Dataset Information

Rates and risk of hospitalisation among patients with type 2 diabetes: retrospective cohort study using the UK General Practice Research Database linked to English Hospital Episode Statistics.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

To investigate the rates and risk of hospitalisations in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) mellitus in England.

Methods

This retrospective population-based cohort study used computerised records from the General Practice Research Database linked to Hospital Episode Statistics data in England. Patients with T2D from January 2006 to December 2010 were selected. Primary outcome measures were all-cause, non-diabetes-related, diabetes-related and hypoglycaemia-related hospitalisations. Factors associated with all-cause and diabetes-related hospitalisations were investigated with Cox's proportional hazards models.

Results

Amongst 97,689 patients with T2D, approximately 60% had at least one hospitalisation during the 4-year study period. Rates of hospitalisation were as follows: all-cause, 33.9 per 100 patient-years (pt-yrs); non-diabetes-related, 29.1 per 100 pt-yrs; diabetes-related, 18.8 per 100 pt-yrs and hypoglycaemia, 0.3 per 100 pt-yrs. The risk of all-cause hospitalisation increased with hospitalisation in the previous year, insulin use and the presence of major comorbidities. The risk of a diabetes-related hospitalisation increased with age, female gender, insulin use, chronic renal insufficiency, hypoglycaemia (as diagnosed by a general practitioner) and diabetes-related hospitalisation in the previous year.

Conclusions

Patients with T2D are hospitalised at a considerably high rate for causes directly related with diabetes complications and stay longer in hospital. History of hospitalisation and complications of diabetes were found to be predictive of inpatient hospitalisations suggesting previous hospitalisation episodes could serve as points of intervention. This study highlights important areas for healthcare intervention and provides a reminder for vigilance when risk factors for hospitalisation in patients with T2D are present.

SUBMITTER: Khalid JM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4282286 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Rates and risk of hospitalisation among patients with type 2 diabetes: retrospective cohort study using the UK General Practice Research Database linked to English Hospital Episode Statistics.

Khalid J M JM Raluy-Callado M M Curtis B H BH Boye K S KS Maguire A A Reaney M M

International journal of clinical practice 20130923 1

<h4>Aims</h4>To investigate the rates and risk of hospitalisations in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) mellitus in England.<h4>Methods</h4>This retrospective population-based cohort study used computerised records from the General Practice Research Database linked to Hospital Episode Statistics data in England. Patients with T2D from January 2006 to December 2010 were selected. Primary outcome measures were all-cause, non-diabetes-related, diabetes-related and hypoglycaemia-related hospitalis ...[more]

PMID: 24112108

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPrimary care databases represent a rich source of data for health care research; however, the quality of recording of secondary care events in these databases is uncertain. This study sought to investigate the completeness of recording of hospital admissions for bleeds in primary care records and explore the impact of incomplete recording on estimates of bleeding risk associated with antithrombotic treatment.MethodsThe study population consisted of adults with non-valvular atrial fibrillation who had at least one bleed recorded in either the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) or Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) while receiving prescriptions for an oral anticoagulant. The proportion of bleeds recorded in HES that had a corresponding bleed recorded in the subsequent 12 weeks in CPRD was calculated, and factors associated with having a corresponding record were identified. Cox proportional hazards analyses investigating the hazard of subsequent bleeding associated with antithrombotic treatment were carried out using linked CPRD-HES data and using CPRD only data, and the results were compared.ResultsLess than 20% of the 14,361 bleeds recorded in the HES data had a corresponding bleed coded in the CPRD in the subsequent 12 weeks. This proportion varied by bleed characteristics, calendar time, day of week of admission (weekday vs weekend) and oral anticoagulant treatment at the time of the bleed. The hazard of subsequent bleeding associated with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and antiplatelet agents (APAs) relative to no antithrombotic treatment were similar using the linked primary and secondary care dataset (VKA HRadj 1.06 CI95 0.96-1.16; APA HRadj 1.08 CI95 0.96-1.21) and the unlinked primary care data (VKA HRadj 1.12 CI95 1.01-1.24; APA HRadj 1.06 CI95 0.95-1.20).ConclusionSecondary care bleeding events are not completely recorded in primary care records and under-recording may be differential with respect to a variety of factors, including antithrombotic treatment. While the impact of under-recording on estimates of the comparative safety of antithrombotic drugs was limited, the extent of the under-recording suggests its potential impact should be considered, and ideally evaluated in future studies utilizing standalone primary care data.

Project description:BackgroundInfectious intestinal disease (IID) has considerable health impact; there are 2 billion cases worldwide resulting in 1 million deaths and 78.7 million disability-adjusted life years lost. Reported IID incidence rates vary and this is partly because terms such as "diarrheal disease" and "acute infectious gastroenteritis" are used interchangeably. Ontologies provide a method of transparently comparing case definitions and disease incidence rates.ObjectiveThis study sought to show how differences in case definition in part account for variation in incidence estimates for IID and how an ontological approach provides greater transparency to IID case finding.MethodsWe compared three IID case definitions: (1) Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre (RCGP RSC) definition based on mapping to the Ninth International Classification of Disease (ICD-9), (2) newer ICD-10 definition, and (3) ontological case definition. We calculated incidence rates and examined the contribution of four supporting concepts related to IID: symptoms, investigations, process of care (eg, notification to public health authorities), and therapies. We created a formal ontology using ontology Web language.ResultsThe ontological approach identified 5712 more cases of IID than the ICD-10 definition and 4482 more than the RCGP RSC definition from an initial cohort of 1,120,490. Weekly incidence using the ontological definition was 17.93/100,000 (95% CI 15.63-20.41), whereas for the ICD-10 definition the rate was 8.13/100,000 (95% CI 6.70-9.87), and for the RSC definition the rate was 10.24/100,000 (95% CI 8.55-12.12). Codes from the four supporting concepts were generally consistent across our three IID case definitions: 37.38% (3905/10,448) (95% CI 36.16-38.5) for the ontological definition, 38.33% (2287/5966) (95% CI 36.79-39.93) for the RSC definition, and 40.82% (1933/4736) (95% CI 39.03-42.66) for the ICD-10 definition. The proportion of laboratory results associated with a positive test result was 19.68% (546/2775).ConclusionsThe standard RCGP RSC definition of IID, and its mapping to ICD-10, underestimates disease incidence. The ontological approach identified a larger proportion of new IID cases; the ontology divides contributory elements and enables transparency and comparison of rates. Results illustrate how improved diagnostic coding of IID combined with an ontological approach to case definition would provide a clearer picture of IID in the community, better inform GPs and public health services about circulating disease, and empower them to respond. We need to improve the Pathology Bounded Code List (PBCL) currently used by laboratories to electronically report results. Given advances in stool microbiology testing with a move to nonculture, PCR-based methods, the way microbiology results are reported and coded via PBCL needs to be reviewed and modernized.

Project description:BackgroundHypertension is a major cause of preventable disability and death globally and affects more than one in four adults in England. Unwarranted variation is variation in access, quality, outcome or value which is unexplained by differences in the condition or patient characteristics and which reduces quality and efficiency. Distinguishing unwarranted from variation due to clinical, organisational or patient factors can be challenging. We carried out this study to explore inter-practice variation in the diagnosis and management of hypertension in the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC) network database, a large, representative surveillance database.Methods and findingWe carried out a cross-sectional study using primary care data extracted from the electronic health records of 1,271,419 adults registered at RCGP RSC general practices on 31st December 2016. Logistic regression was used to indirectly standardise practice-level hypertension prevalence and control against the RCGP RSC population, adjusted for age, gender, ethnicity, deprivation, co-morbidity, NHS region and practice size. Inter-practice variation was demonstrated using funnel plots with 95% and 99.8% control limits. The prevalence of detected hypertension was 18.4% (95% CI 18.4-18.5), n = 234,165. Uncontrolled hypertension was present in 146,553 of 196,052 individuals, 25.2% (25.1-25.4), in whom blood pressure had been recorded in the previous year. Hypertension management varied markedly between practices with a three-fold difference in prevalence, 13.5-38.4%, and a four-fold difference in the proportion of uncontrolled hypertension, 11.8-47.9%. Despite adjustment for sociodemographic and practice characteristics funnel plots demonstrated marked over-dispersion.ConclusionsSubstantial variation in the prevalence of diagnosed hypertension and the management of hypertension was only partially explained by characteristics captured within a routine dataset. The over-dispersion suggests variation is not fully explained by these factors and that context, behaviour and processes of care delivery may contribute to variation. Routine data sources in isolation to not provide sufficient contextual data to diagnose the causes of variation.

Dataset Information

Rates and risk of hospitalisation among patients with type 2 diabetes: retrospective cohort study using the UK General Practice Research Database linked to English Hospital Episode Statistics.

Aims

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Rates and risk of hospitalisation among patients with type 2 diabetes: retrospective cohort study using the UK General Practice Research Database linked to English Hospital Episode Statistics.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets