Random effects modelling versus logistic regression for the inclusion of cluster-level covariates in propensity score estimation: a Monte Carlo simulation and registry cohort analysis

Purpose: Surgeon and hospital-related features, such as volume, can be associated with treatment choices and outcomes. Accounting for these covariates with propensity score (PS) analysis can be challenging due to the clustered nature of the data. We studied six different PS estimation strategies for clustered data using random effects modelling (REM) compared with logistic regression. Methods: Monte Carlo simulations were used to generate variable cluster-level confounding intensity [odds ratio (OR) = 1.01–2.5] and cluster size (20–1,000 patients per cluster). The following PS estimation strategies were compared: i) logistic regression omitting cluster-level confounders; ii) logistic regression including cluster-level confounders; iii) the same as ii) but including cross-level interactions; iv), v), and vi), similar to i), ii), and iii), respectively, but using REM instead of logistic regression. The same strategies were tested in a trial emulation of partial versus total knee replacement (TKR) surgery, where observational versus trial-based estimates were compared as a proxy for bias. Performance metrics included bias and mean square error (MSE). Results: In most simulated scenarios, logistic regression, including cluster-level confounders, led to the lowest bias and MSE, for example, with 50 clusters × 200 individuals and confounding intensity OR = 1.5, a relative bias of 10%, and MSE of 0.003 for (i) compared to 32% and 0.010 for (iv). The results from the trial emulation also gave similar trends. Conclusion: Logistic regression, including patient and surgeon-/hospital-level confounders, appears to be the preferred strategy for PS estimation

The impact of COVID-19 certification mandates on the number of cases of and hospitalizations with COVID-19 in the UK: A difference-in-differences analysis

BackgroundMandatory COVID-19 certification, showing proof of vaccination, negative test, or recent infection to access to public venues, was introduced at different times in the four countries of the UK. We aim to study its effects on the incidence of cases and hospital admissions.MethodsWe performed Negative binomial segmented regression and ARIMA analyses for four countries (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales), and fitted Difference-in-Differences models to compare the latter three to England, as a negative control group, since it was the last country where COVID-19 certification was introduced. The main outcome was the weekly averaged incidence of COVID-19 cases and hospital admissions.ResultsCOVID-19 certification led to a decrease in the incidence of cases and hospital admissions in Northern Ireland, as well as in Wales during the second half of November. The same was seen for hospital admissions in Wales and Scotland during October. In Wales the incidence rate of cases in October already had a decreasing tendency, as well as in England, hence a particular impact of COVID-19 certification was less obvious. Method assumptions for the Difference-in-Differences analysis did not hold for Scotland. Additional NBSR and ARIMA models suggest similar results, while also accounting for correlation in the latter. The assessment of the effect in England itself leads one to believe that this intervention might not be strong enough for the Omicron variant, which was prevalent at the time of introduction of COVID-19 certification in the country.ConclusionsMandatory COVID-19 certification reduced COVID-19 transmission and hospitalizations when Delta predominated in the UK, but lost efficacy when Omicron became the most common variant

Upper Quarter Injury Rates and Risk in United States High School Athletes Prior To and During the Prolonged Sport Stoppage

# Background Upper quarter injuries are a serious problem in high school sports. The distinctive differences in males and females and within sports concerning specific upper quarter body parts necessitates the need to evaluate these injuries across these groups. The COVID-19 pandemic has created an opportunity to evaluate the potential added burden abrupt and prolonged sport stoppage had on upper quarter injury risk. # Hypothesis/Purpose To 1) describe and compare upper quarter injury rates and risk in high school athletes in the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 academic school years; 2) examine injuries by gender, sport, injury type, and location of injury. # Methods An ecological study of the athletes from 176 high schools over six states, matching high schools between 2019-2020 (19-20) and 2020-2021 (20-21) years was performed. Injuries were reported by at least one high school athletic trainer assigned to each school into a centralized database and data collected from July 1, 2019, to June 30, 2021. Injury rates were calculated per 1,000 athletes per academic year. Interrupted time series models assessed the incidence ratio between academic years. # Results A total of 98,487 athletes from all sports participated in 19-20 and 72,521 in 20-21. Upper quarter injury rates increased in from 19-20 $$41.9 (40.6, 43.1)$$ to 20-21 $$50.7 (48.1, 51.3)$$. Upper quarter injury risk $$1.5 (1.1, 2.2)$$ was greater in 20-21 compared to 19-20. Females did not demonstrate increased injury rates between 19-20 $$31.1 (29.4, 32.7)$$ to 20-21 $$28.1 (26.4, 30.0)$$. Males reported increased injury rates from 19-20 $$50.3 (48.5, 52.2)$$ to 20-21 $$67.7 (65.2, 70.2)$$. Increased injury for the shoulder, elbow, and hand were reported in 20-21. Collision, field, and court upper quarter injury rates were increased in 20-21. # Discussion Upper quarter injury rates and injury risk were greater during the 2020-2021 school year than in the prior year. Males demonstrated increased upper quarter injury rates, while females did not. Return to play protocols for high school athletes should be considered following abrupt sport stoppage. # Level of Evidence

Genetic risk, adherence to healthy lifestyle and acute cardiovascular and thromboembolic complications following SARS-COV-2 infection

Current understanding of determinants for COVID-19-related cardiovascular and thromboembolic (CVE) complications primarily covers clinical aspects with limited knowledge on genetics and lifestyles. Here, we analysed a prospective cohort of 106,005 participants from UK Biobank with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. We show that higher polygenic risk scores, indicating individual's hereditary risk, were linearly associated with increased risks of post-COVID-19 atrial fibrillation (adjusted HR 1.52 [95% CI 1.44 to 1.60] per standard deviation increase), coronary artery disease (1.57 [1.46 to 1.69]), venous thromboembolism (1.33 [1.18 to 1.50]), and ischaemic stroke (1.27 [1.05 to 1.55]). These genetic associations are robust across genders, key clinical subgroups, and during Omicron waves. However, a prior composite healthier lifestyle was consistently associated with a reduction in all outcomes. Our findings highlight that host genetics and lifestyle independently affect the occurrence of CVE complications in the acute infection phrase, which can guide tailored management of COVID-19 patients and inform population lifestyle interventions to offset the elevated cardiovascular burden post-pandemic.</p

Reverse total shoulder replacement versus anatomical total shoulder replacement for osteoarthritis: population based cohort study using data from the National Joint Registry and Hospital Episode Statistics for England

Objectives: To answer a national research priority by comparing the risk-benefit and costs associated with reverse total shoulder replacement (RTSR) and anatomical total shoulder replacement (TSR) in patients having elective primary shoulder replacement for osteoarthritis. Design: Population based cohort study using data from the National Joint Registry and Hospital Episode Statistics for England. Setting: Public hospitals and publicly funded procedures at private hospitals in England, 2012-20. Participants: Adults aged 60 years or older who underwent RTSR or TSR for osteoarthritis with intact rotator cuff tendons. Patients were identified from the National Joint Registry and linked to NHS Hospital Episode Statistics and civil registration mortality data. Propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting were used to balance the study groups. Main outcome measures: The main outcome measure was revision surgery. Secondary outcome measures included serious adverse events within 90 days, reoperations within 12 months, prolonged hospital stay (more than three nights), change in Oxford Shoulder Score (preoperative to six month postoperative), and lifetime costs to the healthcare service. Results: The propensity score matched population comprised 7124 RTSR or TSR procedures (126 were revised), and the inverse probability of treatment weighted population comprised 12 968 procedures (294 were revised) with a maximum follow-up of 8.75 years. RTSR had a reduced hazard ratio of revision in the first three years (hazard ratio local minimum 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 0.59) with no clinically important difference in revision-free restricted mean survival time, and a reduced relative risk of reoperations at 12 months (odds ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.25 to 0.83) with an absolute risk difference of −0.51% (95% confidence interval −0.89 to −0.13). Serious adverse events and prolonged hospital stay risks, change in Oxford Shoulder Score, and modelled mean lifetime costs were similar. Outcomes remained consistent after weighting. Conclusions: This study’s findings provide reassurance that RTSR is an acceptable alternative to TSR for patients aged 60 years or older with osteoarthritis and intact rotator cuff tendons. Despite a significant difference in the risk profiles of revision surgery over time, no statistically significant and clinically important differences between RTSR and TSR were found in terms of long term revision surgery, serious adverse events, reoperations, prolonged hospital stay, or lifetime healthcare costs

