Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
PLoS Med ; 20(4): e1004210, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2322955

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: While the United Kingdom National Health Service aimed to reduce social inequalities in the provision of joint replacement, it is unclear whether these gaps have reduced. We describe secular trends in the provision of primary hip and knee replacement surgery between social deprivation groups. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used the National Joint Registry to identify all hip and knee replacements performed for osteoarthritis from 2007 to 2017 in England. The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) 2015 was used to identify the relative level of deprivation of the patient living area. Multilevel negative binomial regression models were used to model the differences in rates of joint replacement. Choropleth maps of hip and knee replacement provision were produced to identify the geographical variation in provision by Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs). A total of 675,342 primary hip and 834,146 primary knee replacements were studied. The mean age was 70 years old (standard deviation: 9) with 60% and 56% of women undergoing hip and knee replacements, respectively. The overall rate of hip replacement increased from 27 to 36 per 10,000 person-years and knee replacement from 33 to 46. Inequalities of provision between the most (reference) and least affluent areas have remained constant for both joints (hip: rate ratio (RR) = 0.58, 95% confidence interval [0.56, 0.60] in 2007, RR = 0.59 [0.58, 0.61] in 2017; knee: RR = 0.82 [0.80, 0.85] in 2007, RR = 0.81 [0.80, 0.83] in 2017). For hip replacement, CCGs with the highest concentration of deprived areas had lower overall provision rates, and CCGs with very few deprived areas had higher provision rates. There was no clear pattern of provision inequalities between CCGs and deprivation concentration for knee replacement. Study limitations include the lack of publicly available information to explore these inequalities beyond age, sex, and geographical area. Information on clinical need for surgery or patient willingness to access care were unavailable. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that there were inequalities, which remained constant over time, especially in the provision of hip replacement, by degree of social deprivation. Providers of healthcare need to take action to reduce this unwarranted variation in provision of surgery.


Subject(s)
Osteoarthritis , State Medicine , Humans , Female , Aged , Cohort Studies , England/epidemiology , Social Deprivation , Registries
2.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 11(4)2023 Apr 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2303797

ABSTRACT

Vaccination reduces the risks related to infectious disease, especially among more vulnerable groups, such as older adults. The vaccines available to older adults in the UK through the government-funded programme currently include influenza, pneumococcal, shingles and COVID-19 vaccines. The purpose of the programme is disease prevention and improving wellbeing among the ageing population. Yet, the target population's views of the programme remain unknown. This paper aims to increase the understanding of older adults' perceptions of the vaccination programme available in the UK. A total of 13 online focus groups (56 informants) were carried out for this qualitative study. The findings indicate that getting vaccinated involves personal decision-making processes, which are influenced by previous experiences and interpersonal interactions. Factors related to the wider community and culture are less prominent in explaining vaccination decisions. However, opportunistic vaccination offers, a lack of information and a lack of opportunities to discuss vaccines, especially with healthcare professionals, are prominent factors. The study provides in-depth data about the rationale behind older adults' vaccination decisions in the UK. We recommend that the provision of information and opportunities to discuss vaccines and infectious disease be improved to enable older adults' to make better informed decisions regarding the vaccines available to them.

3.
Wellcome Open Res ; 2023.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2226219

ABSTRACT

ALSPAC is an ongoing population-based, observational study designed to investigate how genetic/environmental characteristics might influence the health/development of children and their parents. It has evolved to facilitate the measurement of many outcomes in the parental cohort. Pregnant women resident in Bristol, UK with expected dates of delivery between April 1991-December 1992 were eligible. 14,541 pregnancies were originally enrolled. Partners of the pregnant women were initially invited to take part by the women with formal enrolment of individuals since 2010. Data has been collected from 12,113 partners, with 3,807 formally enrolled. Data collected to date: 21 questionnaires, clinical follow up in 2012 (mean age: 53 years) and a family-based clinical follow-up currently ongoing (mean age: 63 years). Questionnaires asked about a wide range of environmental measures, physical/mental health and other phenotypic details including six questionnaires throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinical measures include anthropometrics, blood pressure, body composition, cardiovascular health and a fasting blood sample. DNA has been extracted with genome-wide data available on >3,000 partners and exomes on ~1500 trios. The data contributes to one of the most deeply phenotyped birth cohorts in the world, providing trios of data and multi-generational information, and is fully accessible through a managed access process.

