Dataset Information

What gets recorded, counts: dementia recording in primary care compared with a specialist database.

ABSTRACT:

Background

databases of electronic health records are powerful tools for dementia research, but data can be influenced by incomplete recording. We examined whether people with dementia recorded in a specialist database (from a mental health and dementia care service) differ from those recorded in primary care.

Methods

a retrospective cohort study of the population covered by Lambeth DataNet (primary care electronic records) between 2007 and 2019. Documentation of dementia diagnosis in primary care coded data and linked records in a specialist database (Clinical Records Interactive Search) were compared.

Results

3,859 people had dementia documented in primary care codes and 4,266 in the specialist database, with 2,886/5,239 (55%) documented in both sources. Overall, 55% were labelled as having Alzheimer's dementia and 29% were prescribed dementia medication, but these proportions were significantly higher in those documented in both sources. The cohort identified from the specialist database were less likely to live in a care home (prevalence ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.63-0.85), have multimorbidity (0.87, 0.77-0.98) or consult frequently (0.91, 0.88-0.95) than those identified through primary care codes, although mortality did not differ (0.98, 0.91-1.06).

Discussion

there is under-recording of dementia diagnoses in both primary care and specialist databases. This has implications for clinical care and for generalizability of research. Our results suggest that using a mental health database may under-represent those patients who have more frailty, reflecting differential referral to mental health services, and demonstrating how the patient pathways are an important consideration when undertaking database studies.

SUBMITTER: Davis KAS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8581382 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAntidepressants may be used to manage a number of conditions in children and young people including depression, anxiety, and obsessive-compulsive disorder. UK guidelines for the treatment of depression in children and young people recommend that antidepressants should only be initiated following assessment and diagnosis by a child and adolescent psychiatrist. The aim of this study was to summarise visits to mental health specialists and indications recorded around the time of antidepressant initiation in children and young people in UK primary care.MethodsThe study used linked English primary care electronic health records and Hospital Episode Statistics secondary care data. The study included 5-17-year-olds first prescribed antidepressants between January 2006 and December 2017. Records of visits to paediatric or psychiatric specialists and potential indications (from a pre-specified list) were extracted. Events were counted if recorded less than 12?months before or 6?months after the first antidepressant prescription. Results were stratified by first antidepressant type (all, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), tricyclic and related antidepressants) and by age group (5-11?years, 12-17?years).ResultsIn total, 33,031 5-17-year-olds were included. Of these, 12,149 (37%) had a record of visiting a paediatrician or a psychiatric specialist in the specified time window. The majority of recorded visits (7154, 22%) were to paediatricians. Of those prescribed SSRIs, 5463/22,130 (25%) had a record of visiting a child and adolescent psychiatrist. Overall, 17,972 (54%) patients had a record of at least one of the pre-specified indications. Depression was the most frequently recorded indication (12,501, 38%), followed by anxiety (4155, 13%).ConclusionsThe results suggest many children and young people are being prescribed antidepressants without the recommended involvement of a relevant specialist. These findings may justify both greater training for GPs in child and adolescent mental health and greater access to specialist care and non-pharmacological treatments. Further research is needed to explore factors that influence how and why GPs prescribe antidepressants to children and young people and the real-world practice barriers to adherence to clinical guidelines.

Project description:BackgroundIn patients with serious illness, use of specialist palliative care may result in improved quality of life, patient and caregiver satisfaction and advance care planning, as well as lower health care utilization. However, evidence of efficacy is limited for patients with dementia, particularly in the setting of an acute hospitalization.ObjectiveTo determine whether implementation of hospital-based specialist palliative care was associated with differences in treatment intensity outcomes for hospitalized patients with dementia.DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingFifty-one hospitals in New York State that either did or did not implement a palliative care program between 2008 and 2014. Hospitals that consistently had a palliative care program during the study period were excluded.ParticipantsHospitalized patients with dementia.MeasurementsThe primary outcome of this study was discharge to hospice from an acute hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, use of mechanical ventilation and dialysis, and days in intensive care. Difference-in-difference analyses were performed using multilevel regression to assess the association between implementing a palliative care program and outcomes, while adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics and time trends.ResultsDuring the study period, 82,118 patients with dementia (mean (SD) age, 83.04 (10.04), 51,170 (62.21%) female) underwent an acute hospitalization, of which 41,227 (50.27%) received care in hospitals that implemented a palliative care program. In comparison to patients who received care in hospitals without palliative care, patients with dementia who received care in hospitals after the implementation of palliative care were more 35% likely to be discharged to hospice (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.35 (1.19-1.51), P < .001). No meaningful differences in secondary outcomes were observed.ConclusionImplementation of a specialist palliative care program was associated with an increase in discharge to hospice following acute hospitalization in patients with dementia.

Project description:Dementia is one of the most disabling and burdensome diseases. Incontinence in people with dementia is distressing, adds to carer burden, and influences decisions to relocate people to care homes. Successful and safe management of incontinence in people with dementia presents additional challenges. The aim of this study was to investigate the rates of first diagnosis in primary care of urinary and faecal incontinence among people aged 60-89 with dementia, and the use of medication or indwelling catheters for urinary incontinence.We extracted data on 54,816 people aged 60-89 with dementia and an age-gender stratified sample of 205,795 people without dementia from 2001 to 2010 from The Health Improvement Network (THIN), a United Kingdom primary care database. THIN includes data on patients and primary care consultations but does not identify care home residents. Rate ratios were adjusted for age, sex, and co-morbidity using multilevel Poisson regression. The rates of first diagnosis per 1,000 person-years at risk (95% confidence interval) for urinary incontinence in the dementia cohort, among men and women, respectively, were 42.3 (40.9-43.8) and 33.5 (32.6-34.5). In the non-dementia cohort, the rates were 19.8 (19.4-20.3) and 18.6 (18.2-18.9). The rates of first diagnosis for faecal incontinence in the dementia cohort were 11.1 (10.4-11.9) and 10.1 (9.6-10.6). In the non-dementia cohort, the rates were 3.1 (2.9-3.3) and 3.6 (3.5-3.8). The adjusted rate ratio for first diagnosis of urinary incontinence was 3.2 (2.7-3.7) in men and 2.7 (2.3-3.2) in women, and for faecal incontinence was 6.0 (5.1-7.0) in men and 4.5 (3.8-5.2) in women. The adjusted rate ratio for pharmacological treatment of urinary incontinence was 2.2 (1.4-3.7) for both genders, and for indwelling urinary catheters was 1.6 (1.3-1.9) in men and 2.3 (1.9-2.8) in women.Compared with those without a dementia diagnosis, those with a dementia diagnosis have approximately three times the rate of diagnosis of urinary incontinence, and more than four times the rate of faecal incontinence, in UK primary care. The clinical management of urinary incontinence in people with dementia with medication and particularly the increased use of catheters is concerning and requires further investigation. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.