The REFER (REFer for EchocaRdiogram) study: a prospective validation and health economic analysis of a clinical decision rule, NT-proBNP or their combination in the diagnosis of heart failure in primary care.

Background: Heart failure is a treatable condition but making a diagnosis can be challenging. Objective: To evaluate the performance of a clinical decision rule (CDR) with or without a natriuretic peptide assay for identifying heart failure in symptomatic patients presenting to primary care. Design: Prospective, observational, diagnostic validation study and economic evaluation. Setting: Twenty-eight general practices in central England, UK. Participants: Primary care patients aged ≥ 55 years presenting with recent new-onset shortness of breath, lethargy or peripheral ankle oedema of > 48 hours’ duration. Instrument: The CDR included a clinical element (male, history of myocardial infarction, crepitations at the lung bases and oedema) and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) blood test. The reference standard was an expert consensus panel of three cardiology specialists. Main outcome measure: The main outcome measure was test performance of the CDR and the natriuretic peptide test alone, and in combination, in estimating sensitivity and specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for a diagnosis of heart failure. Economic evaluation of a decision tree with a NHS/Personal Social Services perspective determined the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Results: In total, 304 participants were recruited to the validation cohort. The mean age was 73.9 years (standard deviation 8.8 years) and 124 (40.8%) participants were male. In total, 104 [34.2%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 28.9% to 39.8%] had a confirmed diagnosis of heart failure. The CDR had a sensitivity of 90% (95% CI 83% to 95%), specificity of 46% (95% CI 39% to 53%), PPV of 46% (95% CI 39% to 53%) and NPV of 90% (95% CI 83% to 95%). NT-proBNP level alone with a cut-off point of < 400 pg/ml had a sensitivity of 77% (95% CI 68% to 85%) and specificity of 92% (95% CI 87% to 95%). At the lower cut-off point of 125 pg/ml, sensitivity was 94% (95% CI 88% to 98%) and specificity was 49% (95% CI 42% to 56%). The economic model results suggest that referring a patient for a confirmatory diagnosis if they have had a previous myocardial infarction or have a NT-proBNP level that is greater than a 400 pg/ml threshold (current practice in England) is the most cost-effective option, with a cost of £4400 per QALY gained compared with a do nothing strategy. The base-case results were robust to deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: Natriuretic peptide testing alone performed as well as the validated CDR in determining which patients presenting with symptoms went on to have a diagnosis of heart failure. The current NT-proBNP cut-off point of 400 pg/ml used in the UK is too high and means that one in five patients with heart failure may not be appropriately referred for further investigation and diagnosis, but this threshold was cost-effective in the REFer for EchocaRdiogram (REFER) trial. The study found only three patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFREF), which might limit the benefits of early detection. The other diagnostic strategies with lower NT-proBNP referral levels become more cost-effective as the proportion of HFREF patients increases. International consensus on the optimal cut-off point for natriuretic peptide testing in patients with symptoms suggestive of heart failure should be sought. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN17635379. Funding: This project was funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) programme, a MRC and NIHR partnership

Development of an international standard set of outcome measures for patients with atrial fibrillation: a report of the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) atrial fibrillation working group.

AIMS: As health systems around the world increasingly look to measure and improve the value of care that they provide to patients, being able to measure the outcomes that matter most to patients is vital. To support the shift towards value-based health care in atrial fibrillation (AF), the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) assembled an international Working Group (WG) of 30 volunteers, including health professionals and patient representatives to develop a standardized minimum set of outcomes for benchmarking care delivery in clinical settings. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using an online-modified Delphi process, outcomes important to patients and health professionals were selected and categorized into (i) long-term consequences of disease outcomes, (ii) complications of treatment outcomes, and (iii) patient-reported outcomes. The WG identified demographic and clinical variables for use as case-mix risk adjusters. These included baseline demographics, comorbidities, cognitive function, date of diagnosis, disease duration, medications prescribed and AF procedures, as well as smoking, body mass index (BMI), alcohol intake, and physical activity. Where appropriate, and for ease of implementation, standardization of outcomes and case-mix variables was achieved using ICD codes. The standard set underwent an open review process in which over 80% of patients surveyed agreed with the outcomes captured by the standard set. CONCLUSION: Implementation of these consensus recommendations could help institutions to monitor, compare and improve the quality and delivery of chronic AF care. Their consistent definition and collection, using ICD codes where applicable, could also broaden the implementation of more patient-centric clinical outcomes research in AF

Are more GPs associated with a reduction in emergency hospital admissions? A quantitative study on GP referral in England