4.
PLoS One ; 17(11): e0276781, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2117546

ABSTRACT

Hypertension appears to be one of the commonest comorbidities in COVID-19 patients, although whether hypertensive individuals have a higher risk of severe COVID-19 compared with non-hypertensives is unclear. It is also unclear whether the absolute level of systolic blood pressure, or the type of anti-hypertensive medication is related to this risk. Analyses were conducted using data from the UK Biobank and linked health records. Logistic regression models were fitted to assess the impact of hypertension, systolic blood pressure (SBP) and medications on the risk of severe COVID-19. 16,134 individuals tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus, 22% (n = 3,584) developed severe COVID-19 and 40% (n = 6,517) were hypertensive. Hypertension was associated with 22% higher odds of severe COVID-19 (Odds ratio (OR) 1.22; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12, 1.33), compared with normotension after adjusting for confounding variables. In those taking anti-hypertensive medications, elevated SBP showed a dose-response relationship with severe COVID-19 (150-159mmHg versus 120-129mmHg (OR 1.91; 95% CI 1.44, 2.53), >180+mmHg versus 120-129mmHg (OR 1.93; 95% CI 1.06, 3.51)). SBP <120mmHg was associated with greater odds of severe COVID-19 (OR 1.40; 95% CI 1.11, 1.78). Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin-II receptor blockers were not associated with altered risk of severe COVID-19. Hypertension is an important risk factor for COVID-19. A better understanding of the underlying mechanisms is warranted in case of more severe strains or other viruses in the future.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hypertension , Humans , Antihypertensive Agents/adverse effects , COVID-19/epidemiology , Biological Specimen Banks , Hypertension/complications , Hypertension/drug therapy , Hypertension/epidemiology , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/adverse effects , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies
5.
National Joint Registry, London ; 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2045000

ABSTRACT

This document reports the numbers of prostheses recorded and reported to the NJR between 1 January and 31 December 2020. The tables show volumes of components as they have been entered into the registry, regardless of construct. The procedure counts in this document are presented without adjustment and may vary from counts found in the corresponding main NJR Annual Report analysis. If a procedure has been submitted with missing implant information this will also cause numbers to differ. Procedure counts below four have been suppressed. Components are listed and described according to the current classifications used in the registry. It must be noted that due to COVID-19, the ratio of revision to primary procedures increased in 2020 and this may affect the relative changes in the types and brands of implants used in comparison to previous years. As this document was not published for 2019 Annual Report data, comparison has been made with the 2018 Annual Report data.

6.
J Neurol ; 269(1): 493-503, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1358100

ABSTRACT

As a result of significant recent scientific investment, the range of vaccines available for COVID-19 prevention continues to expand and uptake is increasing globally. Although initial trial safety data have been generally reassuring, a number of adverse events, including vaccine induced thrombosis and thrombocytopenia (VITT), have come to light which have the potential to undermine the success of the vaccination program. However, it can be difficult to interpret available data and put these into context and to communicate this effectively. In this review, we discuss contemporary methodologies employed to investigate possible associations between vaccination and adverse neurological outcomes and why determining causality can be challenging. We demonstrate these issues by discussing relevant historical exemplars and explore the relevance for the current pandemic and vaccination program. We also discuss challenges in understanding and communicating such risks to clinicians and the general population within the context of the 'infodemic' facilitated by the Internet and other media.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Infodemic , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccines/adverse effects
7.
BMJ Open ; 11(5): e049763, 2021 05 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1236464

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Substantial variation in the delivery of hip fracture care, and patient outcomes persists between hospitals, despite established UK national standards and guidelines. Patients' outcomes are partly explained by patient-level risk factors, but it is hypothesised that organisational-level factors account for the persistence of unwarranted variation in outcomes. The mixed-methods REducing unwarranted variation in the Delivery of high qUality hip fraCture services in England and Wales (REDUCE) study, aims to determine key organisational factors to target to improve patient care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Quantitative analysis will assess the outcomes of patients treated at 172 hospitals in England and Wales (2016-2019) using National Hip Fracture Database data combined with English Hospital Episodes Statistics; Patient Episode Database for Wales; Civil Registration (deaths) and multiple organisational-level audits to characterise each service provider. Statistical analyses will identify which organisational factors explain variation in patient outcomes, and typify care pathways with high-quality consistent patient outcomes. Documentary analysis of 20 anonymised British Orthopaedic Association hospital-initiated peer-review reports, and qualitative interviews with staff from four diverse UK hospitals providing hip fracture care, will identify barriers and facilitators to care delivery. The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a major challenge to the resilience of services and interviews will explore strategies used to adapt and innovate. This system-wide understanding will inform the development, in partnership with key national stakeholders, of an 'Implementation Toolkit' to inform and improve commissioning and delivery of hip fracture services. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved: quantitative study by London, City and East Research Ethics Committee (20/LO/0101); and qualitative study by Faculty of Health Sciences University of Bristol Research Ethics Committee (Ref: 108284), National Health Service (NHS) Health Research Authority (20/HRA/71) and each NHS Trust provided Research and Development approval. Findings will be disseminated through scientific conferences, peer-reviewed journals and online workshops.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , State Medicine , England , Humans , London , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Wales
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL