Systematic review of prognostic factors for poor outcome in people living with dementia that can be determined from primary care medical records.

BACKGROUND: Dementia has a major impact on individuals, their families and caregivers, and wider society. Some individuals experience a faster decline of their function and health compared to others. The objective of this systematic review was to determine prognostic factors, measurable in primary care, for poor outcome in people living with dementia. METHODS: Cohort studies set in the community or primary care, and examining prognostic factors for care home admission, cognitive decline, or palliative care were included. Databases were searched from inception to 17th June 2022. Identified papers were screened, the risk of bias assessed using Quality in Prognostic Studies (QUIPS) tool, and data extracted by 2 reviewers, with disagreements resolved by consensus or a 3rd reviewer. A narrative synthesis was undertaken, informed by GRADE, taking into consideration strength of association, risk of bias and precision of evidence. Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) and stakeholder input was obtained to prioritise factors for further investigation. RESULTS: Searches identified 24,283 potentially relevant titles. After screening, 46 papers were included, 21 examined care home admission investigating 94 factors, 26 investigated cognitive decline as an outcome examining 60 factors, and 1 researched palliative care assessing 13 factors. 11 prognostic factors (older age, less deprived, living alone, white race, urban residence, worse baseline cognition, taking dementia medication, depression, psychosis, wandering, and caregiver's desire for admission) were associated with an increased risk of care home admission and 4 prognostic factors (longer duration of dementia, agitation/aggression, psychosis, and hypercholesterolaemia) were associated with an increased risk of cognitive decline. PPIE and other stakeholders recommended further investigation of 22 additional potential prognostic factors. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying evidence for prognostic factors in dementia is challenging. Whilst several factors highlighted as of relevance by our stakeholder groups need further investigation, inequalities may exist in care home admission and there is evidence that several prognostic factors measurable in primary care could alert clinicians to risk of a faster progression. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019111775.

Analgesic prescribing in patients with inflammatory arthritis in England: observational studies in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

OBJECTIVES: Despite little evidence that analgesics are effective in inflammatory arthritis (IA), studies report substantial opioid prescribing. The extent this applies to other analgesics is uncertain. We undertook a comprehensive evaluation of analgesic prescribing in patients with IA in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum to evaluate this. METHODS: From 2004 to 2020, cross-sectional analyses evaluated analgesic prescription annual prevalence in RA, PsA and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), stratified by age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation and geography. Joinpoint regression evaluated temporal prescribing trends. Cohort studies determined prognostic factors at diagnosis for chronic analgesic prescriptions using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Analgesic prescribing declined over time but remained common: 2004 and 2020 IA prescription prevalence was 84.2/100 person-years (PY) (95% CI 83.9, 84.5) and 64.5/100 PY (64.2, 64.8), respectively. In 2004, NSAIDs were most prescribed (56.1/100 PY; 55.8, 56.5), falling over time. Opioids were most prescribed in 2020 (39.0/100 PY; 38.7, 39.2). Gabapentinoid prescribing increased: 2004 prevalence 1.1/100 PY (1.0, 1.2); 2020 prevalence 9.9/100 PY (9.7, 10.0). Most opioid prescriptions were chronic (2020 prevalence 23.4/100 PY [23.2, 23.6]). Non-NSAID analgesic prescribing was commoner in RA, older people, females and deprived areas/northern England. Conversely, NSAID prescribing was commoner in axSpA/males, varying little by deprivation/geography. Peri-diagnosis was high-risk for starting chronic opioid/NSAID prescriptions. Prognostic factors for chronic opioid/gabapentinoid and NSAID prescriptions differed, with NSAIDs having no consistently significant association with deprivation (unlike opioids/gabapentinoids). CONCLUSION: IA analgesic prescribing of all classes is widespread. This is neither evidence-based nor in line with guidelines. Peri-diagnosis is an opportune moment to reduce chronic analgesic prescribing.

Estimating the population health burden of musculoskeletal conditions using primary care electronic health records.

OBJECTIVES: Better indicators from affordable, sustainable data sources are needed to monitor population burden of musculoskeletal conditions. We propose five indicators of musculoskeletal health and assessed if routinely available primary care electronic health records (EHR) can estimate population levels in musculoskeletal consulters. METHODS: We collected validated patient-reported measures of pain experience, function and health status through a local survey of adults (≥35 years) presenting to English general practices over 12 months for low back pain, shoulder pain, osteoarthritis and other regional musculoskeletal disorders. Using EHR data we derived and validated models for estimating population levels of five self-reported indicators: prevalence of high impact chronic pain, overall musculoskeletal health (based on Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire), quality of life (based on EuroQoL health utility measure), and prevalence of moderate-to-severe low back pain and moderate-to-severe shoulder pain. We applied models to a national EHR database (Clinical Practice Research Datalink) to obtain national estimates of each indicator for three successive years. RESULTS: The optimal models included recorded demographics, deprivation, consultation frequency, analgesic and antidepressant prescriptions, and multimorbidity. Applying models to national EHR, we estimated that 31.9% of adults (≥35 years) presenting with non-inflammatory musculoskeletal disorders in England in 2016/17 experienced high impact chronic pain. Estimated population health levels were worse in women, older aged and those in the most deprived neighbourhoods, and changed little over 3 years. CONCLUSION: National and subnational estimates for a range of subjective indicators of non-inflammatory musculoskeletal health conditions can be obtained using information from routine electronic health records.

Indicators of dementia disease progression in primary care: An electronic health record cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The objectives were to assess the feasibility and validity of using markers of dementia-related health as indicators of dementia progression in primary care, by assessing the frequency with which they are recorded and by testing the hypothesis that they are associated with recognised outcomes of dementia. The markers, in 13 domains, were derived previously through literature review, expert consensus, and analysis of regional primary care records. METHODS: The study population consisted of patients with a recorded dementia diagnosis in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, a UK primary care database linked to secondary care records. Incidence of recorded domains in the 36 months after diagnosis was determined. Associations of recording of domains with future hospital admission, palliative care, and mortality were derived. RESULTS: There were 30,463 people with diagnosed dementia. Incidence of domains ranged from 469/1000 person-years (Increased Multimorbidity) to 11/1000 (Home Pressures). An increasing number of domains in which a new marker was recorded in the first year after diagnosis was associated with hospital admission (hazard ratio for ≥4 domains vs. no domains = 1.24; 95% confidence interval = 1.15-1.33), palliative care (1.87; 1.62-2.15), and mortality (1.57; 1.47-1.67). Individual domains were associated with outcomes with varying strengths of association. CONCLUSIONS: Feasibility and validity of potential indicators of progression of dementia derived from primary care records are supported by their frequency of recording and associations with recognised outcomes. Further research should assess whether these markers can help identify patients with poorer prognosis to improve outcomes through stratified care and targeted support.

Markers of dementia-related health in primary care electronic health records.

OBJECTIVES: Identifying routinely recorded markers of poor health in patients with dementia may help treatment decisions and evaluation of earlier outcomes in research. Our objective was to determine whether a set of credible markers of dementia-related health could be identified from primary care electronic health records (EHR). METHODS: The study consisted of (i) rapid review of potential measures of dementia-related health used in EHR studies; (ii) consensus exercise to assess feasibility of identifying these markers in UK primary care EHR; (iii) development of UK EHR code lists for markers; (iv) analysis of a regional primary care EHR database to determine further potential markers; (v) consensus exercise to finalise markers and pool into higher domains; (vi) determination of 12-month prevalence of domains in EHR of 2328 patients with dementia compared to matched patients without dementia. RESULTS: Sixty-three markers were identified and mapped to 13 domains: Care; Home Pressures; Severe Neuropsychiatric; Neuropsychiatric; Cognitive Function; Daily Functioning; Safety; Comorbidity; Symptoms; Diet/Nutrition; Imaging; Increased Multimorbidity; Change in Dementia Drug. Comorbidity was the most prevalent recorded domain in dementia (69%). Home Pressures were the least prevalent domain (1%). Ten domains had a statistically significant higher prevalence in dementia patients, one (Comorbidity) was higher in non-dementia patients, and two (Home Pressures, Diet/Nutrition) showed no association with dementia. CONCLUSIONS: EHR captures important markers of dementia-related health. Further research should assess if they indicate dementia progression. These markers could provide the basis for identifying individuals at risk of faster progression and outcome measures for use in research.

Patterns of symptoms before a diagnosis of first episode psychosis: a latent class analysis of UK primary care electronic health records.

BACKGROUND: The nature of symptoms in the prodromal period of first episode psychosis (FEP) remains unclear. The objective was to determine the patterns of symptoms recorded in primary care in the 5 years before FEP diagnosis. METHODS: The study was set within 568 practices contributing to a UK primary care health record database (Clinical Practice Research Datalink). Patients aged 16-45 years with a first coded record of FEP, and no antipsychotic prescription more than 1 year prior to FEP diagnosis (n = 3045) was age, gender, and practice matched to controls without FEP (n = 12,180). Fifty-five symptoms recorded in primary care in the previous 5 years, categorised into 8 groups (mood-related, 'neurotic', behavioural change, volition change, cognitive change, perceptual problem, substance misuse, physical symptoms), were compared between cases and controls. Common patterns of symptoms prior to FEP diagnosis were identified using latent class analysis. RESULTS: Median age at diagnosis was 30 years, 63% were male. Non-affective psychosis (67%) was the most common diagnosis. Mood-related, 'neurotic', and physical symptoms were frequently recorded (> 30% of patients) before diagnosis, and behavioural change, volition change, and substance misuse were also common (> 10%). Prevalence of all symptom groups was higher in FEP patients than in controls (adjusted odds ratios 1.33-112). Median time from the first recorded symptom to FEP diagnosis was 2-2.5 years except for perceptual problem (70 days). The optimal latent class model applied to FEP patients determined three distinct patient clusters: 'no or minimal symptom cluster' (49%) had no or few symptoms recorded; 'affective symptom cluster' (40%) mainly had mood-related and 'neurotic' symptoms; and 'multiple symptom cluster' (11%) consulted for three or more symptom groups before diagnosis. The multiple symptom cluster was more likely to have drug-induced psychosis, female, obese, and have a higher morbidity burden. Affective and multiple symptom clusters showed a good discriminative ability (C-statistic 0.766; sensitivity 51.2% and specificity 86.7%) for FEP, and many patients in these clusters had consulted for their symptoms several years before FEP diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Distinctive patterns of prodromal symptoms may help alert general practitioners to those developing psychosis, facilitating earlier identification and referral to specialist care, thereby avoiding potentially detrimental treatment delay.

Development and validation of prediction models to estimate risk of primary total hip and knee replacements using data from the UK: two prospective open cohorts using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

OBJECTIVES: The ability to efficiently and accurately predict future risk of primary total hip and knee replacement (THR/TKR) in earlier stages of osteoarthritis (OA) has potentially important applications. We aimed to develop and validate two models to estimate an individual's risk of primary THR and TKR in patients newly presenting to primary care. METHODS: We identified two cohorts of patients aged ≥40 years newly consulting hip pain/OA and knee pain/OA in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Candidate predictors were identified by systematic review, novel hypothesis-free 'Record-Wide Association Study' with replication, and panel consensus. Cox proportional hazards models accounting for competing risk of death were applied to derive risk algorithms for THR and TKR. Internal-external cross-validation (IECV) was then applied over geographical regions to validate two models. RESULTS: 45 predictors for THR and 53 for TKR were identified, reviewed and selected by the panel. 301 052 and 416 030 patients newly consulting between 1992 and 2015 were identified in the hip and knee cohorts, respectively (median follow-up 6 years). The resultant model C-statistics is 0.73 (0.72, 0.73) and 0.79 (0.78, 0.79) for THR (with 20 predictors) and TKR model (with 24 predictors), respectively. The IECV C-statistics ranged between 0.70-0.74 (THR model) and 0.76-0.82 (TKR model); the IECV calibration slope ranged between 0.93-1.07 (THR model) and 0.92-1.12 (TKR model). CONCLUSIONS: Two prediction models with good discrimination and calibration that estimate individuals' risk of THR and TKR have been developed and validated in large-scale, nationally representative data, and are readily automated in electronic patient records.

