RESUMO
ObjectivesExcess mortality captures the total effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on mortality and is not affected by mis-specification of cause of death. We aimed to describe how health and demographic factors have been associated with excess mortality during the pandemic. DesignTime-series analysis. SettingUK primary care data from practices contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink on July 31st 2020. ParticipantsWe constructed a time-series dataset including 9,635,613 adults ([≥]40 years old) who were actively registered at the general practice during the study period. Main outcome measuresWe extracted weekly numbers of deaths between March 2015 and July 2020, stratified by individual-level factors. Excess mortality during wave 1 of the UK pandemic (5th March to 27th May 2020) compared to pre-pandemic was estimated using seasonally adjusted negative binomial regression models. Relative rates of death for a range of factors were estimated before and during wave 1 by including interaction terms. ResultsAll-cause mortality increased by 43% (95% CI 40%-47%) during wave 1 compared with pre-pandemic. Changes to the relative rate of death associated with most socio-demographic and clinical characteristics were small during wave 1 compared with pre-pandemic. However, the mortality rate associated with dementia markedly increased (RR for dementia vs no dementia pre-pandemic: 3.5, 95% CI 3.4-3.5; RR during wave 1: 5.1, 4.87-5.28); a similar pattern was seen for learning disabilities (RR pre-pandemic: 3.6, 3.4-3.5; during wave 1: 4.8, 4.4-5.3), for Black or South Asian ethnicity compared to white, and for London compared to other regions. ConclusionsThe first UK COVID-19 wave appeared to amplify baseline mortality risk by a relatively constant factor for most population subgroups. However disproportionate increases in mortality were seen for those with dementia, learning disabilities, non-white ethnicity, or living in London. Summary boxO_ST_ABSWhat is already known on this topicC_ST_ABSO_LIAll-cause mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic was higher than in previous years; this excess mortality was particularly pronounced among elderly people, males, people of non-white ethnicity, people of lower socio-economic status and people living in care-homes. C_LIO_LISeveral other papers have studied a wider range of factors associated with mortality due to COVID-19 using cause-of-death data. C_LIO_LIThere is little evidence on how all-cause mortality has changed in people with comorbidities. C_LI What this study addsO_LIOur study shows that during Wave 1 of the pandemic all cause death rates increased by a similar proportional degree for almost all population subgroups regardless of their health or socio-demographic circumstances; the exceptions were those with a diagnosis of dementia or learning disabilities and those of non-white ethnicity or living in London. C_LIO_LIThis suggests that COVID-19 has dialled up the risk of death by a similar proportional degree for everyone except those exposed to a higher risk of infection. C_LI
RESUMO
BackgroundConcerns have been raised that the response to the UK COVID-19 pandemic may have worsened physical and mental health, and reduced use of health services. However, the scale of the problem is unquantified, impeding development of effective mitigations. We asked what has happened to general practice contacts for acute physical and mental health outcomes during the pandemic? MethodsUsing electronic health records from the Clinical Research Practice Datalink (CPRD) Aurum (2017-2020), we calculated weekly primary care contacts for selected acute physical and mental health conditions (including: anxiety, depression, acute alcohol-related events, asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD] exacerbations, cardiovascular and diabetic emergencies). We used interrupted time series (ITS) analysis to formally quantify changes in conditions after the introduction of population-wide restrictions ( lockdown) compared to the period prior to their introduction in March 2020. FindingsThe overall population included 9,863,903 individuals on 1st January 2017. Primary care contacts for all conditions dropped dramatically after introduction of population-wide restrictions. By July 2020, except for unstable angina and acute alcohol-related events, contacts for all conditions had not recovered to pre-lockdown levels. The largest reductions were for contacts for: diabetic emergencies (OR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.25-0.50), depression (OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.52-0.53), and self-harm (OR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.54-0.58). InterpretationThere were substantial reductions in primary care contacts for acute physical and mental conditions with restrictions, with limited recovery by July 2020. It is likely that much of the deficit in care represents unmet need, with implications for subsequent morbidity and premature mortality. The conditions we studied are sufficiently severe that any unmet need will have substantial ramifications for the people experiencing the conditions and healthcare provision. Maintaining access must be a key priority in future public health planning (including further restrictions). FundingWellcome Trust Senior Fellowship (SML), Health Data Research UK. RESULTS IN CONTEXTO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSA small study in 47 GP practices in a largely deprived, urban area of the UK (Salford) reported that primary care consultations for four broad diagnostic groups (circulatory disease, common mental health problems, type 2 diabetes mellitus and malignant cancer) declined by 16-50% between March and May 2020, compared to what was expected based on data from January 2010 to March 2020. We searched Medline for other relevant evidence of the indirect effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on physical and mental health from inception to September 25th 2020, for articles published in English, with titles including the search terms ("covid*" or "coronavirus" or "sars-cov-2"), and title or abstracts including the search terms ("indirect impact" or "missed diagnos*" or "missing diagnos*" or "delayed diagnos*" or (("present*" or "consult*" or "engag*" or "access*") AND ("reduction" or "decrease" or "decline")). We found no further studies investigating the change in primary care contacts for specific physical- and mental-health conditions indirectly resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic or its control measures. There has been a reduction in hospital admissions and presentations to accident and emergency departments in the UK, particularly for myocardial infarctions and cerebrovascular accidents. However, there is no published evidence specifically investigating the changes in primary care contacts for severe acute physical and mental health conditions. Added value of this studyTo our knowledge this is the first study to explore changes in healthcare contacts for acute physical and mental health conditions in a large population representative of the UK. We used electronic primary care health records of nearly 10 million individuals across the UK to investigate the indirect impact of COVID-19 on primary care contacts for mental health, acute alcohol-related events, asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations, and cardiovascular and diabetic emergencies up to July 2020. For all conditions studied, we found primary care contacts dropped dramatically following the introduction of population-wide restriction measures in March 2020. By July 2020, with the exception of unstable angina and acute alcohol-related events, primary care contacts for all conditions studied had not recovered to pre-lockdown levels. In the general population, estimates of the absolute reduction in the number of primary care contacts up to July 2020, compared to what we would expect from previous years varied from fewer than 10 contacts per million for some cardiovascular outcomes, to 12,800 per million for depression and 6,600 for anxiety. In people with COPD, we estimated there were 43,900 per million fewer contacts for COPD exacerbations up to July 2020 than what we would expect from previous years. Implicatins of all the available evidenceWhile our results may represent some genuine reduction in disease frequency (e.g. the restriction measures may have improved diabetic glycaemic control due to more regular daily routines at home), it is more likely the reduced primary care conatcts we saw represent a substantial burden of unmet need (particularly for mental health conditions) that may be reflected in subsequent increased mortality and morbidity. Health service providers should take steps to prepare for increased demand in the coming months and years due to the short and longterm ramifications of reduced access to care for severe acute physical and mental health conditions. Maintaining access to primary care is key to future public health planning in relation to the pandemic.
RESUMO
BackgroundPeople with active cancer are recognised as at risk of COVID-19 complications, but it is unclear whether the much larger population of cancer survivors is at elevated risk. We aimed to address this by comparing cancer survivors and cancer-free controls for (i) prevalence of comorbidities considered risk factors for COVID-19; and (ii) risk of severe influenza, as a marker of susceptibility to severe outcomes from epidemic respiratory viruses. MethodsWe included survivors ([≥]1 year) of the 20 most common cancers, and age, sex and general practice-matched cancer-free controls, derived from UK primary care data linked to cancer registrations, hospital admissions and death registrations. Comorbidity prevalences were calculated 1 and 5 years from cancer diagnosis. Risk of hospitalisation or death due to influenza was compared using Cox models adjusted for baseline demographics and comorbidities. Findings108,215 cancer survivors and 523,541 cancer-free controls were included. Cancer survivors had more asthma, other respiratory, cardiac, diabetes, neurological, renal, and liver disease, and less obesity, compared with controls, but there was variation by cancer site. There were 205 influenza hospitalisations/deaths, with cancer survivors at higher risk than controls (adjusted HR 2.78, 95% CI 2.04-3.80). Haematological cancer survivors had large elevated risks persisting for >10 years (HR overall 15.17, 7.84-29.35; HR >10 years from cancer diagnosis 10.06, 2.47-40.93). Survivors of other cancers had evidence of raised risk up to 5 years from cancer diagnosis only (HR 2.22, 1.31-3.74). InterpretationRisks of severe COVID-19 outcomes are likely to be elevated in cancer survivors. This should be taken into account in policies targeted at clinical risk groups, and vaccination for both influenza, and, when available, COVID-19, should be encouraged in cancer survivors. FundingWellcome Trust, Royal Society, NIHR. Research in contextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSFew data are available to date on how COVID-19 affects cancer survivors. We searched PubMed with the keywords "influenza cancer survivors" to identify studies that compared severe influenza outcomes in cancer survivors and in a control group. No study was identified. Added value of this studyIn this matched cohort study of routinely collected electronic health records, we demonstrated raised risks of influenza hospitalisation or mortality in survivors from haematological malignancies for >10 years after diagnosis, and in survivors from solid cancers up to 5 years after diagnosis. Implications of all the available evidenceCancer survivorship appears to be an important risk factor for severe influenza outcomes, suggesting that cancer survivors may also be at raised risk of poor COVID-19 outcomes. This should be taken into account in public health policies targeted at protecting clinical risk groups. Influenza vaccination should be encouraged in this group, and may need to be extended to a wider population of medium- to long-term cancer survivors than currently recommended.
