Temporal trends in the incidence, treatment patterns, and outcomes of coronary artery disease and peripheral artery disease in the UK, 2006–2015

Aims Most reports estimating national incidence rates of coronary (CAD) and peripheral arterial disease (PAD) have focused on stable outpatients or acute or elective hospital admissions, but not on the overall burden of disease. In this study, we report the changing trends in the population-level incidence of CAD and PAD, respectively from 2006 to 2015, statin utilization for secondary prevention and survival outcomes using multiple nationally representative data sources from the UK (primary care encounters, hospital admissions, and procedure-level data). Methods and results A nationally representative study of linked primary and secondary care electronic health records of 4.6 million individuals from the UK. We calculated crude and standardized annual incidence rates separately for CAD and PAD. Statin use for secondary prevention, trends in annual major vascular event rates, and mortality between 2006 and 2015, were estimated for CAD and PAD, respectively. We identified 160 376 and 70 753 patients with incident CAD and PAD, respectively. The age- and sex-standardized incidence of CAD was similar in 2006 (443 per 100 000 person-years) and 2015 [436 per 100 000 person-years; adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96–1.00]. In contrast, there was a 15% decline in the standardized incidence of PAD (236 per 100 000 person-years in 2006 to 202 per 100 000 person-years in 2015; adjusted IRR 0.85, 95% CI 0.82–0.88). The proportion of incident CAD and PAD patients prescribed long-term statins, was only 66% and 55%, respectively and was less common amongst women, patients aged >70 years, with heart failure, chronic lung disease, or depression. Cardiovascular mortality declined by 43% for incident CAD (adjusted IRR 0.57, 95% CI 0.50–0.64) between 2006 and 2015 but did not decline for incident PAD (adjusted IRR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70–1.00). Conclusion and relevance In the UK, the standardized incidence of CAD appears stable but mortality rates are falling, whereas the standardized incidence of PAD is falling but mortality rates are not

The Impact of Error-Management Climate, Error Type and Error Originator on Auditors’ Reporting Errors Discovered on Audit Work Papers

We examine factors affecting the auditor’s willingness to report their own or their peers’ self-discovered errors in working papers subsequent to detailed working paper review. Prior research has shown that errors in working papers are detected in the review process; however, such detection rates only rarely exceed 50% of the seeded errors. Hence, measures that encourage auditors to be alert to their own (or their peers’) potential errors any time they revisit the audit working papers may be valuable in detecting such residual errors and potentially correcting them before damage occurs to the audit firm or its client. We hypothesize that three factors affect the auditor’s willingness to report post detailed review discovered errors: the local office error-management climate (open versus blame), the type of error (mechanical versus conceptual) and who committed the error (the individual who committed the error (self) or a peer). Local office error-management climate is said to be open and supportive where errors and mistakes are accepted as part of everyday life as long as they are learned from and not repeated. In alternative, a blame error-management climate focuses on a “get it right the first time” culture where mistakes are not tolerated and blame gets attached to those admitting to or found committing such errors. We find that error-management climate has a significant overall effect on auditor willingness to report errors, as does who committed the error originally. We find both predicted and unpredicted significant interactions among the three factors that qualify these observed significant main effects. We discuss implications for audit practice and further research

Epidemiology of patients with peripheral artery disease undergoing revascularization in England

Background: Symptoms, severity, and acuteness of peripheral artery disease (PAD) are major determinants of severe limb symptoms, subsequent risk of cardiovascular events and mortality. Lower extremity revascularization (LER) is a key option to relieve symptoms and to prevent limb loss in symptomatic PAD patients. This study aimed to quantify the burden of disease among patients with PAD-LER in England. Methods: Retrospective population-based study of linked primary and secondary care electronic health records, included 13,869 adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with PAD-LER from 2003 to 2018. The incidence of first ever PAD-LER was estimated overall and by type of procedure (endovascular/surgical). Health resource utilization associated with PAD-related complications and treatment patterns were assessed. Results: A high annual incidence of lower-limb revascularization (41.2 per 1,000 person years) and a nearly double incidence of endovascular first revascularization compared with open surgery were observed. More than 70% of patients with PAD-LER had a history of hyperlipidaemia and hypertension and roughly one-third were diabetic and had a history of coronary artery disease. Cardiovascular mortality accounting for one-third (34.1 per 1,000 person years) of all-cause mortality. Over 93% of patients were hospitalized for any reason and the commonest reasons for hospitalization were cardiovascular diseases and PAD with about one third hospitalized for revascularization re-occurrence. Conclusion: There is a significant burden of PAD-LER to the individual and society with ongoing healthcare resource utilization, treatment and increasing mortality