Validation of hip osteoarthritis diagnosis recording in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

PURPOSE: The diagnosis of hip osteoarthritis is subject to several uncertainties, especially in primary care. The aims of this study were to determine (i) the diagnostic accuracy of coding of hip osteoarthritis by primary care physicians in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), (ii) the relative influence of radiographic and clinical parameters on diagnostic accuracy, and (iii) the accuracy of the diagnosis date. METHODS: An extract of all patients aged over 65 years, with a Read code for hip osteoarthritis listed between January 1995 and December 2014, was obtained from CPRD. A random sample was selected of 170 participants. A questionnaire concerning data in medical records on relevant clinical and radiographic criteria used to establish the diagnosis of hip osteoarthritis was distributed to primary care physicians of participants. Using diagnostic criteria, we formulated thresholds for diagnosis based on clinical, radiographic, and combined grounds. RESULTS: One hundred nineteen completed questionnaires were returned (70% response rate). The positive predictive value (PPV) of hip osteoarthritis codes, based on radiological criteria, was 79.8%. The PPV, based on clinical criteria, was 79.0%, with substantial but not complete overlap. Overall 12% of diagnoses were not confirmed. In 42% of cases, there was disparity between date of diagnosis in CPRD and the medical record. Median difference in date was ±425 days (interquartile range, 18-1448 days). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the difficulties in reaching a diagnosis of hip osteoarthritis in primary care, CPRD Read codes have a sufficiently high PPV for most research uses. However, the accuracy of diagnosis date may not be as reliable.

Cost-effectiveness of a model consultation to support self-management in patients with osteoarthritis.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of a model OA consultation for OA to support self-management compared with usual care. Methods: An incremental cost-utility analysis using patient responses to the three-level EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) questionnaire was undertaken from a UK National Health Service perspective alongside a two-arm cluster-randomized controlled trial. Uncertainty was explored through the use of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Results: Differences in health outcomes between the model OA consultation and usual care arms were not statistically significant. On average, visits to the orthopaedic surgeon were lower in the model OA consultation arm by -0.28 (95% CI: -0.55, -0.06). The cost-utility analysis indicated that the model OA consultation was associated with a non-significant incremental cost of £-13.11 (95% CI: -81.09 to 54.85) and an incremental quality adjusted life year (QALY) of -0.003 (95% CI: -0.03 to 0.02), with a 44% chance of being cost-effective at a threshold of £20 000 per QALY gained. The percentage of participants who took time off and the associated productivity cost were lower in the model OA consultation arm. Conclusion: Implementing National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines using a model OA consultation in primary care does not appear to lead to increased costs, but health outcomes remain very similar to usual care. Even though the intervention seems to reduce the demand for orthopaedic surgery, overall it is unlikely to be cost-effective.

Trends in prescribing of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in patients with cardiovascular disease: influence of national guidelines in UK primary care.

Background: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used to treat pain, but have potential side effects in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD). Objectives: To determine trends in NSAIDs prescribing between 2002 and 2010 in patients with CVD, and ascertain whether prescribing patterns changed following publication of major national (the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE)) guidance to GPs. Methods: This was an observational database study of adult patients in 11 practices (Staffordshire, England). NSAIDs were categorised into basic, COX-2 and topical. Study duration was divided on a quarterly basis from 2002-quarter-1 to 2010q4. CVD patients were identified using pre-defined Read Codes recorded in the two years prior to each quarter. Quarterly prevalence was determined. Times of significant changes in prescribing trends were determined using Joinpoint Regression, and compared to dates of the five major guidelines (in 2004q4, 2005q1, 2005q3, 2006q4, 2008q1). Results: In CVD patients, the prescription of basic NSAIDs showed a decreasing trend throughout the study period, from 774 (95% CI, 691-863) per 10000 patients in 2002q1 to 245 (204-291) in 2010q4. COX-2 prescribing increased from 232/10000 (187-286) in 2002q1 to 403/10000 (348-464) in 2004q3. Prescribing then fell sharply to 102/10000 (76-134) in 2005q2 before stabilising around 55/10000. Topical NSAIDs prescribing showed a steady increase, starting at 115/10000 (108-123) in 2002q1 and ending at 270/10000 (258-281) in 2010q4. Similar trends were observed in patients without CVD, particularly a sharp drop in COX-2 prescribing also occurred from 2004q4 when initial MHRA guidance was issued. Conclusion: Despite guidelines and a trend toward decreased prescribing, the use of potentially harmful NSAIDs continued in CVD patients. The MHRA directives potentially might have affected patients without CVD who may have inappropriately restricted their use of COX-2.

Uptake of the NICE osteoarthritis guidelines in primary care: a survey of older adults with joint pain.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a leading cause of pain and disability. NICE OA guidelines (2008) recommend that patients with OA should be offered core treatments in primary care. Assessments of OA management have identified a need to improve primary care of people with OA, as recorded use of interventions concordant with the NICE guidelines is suboptimal in primary care. The aim of this study was to i) describe the patient-reported uptake of non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments recommended in the NICE OA guidelines in older adults with a self-reported consultation for joint pain and ii) determine whether patient characteristics or OA diagnosis impact uptake. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey mailed to adults aged ≥45 years (n = 28,443) from eight general practices in the UK as part of the MOSAICS study. Respondents who reported the presence of joint pain, a consultation in the previous 12 months for joint pain, and gave consent to medical record review formed the sample for this study. RESULTS: Four thousand fifty-nine respondents were included in the analysis (mean age 65.6 years (SD 11.2), 2300 (56.7%) females). 502 (12.4%) received an OA diagnosis in the previous 12 months. More participants reported using pharmacological treatments (e.g. paracetamol (31.3%), opioids (40.4%)) than non-pharmacological treatments (e.g. exercise (3.8%)). Those with an OA diagnosis were more likely to use written information (OR 1.57; 95% CI 1.26,1.96), paracetamol (OR 1.30; 95% CI 1.05,1.62) and topical NSAIDs (OR 1.30; 95% CI 1.04,1.62) than those with a joint pain code. People aged ≥75 years were less likely to use written information (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.40,0.79) and exercise (OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.25,0.55) and more likely to use paracetamol (OR 1.91; 95% CI 1.38,2.65) than those aged < 75 years. CONCLUSION: The cross-sectional population survey was conducted to examine the uptake of the treatments that are recommended in the NICE OA guidelines in older adults with a self-reported consultation for joint pain and to determine whether patient characteristics or OA diagnosis impact uptake. Non-pharmacological treatment was suboptimal compared to pharmacological treatment. Implementation of NICE guidelines needs to examine why non-pharmacological treatments, such as exercise, remain under-used especially among older people.

Population trends in the incidence and initial management of osteoarthritis: age-period-cohort analysis of the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, 1992-2013.

Objective: To determine recent trends in the rate and management of new cases of OA presenting to primary healthcare using UK nationally representative data. Methods: Using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink we identified new cases of diagnosed OA and clinical OA (including OA-relevant peripheral joint pain in those aged over 45 years) using established code lists. For both definitions we estimated annual incidence density using exact person-time, and undertook descriptive analysis and age-period-cohort modelling. Demographic characteristics and management were described for incident cases in each calendar year. Sensitivity analyses explored the robustness of the findings to key assumptions. Results: Between 1992 and 2013 the annual age-sex standardized incidence rate for clinical OA increased from 29.2 to 40.5/1000 person-years. After controlling for period effects, the consultation incidence of clinical OA was higher for successive cohorts born after the mid-1950s, particularly women. In contrast, with the exception of hand OA, we observed no increase in the incidence of diagnosed OA: 8.6/1000 person-years in 2004 down to 6.3 in 2013. In 2013, 16.4% of clinical OA cases had an X-ray referral. While NSAID prescriptions fell from 2004, the proportion prescribed opioid analgesia rose markedly (0.1% of diagnosed OA in 1992 to 1.9% in 2013). Conclusion: Rising rates of clinical OA, continued use of plain radiography and a shift towards opioid analgesic prescription are concerning. Our findings support the search for policies to tackle this common problem that promote joint pain prevention while avoiding excessive and inappropriate health care.