Background: Recent studies have found an association between access to primary care and accident and emergency attendances, with better access associated with fewer attendances. Analyses of an association with emergency admissions, however, have produced conflicting findings. Aim: This study investigated whether emergency admission rates in an area are associated with 1) the number of GPs, and 2) mean size of GP practice. Design and setting: Analysis was conducted utilising Hospital Episode Statistics, the numbers of GPs and GP practices, Office for National Statistics population data, Quality and Outcomes Framework prevalence data, and Index of Multiple Deprivation data, from 2004/2005 to 2011/2012, for all practices in England. Method: Regression analysis of panel data with fixed effects to address 1) a potential two-way relationship between the numbers of GPs and emergency admissions, and 2) unobservable characteristics of GP practices. Results: There is not a statistically significant relationship between the number of GPs in a primary care trust area and the number of emergency admissions, when analysing all areas. In deprived areas, however, a higher number of GPs is associated with lower emergency admissions. There is also a lower emergency admission rate in areas in which practices are on average larger, holding GP supply constant. Conclusion: An increase in GPs was found to reduce emergency admissions in deprived areas, but not elsewhere. Areas in which GPs are concentrated into larger practices showed reduced levels of emergency admissions, all else being equal.This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Health Services and Delivery Research 11/1022: demand management for planned care. FD Richard Hobbs acknowledges his part-funding from the NIHR School for Primary Care Research, the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Health Research and Care (CLARHC) Oxford, the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (BRC3 UHT), and the NIHR Oxford Medtech and In-Vitro Diagnostics Co-operative (MIC)

ESC Heart Failure Association age-adjusted natriuretic peptide thresholds for a new diagnosis of heart failure: diagnostic accuracy study

Background: Natriuretic peptide (NP) testing is an important part of the heart failure (HF) diagnostic pathway. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) HF guidelines currently recommend a NT-proBNP cut-off <125pg/mL to rule out HF in the community.1 However, NP level increases with age and an NT-proBNP above 125pg/mL is common in older people in the general population. The ESC Heart Failure Association (HFA) recently published a practical algorithm for early diagnosis of HF recommending age-specific rule-in NT-proBNP thresholds: ≥125pg/ml for patients aged under 50 years, ≥250pg/ml for patients aged 50-75 years, and ≥500pg/ml for patients over 75 years (Figure 1).2 Purpose: Our aim was to assess NT-proBNP test performance for HF diagnosis at the ESC HFA age-specific thresholds. Method: We analysed our existing diagnostic accuracy study dataset containing primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) linked to inpatient Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) inpatient data between 2004 and 2018. NT-proBNP results were taken from the GP record (index test) and the primary outcome (reference standard) was a HF diagnostic code entered in CPRD or HES within six months of the test. NT-proBNP accuracy for HF was assessed by calculating sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted to assess overall test performance. Results: In total, 229,580 patients had an NP test and 21,102 (9.2%) were diagnosed with HF. The current ESC NT-proBNP threshold ≥125pg/mL had sensitivity 94.6% (95% confidence intervals [CI] 94.2 to 95.0), specificity 50.0% (95%CI 49.7 to 50.3), PPV 16.4% (16.1 to 16.6), NPV 98.9% (98.8 to 99.0)). Area under the ROC curve was 0.874 (0.871 to 0.877). Age-specific NT-proBNP thresholds performance: Below 50 years (≥125pg/mL): 32,882 people tested, HF prevalence 3.8%. Sensitivity 83.5 % (81.3 to 85.5), specificity 77.6% (77.2 to 78.1), PPV 13.0% (12.2 to 13.7), NPV 99.2% (99.0 to 99.3). 50 to 75 years ≥250pg/mL: 105,771 people tested, HF prevalence 9.8%. Sensitivity 88.5% (87.9 to 89.1), specificity 67.8% (67.5 to 68.0), PPV 23.1% (22.6 to 23.5), NPV 98.2% (98.1 to 98.3). Above 75 years ≥500pg/mL: 16,694 people tested, HF prevalence 17.5%. Sensitivity 84.4% (83.0 to 85.7), specificity 63.5% (62.7 to 64.3), PPV 32.8% (31.7 to 33.9), NPV 95.0% (94.6 to 95.5). Conclusion: The age-specific NT-proBNP thresholds in the HFA practical algorithm had higher specificity so fewer people without HF would be referred, reducing demand for echocardiography and cardiology assessment overall meaning people with HF could be seen earlier. However, lower sensitivity means some cases of HF would initially be missed. NT-proBNP was a reliable ‘rule-out’ test at population level. The optimal NT-proBNP threshold will depend on the priorities and capacity of the national healthcare system

Impact of Changes to National Hypertension Guidelines on Hypertension Management and Outcomes in the United Kingdom

In recent years, national and international guidelines have recommended the use of out-of-office blood pressure monitoring for diagnosing hypertension. Despite evidence of cost-effectiveness, critics expressed concerns this would increase cardiovascular morbidity. We assessed the impact of these changes on the incidence of hypertension, out-of-office monitoring and cardiovascular morbidity using routine clinical data from English general practices, linked to inpatient hospital, mortality, and socio-economic status data. We studied 3 937 191 adults with median follow-up of 4.2 years (49% men, mean age=39.7 years) between April 1, 2006 and March 31, 2017. Interrupted time series analysis was used to examine the impact of changes to English hypertension guidelines in 2011 on incidence of hypertension (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes included rate of out-of-office monitoring and cardiovascular events. Across the study period, incidence of hypertension fell from 2.1 to 1.4 per 100 person-years. The change in guidance in 2011 was not associated with an immediate change in incidence (change in rate=0.01 [95% CI, -0.18-0.20]) but did result in a leveling out of the downward trend (change in yearly trend =0.09 [95% CI, 0.04-0.15]). Ambulatory monitoring increased significantly in 2011/2012 (change in rate =0.52 [95% CI, 0.43-0.60]). The rate of cardiovascular events remained unchanged (change in rate =-0.02 [95% CI, -0.05-0.02]). In summary, changes to hypertension guidelines in 2011 were associated with a stabilisation in incidence and no increase in cardiovascular events. Guidelines should continue to recommend out-of-office monitoring for diagnosis of hypertension

Rationale and study design of a cross sectional study documenting the prevalence of Heart Failure amongst the minority ethnic communities in the UK: the E-ECHOES Study (Ethnic - Echocardiographic Heart of England Screening Study)

Background: Heart failure is an important cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Studies to date have not established the prevalence heart failure amongst the minority ethnic community in the UK. The aim of the E-ECHOES (Ethnic - Echocardiographic Heart of England Screening Study) is to establish, for the first time, the community prevalence and severity of left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) and heart failure amongst the South Asian and Black African-Caribbean ethnic groups in the UK.Methods/Design: This is a community based cross-sectional population survey of a sample of South Asian (i.e. those originating from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh) and Black African-Caribbean male and female subjects aged 45 years and over. Data collection undertaken using a standardised protocol comprising a questionnaire incorporating targeted clinical history taking, physical examination, and investigations with resting electrocardiography and echocardiography; and blood sampling with consent. This is the largest study on heart failure amongst these ethnic groups. Full data collection started in September 2006 and will be completed by August 2009.Discussion: The E-ECHOES study will enable the planning and delivery of clinically and cost-effective treatment of this common and debilitating condition within these communities. In addition it will increase knowledge of the aetiology and management of heart failure within minority ethnic communities

Current and potential providers of blood pressure self-screening: a mixed methods study in Oxfordshire.

OBJECTIVES: To (1) establish the extent of opportunities for members of the public to check their own blood pressure (BP) outside of healthcare consultations (BP self-screening), (2) investigate the reasons for and against hosting such a service and (3) ascertain how BP self-screening data are used in primary care. DESIGN: A mixed methods, cross-sectional study. SETTING: Primary care and community locations in Oxfordshire, UK. PARTICIPANTS: 325 sites were surveyed to identify where and in what form BP self-screening services were available. 23 semistructured interviews were then completed with current and potential hosts of BP self-screening services. RESULTS: 18/82 (22%) general practices offered BP self-screening and 68/110 (62%) pharmacies offered professional-led BP screening. There was no evidence of permanent BP self-screening activities in other community settings.Healthcare professionals, managers, community workers and leaders were interviewed. Those in primary care generally felt that practice-based BP self-screening was a beneficial activity that increased the attainment of performance targets although there was variation in its perceived usefulness for patient care. The pharmacists interviewed provided BP checking as a service to the community but were unable to develop self-screening services without a clear business plan. Among potential hosts, barriers to providing a BP self-screening service included a perceived lack of healthcare commissioner and public demand, and a weak-if any-link to their core objectives as an organisation. CONCLUSIONS: BP self-screening currently occurs in a minority of general practices. Any future development of community BP self-screening programmes will require (1) public promotion and (2) careful consideration of how best to support-and reward-the community hosts who currently perceive little if any benefit

Safety, Efficacy and Pharmacokinetics of AZD7442 (Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab) for Treatment of Mild-to-Moderate COVID-19: 15-Month Final Analysis of the TACKLE Trial

Introduction: In the phase 3 TACKLE study, outpatient treatment with AZD7442 (tixagevimab/cilgavimab) was well tolerated and significantly reduced progression to severe disease or death through day 29 in adults with mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at the primary analysis. Here, we report data from the final analysis of the TACKLE study, performed after approximately 15 months’ follow-up. Methods: Eligible participants were randomized 1:1 and dosed within 7 days of symptom onset with 600 mg intramuscular AZD7442 (n = 456; 300 mg tixagevimab/300 mg cilgavimab) or placebo (n = 454). Results: Severe COVID-19 or death through day 29 occurred in 4.4% and 8.8% of participants who received AZD7442 or placebo, a relative risk reduction (RRR) of 50.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 14.4, 71.3; p = 0.0096]; among participants dosed within 5 days of symptom onset, the RRR was 66.9% (95% CI 31.1, 84.1; p = 0.002). Death from any cause or hospitalization for COVID-19 complications or sequelae through day 169 occurred in 5.0% of participants receiving AZD7442 versus 9.7% receiving placebo, an RRR of 49.2% (95% CI 14.7, 69.8; p = 0.009). Adverse events occurred in 55.5% and 55.9% of participants who received AZD7442 or placebo, respectively, and were mostly mild or moderate in severity. Serious adverse events occurred in 10.2% and 14.4% of participants who received AZD7442 or placebo, respectively, and deaths occurred in 1.8% of participants in both groups. Serum concentration–time profiles recorded over 457 days were similar for AZD7442, tixagevimab, and cilgavimab, and were consistent with the extended half-life reported for AZD7442 (approx. 90 days). Conclusions: AZD7442 reduced the risk of progression to severe COVID-19, hospitalization, and death, was well tolerated through 15 months, and exhibited predictable pharmacokinetics in outpatients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. These data support the long-term safety of using long-acting monoclonal antibodies to treat COVID-19. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04723394. (https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04723394

Variations in achievement of evidence-based, high-impact quality indicators in general practice : An observational study

BACKGROUND: There are widely recognised variations in the delivery and outcomes of healthcare but an incomplete understanding of their causes. There is a growing interest in using routinely collected 'big data' in the evaluation of healthcare. We developed a set of evidence-based 'high impact' quality indicators (QIs) for primary care and examined variations in achievement of these indicators using routinely collected data in the United Kingdom (UK). METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis of routinely collected, electronic primary care data from a sample of general practices in West Yorkshire, UK (n = 89). The QIs covered aspects of care (including processes and intermediate clinical outcomes) in relation to diabetes, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, myocardial infarction, chronic kidney disease (CKD) and 'risky' prescribing combinations. Regression models explored the impact of practice and patient characteristics. Clustering within practice was accounted for by including a random intercept for practice. RESULTS: Median practice achievement of the QIs ranged from 43.2% (diabetes control) to 72.2% (blood pressure control in CKD). Considerable between-practice variation existed for all indicators: the difference between the highest and lowest performing practices was 26.3 percentage points for risky prescribing and 100 percentage points for anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation. Odds ratios associated with the random effects for practices emphasised this; there was a greater than ten-fold difference in the likelihood of achieving the hypertension indicator between the lowest and highest performing practices. Patient characteristics, in particular age, gender and comorbidity, were consistently but modestly associated with indicator achievement. Statistically significant practice characteristics were identified less frequently in adjusted models. CONCLUSIONS: Despite various policy and improvement initiatives, there are enduring inappropriate variations in the delivery of evidence-based care. Much of this variation is not explained by routinely collected patient or practice variables, and is likely to be attributable to differences in clinical and organisational behaviour

Patient-level and practice-level factors associated with consultation duration: a cross-sectional analysis of over one million consultations in English primary care

OBJECTIVES: Consultation duration has previously been shown to be associated with patient, practitioner and practice characteristics. However, previous studies were conducted outside the UK, considered only small numbers of general practitioner (GP) consultations or focused primarily on practitioner-level characteristics. We aimed to determine the patient-level and practice-level factors associated with duration of GP and nurse consultations in UK primary care. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional data were obtained from English general practices contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) linked to data on patient deprivation and practice staffing, rurality and Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) achievement. PARTICIPANTS: 218 304 patients, from 316 English general practices, consulting from 1 April 2013 to 31 March 2014. ANALYSIS: Multilevel mixed-effects models described the association between consultation duration and patient-level and practice-level factors (patient age, gender, smoking status, ethnic group, deprivation and practice rurality, number of full-time equivalent GPs/nurses, list size, consultation rate, quintile of overall QOF achievement and training status). RESULTS: Mean duration of face-to-face GP consultations was 9.24 min and 5.32 min for telephone consultations. Nurse face-to-face and telephone consultations lasted 9.70 and 5.73 min on average, respectively. Longer GP consultation duration was associated with female patient gender, practice training status and older patient age. Shorter duration was associated with higher deprivation and consultation rate. Longer nurse consultation duration was associated with male patient gender, older patient age and ever smoking; and shorter duration with higher consultation rate. Observed differences in duration were small (eg, GP consultations with female patients compared with male patients were 8 s longer on average). CONCLUSIONS: Small observed differences in consultation duration indicate that patients are treated similarly regardless of background. Increased consultation duration may be beneficial for older or comorbid patients, but the benefits and costs of increased consultation duration require further study