsis mortality. Methods: With the approval of NHS England, we harnessed the OpenSAFELY platform to execute a cohort study and a 1:6 matched case-control study. A sepsis diagnosis was identified from the incident hospital admissions record using ICD-10 codes. This encompassed 248,767 cases with non-COVID-19 sepsis from a cohort of 22.0 million individuals spanning January 1, 2019, to June 31, 2022. Socioeconomic deprivation was gauged using the Index of Multiple Deprivation score, reflecting indicators like income, employment, and education. Hospitalisation-related sepsis diagnoses were categorised as community-acquired or hospital-acquired. Cases were matched to controls who had no recorded diagnosis of sepsis, based on age (stepwise), sex, and calendar month. The eligibility criteria for controls were established primarily on the absence of a recorded sepsis diagnosis. Associations between potential predictors and odds of developing non-COVID-19 sepsis underwent assessment through conditional logistic regression models, with multivariable regression determining odds ratios (ORs) for 30-day mortality. Findings: The study included 224,361 (10.2%) cases with non-COVID-19 sepsis and 1,346,166 matched controls. The most socioeconomic deprived quintile was associated with higher odds of developing non-COVID-19 sepsis than the least deprived quintile (crude OR 1.80 [95% CI 1.77-1.83]). Other risk factors (after adjusting comorbidities) such as learning disability (adjusted OR 3.53 [3.35-3.73]), chronic liver disease (adjusted OR 3.08 [2.97-3.19]), chronic kidney disease (stage 4: adjusted OR 2.62 [2.55-2.70], stage 5: adjusted OR 6.23 [5.81-6.69]), cancer, neurological disease, immunosuppressive conditions were also associated with developing non-COVID-19 sepsis. The incidence rate of non-COVID-19 sepsis decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic and rebounded to pre-pandemic levels (April 2021) after national lockdowns had been lifted. The 30-day mortality risk in cases with non-COVID-19 sepsis was higher for the most deprived quintile across all periods. Interpretation: Socioeconomic deprivation, comorbidity and learning disabilities were associated with an increased odds of developing non-COVID-19 related sepsis and 30-day mortality in England. This study highlights the need to improve the prevention of sepsis, including more precise targeting of antimicrobials to higher-risk patients. Funding: The UK Health Security Agency, Health Data Research UK, and National Institute for Health Research.