Dataset Information

Impact of statin related media coverage on use of statins: interrupted time series analysis with UK primary care data.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To quantify how a period of intense media coverage of controversy over the risk:benefit balance of statins affected their use.

Design

Interrupted time series analysis of prospectively collected electronic data from primary care.

Setting

Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) in the United Kingdom.

Participants

Patients newly eligible for or currently taking statins for primary and secondary cardiovascular disease prevention in each month in January 2011-March 2015.

Main outcome measures

Adjusted odds ratios for starting/stopping taking statins after the media coverage (October 2013-March 2014).

Results

There was no evidence that the period of high media coverage was associated with changes in statin initiation among patients with a high recorded risk score for cardiovascular disease (primary prevention) or a recent cardiovascular event (secondary prevention) (odds ratio 0.99 (95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.13; P=0.92) and 1.04 (0.92 to 1.18; P=0.54), respectively), though there was a decrease in the overall proportion of patients with a recorded risk score. Patients already taking statins were more likely to stop taking them for both primary and secondary prevention after the high media coverage period (1.11 (1.05 to 1.18; P<0.001) and 1.12 (1.04 to 1.21; P=0.003), respectively). Stratified analyses showed that older patients and those with a longer continuous prescription were more likely to stop taking statins after the media coverage. In post hoc analyses, the increased rates of cessation were no longer observed after six months.

Conclusions

A period of intense public discussion over the risks:benefit balance of statins, covered widely in the media, was followed by a transient rise in the proportion of people who stopped taking statins. This research highlights the potential for widely covered health stories in the lay media to impact on healthcare related behaviour.

SUBMITTER: Matthews A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4925917 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 had a considerable impact on mortality, but its effect on behaviors associated with social media remains unclear. As travel decreased due to lockdowns during the pandemic, selfie-related mortality may have decreased, as fewer individuals were taking smartphone photographs in risky locations.ObjectiveIn this study, we examined the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on trends in selfie-related mortality.MethodsWe identified fatal selfie-related injuries reported in web-based news reports worldwide between March 2014 and April 2021, including the deaths of individuals attempting a selfie photograph or anyone else present during the incident. The main outcome measure was the total number of selfie-related deaths per month. We used interrupted time series regression to estimate the monthly change in the number of selfie-related deaths over time, comparing the period before the pandemic (March 2014 to February 2020) with the period during the pandemic (March 2020 to April 2021).ResultsThe study included a total of 332 selfie-related deaths occurring between March 2014 and April 2021, with 18 (5.4%) deaths during the pandemic. Most selfie-related deaths occurred in India (n=153, 46.1%) and involved men (n=221, 66.6%) and young individuals (n=296, 89.2%). During the pandemic, two-thirds of selfie-related deaths were due to falls, whereas a greater proportion of selfie-related deaths before the pandemic were due to drowning. Based on interrupted time series regression, there was an average of 1.3 selfie-related deaths per month during the pandemic, compared with 4.3 deaths per month before the pandemic. The number of selfie-related deaths decreased by 2.6 in the first month of the pandemic alone and continued to decrease thereafter.ConclusionsOur findings indicate that the COVID-19 pandemic led to a marked decrease in selfie-related mortality, suggesting that lockdowns and travel restrictions likely prevented hazardous selfie-taking. The decrease in selfie-related mortality occurred despite a potential increase in social media use during the pandemic.

Project description:To examine HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor (statin) drug dispensing patterns to Nova Scotia Seniors' Pharmacare program (NSSPP) beneficiaries over a 14-year period in response to: 1) rosuvastatin market entry in 2003, 2) JUPITER trial publication in 2008, and 3) generic atorvastatin availability in 2010.All NSSPP beneficiaries who redeemed at least one prescription for a statin from April 1, 1999 to March 31, 2013 were included. Aggregated, anonymous monthly prescription counts were extracted by the Nova Scotia Department of Health and Wellness (Nova Scotia, Canada) and changes in dispensing patterns of statins were measured. Data were analyzed using descriptive analyses and interrupted time series methods.The percentage of NSSPP beneficiaries dispensed any statin increased from 5.3% in April 1999 to 20.7% in March 2013. In 1999, most NSSPP beneficiaries were dispensed either simvastatin (29.5%) or atorvastatin (28.7%). When rosuvastatin was added to the NSSPP Formulary in August 2003, prescriptions dispensed for simvastatin, lovastatin, pravastatin, and fluvastatin declined significantly (slope change, -0.0027; 95% confidence interval (CI), (-0.0046, -0.0009)). This significant decline continued following the publication of JUPITER (level change, -0.1974; 95% CI, (-0.2991, -0.0957)) and the availability of generic atorvastatin (level change, -0.2436; 95% CI, (-0.3314, -0.1558)). Atorvastatin was not significantly affected by any of the three interventions, although it maintained an overall decreasing trend. Only upon the availability of generic atorvastatin did the upward trend in rosuvastatin use decrease significantly (slope change, -0.0010, 95% CI, (-0.0015, -0.0005)).The type and rate of statins dispensed to NSSPP beneficiaries changed from 1999 to 2013 in response to the availability of new agents and publication of the JUPITER trial. The overall proportion of NSSPP beneficiaries dispensed a statin increased approximately 4-fold during the study period. In 2013, rosuvastatin was the most commonly dispensed statin (44.1%) followed by atorvastatin (39.1%).

Project description:BackgroundWe evaluated the impact of the pharmacist-led Safety Medication dASHboard (SMASH) intervention on medication safety in primary care.Methods and findingsSMASH comprised (1) training of clinical pharmacists to deliver the intervention; (2) a web-based dashboard providing actionable, patient-level feedback; and (3) pharmacists reviewing individual at-risk patients, and initiating remedial actions or advising general practitioners on doing so. It was implemented in 43 general practices covering a population of 235,595 people in Salford (Greater Manchester), UK. All practices started receiving the intervention between 18 April 2016 and 26 September 2017. We used an interrupted time series analysis of rates (prevalence) of potentially hazardous prescribing and inadequate blood-test monitoring, comparing observed rates post-intervention to extrapolations from a 24-month pre-intervention trend. The number of people registered to participating practices and having 1 or more risk factors for being exposed to hazardous prescribing or inadequate blood-test monitoring at the start of the intervention was 47,413 (males: 23,073 [48.7%]; mean age: 60 years [standard deviation: 21]). At baseline, 95% of practices had rates of potentially hazardous prescribing (composite of 10 indicators) between 0.88% and 6.19%. The prevalence of potentially hazardous prescribing reduced by 27.9% (95% CI 20.3% to 36.8%, p < 0.001) at 24 weeks and by 40.7% (95% CI 29.1% to 54.2%, p < 0.001) at 12 months after introduction of SMASH. The rate of inadequate blood-test monitoring (composite of 2 indicators) reduced by 22.0% (95% CI 0.2% to 50.7%, p = 0.046) at 24 weeks; the change at 12 months (23.5%) was no longer significant (95% CI -4.5% to 61.6%, p = 0.127). After 12 months, 95% of practices had rates of potentially hazardous prescribing between 0.74% and 3.02%. Study limitations include the fact that practices were not randomised, and therefore unmeasured confounding may have influenced our findings.ConclusionsThe SMASH intervention was associated with reduced rates of potentially hazardous prescribing and inadequate blood-test monitoring in general practices. This reduction was sustained over 12 months after the start of the intervention for prescribing but not for monitoring of medication. There was a marked reduction in the variation in rates of hazardous prescribing between practices.

Project description:BACKGROUND:It is unknown whether interventions known to improve the healthcare response to domestic violence and abuse (DVA)-a global health concern-are effective outside of a trial. METHODS:An observational interrupted time series study in general practice. All registered women aged 16 and above were eligible for inclusion. In four implementation boroughs' general practices, there was face-to-face, practice-based, clinically relevant DVA training, a prompt in the electronic medical record, reminding clinicians to consider DVA, a simple referral pathway to a named advocate, ensuring direct access for women to specialist services, overseen by a national, health-focused DVA organisation, fostering best practice. The fifth comparator borough had only a session delivered by a local DVA specialist agency at community venues conveying information to clinicians. The primary outcome was the daily number of referrals received by DVA workers per 1000 women registered in a general practice, from 205 general practices, in all five northeast London boroughs. The secondary outcome was recorded new DVA cases in the electronic medical record in two boroughs. Data was analysed using an interrupted time series with a mixed effects Poisson regression model. RESULTS:In the 144 general practices in the four implementation boroughs, there was a significant increase in referrals received by DVA workers-global incidence rate ratio of 30.24 (95% CI 20.55 to 44.77, p?<?0.001). There was no increase in the 61 general practices in the other comparator borough (incidence rate ratio of 0.95, 95% CI 0.13 to 6.84, p?=?0.959). New DVA cases recorded significantly increased with an incident rate ratio of 1.27 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.48, p?<?0.002) in the implementation borough but not in the comparator borough (incidence rate ratio of 1.05, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.34, p?=?0.699). CONCLUSIONS:Implementing integrated referral routes, training and system-level support, guided by a national health-focused DVA organisation, outside of a trial setting, was effective and sustainable at scale, over four years (2012 to 2017) increasing referrals to DVA workers and new DVA cases recorded in electronic medical records.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Medical admissions must balance two potentially competing missions: to select those who will be successful medical students and clinicians and to increase the diversity of the medical school population and workforce. Many countries address this dilemma by reducing the heavy reliance on prior educational attainment, complementing this with other selection tools. However, evidence to what extent this shift in practice has actually widened access is conflicting. AIM:To examine if changes in medical school selection processes significantly impact on the composition of the student population. DESIGN AND SETTING:Observational study of medical students from 18 UK 5-year medical programmes who took the UK Clinical Aptitude Test from 2007 to 2014; detailed analysis on four schools. PRIMARY OUTCOME:Proportion of admissions to medical school for four target groups (lower socioeconomic classes, non-selective schooling, non-white and male). DATA ANALYSIS:Interrupted time-series framework with segmented regression was used to identify the impact of changes in selection practices in relation to invitation to interview to medical school. Four case study medical schools were used looking at admissions within for the four target groups. RESULTS:There were no obvious changes in the overall proportion of admissions from each target group over the 8-year period, averaging at 3.3% lower socioeconomic group, 51.5% non-selective school, 30.5% non-white and 43.8% male. Each case study school changed their selection practice in decision making for invite to interview during 2007-2014. Yet, this within-school variation made little difference locally, and changes in admission practices did not lead to any discernible change in the demography of those accepted into medical school. CONCLUSION:Although our case schools changed their selection procedures, these changes did not lead to any observable differences in their student populations. Increasing the diversity of medical students, and hence the medical profession, may require different, perhaps more radical, approaches to selection.

