Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Montrer: 20 | 50 | 100
Résultats 1 - 4 de 4
Filtre
Ajouter des filtres

Base de données
Type de document
Gamme d'année
1.
medrxiv; 2023.
Preprint Dans Anglais | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2023.11.08.23298275

Résumé

For over half a century, life expectancy in Eastern European (former communist) countries has been appreciably lower than in Western Europe, although this difference has been narrowing since 2000. We investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on these differences. The pandemic reversed the recent convergence and widened the gap to levels observed more than two decades ago (7.9 years for males and 4.9 for females in 2021). Moreover, the trajectory of excess mortality in the pandemic differed between East and West, with the first major peaks in Eastern Europe occurring on average six months after the first peaks seen in Western countries. Despite this, the East suffered greater losses in life expectancy, especially in 2021. This was due to larger relative mortality increases in the East rather than greater frailty of the Eastern European populations as indexed by higher pre-pandemic mortality levels. East-West differences in life expectancy losses in 2021 were substantially explained by COVID-19 vaccination, which together with trust in government accounted for half the gap. We conclude that the East-West differences in life expectancy losses are associated with structural and psychosocial traits that have their roots in the communist era. This includes differences in the connectivity of populations (which drives the differences in timing), as well as profound contrasts in levels of trust in science, authorities, and their capacity to enforce lockdowns and other regulatory measures (driving the huge differences in excess mortality from autumn 2020 onwards).


Sujets)
COVID-19
2.
medrxiv; 2021.
Preprint Dans Anglais | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2021.07.07.21253295

Résumé

Background: Residents in care homes have been severely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. We describe trends in risk of mortality among care home residents compared to residents in private homes in England. Methods: On behalf of NHS England, we used OpenSAFELY-TPP, an analytics platform running across the linked electronic health records of approximately a third of the English population, to calculate monthly age-standardised risks of death due to all causes and COVID-19 among adults aged >=65 years between 1/2/2019 and 31/03/2021. Care home residents were identified using linkage to the Care and Quality Commission. Findings: We included 4,329,078 people aged 65 years or older on the 1st of February 2019, 2.2% of whom were classified as residing in a care or nursing home. Age-standardised mortality risks were approximately 10 times higher among care home residents compared to non-residents in February 2019 residents (CMF = 10.59, 95%CI = 9.51, 11.81 among women, CMF = 10.82, 95%CI = 9.89, 11.84 among men). This increased to more than 17 times in April 2020 (CMF = 17.52, 95%CI = 16.38, 18.74 among women, CMF = 18.12, 95%CI = 17.17, 19.12 among men) before returning to pre-pandemic levels in June 2020. CMFs did not increase during the second wave, despite a rise in the absolute age-standardised COVID-19 mortality risks. Interpretation: The first COVID-19 wave had a disproportionate impact on care home residents in England compared to older private home residents. A degree of immunity, improved protective measures or changes in the underlying frailty of the populations may explain the lack of an increase in the relative mortality risks during the second wave. The care home population should be prioritised for measures aimed at controlling the spread of COVID-19.


Sujets)
COVID-19 , Mort
3.
medrxiv; 2021.
Preprint Dans Anglais | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2021.06.04.21258344

Résumé

Objectives: Excess mortality captures the total effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on mortality and is not affected by mis-specification of cause of death. We aimed to describe how health and demographic factors have been associated with excess mortality during the pandemic. Design: Time-series analysis. Setting: UK primary care data from practices contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink on July 31st 2020. Participants: We constructed a time-series dataset including 9,635,613 adults ([≥]40 years old) who were actively registered at the general practice during the study period. Main outcome measures: We extracted weekly numbers of deaths between March 2015 and July 2020, stratified by individual-level factors. Excess mortality during wave 1 of the UK pandemic (5th March to 27th May 2020) compared to pre-pandemic was estimated using seasonally adjusted negative binomial regression models. Relative rates of death for a range of factors were estimated before and during wave 1 by including interaction terms. Results: All-cause mortality increased by 43% (95% CI 40%-47%) during wave 1 compared with pre-pandemic. Changes to the relative rate of death associated with most socio-demographic and clinical characteristics were small during wave 1 compared with pre-pandemic. However, the mortality rate associated with dementia markedly increased (RR for dementia vs no dementia pre-pandemic: 3.5, 95% CI 3.4-3.5; RR during wave 1: 5.1, 4.87-5.28); a similar pattern was seen for learning disabilities (RR pre-pandemic: 3.6, 3.4-3.5; during wave 1: 4.8, 4.4-5.3), for Black or South Asian ethnicity compared to white, and for London compared to other regions. Conclusions: The first UK COVID-19 wave appeared to amplify baseline mortality risk by a relatively constant factor for most population subgroups. However disproportionate increases in mortality were seen for those with dementia, learning disabilities, non-white ethnicity, or living in London.


Sujets)
COVID-19 , Incapacités d'apprentissage , Démence , Mort
4.
medrxiv; 2020.
Preprint Dans Anglais | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2020.04.21.20073049

Résumé

Background. Reporting of daily hospital COVID-19 deaths in the UK are promoted by the government and scientific advisers alike as a key metric for assessing the progress in the control of the epidemic. These data, however, have certain limitations, among which one of the most significant concerns the fact that the daily totals span deaths that have occurred between 1 and 10 days or more in the past. Data and methods. We obtained daily data published published by NHS England up to and including April 25 in the form of Excel spreadsheets in which deaths counts are presented by date of death according to age and region. Simple descriptive analyses were conducted and presented in graphical and tabular form which were aimed at illustrating the biases inherent in focussing on daily counts regardless of when the deaths occurred. We then looked at how a less biased picture could be obtained by looking at trends in death counts stratifying by individual period of delay in days between occurrence of death and when the death was included in the daily announcement. Findings. The number of hospital COVID-19 deaths announced daily overestimates the maximum number of deaths actually occurring so far in the epidemic in the UK, and also obscures the pattern of decline in deaths. Taking account of reporting delays suggests that for England as a whole a peak in hospital COVID-19 deaths may have been reached on April 8 with a subsequent gradual decline suggested. The same peak is also seen among those aged 60-79 and 80+, although there is slightly shallower decline in the oldest age group (80+ years). Among those aged 40-59 years a later peak on April 11 is evident. London shows a peak on April 8 and a clearer and steeper pattern of subsequent decline compared to England as a whole. Interpretation. Analyses of mortality trends must take account of delay, and in communication with the public more emphasis should be placed on looking at trends based on deaths that occurred 5 or more days prior to the announcement day. The slightly weaker decline seen at age 80+ may reflect increased hospitalisation of people from care homes, whereas the later peak under the age of 60 years may reflect the higher proportions at these younger ages being admitted to critical care resulting in an extension of life of several days.


Sujets)
COVID-19 , Mort
SÉLECTION CITATIONS
Détails de la recherche