Treatment and Intervention for Opiate Dependence in the United Kingdom:Lessons from Triumph and Failure

The history of opiate treatment in the United Kingdom (UK) since the early 1980s is a rich source of learning about the benefits and pitfalls of drug treatment policy. We present five possible lessons to be learnt about how factors outside the clinic, including government, charities and researchers can influence treatment and outcomes. First, do not let a crisis go to waste. The philosophical shift from abstinence to harm reduction in the 1980s, in response to an HIV outbreak in injecting users, facilitated expansion in addiction services and made a harm reduction approach more acceptable. Second, studies of drug-related deaths can lead to advances in care. By elucidating the pattern of mortality, and designing interventions to address the causes, researchers have improved patient safety in certain contexts, though significant investment in Scotland has not arrested rising mortality. Third, collection of longitudinal data and its use to inform clinical guidelines, as pursued from the mid-1990s, can form an enduring evidence base and shape policy, sometimes in unintended ways. Fourth, beware of the presentation of harm reduction and recovery as in conflict. At the least, this reduces patient choice, and at worst, it has caused some services to be redesigned in a manner that jeopardises patient safety. Fifth, the relationship between the third and state sectors must be carefully nurtured. In the UK, early collaboration has been replaced by competition, driven by changes in funding, to the detriment of service provision

Clinical outcomes following primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction according to sex and race

Background: Female sex and South Asian race have been associated with poor clinical outcomes following primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) but remain understudied in large real-world series. We therefore investigated the association of sex and race with clinical outcomes following PPCI. Methods: We conducted a prospective study of all patients undergoing PPCI for STEMI between January 2009 and December 2011 at a large UK cardiac centre. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were compared according to sex and race using Chi-square test, independent samples Student’s t-test and Mann–Whitney U-test. Primary and secondary outcomes were 12-month major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) – defined as all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction and unplanned revascularization, analysed using Cox proportional hazard models adjusting for cardiovascular risk factors. Results: Three thousand and forty-nine patients were included. Women (n=826) were older than men (n=2223) (median age 69 vs. 60 years, p <0.01). Mortality (hazard ratio 1.48 (1.15–1.90)) and MACE (hazard ratio 1.40 (1.14–1.72)) were higher in women in univariable analysis. However, there were no significant sex-differences in mortality or MACE after age-stratification alone. Multivariable analysis also showed no significant differences in outcomes between sexes. South Asians (n=297) were younger but had a higher prevalence of most risk factors than White patients (n=2570). Mortality and MACE did not differ significantly between South Asian and White patients in univariable or multivariable analysis. Conclusion: MACE and mortality was not greater in women, or in South Asian patients following PPCI after adjustment for cardiovascular risk factors including age, which was most strongly associated with both outcomes