Dataset Information

Outcomes of COVID-19-positive acute coronary syndrome patients: A multisource electronic healthcare records study from England.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Patients with underlying cardiovascular disease and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection are at increased risk of morbidity and mortality.

Objectives

This study was designed to characterize the presenting profile and outcomes of patients hospitalized with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and COVID-19 infection.

Methods

This observational cohort study was conducted using multisource data from all acute NHS hospitals in England. All consecutive patients hospitalized with diagnosis of ACS with or without COVID-19 infection between 1 March and 31 May 2020 were included. The primary outcome was in-hospital and 30-day mortality.

Results

A total of 12 958 patients were hospitalized with ACS during the study period, of which 517 (4.0%) were COVID-19-positive and were more likely to present with non-ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction. The COVID-19 ACS group were generally older, Black Asian and Minority ethnicity, more comorbid and had unfavourable presenting clinical characteristics such as elevated cardiac troponin, pulmonary oedema, cardiogenic shock and poor left ventricular systolic function compared with the non-COVID-19 ACS group. They were less likely to receive an invasive coronary angiography (67.7% vs 81.0%), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (30.2% vs 53.9%) and dual antiplatelet medication (76.3% vs 88.0%). After adjusting for all the baseline differences, patients with COVID-19 ACS had higher in-hospital (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 3.27; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.41-4.42) and 30-day mortality (aOR: 6.53; 95% CI: 5.1-8.36) compared to patients with the non-COVID-19 ACS.

Conclusion

COVID-19 infection was present in 4% of patients hospitalized with an ACS in England and is associated with lower rates of guideline-recommended treatment and significant mortality hazard.

SUBMITTER: Rashid M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8013521 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Electronic Healthcare Records (EHRs) are created to capture summaries of care and contact made to healthcare services. EHRs offer a means to analyse admissions to hospitals for epidemiological research. In the United Kingdom (UK), England, Scotland and Wales maintain separate data stores, which are administered and managed exclusively by devolved Government. This independence results in harmonisation challenges, not least lack of uniformity, making it difficult to evaluate care, diagnoses and treatment across the UK. To overcome this lack of uniformity, it is important to develop methods to integrate EHRs to provide a multi-nation dataset of health.To develop and describe a method which integrates the EHRs of Armed Forces personnel in England, Scotland and Wales based on variable commonality to produce a multi-nation dataset of secondary health care.An Armed Forces cohort was used to extract and integrate three EHR datasets, using commonality as the linkage point. This was achieved by evaluating and combining variables which shared the same characteristics. EHRs representing Accident and Emergency (A&E), Admitted Patient Care (APC) and Outpatient care were combined to create a patient-level history spanning three nations. Patient-level EHRs were examined to ascertain admission differences, common diagnoses and record completeness.A total of 6,336 Armed Forces personnel were matched, of which 5,460 personnel had 7,510 A&E visits, 9,316 APC episodes and 45,005 Outpatient appointments. We observed full completeness for diagnoses in APC, whereas Outpatient admissions were sparsely coded; with 88% of diagnoses coded as "Unknown/unspecified cause of morbidity". In addition, A&E records were sporadically coded; we found five coding systems for identifying reason for admission.At present, EHRs are designed to monitor the cost of treatment, enable administrative oversight, and are not currently suited to epidemiological research. However, only small changes may be needed to take advantage of what should be a highly cost-effective means of delivering important research for the benefit of the NHS.

Project description:BackgroundThere is increasing awareness of the importance of patient activation (knowledge, skills, and confidence for managing one's health and health care) among clinicians and policy makers, with emerging evidence showing higher levels of patient activation are associated with better health outcomes and experiences of health care. This study aimed to examine the association between patient activation and a wide range of specific types of healthcare service utilisation in England, including GP and non-GP primary care, elective and emergency hospital admissions, outpatient visits, and attendances at the Accident and Emergency department.MethodsData were derived from linked electronic patient records collected by primary and secondary healthcare providers in North West London between January 2016 and November 2019. Our analyses focused on adults (18+) with a valid Patient Activation Measure (PAM). After excluding patients with missing data, we had an analytical sample of 15,877 patients. Data were analysed using negative binomial regression and logistic regression models depending on the outcome variable.ResultsPatients had a mean activation score of 55.1 and a standard deviation (SD) of 17.7 (range: 0-100). They had an average of 5.4 GP visits (SD = 8.0), 26.8 non-GP visits (SD = 23.4) and 6.0 outpatient attendances (SD = 7.9) within a one-year follow-up. About 24.7% patients had at least one elective admission, 24.2% had one or more emergency admissions, and 42.3% had one or more A&E attendance within the follow-up. After accounting for a number of demographic and health factors, we found a linear (or proximately linear) association between patient activation and the number of GP visits, emergency admissions and A&E attendance, but a non-linear relationship between patient activation and the number of non-GP visits, the number of outpatient attendance and elective inpatient admission.ConclusionsThis study has provided strong empirical evidence from England linking patient activation with healthcare service utilisation. It suggests the value of supporting patient activation as a potential pathway to ease the burden of healthcare system.

Project description:IntroductionDisease registers and electronic health records are valuable resources for disease surveillance and research but can be limited by variation in data quality over time. Quality may be limited in terms of the accuracy of clinical information, of the internal linkage that supports person-based analysis of most administrative datasets, or by errors in linkage between multiple datasets.ObjectivesBy linking the National Down Syndrome Cytogenetic Register (NDSCR) to Hospital Episode Statistics for England (HES), we aimed to assess the quality of each and establish a consistent approach for analysis of trends in prevalence of Down's syndrome among live births in England.MethodsProbabilistic record linkage of NDSCR to HES for the period 1998-2013 was supported by linkage of babies to mothers within HES. Comparison of prevalence estimates in England were made using NDSCR only, HES data only, and linked data. Capture-recapture analysis and quantitative bias analysis were used to account for potential errors, including false positive diagnostic codes, unrecorded diagnoses, and linkage error.ResultsAnalyses of single-source data indicated increasing live birth prevalence of Down's Syndrome, particularly in the analysis of HES. Linked data indicated a contrastingly stable prevalence of 12.3 (plausible range: 11.6-12.7) cases per 10 000 live births.ConclusionCase ascertainment in NDSCR improved slightly over time, creating a picture of slowly increasing prevalence. The emerging epidemic suggested by HES primarily reflects improving linkage within HES (assignment of unique patient identifiers to hospital episodes). Administrative data are valuable but trends should be interpreted with caution, and with assessment of data quality over time. Data linkage with quantitative bias analysis can provide more robust estimation and, in this case, stronger evidence that prevalence is not increasing. Routine linkage of administrative and register data can enhance the value of each.

Project description:BackgroundDrug-related adverse events remain an important cause of morbidity and mortality and impose huge burden on healthcare costs. Routinely collected electronic healthcare data give a good snapshot of how drugs are being used in 'real-world' settings.ObjectiveTo describe a strategy that identifies potentially drug-induced acute myocardial infarction (AMI) from a large international healthcare data network.MethodsPost-marketing safety surveillance was conducted in seven population-based healthcare databases in three countries (Denmark, Italy, and the Netherlands) using anonymised demographic, clinical, and prescription/dispensing data representing 21,171,291 individuals with 154,474,063 person-years of follow-up in the period 1996-2010. Primary care physicians' medical records and administrative claims containing reimbursements for filled prescriptions, laboratory tests, and hospitalisations were evaluated using a three-tier triage system of detection, filtering, and substantiation that generated a list of drugs potentially associated with AMI. Outcome of interest was statistically significant increased risk of AMI during drug exposure that has not been previously described in current literature and is biologically plausible.ResultsOverall, 163 drugs were identified to be associated with increased risk of AMI during preliminary screening. Of these, 124 drugs were eliminated after adjustment for possible bias and confounding. With subsequent application of criteria for novelty and biological plausibility, association with AMI remained for nine drugs ('prime suspects'): azithromycin; erythromycin; roxithromycin; metoclopramide; cisapride; domperidone; betamethasone; fluconazole; and megestrol acetate.LimitationsAlthough global health status, co-morbidities, and time-invariant factors were adjusted for, residual confounding cannot be ruled out.ConclusionA strategy to identify potentially drug-induced AMI from electronic healthcare data has been proposed that takes into account not only statistical association, but also public health relevance, novelty, and biological plausibility. Although this strategy needs to be further evaluated using other healthcare data sources, the list of 'prime suspects' makes a good starting point for further clinical, laboratory, and epidemiologic investigation.

Project description:Background: People who use illicit opioids such as heroin have substantial health needs, but there are few longitudinal studies of general health and healthcare in this population. Most research to date has focused on a narrow set of outcomes, including overdoses and HIV or hepatitis infections. We developed and validated a cohort using UK primary care electronic health records (Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD and AURUM databases) to facilitate research into healthcare use by people who use illicit opioid use (HUPIO). Methods: Participants are patients in England with primary care records indicating a history of illicit opioid use. We identified codes including prescriptions of opioid agonist therapies (methadone and buprenorphine) and clinical observations such as 'heroin dependence'. We constructed a cohort of patients with at least one of these codes and aged 18-64 at cohort entry, with follow-up between January 1997 and March 2020. We validated the cohort by comparing patient characteristics and mortality rates to other cohorts of people who use illicit opioids, with different recruitment methods. Results: Up to March 2020, the HUPIO cohort included 138,761 patients with a history of illicit opioid use. Demographic characteristics and all-cause mortality were similar to existing cohorts: 69% were male; the median age at index for patients in CPRD AURUM (the database with more included participants) was 35.3 (interquartile range 29.1-42.6); the average age of new cohort entrants increased over time; 76% had records indicating current tobacco smoking; patients disproportionately lived in deprived neighbourhoods; and all-cause mortality risk was 6.6 (95% CI 6.5-6.7) times the general population of England. Conclusions: Primary care data offer new opportunities to study holistic health outcomes and healthcare of this population. The large sample enables investigation of rare outcomes, whilst the availability of linkage to external datasets allows investigation of hospital use, cancer treatment, and mortality.