The natural history of symptomatic COVID-19 during the first wave in Catalonia

The natural history of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has yet to be fully described. Here, we use patient-level data from the Information System for Research in Primary Care (SIDIAP) to summarise COVID-19 outcomes in Catalonia, Spain. We included 5,586,521 individuals from the general population. Of these, 102,002 had an outpatient diagnosis of COVID-19, 16,901 were hospitalised with COVID-19, and 5273 died after either being diagnosed or hospitalised with COVID-19 between 1st March and 6th May 2020. Older age, being male, and having comorbidities were all generally associated with worse outcomes. These findings demonstrate the continued need to protect those at high risk of poor outcomes, particularly older people, from COVID-19 and provide appropriate care for those who develop symptomatic disease. While risks of hospitalisation and death were lower for younger populations, there is a need to limit their role in community transmission

High blood pressure and risk of dementia : a two-sample Mendelian randomization study in the UK biobank

This work was supported by Janssen Research and Development , LLC (of Johnson & Johnson).Background: Findings from randomized controlled trials have yielded conflicting results on the association between blood pressure (BP) and dementia traits. We tested the hypothesis that a causal relationship exists between systolic BP (SBP) and/or diastolic BP (DBP) and risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Methods: We performed a generalized summary Mendelian randomization (GSMR) analysis using summary statistics of a genome-wide association study meta-analysis of 299,024 individuals of SBP or DBP as exposure variables against three different outcomes: 1) AD diagnosis (International Genomics of Alzheimer's Project), 2) maternal family history of AD (UK Biobank), and 3) paternal family history of AD (UK Biobank). Finally, a combined meta-analysis of 368,440 individuals that included these three summary statistics was used as final outcome. Results: GSMR applied to the International Genomics of Alzheimer's Project dataset revealed a significant effect of high SBP lowering the risk of AD (βGSMR = −0.19, p =.04). GSMR applied to the maternal family history of AD UK Biobank dataset (SBP [βGSMR = −0.12, p =.02], DBP [βGSMR = −0.10, p =.05]) and to the paternal family history of AD UK Biobank dataset (SBP [βGSMR = −0.16, p =.02], DBP [βGSMR = −0.24, p = 7.4 × 10−4]) showed the same effect. A subsequent combined meta-analysis confirmed the overall significant effect for the other SBP analyses (βGSMR = −0.14, p =.03). The DBP analysis in the combined meta-analysis also confirmed a DBP effect on AD (βGSMR = −0.14, p =.03). Conclusions: A causal effect exists between high BP and a reduced late-life risk of AD. The results were obtained through careful consideration of confounding factors and the application of complementary MR methods on independent cohorts.Peer reviewe

