Digital health, cardiometabolic disease and ethnicity: an analysis of United Kingdom government policies from 2010 to 2022.

Recent health policies in the United Kingdom (UK) and internationally have focussed on digitisation of healthcare. We examined UK policies for evidence of government action addressing health inequalities and digital health, using cardiometabolic disease as an exemplar. Using a systematic search methodology, we identified 87 relevant policy documents published between 2010 and 2022. We found increasing emphasis on digital health, including for prevention, diagnosis and management of cardiometabolic disease. Several policies also focused on tackling health inequalities and improving digital access. The COVID-19 pandemic amplified inequalities. No policies addressed ethnic inequalities in digital health for cardiometabolic disease, despite high prevalence in minority ethnic communities. Our findings suggest that creating opportunities for digital inclusion and reduce longer-term health inequalities, will require future policies to focus on: the heterogeneity of ethnic groups; cross-sectoral disadvantages which contribute to disease burden and digital accessibility; and disease-specific interventions which lend themselves to culturally tailored solutions.

Ethnic health inequalities in the NHS

Improvement is urgently required "from board to ward”

Handling of the Covid-19 Pandemic and Its Effects on Bariatric Surgical Practice: Analysis of GENEVA Study Database.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to a worldwide suspension of bariatric and metabolic surgery (BMS) services. The current study analyses data on patterns of service delivery, recovery of practices, and protective measures taken during the COVID-19 pandemic by bariatric teams. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The current study is a subset analysis of the GENEVA study which was an international cohort study between 01/05/2020 and 31/10/2020. Data were specifically analysed regarding the timing of BMS suspension, patterns of service recovery, and precautionary measures deployed. RESULTS: A total of 527 surgeons from 439 hospitals in 64 countries submitted data regarding their practices and handling of the pandemic. Smaller hospitals (with less than 200 beds) were able to restart BMS programmes more rapidly (time to BMS restart 60.8 ± 38.9 days) than larger institutions (over 2000 beds) (81.3 ± 30.5 days) (p = 0.032). There was a significant difference in the time interval between cessation/reduction and restart of bariatric services between government-funded practices (97.1 ± 76.2 days), combination practices (84.4 ± 47.9 days), and private practices (58.5 ± 38.3 days) (p < 0.001). Precautionary measures adopted included patient segregation, utilisation of personal protective equipment, and preoperative testing. Following service recovery, 40% of the surgeons operated with a reduced capacity. Twenty-two percent gave priority to long waiters, 15.4% gave priority to uncontrolled diabetics, and 7.6% prioritised patients requiring organ transplantation. CONCLUSION: This study provides global, real-world data regarding the recovery of BMS services following the COVID-19 pandemic.

Frameworks for Implementation, Uptake, and Use of Cardiometabolic Disease-Related Digital Health Interventions in Ethnic Minority Populations: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Digital health interventions have become increasingly common across health care, both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Health inequalities, particularly with respect to ethnicity, may not be considered in frameworks that address the implementation of digital health interventions. We considered frameworks to include any models, theories, or taxonomies that describe or predict implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess how health inequalities are addressed in frameworks relevant to the implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions; health and ethnic inequalities; and interventions for cardiometabolic disease. METHODS: SCOPUS, PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and gray literature were searched to identify papers on frameworks relevant to the implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions; ethnically or culturally diverse populations and health inequalities; and interventions for cardiometabolic disease. We assessed the extent to which frameworks address health inequalities, specifically ethnic inequalities; explored how they were addressed; and developed recommendations for good practice. RESULTS: Of 58 relevant papers, 22 (38%) included frameworks that referred to health inequalities. Inequalities were conceptualized as society-level, system-level, intervention-level, and individual. Only 5 frameworks considered all levels. Three frameworks considered how digital health interventions might interact with or exacerbate existing health inequalities, and 3 considered the process of health technology implementation, uptake, and use and suggested opportunities to improve equity in digital health. When ethnicity was considered, it was often within the broader concepts of social determinants of health. Only 3 frameworks explicitly addressed ethnicity: one focused on culturally tailoring digital health interventions, and 2 were applied to management of cardiometabolic disease. CONCLUSIONS: Existing frameworks evaluate implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions, but to consider factors related to ethnicity, it is necessary to look across frameworks. We have developed a visual guide of the key constructs across the 4 potential levels of action for digital health inequalities, which can be used to support future research and inform digital health policies.

Ramadan is not associated with increased infection risk in Pakistani and Bangladeshi populations: Findings from controlled interrupted time series analysis of UK primary care data.

BACKGROUND: The effect of fasting on immunity is unclear. Prolonged fasting is thought to increase the risk of infection due to dehydration. This study describes antibiotic prescribing patterns before, during, and after Ramadan in a primary care setting within the Pakistani and Bangladeshi populations in the UK, most of whom are Muslims, compared to those who do not observe Ramadan. METHOD: Retrospective controlled interrupted time series analysis of electronic health record data from primary care practices. The study consists of two groups: Pakistanis/Bangladeshis and white populations. For each group, we constructed a series of aggregated, daily prescription data from 2007 to 2017 for the 30 days preceding, during, and after Ramadan, respectively. FINDINGS: Controlling for the rate in the white population, there was no evidence of increased antibiotic prescription in the Pakistani/Bangladeshi population during Ramadan, as compared to before Ramadan (IRR: 0.994; 95% CI: 0.988-1.001, p = 0.082) or after Ramadan (IRR: 1.006; 95% CI: 0.999-1.013, p = 0.082). INTERPRETATION: In this large, population-based study, we did not find any evidence to suggest that fasting was associated with an increased susceptibility to infection.

The clinical profile and associated mortality in people with and without diabetes with Coronavirus disease 2019 on admission to acute hospital services.

INTRODUCTION: To assess if in adults with COVID-19, whether those with diabetes and complications (DM+C) present with a more severe clinical profile and if that relates to increased mortality, compared to those with diabetes with no complications (DM-NC) and those without diabetes. METHODS: Service-level data was used from 996 adults with laboratory confirmed COVID-19 who presented to the Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, UK, from March to June 2020. All individuals were categorized into DM+C, DM-NC, and non-diabetes groups. Physiological and laboratory measurements in the first 5 days after admission were collated and compared among groups. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to evaluate associations between diabetes status and the risk of mortality. RESULTS: Among the 996 individuals, 104 (10.4%) were DM+C, 295 (29.6%) DM-NC and 597 (59.9%) non-diabetes. There were 309 (31.0%) in-hospital deaths documented, 40 (4.0% of total cohort) were DM+C, 99 (9.9%) DM-NC and 170 (17.0%) non-diabetes. Individuals with DM+C were more likely to present with high anion gap/metabolic acidosis, features of renal impairment, and low albumin/lymphocyte count than those with DM-NC or those without diabetes. There was no significant difference in mortality rates among the groups: compared to individuals without diabetes, the adjusted HRs were 1.39 (95% CI 0.95-2.03, p = 0.093) and 1.18 (95% CI 0.90-1.54, p = 0.226) in DM+C and DM-C, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Those with COVID-19 and DM+C presented with a more severe clinical and biochemical profile, but this did not associate with increased mortality in this study.

Differences in presentation, severity and management of DKA in type 1 and type 2 diabetes during the COVID-19 pandemic

Introduction COVID-19 infection in people with diabetes is associated with a disproportionately increased risk of complications and mortality.1 Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) is an acute complication of diabetes.2,3 Little is known about DKA in the presence of COVID-19 infection. DKA onset was defined as the presence of hyperglycaemia (serum glucose >11 mmol/L), ketosis (serum ketones >3 mmol/L or urine ketone >+++) and metabolic acidosis (pH <7.3 or bicarbonate <15 mmol/L) and DKA resolution as (ketone <0.6 mmol/L or urinary ketones <++ and pH >7.3 or bicarbonate >15 mmol/L) as per national guidelines in the UK.4 Results A total of 88 episodes were included in the final analysis (20 COVID-positive, 31 COVID-negative, 37 pre-COVID). There was no significant difference in the severity of DKA at presentation (median for COVID positive, COVID negative and pre-COVID groups): pH (7.15 vs 7.2 vs 7.2), bicarbonate (11.4 mmol/L vs 11 mmol/L vs 13.3 mmol/L), glucose (25.85 mmol/L vs 30.9 mmol/L vs 29.1 mmol/L), lactate (2.7 mmol/L vs 3.2 mmol/L vs 2.8 mmol/L), serum osmolality (314.6 mmol/L vs 323.1 mmol/L vs 316.2 mmol/L).