Annual consultation incidence of osteoarthritis estimated from population-based health care data in England.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the consultation incidence of OA using population-based health care data in England and compare OA incidence figures with those derived in other countries. METHODS: A population-based health care database (Consultations in Primary Care Archive) in England was used to derive the consultation incidence of OA (overall and by joint site) using the maximum available run-in period method. These estimates, and their distribution by age and sex, were compared with those published from population-based health care databases in Canada, the Netherlands and Spain. A novel age-stratified run-in period method was then used to investigate whether the consultation incidence has been increasing over time in younger adults. RESULTS: The annual consultation incidence of OA (any joint) was 8.6/1000 persons ≥15 years of age (95% CI 7.9, 9.3) [6.3 (95% CI 5.5, 7.1) in men and 10.8 (95% CI 9.8, 12.0) in women]. Incidence increased sharply between 45 and 64 years of age, peaking at 75-84 years. The joint-specific incidence was 1.4 (95% CI 1.1, 1.7), 3.5 (95% CI 3.1, 3.9) and 1.3 (95% CI 1.1, 1.6) for hip OA, knee OA and hand OA, respectively. The estimates and their distribution by age and sex were broadly consistent with international estimates. Between 2003 and 2010, incidence in those aged 35-44 years increased from 0.3 to 2.0/1000 persons. CONCLUSION: Newly diagnosed cases of OA in England occur in 9 in 1000 at-risk adults each year, similar to other international estimates. Although lower, the consultation incidence proportion in younger adults appears to have increased in the past decade.

Impact of musculoskeletal pain on insomnia onset: a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Pain, the most common manifestation of rheumatological conditions, is highly prevalent among older adults, with worse health outcomes found in those with co-morbid insomnia. Proactive prevention of insomnia may reduce the overall disease burden of pain and rheumatological conditions. To inform such development, this study examined the role of pain, physical limitation and reduced social participation in predicting and mediating insomnia onset. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted involving 6676 individuals ≥50 years of age who completed questionnaires at baseline and a 3-year follow-up. Participants were classified into none, some and widespread pain according to the ACR criteria. Logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between baseline pain and insomnia onset at 3 years. Path analysis was used to test for the mediating role of physical limitation and social participation restriction. RESULTS: Some [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.57 (95% CI 1.15, 2.13)] and widespread [2.13 (1.66, 3.20)] pain increased the risk of insomnia onset at 3 years, after adjusting for age, gender, socio-economic class, education, anxiety, depression, sleep and co-morbidity at baseline. The combination of physical limitation and reduced social participation explained up to 68% of the effect of some pain on insomnia onset and 66% of the effect of widespread pain on insomnia onset. CONCLUSION: There was a dose-response association between the extent of pain at baseline and insomnia onset at 3 years that was substantially mediated by physical limitation and reduced social participation. Targeting physical limitation and social participation in older people with pain may buffer co-morbid insomnia, reducing the overall disease burden.

Quality of care for OA: the effect of a point-of-care consultation recording template.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to determine the feasibility of introducing a computerized template for identifying quality of care during an OA consultation, describe quality of OA care in practices in which the template was introduced and assess the effect of the template on routinely recorded clinician behaviour in those practices. METHODS: A computerized template to assist the recording of care in consultations for patients with OA was installed in eight general practices. Eligible patients were those ≥45 years of age consulting for clinical OA during a 6 month period. The main outcomes were frequency of template triggering, achievement of quality indicators during the consultation (assessment of pain and function, assessment for first-line analgesics, provision of information, exercise advice, consideration of physiotherapy referral, weight loss advice) and change in routinely recorded clinician behaviour (diagnostic coding, prescribing, referral, use of radiography, weight records) compared with the 12 months prior to template installation. RESULTS: The template was triggered for 1730 patients. Achievement of indicators ranged from 36% (for consideration of physiotherapy referral) to 63% (for pain assessment), with substantial variability between clinicians. There was an increase in prescription of recommended first-line analgesics following the template installation: paracetamol [odds ratio (OR) 1.49 (95% CI 1.22, 1.82) compared with pre-template] and topical NSAIDs [OR 1.95 (95% CI 1.61, 2.35)]. CONCLUSION: This new template is a feasible tool for capturing data during OA consultations to aid assessment of quality of care. It was associated with significant improvements in recommended care processes. However, strategies are needed to ensure consistent approaches between clinicians. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN06984617/mosaics.

Variations in patient-reported physical health between cardiac and musculoskeletal diseases: systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based studies.

Population-based assessments of physical health are important to evaluate healthcare resource allocation. Normative data on the level of physical impairments attributable to specific diseases and severity levels within these diseases is critical to interpreting such data. Our objective, by means of a systematic review and meta-analysis, was to test the hypothesis that specific diseases which form cardiovascular and musculoskeletal disease spectra are associated with gradients of physical impairments. We examined a cardiovascular disease spectrum which consisted of hypertension, ischaemic heart disease and heart failure, and a musculoskeletal disease spectrum of lower back pain, osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. Using Medline, EMBASE and CINAHL databases, articles which had examined these morbidities and used either the SF-12 or SF-36 in general or primary care populations were selected; data was extracted independently by three reviewers. Study characteristics were described and the mean physical component summary scores of the SF-12 or SF-36 was analysed by disease, using random-effects meta-analysis. The association between disease and physical health (mean physical component summary scores) was assessed using multilevel meta-regression analysis, adjusting for age, health setting, country, disease definition and SF-12 or 36 format. From this search, 26 articles were identified, yielding 70 separate estimates of mean physical component summary scores across the morbidities from 14 different countries. For the selected conditions, pooled unadjusted mean physical component summary scores were: 44.4 for hypertension, 38.9 for ischaemic heart disease, 35.9 for heart failure, 39.5 for lower back pain, 36.0 for osteoarthritis and 36.5 for rheumatoid arthritis. The adjusted meta-regression showed mean physical component summary score difference for ischaemic heart disease of -4.6 (95 % confidence interval -6.0 to -3.2) and heart failure -7.5 (-9.1 to -5.9) compared to the hypertension category. For osteoarthritis -4.2 (-5.3 to -3.0) and rheumatoid arthritis -3.9 (-9.5 to 1.6) compared to the lower back pain category. Our findings provide the benchmark norms for the differences in physical health within and between disease spectra. Improved characterisation of the relative impact of individual conditions on physical health will facilitate public health assessments of chronic diseases as well as assessments of interventions using functional patient-reported outcomes.

International comparisons of the consultation prevalence of musculoskeletal conditions using population-based healthcare data from England and Sweden.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the consultation prevalence of musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions as presented in different healthcare systems, and to determine the feasibility of comparing prevalence figures between nations. METHODS: The settings were an English regional database (Consultations in Primary Care Archive (CiPCA)) and the Swedish Skåne County Health Care Register. Case definitions, data extraction and analysis procedures were harmonised. The number of people consulting per 10 000 registered population in primary care, and in primary or secondary care, in the year 2010 (annual consultation prevalence) were determined for doctor-diagnosed osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), low back pain, and spondyloarthritis including psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Seven-year period consultation prevalences were also determined. RESULTS: Combining primary and secondary care, annual consultation prevalences of any MSK condition (2143 vs 1610/10 000) and low back pain (587 vs 294/10 000) were higher in England than in Sweden, but higher for RA, spondyloarthritis and psoriatic arthritis in Sweden. Annual primary care prevalence figures for OA (176 vs 196/10 000), RA (25 vs 26/10 000), spondyloarthritis (both 8/10 000) and psoriatic arthritis (5 vs 3/10 000) were similar between England and Sweden. AS was rarely recorded in Swedish primary care. These patterns were also observed for 7-year period consultation prevalences. CONCLUSIONS: A rigorous methodological approach allowed feasible comparison of MSK consultation prevalence between England and Sweden. Differences in prevalence of inflammatory and unspecific pain conditions may be partially explained by known variations in healthcare systems and recording practice. Routine healthcare data offers potential for investigating variations in occurrence and outcome of MSK conditions between nations.

Assessing fatigue in ankylosing spondylitis: the importance of frequency and severity.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the value of assessing fatigue frequency and its relationship with fatigue severity in a UK cohort of AS patients. METHODS: Single items from the Evaluation of AS Quality of Life and BASDAI were used to measure fatigue frequency and severity, respectively. Items were included in a questionnaire containing AS-specific and generic measures, completed by participants in a postal survey at baseline and 6 months. Respondents were categorized at baseline into four groups according to fatigue frequency and severity and compared on other measures of health status. RESULTS: Of baseline responders who experienced fatigue (n = 451, 74%), 75% reported it to be frequent and severe, 15% frequent not severe and 10% severe not frequent. There was no difference between groups on gender, age or years with AS. Patients reporting frequent and severe fatigue had worse scores than other groups across all other health status measures. Patients reporting only frequent fatigue had similar scores to those reporting only severe fatigue, but worse than those without fatigue. Eighty-one per cent of non-fatigued patients and 79% of those with frequent and severe fatigue at baseline did not change their level of fatigue at 6 months. However, 80% of patients with frequent or severe fatigue at baseline changed, mainly to no fatigue (43%) or both frequent and severe fatigue (30%). CONCLUSION: Routinely assessing both the frequency and severity of fatigue is important in understanding the impact of fatigue and its change over time. Not assessing frequency could result in the failure to identify patients with significant fatigue. However, the multidimensional nature of fatigue should be further explored.

Associations between cardiovascular disease severity, osteoarthritis co-morbidity and physical health: a population-based study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the interaction between cardiovascular disease severity and OA co-morbidity on physical health. METHODS: A baseline questionnaire was mailed to 9676 patients aged ≥40 years from UK family practices. A priori exclusive morbidity groups were constructed as follows, based on records 3 years before baseline: (i) reference group--neither cardiovascular disease nor OA; (ii) cardiovascular disease severity index groups--with hypertension, ischaemic heart disease or heart failure without OA; (iii) OA index group without cardiovascular disease and (iv) co-morbid severity groups with hypertension, ischaemic heart disease or heart failure with OA. Adjusted associations between morbidity groups and physical health [mean physical component summary (PCS) score based on the 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12)] compared with the reference group were assessed using linear regression methods. RESULTS: A total of 5426 patients responded to the baseline questionnaire (56% response). The adjusted mean difference in PCS score between the reference group and the cardiovascular disease index were -2.4 (95% CI -3.4, -1.4) for hypertension, -5.3 (-6.3, -4.3) for ischaemic heart disease and -11.8 (-13.6, -9.9) for heart failure. The difference in the score for the index OA group was -5.6 (-6.5, -4.6). Estimates for co-morbid OA groups were -6.8 (-7.9, -5.7) for hypertension, -9.1 (-10.6, -7.6) for ischaemic heart disease and -12.8 (-16.0, -9.7) for heart failure. CONCLUSION: In cardiovascular populations with differing severity, the co-morbid addition of OA was associated with incrementally poorer physical health, but such interactions were less than additive.

Socioeconomic status and the risk for being diagnosed with spondyloarthritis and chronic pain: a nested case-control study.

Socioeconomic status could potentially impact on which type of rheumatic diagnosis a patient receives. We determined whether different socioeconomic status is a risk factor for being diagnosed with spondyloarthritis (SpA) or chronic pain. In a nested case-control study, we identified two sets of adult cases diagnosed with (i) SpA (n = 1,194) and (ii) chronic pain (n = 3,730) during 2010-2012 in Skåne region, Sweden. We randomly sampled controls matched for age and sex. Level of education, marital status, and income were identified in national registers 4 years before inclusion. We also studied health-care utilization, prescribed pharmaceuticals, and work status. We used conditional logistic regressions and included socioeconomic variables and geographic area in the models. Low (odds ratio [OR] 1.69 95 % CI 1.50-1.91) or moderate education (OR 1.43 95 % CI 1.30-1.57), and low (OR 1.40 95 % CI 1.25-1.57) or moderate income (OR 1.24 95 % CI 1.10-1.38) were associated with a chronic pain diagnosis. For a SpA diagnosis, moderate income (OR 1.25 95 % CI 1.04-1.50) was the only significant factor identified. Both case groups had a larger proportion that did not work (P < 0.001), used more health care (P < 0.001), and were more frequently prescribed NSAIDs (P < 0.001) 4 years before diagnosis than controls. We confirmed that lower levels of education and income are associated with a chronic pain diagnosis. This association may reflect a true higher incidence of chronic pain and/or increased consultation propensity for such pain in people with socioeconomic status. We found no such association for SpA.