Incident Use of Hydroxychloroquine for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Objective: We studied whether the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for COVID-19 resulted in supply shortages for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods: We used US claims data (IQVIA PHARMETRICS® Plus for Academics [PHARMETRICS]) and hospital electronic records from Spain (Institut Municipal d'Assistència Sanitària Information System [IMASIS]) to estimate monthly rates of HCQ use between January 2019 and March 2022, in the general population and in patients with RA and SLE. Methotrexate (MTX) use was estimated as a control. Results: More than 13.5 million individuals (13,311,811 PHARMETRICS, 207,646 IMASIS) were included in the general population cohort. RA and SLE cohorts enrolled 135,259 and 39,295 patients, respectively, in PHARMETRICS. Incidence of MTX and HCQ were stable before March 2020. On March 2020, the incidence of HCQ increased by 9- and 67-fold in PHARMETRICS and IMASIS, respectively, and decreased in May 2020. Usage rates of HCQ went back to prepandemic trends in Spain but remained high in the United States, mimicking waves of COVID-19. No significant changes in HCQ use were noted among patients with RA and SLE. MTX use rates decreased during HCQ approval period for COVID-19 treatment. Conclusion: Use of HCQ increased dramatically in the general population in both Spain and the United States during March and April 2020. Whereas Spain returned to prepandemic rates after the first wave, use of HCQ remained high and followed waves of COVID-19 in the United States. However, we found no evidence of general shortages in the use of HCQ for both RA and SLE in the United States.</p

Renin-angiotensin system blockers and susceptibility to COVID-19:an international, open science, cohort analysis

Background: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have been postulated to affect susceptibility to COVID-19. Observational studies so far have lacked rigorous ascertainment adjustment and international generalisability. We aimed to determine whether use of ACEIs or ARBs is associated with an increased susceptibility to COVID-19 in patients with hypertension.Methods: In this international, open science, cohort analysis, we used electronic health records from Spain (Information Systems for Research in Primary Care [SIDIAP]) and the USA (Columbia University Irving Medical Center data warehouse [CUIMC] and Department of Veterans Affairs Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership [VA-OMOP]) to identify patients aged 18 years or older with at least one prescription for ACEIs and ARBs (target cohort) or calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and thiazide or thiazide-like diuretics (THZs; comparator cohort) between Nov 1, 2019, and Jan 31, 2020. Users were defined separately as receiving either monotherapy with these four drug classes, or monotherapy or combination therapy (combination use) with other antihypertensive medications. We assessed four outcomes: COVID-19 diagnosis; hospital admission with COVID-19; hospital admission with pneumonia; and hospital admission with pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute kidney injury, or sepsis. We built large-scale propensity score methods derived through a data-driven approach and negative control experiments across ten pairwise comparisons, with results meta-analysed to generate 1280 study effects. For each study effect, we did negative control outcome experiments using a possible 123 controls identified through a data-rich algorithm. This process used a set of predefined baseline patient characteristics to provide the most accurate prediction of treatment and balance among patient cohorts across characteristics. The study is registered with the EU Post-Authorisation Studies register, EUPAS35296.Findings: Among 1 355 349 antihypertensive users (363 785 ACEI or ARB monotherapy users, 248 915 CCB or THZ monotherapy users, 711 799 ACEI or ARB combination users, and 473 076 CCB or THZ combination users) included in analyses, no association was observed between COVID-19 diagnosis and exposure to ACEI or ARB monotherapy versus CCB or THZ monotherapy (calibrated hazard ratio [HR] 0·98, 95% CI 0·84-1·14) or combination use exposure (1·01, 0·90-1·15). ACEIs alone similarly showed no relative risk difference when compared with CCB or THZ monotherapy (HR 0·91, 95% CI 0·68-1·21; with heterogeneity of &gt;40%) or combination use (0·95, 0·83-1·07). Directly comparing ACEIs with ARBs demonstrated a moderately lower risk with ACEIs, which was significant with combination use (HR 0·88, 95% CI 0·79-0·99) and non-significant for monotherapy (0·85, 0·69-1·05). We observed no significant difference between drug classes for risk of hospital admission with COVID-19, hospital admission with pneumonia, or hospital admission with pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute kidney injury, or sepsis across all comparisons.Interpretation: No clinically significant increased risk of COVID-19 diagnosis or hospital admission-related outcomes associated with ACEI or ARB use was observed, suggesting users should not discontinue or change their treatment to decrease their risk of COVID-19.</p