Project description:BackgroundUncontrolled infection and lockdown measures introduced in response have resulted in an unprecedented challenge for health systems internationally. Whether such unprecedented impact was due to lockdown itself and recedes when such measures are lifted is unclear. We assessed the short- and medium-term impacts of the first lockdown measures on hospital care for tracer non-COVID-19 conditions in England, Scotland and Wales across diseases, sexes, and socioeconomic and ethnic groups.MethodsWe used OpenSAFELY (for England), EAVEII (Scotland), and SAIL Databank (Wales) to extract weekly hospital admission rates for cancer, cardiovascular and respiratory conditions (excluding COVID-19) from the pre-pandemic period until 25/10/2020 and conducted a controlled interrupted time series analysis. We undertook stratified analyses and assessed admission rates over seven months during which lockdown restrictions were gradually lifted.FindingsOur combined dataset included 32 million people who contributed over 74 million person-years. Admission rates for all three conditions fell by 34.2% (Confidence Interval (CI): -43.0, -25.3) in England, 20.9% (CI: -27.8, -14.1) in Scotland, and 24.7% (CI: -36.7, -12.7) in Wales, with falls across every stratum considered. In all three nations, cancer-related admissions fell the most while respiratory-related admissions fell the least (e.g., rates fell by 40.5% (CI: -47.4, -33.6), 21.9% (CI: -35.4, -8.4), and 19.0% (CI: -30.6, -7.4) in England for cancer, cardiovascular-related, and respiratory-related admissions respectively). Unscheduled admissions rates fell more in the most than the least deprived quintile across all three nations. Some ethnic minority groups experienced greater falls in admissions (e.g., in England, unscheduled admissions fell by 9.5% (CI: -20.2, 1.2) for Whites, but 44.3% (CI: -71.0, -17.6), 34.6% (CI: -63.8, -5.3), and 25.6% (CI: -45.0, -6.3) for Mixed, Other and Black ethnic groups respectively). Despite easing of restrictions, the overall admission rates remained lower in England, Scotland, and Wales by 20.8%, 21.6%, and 22.0%, respectively when compared to the same period (August-September) during the pre-pandemic years. This corresponds to a reduction of 26.2, 23.8 and 30.2 admissions per 100,000 people in England, Scotland, and Wales respectively.InterpretationHospital care for non-COVID diseases fell substantially across England, Scotland, and Wales during the first lockdown, with reductions persisting for at least six months. The most deprived and minority ethnic groups were impacted more severely.FundingThis work was funded by the Medical Research Council as part of the Lifelong Health and Wellbeing study as part of National Core Studies (MC_PC_20030). SVK acknowledges funding from the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00022/2), and the Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office (SPHSU17). EAVE II is funded by the Medical Research Council (MR/R008345/1) with the support of BREATHE - The Health Data Research Hub for Respiratory Health (MC_PC_19004), which is funded through the UK Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund and delivered through Health Data Research UK. BG has received research funding from the NHS National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), the Wellcome Trust, Health Data Research UK, Asthma UK, the British Lung Foundation, and the Longitudinal Health and Wellbeing strand of the National Core Studies programme.