Can analyses of electronic patient records be independently and externally validated? The effect of statins on the mortality of patients with ischaemic heart disease: a cohort study with nested case-control analysis

Objective To conduct a fully independent and external validation of a research study based on one electronic health record database, using a different electronic database sampling the same population. Design Using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), we replicated a published investigation into the effects of statins in patients with ischaemic heart disease (IHD) by a different research team using QResearch. We replicated the original methods and analysed all-cause mortality using: (1) a cohort analysis and (2) a case-control analysis nested within the full cohort. Setting Electronic health record databases containing longitudinal patient consultation data from large numbers of general practices distributed throughout the UK. Participants CPRD data for 34 925 patients with IHD from 224 general practices, compared to previously published results from QResearch for 13 029 patients from 89 general practices. The study period was from January 1996 to December 2003. Results We successfully replicated the methods of the original study very closely. In a cohort analysis, risk of death was lower by 55% for patients on statins, compared with 53% for QResearch (adjusted HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.50; vs 0.47, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.53). In case-control analyses, patients on statins had a 31% lower odds of death, compared with 39% for QResearch (adjusted OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.75; vs OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.72). Results were also close for individual statins. Conclusions Database differences in population characteristics and in data definitions, recording, quality and completeness had a minimal impact on key statistical outputs. The results uphold the validity of research using CPRD and QResearch by providing independent evidence that both datasets produce very similar estimates of treatment effect, leading to the same clinical and policy decisions. Together with other non-independent replication studies, there is a nascent body of evidence for wider validity

Withdrawing performance indicators: retrospective analysis of general practice performance under UK Quality and Outcomes Framework.

This is a freely-available open access publication. Please cite the published version which is available via the DOI link in this record.OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of withdrawing incentives on recorded quality of care, in the context of the UK Quality and Outcomes Framework pay for performance scheme. DESIGN: Retrospective longitudinal study. SETTING: Data for 644 general practices, from 2004/05 to 2011/12, extracted from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. PARTICIPANTS: All patients registered with any of the practices over the study period-13,772,992 in total. INTERVENTION: Removal of financial incentives for aspects of care for patients with asthma, coronary heart disease, diabetes, stroke, and psychosis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Performance on eight clinical quality indicators withdrawn from a national incentive scheme: influenza immunisation (asthma) and lithium treatment monitoring (psychosis), removed in April 2006; blood pressure monitoring (coronary heart disease, diabetes, stroke), cholesterol concentration monitoring (coronary heart disease, diabetes), and blood glucose monitoring (diabetes), removed in April 2011. Multilevel mixed effects multiple linear regression models were used to quantify the effect of incentive withdrawal. RESULTS: Mean levels of performance were generally stable after the removal of the incentives, in both the short and long term. For the two indicators removed in April 2006, levels in 2011/12 were very close to 2005/06 levels, although a small but statistically significant drop was estimated for influenza immunisation. For five of the six indicators withdrawn from April 2011, no significant effect on performance was seen following removal and differences between predicted and observed scores were small. Performance on related outcome indicators retained in the scheme (such as blood pressure control) was generally unaffected. CONCLUSIONS: Following the removal of incentives, levels of performance across a range of clinical activities generally remained stable. This indicates that health benefits from incentive schemes can potentially be increased by periodically replacing existing indicators with new indicators relating to alternative aspects of care. However, all aspects of care investigated remained indirectly or partly incentivised in other indicators, and further work is needed to assess the generalisability of the findings when incentives are fully withdrawn.National Institute for Health Research (NIHR

Medication safety in community pharmacy: a qualitative study of the sociotechnical context

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>While much research has been conducted on medication safety, few of these studies have addressed primary care, despite the high volume of prescribing and dispensing of medicines that occurs in this setting. Those studies that have examined primary care dispensing emphasised the need to understand the role of sociotechnical factors (that is, the interactions between people, tasks, equipment and organisational structures) in promoting or preventing medication incidents. The aim of this study was to identify sociotechnical factors that community pharmacy staff encounter in practice, and suggest how these factors might impact on medication safety.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Sixty-seven practitioners, working in the North West of England, took part in ten focus groups on risk management in community pharmacy. The data obtained from these groups was subjected to a qualitative analysis to identify recurrent themes pertaining to sociotechnical aspects of medication safety.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The findings indicated several characteristics of participants' work settings that were potentially related to medication safety. These were broadly classified as relationships involving the pharmacist, demands on the pharmacist and management and governance of pharmacists.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>It is recommended that the issues raised in this study be considered in future work examining medication safety in primary care.</p

Self-harm in a primary care cohort of older people: incidence, clinical management, and risk of suicide and other causes of death