A UK nationwide study of people with type 1 diabetes admitted to hospital with COVID-19 infection.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this work was to describe the clinical characteristics of adults with type 1 diabetes admitted to hospital and the risk factors associated with severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) in the UK. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed using data collected through a nationwide audit of people admitted to hospital with diabetes and COVID-19, conducted by the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists from March to October 2020. Prespecified demographic, clinical, medication and laboratory data were collected from the electronic and paper medical record systems of the participating hospitals by local clinicians. The primary outcome of the study, severe COVID-19, was defined as death in hospital and/or admission to the adult intensive care unit (AICU). Logistic regression models were used to generate age-adjusted ORs. RESULTS: Forty UK centres submitted data. The final dataset included 196 adults who were admitted to hospital and had both type 1 diabetes and COVID-19 on admission (male sex 55%, white 70%, with mean [SD] age 62 [19] years, BMI 28.3 [7.3] kg/m2 and last recorded HbA1c 76 [31] mmol/mol [9.1 (5.0)%]). The prevalence of pre-existing microvascular disease and macrovascular disease was 56% and 39%, respectively. The prevalence of diabetic ketoacidosis on admission was 29%. A total of 68 patients (35%) died or were admitted to AICU. The proportions of people that died were 7%, 38% and 38% of those aged <55, 55-74 and ≥75 years, respectively. BMI, serum creatinine levels and having one or more microvascular complications were positively associated with the primary outcome after adjusting for age. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: In people with type 1 diabetes and COVID-19 who were admitted to hospital in the UK, higher BMI, poorer renal function and presence of microvascular complications were associated with greater risk of death and/or admission to AICU. Risk of severe COVID-19 is reassuringly very low in people with type 1 diabetes who are under 55 years of age without microvascular or macrovascular disease. IN PEOPLE WITH TYPE 1 DIABETES AND COVID-19 ADMITTED TO HOSPITAL IN THE UK, BMI AND ONE OR MORE MICROVASCULAR COMPLICATIONS HAD A POSITIVE ASSOCIATION AND LOW SERUM CREATINE LEVELS HAD A NEGATIVE ASSOCIATION WITH DEATH/ADMISSION TO INTENSIVE CARE UNIT AFTER ADJUSTING FOR AGE.

Effect of COVID-19 on the clinical course of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 in people with diabetes is associated with a disproportionately worse prognosis. DKA is an acute complication of diabetes with a mortality rate of approximately 0.67%. Little is known about the natural history of DKA in the presence of COVID-19. This study aimed to explore the effects of COVID-19 on presentation, clinical course and outcome in patients presenting with DKA. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: All patients treated for DKA between 1 March 2020 and 30 May 2020 were included. Patients were categorised as COVID-positive or COVID-negative based on the swab test. A pre-COVID group was established using data from 01 March 2019 to 30 May 2019 as external control. Data regarding demographics, diabetes type, pH, bicarbonate, lactate, glucose, DKA duration, complications and outcome were collected. RESULTS: A total of 88 DKA episodes were included in this study. There was no significant difference in the severity or duration of DKA between the three groups. COVID-positive T1DM were more hyperglycaemic on admission compared to COVID-negative and pre-COVID patients. There was an over representation of T2DM in COVID-positive patients with DKA than in pre-COVID or COVID-negative groups. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 appears to influence the natural history of DKA differently in T1DM and T2DM. Patients with T1DM and COVID-19 presented with more hyperglycaemia (60 mmol/L (35.9-60.0) vs 31.4 mmol/L (28.0-39.1) vs 24 mmol/L (20.2-33.75), respectively). Patients with T2DM were unusually presenting in DKA when infected with COVID-19 with greater ICU need and higher mortality rates. A collaborative, multi-centre study is needed to provide more definitive results.

Association of Metformin with Susceptibility to COVID-19 in People with Type 2 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Diabetes has emerged as an important risk factor for mortality from COVID-19. Metformin, the most commonly prescribed glucose-lowering agent, has been proposed to influence susceptibility to and outcomes of COVID-19 via multiple mechanisms. We investigated whether, in patients with diabetes, metformin is associated with susceptibility to COVID-19 and its outcomes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed a propensity score-matched cohort study with active comparators using a large UK primary care dataset. Adults with type 2 diabetes patients and a current prescription for metformin and other glucose-lowering agents (MF+) were compared to those with a current prescription for glucose-lowering agents that did not include metformin (MF-). Outcomes were confirmed COVID-19, suspected/confirmed COVID-19, and associated mortality. A negative control outcome analysis (back pain) was also performed. RESULTS: There were 29 558 and 10 271 patients in the MF+ and MF- groups, respectively, who met the inclusion criteria. In the propensity score-matched analysis, the adjusted hazard ratios for suspected/confirmed COVID-19, confirmed COVID-19, and COVID-19-related mortality were 0.85 (95% CI 0.67, 1.08), 0.80 (95% CI 0.49, 1.30), and 0.87 (95% CI 0.34, 2.20) respectively. The negative outcome control analysis did not suggest unobserved confounding. CONCLUSION: Current prescription of metformin was not associated with the risk of COVID-19 or COVID-19-related mortality. It is safe to continue prescribing metformin to improve glycemic control in patients with.

Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors and susceptibility to COVID-19: A population-based retrospective cohort study.

Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are widely prescribed in people with type 2 diabetes. We aimed to investigate whether SGLT2 inhibitor prescription is associated with COVID-19, when compared with an active comparator. We performed a propensity-score-matched cohort study with active comparators and a negative control outcome in a large UK-based primary care dataset. Participants prescribed SGLT2 inhibitors (n = 9948) and a comparator group prescribed dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors (n = 14 917) were followed up from January 30 to July 27, 2020. The primary outcome was confirmed or clinically suspected COVID-19. The incidence rate of COVID-19 was 19.7/1000 person-years among users of SGLT2 inhibitors and 24.7/1000 person-years among propensity-score-matched users of DPP-4 inhibitors. The adjusted hazard ratio was 0.92 (95% confidence interval 0.66 to 1.29), and there was no evidence of residual confounding in the negative control analysis. We did not observe an increased risk of COVID-19 in primary care amongst those prescribed SGLT2 inhibitors compared to DPP-4 inhibitors, suggesting that clinicians may safely use these agents in the everyday care of people with type 2 diabetes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The impact of ethnicity on clinical outcomes in COVID-19: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between ethnicity and COVID-19 is uncertain. We performed a systematic review to assess whether ethnicity has been reported in patients with COVID-19 and its relation to clinical outcomes. METHODS: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and PROSPERO for English-language citations on ethnicity and COVID-19 (1st December 2019-15th May 2020). We also reviewed: COVID-19 articles in NEJM, Lancet, BMJ, JAMA, clinical trial protocols, grey literature, surveillance data and preprint articles on COVID-19 in MedRxiv to evaluate if the association between ethnicity and clinical outcomes were reported and what they showed. PROSPERO:180654. FINDINGS: Of 207 articles in the database search, five reported ethnicity; two reported no association between ethnicity and mortality. Of 690 articles identified from medical journals, 12 reported ethnicity; three reported no association between ethnicity and mortality. Of 209 preprints, 34 reported ethnicity - 13 found Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) individuals had an increased risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 and 12 reported worse clinical outcomes, including ITU admission and mortality, in BAME patients compared to White patients. Of 12 grey literature reports, seven with original data reported poorer clinical outcomes in BAME groups compared to White groups. INTERPRETATION: Data on ethnicity in patients with COVID-19 in the published medical literature remains limited. However, emerging data from the grey literature and preprint articles suggest BAME individuals are at an increased risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to White individuals and also worse clinical outcomes from COVID-19. Further work on the role of ethnicity in the current pandemic is of urgent public health importance. FUNDING: NIHR.