45 research outputs found

    Family practices' achievement of diabetes quality of care targets and risk of screen-detected diabetic retinopathy

    Get PDF
    Background: We aimed to determine whether family practices' achievement of diabetes quality of care targets is associated with diabetic retinal disease in registered patients. Methods: Data for achievement of diabetes quality of care targets, including the proportion of patients with HbA1c≤7.5%, for 144 family practices in London UK, for the years 2004/5 to 2007/8, were linked to data from a population-based diabetes eye screening programme collected from September 2007 to February 2009. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, duration and type of diabetes, unadjusted diabetes prevalence, ethnicity and deprivation category. Results: Data were analysed for 24,458 participants with one or more eye screening results in the period. There were 9,332 (38%) with any diabetic retinopathy and 2,819 (11.5%) with sight threatening diabetic retinopathy (STDR), including 2,654 (10.9%) with maculopathy. Among participants registered at 13 family practices that were in the highest quartile for achievement of the HbA1c quality of care target for all four years of study, the relative odds of any diabetic retinopathy were 0.78 (0.69 to 0.88) P<0.001. For participants at 12 practices consistently in the lowest quartile of HbA1c achievement, the relative odds of any diabetic retinopathy were 1.16 (1.03 to 1.30), P = 0.015. In the highest achieving practices, the relative odds of maculopathy were 0.74 (0.62 to 0.89), P = 0.001 and STDR 0.77 (0.65 to 0.92), P = 0.004. Conclusions: The risk of diabetic retinopathy might be lower at family practices that consistently achieve highly on diabetes quality of care targets for HbA1c

    Ethnic Variations in the Prevalence of Diabetic Retinopathy in People with Diabetes Attending Screening in the United Kingdom (DRIVE UK)

    Get PDF
    AIMS: To compare the prevalence of diabetic retinopathy (DR) in people of various ethnic groups with diabetes in the United Kingdom (UK). METHODS: The Diabetic Retinopathy In Various Ethnic groups in UK (DRIVE UK) Study is a cross-sectional study on the ethnic variations of the prevalence of DR and visual impairment in two multi-racial cohorts in the UK. People on the diabetes register in West Yorkshire and South East London who were screened, treated or monitored between April 2008 to July 2009 (London) or August 2009 (West Yorkshire) were included in the study. Data included age, sex, ethnic group, type of diabetes, presenting visual acuity and the results of grading of diabetic retinopathy. Prevalence estimates for the ethnic groups were age-standardised to the white European population for comparison purposes. RESULTS: Out of 57,144 people on the two diabetic registers, data were available on 50,285 individuals (88.0%), of these 3,323 had type 1 and 46,962 had type 2 diabetes. In type 2 diabetes, the prevalence of any DR was 38.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 37.4% to 38.5%) in white Europeans compared to 52.4% (51.2% to 53.6%) in African/Afro-Caribbeans and 42.3% (40.3% to 44.2%) in South Asians. Similarly, sight threatening DR was also significantly more prevalent in Afro-Caribbeans (11.5%, 95% CI 10.7% to 12.3%) and South Asians (10.3%, 9.0% to 11.5%) compared to white Europeans (5.5%, 5.3% to 5.8%). Differences observed in Type 1 diabetes did not achieve conventional levels of statistical significance, but there were lower numbers for these analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Minority ethnic communities with type 2 diabetes in the UK are more prone to diabetic retinopathy, including sight-threatening retinopathy and maculopathy compared to white Europeans

    Ethnic Variation in the Prevalence of Visual Impairment in People Attending Diabetic Retinopathy Screening in the United Kingdom (DRIVE UK)

    Get PDF
    PURPOSE: To provide estimates of visual impairment in people with diabetes attending screening in a multi-ethnic population in England (United Kingdom). METHODS: The Diabetic Retinopathy In Various Ethnic groups in UK (DRIVE UK) Study is a cross-sectional study on the ethnic variations of the prevalence of DR and visual impairment in two multi-racial cohorts in the UK. People on the diabetes register in West Yorkshire and South East London who were screened, treated or monitored between April 2008 to July 2009 (London) or August 2009 (West Yorkshire) were included in the study. Data on age, gender, ethnic group, visual acuity and diabetic retinopathy were collected. Ethnic group was defined according to the 2011 census classification. The two main ethnic minority groups represented here are Blacks ("Black/African/Caribbean/Black British") and South Asians ("Asians originating from the Indian subcontinent"). We examined the prevalence of visual impairment in the better eye using three cut-off points (a) loss of vision sufficient for driving (approximately <6/9) (b) visual impairment (<6/12) and (c) severe visual impairment (<6/60), standardising the prevalence of visual impairment in the minority ethnic groups to the age-structure of the white population. RESULTS: Data on visual acuity and were available on 50,331 individuals 3.4% of people diagnosed with diabetes and attending screening were visually impaired (95% confidence intervals (CI) 3.2% to 3.5%) and 0.39% severely visually impaired (0.33% to 0.44%). Blacks and South Asians had a higher prevalence of visual impairment (directly age standardised prevalence 4.6%, 95% CI 4.0% to 5.1% and 6.9%, 95% CI 5.8% to 8.0% respectively) compared to white people (3.3%, 95% CI 3.1% to 3.5%). Visual loss was also more prevalent with increasing age, type 1 diabetes and in people living in Yorkshire. CONCLUSIONS: Visual impairment remains an important public health problem in people with diabetes, and is more prevalent in the minority ethnic groups in the UK

    Enhanced invitation methods to increase uptake of NHS health checks: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

    Get PDF
    Background: NHS Health Checks is a new program for primary prevention of heart disease, stroke, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and vascular dementia in adults aged 40 to 74 years in England. Individuals without existing cardiovascular disease or diabetes are invited for a Health Check every 5 years. Uptake among those invited is lower than anticipated. Method: The project is a three-arm randomized controlled trial to test the hypothesis that enhanced invitation methods, using the Question-Behaviour Effect (QBE), will increase uptake of NHS Health Checks compared with a standard invitation. Participants comprise individuals eligible for an NHS Health Check registered in two London boroughs. Participants are randomized into one of three arms. Group A receives the standard NHS Health Check invitation letter, information sheet, and reminder letter at 12 weeks for nonattenders. Group B receives a QBE questionnaire 1 week before receiving the standard invitation, information sheet, and reminder letter where appropriate. Group C is the same as Group B, but participants are offered a £5 retail voucher if they return the questionnaire. Participants are randomized in equal proportions, stratified by general practice. The primary outcome is uptake of NHS Health Checks 6 months after invitation from electronic health records. We will estimate the incremental health service cost per additional completed Health Check for trial groups B and C versus trial arm A, as well as evaluating the impact of the QBE questionnaire, and questionnaire plus voucher, on the socioeconomic inequality in uptake of Health Checks. The trial includes a nested comparison of two methods for implementing allocation, one implemented manually at general practices and the other implemented automatically through the information systems used to generate invitations for the Health Check. Discussion: The research will provide evidence on whether asking individuals to complete a preliminary questionnaire, by using the QBE, is effective in increasing uptake of Health Checks and whether an incentive alters questionnaire return rates as well as uptake of Health Checks. The trial interventions can be readily translated into routine service delivery if they are shown to be cost-effective

    Enhanced Invitations Using the Question-Behavior Effect and Financial Incentives to Promote Health Check Uptake in Primary Care

    Get PDF
    Background: Uptake of health checks for cardiovascular risk assessment in primary care in England is lower than anticipated. The question-behavior effect (QBE) may offer a simple, scalable intervention to increase health check uptake. Purpose: The present study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of enhanced invitation methods employing the QBE, with or without a financial incentive to return the questionnaire, at increasing uptake of health checks. Methods: We conducted a three-arm randomized trial including all patients at 18 general practices in two London boroughs, who were invited for health checks from July 2013 to December 2014. Participants were randomized to three trial arms: (i) Standard health check invitation letter only; (ii) QBE questionnaire followed by standard invitation letter; or (iii) QBE questionnaire with offer of a financial incentive to return the questionnaire, followed by standard invitation letter. In intention to treat analysis, the primary outcome of completion of health check within 6 months of invitation, was evaluated using a p value of .0167 for significance. Results: 12,459 participants were randomized. Health check uptake was evaluated for 12,052 (97%) with outcome data collected. Health check uptake within 6 months of invitation was: standard invitation, 590 / 4,095 (14.41%); QBE questionnaire, 630 / 3,988 (15.80%); QBE questionnaire and financial incentive, 629 / 3,969 (15.85%). Difference following QBE questionnaire, 1.43% (95% confidence interval −0.12 to 2.97%, p = .070); following QBE questionnaire and financial incentive, 1.52% (−0.03 to 3.07%, p = .054). Conclusions: Uptake of health checks following a standard invitation was low and not significantly increased through enhanced invitation methods using the QBE

    Modelling the impact on avoidable cardiovascular disease burden and costs of interventions to lower SBP in the England population

    No full text
    Background: The burden of disease from cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains significant in England. Blood pressure remains an important risk factor. Health gain through public health measures and improving treatment compliance are potentially likely to be high. We assess the impact of known cost-effective interventions in terms of the avoidable CVD burden and costs by comparing these strategies to the current situation. Methods: We modelled avoidable CVD outcomes simulating the English population aged over 16 years with Excel spreadsheets for the current prevention/treatment and following various interventions over a 10-year time frame. The outcome measures were avoidable incident heart disease and stroke events, deaths and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). Costs are reported from the health service perspective. We analysed relative cost-effectiveness, undertook sensitivity analysis and measured relative impacts of different strategies on avoidable burden of disease. Results: The assessed interventions have a potential to reduce the current burden of disease between 70 000 and about 1 million DALYs over the 10-year frame. Although all interventions were cost-effective, some (e.g. Salt reduction in the population and 'Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension-sodium', which modelled the impact of salt reduction and dietary approaches) were cost-saving. The cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies was sensitive to drug costs. Conclusion: Evidence-based interventions appropriately scaled up for both prevention and treatment of blood pressure lead to important additional potential health gains. There was noticeable variance in cost-effectiveness and impact among the different interventions at a population level. Taking into account impact, priority should be given to prevention to reduce blood pressure at a population level through reduced salt consumption

    Do health checks improve risk factor detection in primary care?:Matched cohort study using electronic health records

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effect of NHS Health Checks on cardiovascular risk factor detection and inequalities. METHODS: Matched cohort study in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, including participants who received a health check in England between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2013, together with matched control participants, with linked deprivation scores. RESULTS: There were 91 618 eligible participants who received a health check, of whom 75 123 (82%) were matched with 182 245 controls. After the health check, 90% of men and 92% of women had complete data for blood pressure, total cholesterol, smoking and body mass index; a net 51% increase (P < 0.001) over controls. After the check, gender and deprivation inequalities in recording of all risk factors were lower than for controls. Net increase in risk factor detection was greater for hypercholesterolaemia (men +33%; women +32%) than for obesity (men +8%; women +4%) and hypertension in men only (+5%) (all P < 0.001). Detection of smoking was 5% lower in health check participants than controls (P < 0.001). Over 4 years, statins were prescribed to 11% of health -check participants and 7.6% controls (hazard ratio 1.58, 95% confidence interval 1.53–1.63, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: NHS Health Checks are associated with increased detection of hypercholesterolaemia, and to a lesser extent obesity and hypertension, but smokers may be under-represented
    corecore