BACKGROUND: Self-harm is a major risk factor for suicide, with older adults (older than 65 years) having reportedly greater suicidal intent than any other age group. With the aging population rising and paucity of research focus in this age group, the extent of the problem of self-harm needs to be established. In a primary care cohort of older adults we aimed to investigate the incidence of self-harm, subsequent clinical management, prevalence of mental and physical diagnoses, and unnatural-cause mortality risk, including suicide. METHODS: The UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink contains anonymised patient records from general practice that routinely capture clinical information pertaining to both primary and secondary care services. We identified 4124 adults aged 65 years and older with a self-harm episode ascertained from Read codes recorded during 2001-14. We calculated standardised incidence and in 2854 adults with at least 12 months follow-up examined the frequency of psychiatric referrals and prescription of psychotropic medication after self-harm. We estimated prevalence of mental and physical illness diagnoses before and after self-harm and, using Cox regression in a matched cohort, we examined cause-specific mortality risks. FINDINGS: Overall incidence of self-harm in older adults aged 65 years and older was 4·1 per 10 000 person-years with stable gender-specific rates observed over the 13-year period. After self-harm, 335 (11·7%) of 2854 adults were referred to mental health services, 1692 (59·3%) were prescribed an antidepressant, and 336 (11·8%) were prescribed a tricyclic antidepressant (TCA). Having a diagnosed previous mental illness was twice as prevalent in the self-harm cohort as in the comparison cohort (prevalence ratio 2·10 [95% CI 2·03-2·17]) and with a previous physical health condition prevalence was 20% higher in the self-harm cohort compared to the comparison cohort (1·20 [1·17-1·23]). Adults from the self-harm cohort (n=2454) died from unnatural causes an estimated 20 times more frequently than the comparison cohort (n=48 921) during the first year. A markedly elevated risk of suicide (hazard ratio 145·4 [95% CI 53·9-392·3]) was observed in the self-harm cohort. INTERPRETATION: Within primary care, we have identified a group of older adults at high risk from unnatural death, particularly within the first year of self-harm. We have highlighted a high frequency of prescription of TCAs, known to be potentially fatally toxic in overdose. We emphasise the need for early intervention, careful alternative prescribing, and increased support when older adults consult after an episode of self-harm and with other health conditions. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre

Process Mining in Primary Care: Avoiding Adverse Events Due to Hazardous Prescribing

Process mining helps healthcare professionals understand processes within healthcare. While often used in secondary care, there is little work in process mining using primary care data. Serious adverse events that result from hazardous prescribing are common and costly. For example, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and antiplatelets can cause gastro-intestinal bleeds (GiBs). Prescribing typically occurs during primary care; therefore we used this setting to attempt process mining. We extracted events (drug started, drug stopped, GiB) for understanding three prescribing pathways, and applied process mining. We found NSAIDs are often short-term prescriptions whereas antiplatelets are often long-term. This perhaps explains our finding that co-prescription of gastro-protection is more prevalent for antiplatelets than NSAIDs. We identified reasons why primary care data is harder to process mine and proposed solutions. Process mining primary care data is possible and likely useful for improving patient safety and reducing costs

Changes to healthcare utilisation and symptoms for common mental health problems over the first 21 months of the COVID-19 pandemic: parallel analyses of electronic health records and survey data in England

BACKGROUND: Few studies have investigated the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health beyond 2020. This study quantifies changes to healthcare utilisation and symptoms for common mental health problems over the pandemic’s first 21 months. METHODS: Parallel cohort studies using primary care database and survey data for adults (≥16 years) in England from January 2015 to December 2021: 16,551,842 from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) and 40,699 from the UK Household Longitudinal Survey (UKHLS). Interrupted time-series models estimated changes in monthly prevalence of presentations and prescribed medications for anxiety and depression (CPRD); and self-reported psychological distress (UKHLS). The pandemic period was divided into five phases: 1st Wave (April–May 2020); post-1st Wave (June–September 2020); 2nd Wave (October 2020–February 2021); post 2nd Wave (March–May 2021); 3rd Wave (June–December 2021). FINDINGS: Primary care presentations for depression or anxiety dropped during the first wave (4.6 fewer monthly appointments per 1000 patients, 4.4–4.8) and remained lower than expected throughout follow-up. Self-reported psychological distress exceeded expected levels during the first (Prevalence Ratio = 1.378, 95% CI 1.289–1.459) and second waves (PR = 1.285, 1.189–1.377), returning towards expected levels during the third wave (PR = 1.038, 0.929–1.154). Increases in psychological distress and declines in presentations were greater for women. The decrease in primary care presentations for depression and anxiety exceeded that for physical health conditions (rheumatoid arthritis, diabetes, urinary tract infections). Anxiety and depression prescriptions returned to pre-pandemic levels during the second wave due to increased repeat prescriptions. INTERPRETATION: Despite periods of distress during the pandemic, we did not find an enduring effect on common mental health problems. The fall in primary care presentations for anxiety or depression suggests changing healthcare utilisation for mental distress and a potential treatment gap. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR)