Search

Background Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease affects nearly 400 million worldwide – over a million in the United Kingdom – and is the third leading cause of death. However, there is limited understanding of what prompts a diagnosis, how long this takes from symptom onset and the different approaches to clinical management by primary care professionals. Objectives Map out the clinical management and National Health Service contacts from symptom presentation to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease diagnosis and first acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in three time periods; construct risk prediction for first acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Design Retrospective cohort study and cross-sectional survey. Setting Primary care. Participants Patients with incident chronic obstructive pulmonary disease aged > 35 years in England. Interventions None. Main outcome measures First acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Data sources Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum; new online survey. Results Forty thousand five hundred and seventy-seven patients were diagnosed between April 2006 and March 2007 (cohort 1), 48,249 between April 2016 and March 2017 (cohort 2) and 4752 between March and August 2020 (cohort 3). The mean (standard deviation) age was 68.3 years (12.0); 47.3% were female. Around three-quarters were diagnosed in primary care, with a slight fall in cohort 3. Compliance with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence diagnostic guidelines was slightly higher in cohorts 2 and 3 for all patients; 35.8% (10.0% in the year before diagnosis) had all four elements met for all cohorts combined. Multilevel modelling showed considerable between-practice variation in spirometry. The survey on the charity website had 156 responses by chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients. Many respondents had not heard of the condition, hoped the symptoms would go away and identified various healthcare-related barriers to earlier diagnosis. Clinical Practice Research Datalink analysis showed notable changes in post-diagnosis prescribing from cohort 1 to 2, such as increases in long-acting muscarinic antagonist (21.7–46.3%). Triple therapy rose from 2.9% in cohort 2 to 11.1% in cohort 3. Documented pulmonary rehabilitation rose from just 0.8% in cohort 1 to 13.7% in cohort 2 and 20.9% in cohort 3. For all patients combined, the median time to first acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in patients who had one was 1.4 years in cohorts 1 and 2. Acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease prediction models identified some consistent predictors, such as age, deprivation, severity, comorbidities, post-diagnosis spirometry and annual review. Models without post-diagnosis general practitioner actions had a c-statistic of around 0.70; the highest c-statistic was 0.81, for cohort 2 with post-diagnosis general practitioner actions and 6-month follow-up. All models had good calibration. The three most important predictors in terms of their population attributable risks were being a current smoker and offered smoking cessation advice (32.8%), disease severity (30.6%) and deprivation (15.4%). The highest population attributable risks for variables with adjusted hazard ratios

Objectives To examine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on deprivation-related inequalities in hospitalisations for cardiovascular disease (CVD) conditions in Denmark and England between March 2018 and December 2021.Design Time-series studies in England and Denmark.Setting With the approval of National Health Service England, we used English primary care electronic health records, linked to secondary care and death registry data through the OpenSAFELY platform and nationwide Danish health registry data.Participants We included adults aged 18 and over without missing age, sex or deprivation information. On 1 March 2020, 16 234 700 people in England and 4 491 336 people in Denmark met the inclusion criteria.Primary outcome measures Hospital admissions with the primary reason for myocardial infarction (MI), ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke, heart failure and venous thromboembolism (VTE).Results We saw deprivation gradients in monthly CVD hospitalisations in both countries, with differences more pronounced in Denmark. Based on pre-pandemic trends, in England, there were an estimated 2608 fewer admissions than expected for heart failure in the most deprived quintile during the pandemic compared with an estimated 979 fewer admissions in the least deprived quintile. For all other outcomes, there was little variation by deprivation quintile. In Denmark, there were an estimated 1013 fewer admissions than expected over the pandemic for MI in the most deprived quintile compared with 619 in the least deprived quintile. Similar trends were seen for stroke and VTE, though absolute numbers were smaller. Heart failure admissions were similar to pre-pandemic levels with little variation by deprivation quintile.Conclusions Overall, we did not find that the pandemic substantially worsened pre-existing deprivation-related differences in CVD hospitalisations, though there were exceptions in both countries.

Background Not all chronic diseases have clear pathways and time targets for diagnosis. We explored pathways and timings for four major chronic respiratory diseases in England.Methods Using deidentified electronic healthcare records from Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum linked to Hospital Episode Statistics, we derived cohorts of patients diagnosed with asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), ILD or bronchiectasis at three time periods (2008/2009, 2018/2019 and 2020/2021). We followed people 2 years before and 2 years after diagnosis, calculating the proportion of people who presented with symptoms, underwent diagnostic tests, were treated and consulted healthcare (primary or secondary) and calculated time intervals between events. We repeated analyses by socioeconomic status and geographical region.Results We descriptively studied patient pathways for 429 619 individuals across all time frames and diseases. Most people (>87%) had first evidence of diagnosis in primary care. The proportion of people reporting symptoms prior to diagnosis was similar for asthma, COPD and ILD (41.0%–57.9%) and higher in bronchiectasis (67.9%–71.8%). The proportion undergoing diagnostic tests was high for COPD and bronchiectasis (77.6%–89.2%) and lower for asthma (14%–32.7%) and ILD (2.6%–3.3%). The proportion of people undergoing diagnostic tests decreased in 2020/2021 for all diseases, mostly COPD. Time (months) (median (IQR)) between symptoms and diagnosis, averaged over three time periods, was lowest in asthma (~7.5 (1.3–16.0)), followed by COPD (~8.6 (1.8–17.2)), ILD (~10.1 (3.6–18.0)) and bronchiectasis (~13.5 (5.9–19.8)). Time from symptoms to diagnosis increased by ~2 months in asthma and COPD over the three time periods. Although most patients were symptomatically treated prior to diagnosis, time between diagnosis and postdiagnostic treatment was around 4 months for ILD, 3 months for bronchiectasis and instantaneous for asthma and COPD. Socioeconomic status and regional trends showed little disparity.Conclusion Current pathways demonstrate missed opportunities to diagnose and manage disease and to improve disease coding.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a multisystem disease, and many patients have multiple conditions. We explored multimorbidity patterns that might inform intervention planning to reduce health-care costs while preserving quality of life for patients. Literature searches up to February 2022 revealed 4419 clinical observational and comparative studies of risk factors for multimorbidity in people with COPD, pulmonary emphysema, or chronic bronchitis at baseline. Of these, 29 met the inclusion criteria for this review. Eight studies were cluster and network analyses, five were regression analyses, and 17 (in 16 papers) were other studies of specific conditions, physical activity and treatment. People with COPD more frequently had multimorbidity and had up to ten times the number of disorders of those without COPD. Disease combinations prominently featured cardiovascular and metabolic diseases, asthma, musculoskeletal and psychiatric disorders. An important risk factor for multimorbidity was low socioeconomic status. One study showed that many patients were receiving multiple drugs and had increased risk of adverse events, and that 10% of medications prescribed were inappropriate. Many patients with COPD have mainly preventable or modifiable multimorbidity. A proactive multidisciplinary approach to prevention and management could reduce the burden of care.

Abstract Background Air pollution harms health across the life course. Children are at particular risk of adverse effects during development, which may impact on health in later life. Interventions that improve air quality are urgently needed both to improve public health now, and prevent longer-term increased vulnerability to chronic disease. Low Emission Zones are a public health policy intervention aimed at reducing traffic-derived contributions to urban air pollution, but evidence that they deliver health benefits is lacking. We describe a natural experiment study (CHILL: Children’s Health in London and Luton) to evaluate the impacts of the introduction of London’s Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) on children’s health. Methods CHILL is a prospective two-arm parallel longitudinal cohort study recruiting children at age 6–9 years from primary schools in Central London (the focus of the first phase of the ULEZ) and Luton (a comparator site), with the primary outcome being the impact of changes in annual air pollutant exposures (nitrogen oxides [NOx], nitrogen dioxide [NO2], particulate matter with a diameter of less than 2.5micrograms [PM2.5], and less than 10 micrograms [PM10]) across the two sites on lung function growth, measured as post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) over five years. Secondary outcomes include physical activity, cognitive development, mental health, quality of life, health inequalities, and a range of respiratory and health economic data. Discussion CHILL’s prospective parallel cohort design will enable robust conclusions to be drawn on the effectiveness of the ULEZ at improving air quality and delivering improvements in children’s respiratory health. With increasing proportions of the world’s population now living in large urban areas exceeding World Health Organisation air pollution limit guidelines, our study findings will have important implications for the design and implementation of Low Emission and Clean Air Zones in the UK, and worldwide. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04695093 (05/01/2021).

Background In sub-Saharan Africa, the origins of asthma and high prevalence of abnormal lung function remain unclear. In high-income countries (HICs), associations between birth measurements and childhood asthma and lung function highlight the importance of antenatal and early life factors in the aetiology of asthma and abnormal lung function in children. We present here the first study in sub-Saharan Africa to relate birth characteristics to both childhood respiratory symptoms and lung function.Methods Children attending schools in two socioeconomically contrasting but geographically close areas of Nairobi, Kenya, were recruited to a cross-sectional study of childhood asthma and lung function. Questionnaires quantified respiratory symptoms and preterm birth; lung function was measured by spirometry; and parents were invited to bring the child’s immunisation booklet containing records of birth weight and serial weights in the first year.Results 2373 children participated, 52% girls, median age (IQR), 10 years (8–13). Spirometry data were available for 1622. Child immunisation booklets were available for 500 and birth weight and infant weight gain data were available for 323 and 494 children, respectively. In multivariable analyses, preterm birth was associated with the childhood symptoms ‘wheeze in the last 12 months’; OR 1.64, (95% CI 1.03 to 2.62), p=0.038; and ‘trouble breathing’ 3.18 (95% CI 2.27 to 4.45), p

Objective Identify prevalence of self-reported swallow, communication, voice and cognitive compromise following hospitalisation for COVID-19.Design Multicentre prospective observational cohort study using questionnaire data at visit 1 (2–7 months post discharge) and visit 2 (10–14 months post discharge) from hospitalised patients in the UK. Lasso logistic regression analysis was undertaken to identify associations.Setting 64 UK acute hospital Trusts.Participants Adults aged >18 years, discharged from an admissions unit or ward at a UK hospital with COVID-19.Main outcome measures Self-reported swallow, communication, voice and cognitive compromise.Results Compromised swallowing post intensive care unit (post-ICU) admission was reported in 20% (188/955); 60% with swallow problems received invasive mechanical ventilation and were more likely to have undergone proning (p=0.039). Voice problems were reported in 34% (319/946) post-ICU admission who were more likely to have received invasive (p

What is this summary about? Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are a type of medication delivered via an inhaler device that are commonly used in the treatment of asthma. ICS can also be used to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a progressive respiratory condition in which the lungs become worse over time. However, unlike in asthma, ICS are only effective in a small proportion of people with COPD. ICS can cause significant side effects in people with COPD, including pneumonia. Because of this, guidelines written by COPD experts recommend that ICS should largely be prescribed to people with COPD whose symptoms flare up frequently and become difficult to manage (episodes known as exacerbations). Despite this guidance, records collected from routine clinical practice suggest that many healthcare professionals prescribe ICS to people with COPD who do not have frequent exacerbations, putting them at unnecessary risk of side effects. The over-prescription of ICS in COPD may partly be due to the recent introduction of single-inhaler combination therapies, which combine ICS with other medicines (bronchodilators). This ‘one inhaler for all’ approach is a concerning trend as it goes against global COPD treatment guidelines, which recommend ICS use in only a small proportion of people. This is a plain language summary of a review article originally published in the journal NPJ Primary Care Respiratory Medicine. In this review, we investigate the benefits and risks of ICS use in COPD. Using data from both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies, we explain which people benefit from ICS use, and why health regulatory bodies have concluded that ICS do not help people with COPD to live longer. Lastly, we provide practical guidance for doctors and people with COPD regarding when ICS should be prescribed and when they should be withdrawn.

Introduction Diagnosis of asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), bronchiectasis and interstitial lung disease (ILD) can be convoluted, and limited data exist on understanding the experience of diagnosis from a patient perspective.Aim To investigate a patient’s ‘route to diagnosis’, particularly focusing on the time prior to seeking healthcare, and perceived experiences of the diagnostic pathway.Methods An online survey was distributed via the UK Taskforce for Lung Health and member mailing lists to patients as well as the website and social media accounts from 23 May 2022 to 5 July 2022. Analysis was descriptive; χ2 tests were performed to make comparisons across diseases.Results There were 398 valid responses (COPD=156, asthma=119, ILD=67 and bronchiectasis=56). While only 9.2% of respondents who were eventually diagnosed with asthma had not heard of their disease, the corresponding percentages for COPD, ILD and bronchiectasis were 34.0%, 74.6% and 69.6%, respectively. 33.9% of people with bronchiectasis believed their delayed diagnosis was due to the health professionals’ lack of expertise or knowledge—24.4% for asthma, 19.2% for COPD and 17.9% for ILD.People with COPD were more likely (37.2%) and patients with asthma less likely (10.9%) to report they did not know the signs of potential lung disease (p

Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is a collective term representing a diverse group of pulmonary fibrotic and inflammatory conditions. Due to the diversity of ILD conditions, paucity of guidance and updates to diagnostic criteria over time, it has been challenging to precisely determine ILD incidence and prevalence. This systematic review provides a synthesis of published data at a global level and highlights gaps in the current knowledge base. Medline and Embase databases were searched systematically for studies reporting incidence and prevalence of various ILDs. Randomised controlled trials, case reports and conference abstracts were excluded. 80 studies were included, the most described subgroup was autoimmune-related ILD, and the most studied conditions were rheumatoid arthritis (RA)-associated ILD, systemic sclerosis associated (SSc) ILD and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). The prevalence of IPF was mostly established using healthcare datasets, whereas the prevalence of autoimmune ILD tended to be reported in smaller autoimmune cohorts. The prevalence of IPF ranged from 7 to 1650 per 100 000 persons. Prevalence of SSc ILD and RA ILD ranged from 26.1% to 88.1% and 0.6% to 63.7%, respectively. Significant heterogeneity was observed in the reported incidence of various ILD subtypes. This review demonstrates the challenges in establishing trends over time across regions and highlights a need to standardise ILD diagnostic criteria.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020203035.

Background: Poor asthma control is associated with high short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) use. Aim: To assess asthma-related healthcare resource utilisation (HCRU) and medication costs associated with high versus low SABA prescriptions in the UK. Design & setting: Analysis of SABINA I (SABA use IN Asthma I), a retrospective longitudinal study using UK electronic health records (Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD 2008−2019 and Hospital Episode Statistics database). Method: Eligible patients were ≥12 years old with SABA prescriptions in the past year. SABA prescriptions (number of canisters per year) were defined as high (≥3) or low (1–2). Association of SABA prescriptions with HCRU was assessed by negative binominal model adjusted for covariates. The UK unit costs from the NHS were applied to estimate total healthcare costs (2020). Medication costs were based on the annual average number of canisters per year per patient. Results: Overall, 186 061 patients with SABA prescriptions were included, of whom 51% were prescribed high SABA. Total annual average costs (HCRU and medication) were 52% higher in the high SABA group versus the low SABA group (£2 256 091 per 1000 patients/year versus £1 480 640 per 1000 patients/year). Medication costs accounted for the majority of asthma-related costs. Across both groups, most HCRU costs were for non–exacerbation-related primary care or hospital outpatient visits. The annual average HCRU cost difference for high SABA versus low SABA was the greatest for hospitalisations (+230%; £15 521 per 1000 patients/year versus £4697 per 1000 patients/year) and exacerbation-related primary care visits (+162%; £18 770 per 1000 patients/year versus £7160 per 1000 patients/year). Asthma-related HCRU extrapolated to the broader UK asthma population was £108.5 million per year higher with high SABA versus low SABA. Conclusion: High SABA versus low SABA prescriptions are associated with higher asthma-related HCRU costs.

Introduction In patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the risk of certain cardiovascular (CV) events is increased by threefold to fivefold in the year following acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD), compared with a non-exacerbation period. While the effect of severe AECOPD is well established, the relationship of moderate exacerbation or prior exacerbation to elevated risk of CV events is less clear. We will conduct cohort studies in multiple countries to further characterise the association between AECOPD and CV events.Methods and analysis Retrospective longitudinal cohort studies will be conducted within routinely collected electronic healthcare records or claims databases. The study cohorts will include patients meeting inclusion criteria for COPD between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2018. Moderate exacerbation is defined as an outpatient visit and/or medication dispensation/prescription for exacerbation; severe exacerbation is defined as hospitalisation for COPD. The primary outcomes of interest are the time to (1) first hospitalisation for a CV event (including acute coronary syndrome, heart failure, arrhythmias or cerebral ischaemia) since cohort entry or (2) death. Time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models will compare the hazard of a CV event between exposed periods following exacerbation (split into these periods: 1–7, 8–14, 15–30, 31–180 and 181–365 days) and the unexposed reference time period, adjusted on time-fixed and time-varying confounders.Ethics and dissemination Studies have been approved in Canada, Japan, the Netherlands, Spain and the UK, where an institutional review board is mandated. For each study, the results will be published in peer-reviewed journals.

Objectives To describe prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD), demographic and clinical characteristics, treatment patterns and rates of cardiovascular and renal complications for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated in routine clinical care.Design Repeat cross-sectional study (6 monthly cross-sections) and cohort study from 1 January 2017 to 31 December 2019.Setting Primary care data from English practices contributing to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to Hospital Episode Statistics and Office for National Statistics mortality data.Participants Patients with T2D aged >18 years, at least one year of registration data.Primary and secondary outcomes Primary outcome was prevalence of CKD defined as chronic kidney disease epidemiology collaboration (CKD-EPI) estimated glomerular filtration rate

BackgroundValidity of exposure and outcome measures in electronic medical records is vital to ensure robust, comparable study findings however, despite validation studies, definitions of variables used often differ. Using exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as an example, we investigated the impact of potential misclassification of different definitions commonly used in publications on study findings.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was performed. English primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum database with linked secondary care data were used to define a population of COPD patients ≥40 years old registered at a general practice. Index date was the date eligibility criteria were met and end of follow-up was 30/12/19, death or end of data collection. Exacerbations were defined using 6 algorithms based on definitions commonly used in the literature, including one validated definition. For each algorithm, the proportion of frequent exacerbators (≥2 exacerbations/year) and exacerbation rates were described. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to investigate each algorithm on the association between heart failure and risk of COPD exacerbation.FindingsA total of 315,184 patients were included. Baseline proportion of frequent exacerbators varied from 2.7% to 15.3% depending on the algorithm. Rates of exacerbations over follow-up varied from 19.3 to 66.6 events/100 person-years. The adjusted hazard ratio for the association between heart failure and exacerbation varied from 1.45, 95% confidence intervals 1.42-1.49, to 1.01, 0.98-1.04.InterpretationThe use of high validity definitions and standardisation of definitions in electronic medical records is crucial to generating high quality, robust evidence.

BackgroundThe ever-growing size, breadth, and availability of patient data allows for a wide variety of clinical features to serve as inputs for phenotype discovery using cluster analysis. Data of mixed types in particular are not straightforward to combine into a single feature vector, and techniques used to address this can be biased towards certain data types in ways that are not immediately obvious or intended. In this context, the process of constructing clinically meaningful patient representations from complex datasets has not been systematically evaluated.AimsOur aim was to a) outline and b) implement an analytical framework to evaluate distinct methods of constructing patient representations from routine electronic health record data for the purpose of measuring patient similarity. We applied the analysis on a patient cohort diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.MethodsUsing data from the CALIBER data resource, we extracted clinically relevant features for a cohort of patients diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. We used four different data processing pipelines to construct lower dimensional patient representations from which we calculated patient similarity scores. We described the resulting representations, ranked the influence of each individual feature on patient similarity and evaluated the effect of different pipelines on clustering outcomes. Experts evaluated the resulting representations by rating the clinical relevance of similar patient suggestions with regard to a reference patient.ResultsEach of the four pipelines resulted in similarity scores primarily driven by a unique set of features. It was demonstrated that data transformations according to each pipeline prior to clustering can result in a variation of clustering results of over 40%. The most appropriate pipeline was selected on the basis of feature ranking and clinical expertise. There was moderate agreement between clinicians as measured by Cohen's kappa coefficient.ConclusionsData transformation has downstream and unforeseen consequences in cluster analysis. Rather than viewing this process as a black box, we have shown ways to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate and select the appropriate preprocessing pipeline.

Objective To understand the burden of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among people who use illicit opioids such as heroin, and evaluate inequalities in treatment.Design Cohort study.Setting Patients registered at primary care practices in England.Participants 106 789 patients in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink with illicit opioid use recorded between 2001 and 2018, and a subcohort of 3903 patients with a diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. For both cohorts, the study sampled a comparison group with no history of illicit opioids that was matched by age, sex, and general practice.Main outcome measures In the base cohort: diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and death due to the disease. In the subcohort: five treatments (influenza vaccine, pneumococcal vaccine, pulmonary rehabilitation, bronchodilators or corticosteroids, and smoking cessation support) and exacerbations requiring hospital admission.Results 680 of 106 789 participants died due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, representing 5.1% of all cause deaths. Illicit opioid use was associated with 14.59 times (95% confidence interval 12.28 to 17.33) the risk of death related to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and 5.89 times (5.62 to 6.18) the risk of a diagnosis of the disease. Among patients with a new diagnosis, comorbid illicit opioid use was associated with current smoking, underweight, worse lung function, and more severe breathlessness. After adjusting for these differences, illicit opioids were associated with 1.96 times (1.82 to 2.12) times the risk of exacerbations requiring hospital admission, but not associated with a substantially different probability of the five treatments.Conclusions Death due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is about 15 times more common among people who use illicit opioids than the general population. This inequality does not appear to be explained by differences in treatment, but late diagnosis of the disease among people who use illicit opioids might contribute.

Introduction There is concern that survivors of adult cancers may be at increased risk of respiratory infections and of exacerbations of pre-existing respiratory conditions. Considering the high prevalence of respiratory disease in the general population, increased respiratory disease risk in survivors of adult cancers could translate into an important impact on morbidity and mortality. The aim of this systematic review is to summarise and assess the quality of all studies comparing respiratory outcomes between adult cancer survivors and individuals with no history of cancer.Methods and analysis This systematic literature review will be conducted using Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane. We will include cohort or case–control studies that provide a comparative estimate of the risk of a respiratory disease of interest in survivors of adult cancer against a comparator cohort of cancer-free individuals. No geographic, time or language restrictions will be applied. We will assess the risk of bias using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology checklists. Results will be summarised by type of respiratory outcome, cancer type and cancer survivorship definition. If sufficient numbers of homogeneous studies are found, summary measures of association will be calculated using random effects meta-analysis models.Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval is not applicable to our study. The results will be used to identify evidence gaps and priorities for future research to understand respiratory morbidity in survivors of adult cancers and identify possible mitigation strategies. Results from this review will be disseminated to clinical audiences and submitted to a peer-reviewed journal when completed.Trial registration number This study has been registered on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42022311557).

Objectives To assess the frequency of reporting of ethnicity (or ‘race’) and socioeconomic status (SES) indicators in high-impact journals.Design Targeted literature review.Data sources The 10 highest ranked general medical journals using Google scholar h5 index.Eligibility criteria Inclusion criteria were, human research, reporting participant level data. Exclusion criteria were non-research article, animal/other non-human participant/subject or no participant characteristics reported.Data extraction and synthesis Working backwards from 19 April 2021 in each journal, two independent reviewers selected the 10 most recent articles meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria, to create a sample of 100 articles. Data on the frequency of reporting of ethnicity (or ‘race’) and SES indicators were extracted and presented using descriptive statistics.Results Of 100 research articles included, 35 reported ethnicity and 13 SES. By contrast, 99 reported age, and 97 reported sex or gender. Among the articles not reporting ethnicity, only 3 (5%) highlighted this as a limitation, and only 6 (7%) where SES data were missing. Median number of articles reporting ethnicity per journal was 2.5/10 (range 0 to 9). Only two journals explicitly requested reporting of ethnicity (or race), and one requested SES.Conclusions The majority of research published in high-impact medical journals does not include data on the ethnicity and SES of participants, and this omission is rarely acknowledged as a limitation. This situation persists despite the well-established importance of this issue and International Committee of Medical Journal Editors recommendations to include relevant demographic variables to ensure representative samples. Standardised explicit minimum standards are required.

Introduction Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of mortality in Europe; however, it is important to understand how clinical practice patterns differ between countries and how this might relate to disease outcomes, to identify ways of improving local disease management. We aimed to describe and compare the management of patients with COPD in the UK and France between 2008 and 2017.Methods We used data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD and Hospital Episode Statistics in the UK and the Echantillon Généraliste des Bénéficiaire in France to identify patients with COPD each year between 2008 and 2017. We compared patient characteristics, all-cause mortality and COPD exacerbations each year between 2008 and 2017 for patients in the UK and France separately. Health care utilisation and COPD exacerbations in 2017 were compared between France and the UK using t-tests and χ2 tests.Results Patients with COPD were similar in gender and comorbidities in both countries. Incidence of COPD exacerbations remained stable in the UK and France between 2007 and 2017. In 2017, the proportion of all-cause and COPD-related hospitalisations was greater in the UK than in France (43.9% vs 32.8% and 8.3% vs 4.9%, respectively; p

Background Frailty, a state of reduced physiological reserve, is common in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Frailty can occur at any age; however, the implications in younger people (eg, aged 65 years.

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has led to over 100 million cases worldwide. The UK has had over 4 million cases, 400 000 hospital admissions and 100 000 deaths. Many patients with COVID-19 suffer long-term symptoms, predominantly breathlessness and fatigue whether hospitalised or not. Early data suggest potentially severe long-term consequence of COVID-19 is development of long COVID-19-related interstitial lung disease (LC-ILD).Methods and analysis The UK Interstitial Lung Disease Consortium (UKILD) will undertake longitudinal observational studies of patients with suspected ILD following COVID-19. The primary objective is to determine ILD prevalence at 12 months following infection and whether clinically severe infection correlates with severity of ILD. Secondary objectives will determine the clinical, genetic, epigenetic and biochemical factors that determine the trajectory of recovery or progression of ILD. Data will be obtained through linkage to the Post-Hospitalisation COVID platform study and community studies. Additional substudies will conduct deep phenotyping. The Xenon MRI investigation of Alveolar dysfunction Substudy will conduct longitudinal xenon alveolar gas transfer and proton perfusion MRI. The POST COVID-19 interstitial lung DiseasE substudy will conduct clinically indicated bronchoalveolar lavage with matched whole blood sampling. Assessments include exploratory single cell RNA and lung microbiomics analysis, gene expression and epigenetic assessment.Ethics and dissemination All contributing studies have been granted appropriate ethical approvals. Results from this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals.Conclusion This study will ensure the extent and consequences of LC-ILD are established and enable strategies to mitigate progression of LC-ILD.

BackgroundThe UK National Health Service (NHS) classified 2.2 million people as clinically extremely vulnerable (CEV) during the first wave of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, advising them to “shield” (to not leave home for any reason). ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to measure the determinants of shielding behavior and associations with well-being in a large NHS patient population for informing future health policy. MethodsPatients contributing to an ongoing longitudinal participatory epidemiology study (Longitudinal Effects on Wellbeing of the COVID-19 Pandemic [LoC-19], n=42,924) received weekly email invitations to complete questionnaires (17-week shielding period starting April 9, 2020) within their NHS personal electronic health record. Question items focused on well-being. Participants were stratified into four groups by self-reported CEV status (qualifying condition) and adoption of shielding behavior (baselined at week 1 or 2). The distribution of CEV criteria was reported alongside situational variables and univariable and multivariable logistic regression. Longitudinal trends in physical and mental well-being were displayed graphically. Free-text responses reporting variables impacting well-being were semiquantified using natural language processing. In the lead up to a second national lockdown (October 23, 2020), a follow-up questionnaire evaluated subjective concern if further shielding was advised. ResultsThe study included 7240 participants. In the CEV group (n=2391), 1133 (47.3%) assumed shielding behavior at baseline, compared with 633 (13.0%) in the non-CEV group (n=4849). CEV participants who shielded were more likely to be Asian (odds ratio [OR] 2.02, 95% CI 1.49-2.76), female (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.05-1.45), older (OR per year increase 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.02), living in a home with an outdoor space (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.06-1.70) or three to four other inhabitants (three: OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.15-1.94; four: OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.10-2.01), or solid organ transplant recipients (OR 2.85, 95% CI 2.18-3.77), or have severe chronic lung disease (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.30-2.04). Receipt of a government letter advising shielding was reported in 1115 (46.6%) CEV participants and 180 (3.7%) non-CEV participants, and was associated with adopting shielding behavior (OR 3.34, 95% CI 2.82-3.95 and OR 2.88, 95% CI 2.04-3.99, respectively). In CEV participants, shielding at baseline was associated with a lower rating of mental well-being and physical well-being. Similar results were found for non-CEV participants. Concern for well-being if future shielding was required was most prevalent among CEV participants who had originally shielded. ConclusionsFuture health policy must balance the potential protection from COVID-19 against our findings that shielding negatively impacted well-being and was adopted in many in whom it was not indicated and variably in whom it was indicated. This therefore also requires clearer public health messaging and support for well-being if shielding is to be advised in future pandemic scenarios.

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treatment is informed by randomised controlled trial results, but it is unclear if these findings apply to people excluded from these trials. We used data from the TORCH (TOwards a Revolution in COPD Health) randomised controlled trial to validate non-interventional methods for assessing the clinical effectiveness of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treatment in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, before applying these methods to the analysis of people who would have been excluded from TORCH. Objectives: To validate the use of non-interventional Clinical Practice Research Datalink data and methods for estimating chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treatment effects against trial results, and, using validated methods, to determine treatment effects in people who would have been excluded from the TORCH trial. Design: A historical non-interventional cohort design, including validation against randomised controlled trial results. Setting: The UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Participants: People aged ≥ 18 years with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease registered in Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD between January 2000 and January 2017. For objective 1, we prepared a cohort that was analogous to the TORCH trial cohort by applying TORCH trial inclusion/exclusion criteria followed by individual matching to TORCH trial participants. For objectives 2 and 3, we prepared cohorts that were analogous to the TORCH trial that, nevertheless, would not have been eligible for the TORCH trial because of age, asthma, comorbidity or mild disease. Interventions: The long-acting beta-2 agonist and inhaled corticosteroid combination product Seretide (GlaxoSmithKline plc) [i.e. fluticasone propionate plus salmeterol (FP-SAL)] compared with (1) no FP-SAL exposure or (2) exposure to salmeterol (i.e. the long-acting beta-2 agonist) only. Main outcome measures: Exacerbations, mortality, pneumonia and time to treatment change. Results: For objective 1, the exacerbation rate ratio was comparable to that in the TORCH trial for FP-SAL compared with salmeterol (0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.74 to 0.97, vs. TORCH trial 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.81 to 0.95), but not for FP-SAL compared with no FP-SAL (1.30, 95% confidence interval 1.19 to 1.42, vs. TORCH trial 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.69 to 0.81). Active comparator results were also consistent with the TORCH trial for mortality (hazard ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.32, vs. TORCH trial hazard ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.77 to 1.13) and pneumonia (risk ratio 1.39, 95% confidence interval 1.04 to 1.87, vs. TORCH trial risk ratio 1.47, 95% confidence interval 1.25 to 1.73). For objectives 2 and 3, active comparator results were consistent with the TORCH trial for exacerbations, with the exception of people with milder chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, in whom we observed a stronger protective association (risk ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 0.70, vs. TORCH trial risk ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.74 to 0.97). For the analysis of mortality, we saw a lack of association with being prescribed FP-SAL (vs. being prescribed salmeterol), with the exception of those with prior asthma, for whom we observed an increase in mortality (hazard ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.21 to 1.85, vs. TORCH trial-analogous HR 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.64 to 1.32). Conclusions: Routinely collected electronic health record data can be used to successfully measure chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treatment effects when comparing two treatments, but not for comparisons between active treatment and no treatment. Analyses involving patients who would have been excluded from trials mostly suggests that treatment effects for FP-SAL are similar to trial effects, although further work is needed to characterise a small increased risk of death in those with concomitant asthma. Limitations: Some of our analyses had small numbers. Future work: The differences in treatment effects that we found should be investigated further in other data sets. Currently recommended chronic obstructive pulmonary disease inhaled combination therapy (other than FP-SAL) should also be investigated using these methods. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 51. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

BackgroundGuidelines recommend stepping down asthma treatment to the minimum effective dose to achieve symptom control, prevent adverse side effects, and reduce costs. Limited data exist on asthma prescription patterns in a real-world setting. We aimed to evaluate the appropriateness of doses prescribed to a UK general asthma population and assess whether stepping down medication increased exacerbations or reliever use, as well as its impact on costs.Methods and findingsWe used nationwide UK primary care medical records, 2001-2017, to identify 508,459 adult asthma patients managed with preventer medication. Prescriptions of higher-level medication: medium/high-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) or ICSs + add-on medication (long-acting β2-agonist [LABA], leukotriene receptor antagonist [LTRA], theophylline, or long-acting muscarinic antagonist [LAMA]) steadily increased over time (2001 = 49.8%, 2017 = 68.3%). Of those prescribed their first preventer, one-third were prescribed a higher-level medication, of whom half had no reliever prescription or exacerbation in the year prior. Of patients first prescribed ICSs + 1 add-on, 70.4% remained on the same medication during a mean follow-up of 6.6 years. Of those prescribed medium/high-dose ICSs as their first preventer, 13.0% already had documented diabetes, cataracts, glaucoma, or osteopenia/osteoporosis. A cohort of 125,341 patients were drawn to assess the impact of stepping down medication: mean age 50.4 years, 39.4% males, 39,881 stepped down. Exposed patients were stepped down by dropping their LABAs or another add-on or by halving their ICS dose (halving their mean-daily dose or their inhaler dose). The primary and secondary outcomes were, respectively, exacerbations and an increase in reliever prescriptions. Multivariable regression was used to assess outcomes and determine the prognostic factors for initiating stepdown. There was no increased exacerbation risk for each possible medication stepdown (adjusted hazard ratio, 95% CI, p-value: ICS inhaler dose = 0.86, 0.77-0.93, p < 0.001; ICS mean daily = 0.80, 0.74-0.87, p < 0.001; LABA = 1.01, 0.92-1.11, p = 0.87, other add-on = 1.00, 0.91-1.09, p = 0.79) and no increase in reliever prescriptions (adjusted odds ratio, 95% CI, p-value: ICS inhaler dose = 0.99, 0.98-1.00, p = 0.59; ICS mean daily = 0.78, 0.76-0.79, p < 0.001; LABA = 0.83, 0.82-0.85, p < 0.001; other add-on = 0.86, 0.85-0.87, p < 0.001). Prognostic factors to initiate stepdown included medication burden, but not medication side effects. National Health Service (NHS) indicative prices were used for cost estimates. Stepping down medication, either LABAs or ICSs, could save annually around £17,000,000 or £8,600,000, respectively. Study limitations include the possibility that prescribed medication may not have been dispensed or adhered to and the reason for stepdown was not documented.ConclusionIn this UK study, we observed that asthma patients were increasingly prescribed higher levels of treatment, often without clear clinical indication for such high doses. Stepping down medication did not adversely affect outcomes and was associated with substantial cost savings.

Accurate prognosis information after a diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) would facilitate earlier and better informed decisions about the use of prevention strategies and advanced care plans. We therefore aimed to develop and validate an accurate prognosis model for incident COPD cases using only information present in general practitioner (GP) records at the point of diagnosis. Incident COPD patients between 2004-2012 over the age of 35 were studied using records from 396 general practices in England. We developed a model to predict all-cause five-year mortality at the point of COPD diagnosis, using 47,964 English patients. Our model uses age, gender, smoking status, body mass index, forced expiratory volume in 1-second (FEV1) % predicted and 16 co-morbidities (the same number as the Charlson Co-morbidity Index). The performance of our chosen model was validated in all countries of the UK (N = 48,304). Our model performed well, and performed consistently in validation data. The validation area under the curves in each country varied between 0.783-0.809 and the calibration slopes between 0.911-1.04. Our model performed better in this context than models based on the Charlson Co-morbidity Index or Cambridge Multimorbidity Score. We have developed and validated a model that outperforms general multimorbidity scores at predicting five-year mortality after COPD diagnosis. Our model includes only data routinely collected before COPD diagnosis, allowing it to be readily translated into clinical practice, and has been made available through an online risk calculator (https://skiddle.shinyapps.io/incidentcopdsurvival/).

Russia has one of the highest rates of cardiovascular disease in the world. The International Project on Cardiovascular Disease in Russia (IPCDR) was set up to understand the reasons for this. A substantial component of this study was the Know Your Heart Study devoted to characterising the nature and causes of cardiovascular disease in Russia by conducting large cross-sectional surveys in two Russian cities Novosibirsk and Arkhangelsk. The study population was 4542 men and women aged 35-69 years recruited from the general population. Fieldwork took place between 2015-18. There were two study components: 1) a baseline interview to collect information on socio-demographic characteristics and cardiovascular risk factors, usually conducted at home, and 2) a comprehensive health check at a primary care clinic which included detailed examination of the cardiovascular system. In this paper we describe in detail the rationale for, design and conduct of these studies.

Russia has one of the highest rates of cardiovascular disease in the world. The International Project on Cardiovascular Disease in Russia (IPCDR) was set up to understand the reasons for this. A substantial component of this study was the Know Your Heart Study devoted to characterising the nature and causes of cardiovascular disease in Russia by conducting large cross-sectional surveys in two Russian cities Novosibirsk and Arkhangelsk. The study population was 4542 men and women aged 35-69 years recruited from the general population. Fieldwork took place between 2015-18. There were two study components: 1) a baseline interview to collect information on socio-demographic characteristics and cardiovascular risk factors, usually conducted at home, and 2) a comprehensive health check at a primary care clinic which included detailed examination of the cardiovascular system. In this paper we describe in detail the rationale for, design and conduct of these studies.

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are arguably the most important comorbidities in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). CVDs are common in people with COPD, and their presence is associated with increased risk for hospitalization, longer length of stay and all-cause and CVD-related mortality. The economic burden associated with CVD in this population is considerable and the cumulative cost of treating comorbidities may even exceed that of treating COPD itself. Our understanding of the biological mechanisms that link COPD and various forms of CVD has improved significantly over the past decade. But despite broad acceptance of the prognostic significance of CVDs in COPD, there remains widespread under-recognition and undertreatment of comorbid CVD in this population. The reasons for this are unclear; however institutional barriers and a lack of evidence-based guidelines for the management of CVD in people with COPD may be contributory factors. In this review, we summarize current knowledge relating to the prevalence and incidence of CVD in people with COPD and the mechanisms that underlie their coexistence. We discuss the implications for clinical practice and highlight opportunities for improved prevention and treatment of CVD in people with COPD. While we advocate more active assessment for signs of cardiovascular conditions across all age groups and all stages of COPD severity, we suggest targeting those aged under 65 years. Evidence indicates that the increased risks for CVD are particularly pronounced in COPD patients in mid-to-late-middle-age and thus it is in this age group that the benefits of early intervention may prove to be the most effective.

BACKGROUND:Acute Exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) identified from electronic healthcare records (EHR) are important for research, public health and to inform healthcare utilisation and service provision. However, there is no standardised method of identifying AECOPD in UK EHR. We aimed to validate the recording of AECOPD in UK EHR. METHODS:We randomly selected 1385 patients with COPD from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. We selected dates of possible AECOPD based on 15 different algorithms between January 2004 and August 2013. Questionnaires were sent to GPs asking for confirmation of their patients' AECOPD on the dates identified and for any additional relevant information. Responses were reviewed independently by two respiratory physicians. Positive predictive value (PPV) and sensitivity were calculated. RESULTS:The response rate was 71.3%. AECOPD diagnostic codes, lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) codes, and prescriptions of antibiotics and oral corticosteroids (OCS) together for 5-14 days had a high PPV (>75%) for identifying AECOPD. Symptom-based algorithms and prescription of antibiotics or OCS alone had lower PPVs (60-75%). A combined strategy of antibiotic and OCS prescriptions for 5-14 days, or LRTI or AECOPD code resulted in a PPV of 85.5% (95% CI, 82.7-88.3%) and a sensitivity of 62.9% (55.4-70.4%). CONCLUSION:Using a combination of diagnostic and therapy codes, the validity of AECOPD identified from EHR can be high. These strategies are useful for understanding health-care utilisation for AECOPD, informing service provision and for researchers. These results highlight the need for common coding strategies to be adopted in primary care to allow easy and accurate identification of events.

Community-acquired lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) and pneumonia (CAP) are common causes of morbidity and mortality among those aged ≥65 years; a growing population in many countries. Detailed incidence estimates for these infections among older adults in the United Kingdom (UK) are lacking. We used electronic general practice records from the Clinical Practice Research Data link, linked to Hospital Episode Statistics inpatient data, to estimate incidence of community-acquired LRTI and CAP among UK older adults between April 1997-March 2011, by age, sex, region and deprivation quintile. Levels of antibiotic prescribing were also assessed. LRTI incidence increased with fluctuations over time, was higher in men than women aged ≥70 and increased with age from 92.21 episodes/1000 person-years (65-69 years) to 187.91/1000 (85-89 years). CAP incidence increased more markedly with age, from 2.81 to 21.81 episodes/1000 person-years respectively, and was higher among men. For both infection groups, increases over time were attenuated after age-standardisation, indicating that these rises were largely due to population aging. Rates among those in the most deprived quintile were around 70% higher than the least deprived and were generally higher in the North of England. GP antibiotic prescribing rates were high for LRTI but lower for CAP (mostly due to immediate hospitalisation). This is the first study to provide long-term detailed incidence estimates of community-acquired LRTI and CAP in UK older individuals, taking person-time at risk into account. The summary incidence commonly presented for the ≥65 age group considerably underestimates LRTI/CAP rates, particularly among older individuals within this group. Our methodology and findings are likely to be highly relevant to health planners and researchers in other countries with aging populations.