Search

The article focuses on a study related to the effects of hourly differences in air pollution on the risk of myocardial infarction. The study found that higher levels of air pollution are associated with increased cardiorespiratory mortality. The study was funded through grants from the British Heart Foundation and the Garfield Weston Trust.

Background: Given the recent declines in heart attack and stroke incidence, it is unclear how women and men differ in first lifetime presentations of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). We compared the incidence of 12 cardiac, cerebrovascular, and peripheral vascular diseases in women and men at different ages.Methods and Results: We studied 1 937 360 people, aged ≥ 30 years and free from diagnosed CVD at baseline (51% women), using linked electronic health records covering primary care, hospital admissions, acute coronary syndrome registry, and mortality (Cardiovascular Research Using LInked Bespoke Studies and Electronic Records [CALIBER] research platform). During 6 years median follow-up between 1997 and 2010, 114 859 people experienced an incident cardiovascular diagnosis, the majority (66%) of which were neither myocardial infarction nor ischemic stroke. Associations of male sex with initial diagnoses of CVD, however, varied from strong (age-adjusted hazard ratios, 3.6-5.0) for abdominal aortic aneurysm, myocardial infarction, and unheralded coronary death (particularly >60 years), through modest (hazard ratio, 1.5-2.0) for stable angina, ischemic stroke, peripheral arterial disease, heart failure, and cardiac arrest, to weak (hazard ratio <1.5) for transient ischemic attack, intracerebral hemorrhage, and unstable angina, and inverse (0.69) for subarachnoid hemorrhage (all P<0.001).Conclusions: The majority of initial presentations of CVD are neither myocardial infarction nor ischemic stroke, yet most primary prevention studies focus on these presentations. Sex has differing associations with different CVDs, with implications for risk prediction and management strategies.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01164371. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People who live alone experience greater levels of mental illness; however, it is unclear whether the COVID-19 pandemic had a disproportionately negative impact on this demographic., Objective: To describe the mental health gap between those who live alone and with others in the UK prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: Self-reported psychological distress and life satisfaction in 10 prospective longitudinal population surveys (LPSs) assessed in the nearest pre-pandemic sweep and three periods during the pandemic. Recorded diagnosis of common and severe mental illnesses between March 2018 and January 2022 in electronic healthcare records (EHRs) within the OpenSAFELY-TPP., Findings: In 37 544 LPS participants, pooled models showed greater psychological distress (standardised mean difference (SMD): 0.09 (95% CI: 0.04; 0.14); relative risk: 1.25 (95% CI: 1.12; 1.39)) and lower life satisfaction (SMD: -0.22 (95% CI: -0.30; -0.15)) for those living alone pre-pandemic. This gap did not change during the pandemic. In the EHR analysis of c.16 million records, mental health conditions were more common in those who lived alone (eg, depression 26 (95% CI: 18 to 33) and severe mental illness 58 (95% CI: 54 to 62) more cases more per 100 000). For common mental health disorders, the gap in recorded cases in EHRs narrowed during the pandemic., Conclusions: People living alone have poorer mental health and lower life satisfaction. During the pandemic, this gap in self-reported distress remained; however, there was a narrowing of the gap in service use., Clinical Implications: Greater mental health need and potentially greater barriers to mental healthcare access for those who live alone need to be considered in healthcare planning., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Since 2010 the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has recommended screening adults for excessive alcohol consumption to try and help prevent alcohol-use disorders. Little is known about the extent to which these recommendations are followed, and the resulting completeness and validity of alcohol-related data recording in primary care., Objective: To investigate the completeness and accuracy of recording of alcohol use within primary care records in the UK., Design and Setting: Cross-sectional study in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink., Participants: We included all adult patients registered on 1 st January 2018 with ≥1 year of follow-up., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: We calculated prevalence of alcohol consumption recording overall and within patient groups. We then validated alcohol consumption data against recommended screening tools (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT)) as the gold standard. We also calculated how prevalence of alcohol recording changed over the preceding decade., Results: In 2018, among 1.8 million registered adult patients, just over half (51.9%) had a record for a code related to alcohol in the previous 5 years. Recording of alcohol consumption was more common among women, older people, ex-smokers and those from more deprived areas, who were overweight/obese, or with comorbidities. A quarter of patients had units per week recorded in the last 5 years, but <10% had an AUDIT or Fast Alcohol Screening Test (FAST) alcohol screening test score. The recorded alcohol measures corresponded to results from gold standard AUDIT scores. The distribution of consumption among current drinkers was similar to the Health Survey for England., Conclusions: Half of adults in UK primary care have no recorded alcohol consumption data. When consumption is recorded, we have demonstrated internal and external validity of the data, suggesting greater recording may help identify opportunities for interventions to reduce harms., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Worldwide treatment recommendations for lowering blood pressure continue to be guided predominantly by blood pressure thresholds, despite strong evidence that the benefits of blood pressure reduction are observed in patients across the blood pressure spectrum. In this study, we aimed to investigate the implications of alternative strategies for offering blood pressure treatment, using the UK as an illustrative example., Methods: We did a retrospective cohort study in primary care patients aged 30-79 years without cardiovascular disease, using data from the UK's Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to Hospital Episode Statistics and Office for National Statistics mortality. We assessed and compared four different strategies to determine eligibility for treatment: using 2011 UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline, or proposed 2019 NICE guideline, or blood pressure alone (threshold ≥140/90 mm Hg), or predicted 10-year cardiovascular risk alone (QRISK2 score ≥10%). Patients were followed up until the earliest occurrence of a cardiovascular disease diagnosis, death, or end of follow-up period (March 31, 2016). For each strategy, we estimated the proportion of patients eligible for treatment and number of cardiovascular events that could be prevented with treatment. We then estimated eligibility and number of events that would occur during 10 years in the UK general population., Findings: Between Jan 1, 2011, and March 31, 2016, 1 222 670 patients in the cohort were followed up for a median of 4·3 years (IQR 2·5-5·2). 271 963 (22·2%) patients were eligible for treatment under the 2011 NICE guideline, 327 429 (26·8%) under the proposed 2019 NICE guideline, 481 859 (39·4%) on the basis of a blood pressure threshold of 140/90 mm Hg or higher, and 357 840 (29·3%) on the basis of a QRISK2 threshold of 10% or higher. During follow-up, 32 183 patients were diagnosed with cardiovascular disease (overall rate 7·1 per 1000 person-years, 95% CI 7·0-7·2). Cardiovascular event rates in patients eligible for each strategy were 15·2 per 1000 person-years (95% CI 15·0-15·5) under the 2011 NICE guideline, 14·9 (14·7-15·1) under the proposed 2019 NICE guideline, 11·4 (11·3-11·6) with blood pressure threshold alone, and 16·9 (16·7-17·1) with QRISK2 threshold alone. Scaled to the UK population, we estimated that 233 152 events would be avoided under the 2011 NICE guideline (28 patients needed to treat for 10 years to avoid one event), 270 233 under the 2019 NICE guideline (29 patients), 301 523 using a blood pressure threshold (38 patients), and 322 921 using QRISK2 threshold (27 patients)., Interpretation: A cardiovascular risk-based strategy (QRISK2 ≥10%) could prevent over a third more cardiovascular disease events than the 2011 NICE guideline and a fifth more than the 2019 NICE guideline, with similar efficiency regarding number treated per event avoided., Funding: National Institute for Health Research., (Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)