The impact of COVID-19 restrictions on acute hospital presentations due to alcohol-related harm in Waitemata Auckland, New Zealand.

AIMS: New Zealand's public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic has largely been considered successful, although there have been concerns surrounding the potential harms of the lockdown restrictions enforced, including alteration of alcohol consumption. New Zealand utilised a four-tiered alert level system of lockdowns and restrictions, with Level 4 denoting strict lockdown. This study aimed to compare alcohol-related hospital presentations during these periods with corresponding calendar-matched dates from the preceding year. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective case-controlled analysis of all alcohol-related hospital presentations between 1 January 2019 to 2 December 2021 and compared COVID-19 restriction periods to corresponding calendar-matched pre-pandemic periods. RESULTS: A total of 3,722 and 3,479 alcohol-related acute hospital presentations occurred during the four COVID-19 restriction levels and corresponding control periods respectively. Alcohol-related presentations accounted for a greater proportion of all admissions during COVID-19 Alert Levels 3 and 1 than the respective control periods (both p⁢0.05), but not during Levels 4 and 2 (both p>0.30). Acute mental and behavioural disorders accounted for a greater proportion of alcohol-related presentations during Alert Levels 4 and 3 (both p≤0.02), although alcohol dependence was present in a lower proportion of presentations during Alert Levels 4, 3, and 2 (all p⁢0.01). There was no difference in acute medical conditions including hepatitis and pancreatitis during all alert levels (all p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Alcohol-related presentations were unchanged compared to matched control periods during the strictest level of lockdown, although acute mental and behavioural disorders accounted for a greater proportion of alcohol-related admissions during this period. New Zealand appears to have avoided the general trend of increased alcohol-related harms seen internationally during the COVID-19 pandemic and its lockdown restrictions.

Underuse of beta-blockers by patients with COPD and co-morbid acute coronary syndrome: A nationwide follow-up study in New Zealand.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Clinical guidelines recommend the use of beta-blockers and other cardiovascular prevention drugs in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Studies in several countries have found that beta-blockers are underused in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and co-morbid heart disease, although most have only examined use in subgroups of patients. We undertook a nationwide follow-up study in New Zealand to describe the use of beta-blockers and other cardiovascular prevention drugs in patients with COPD and ACS. METHODS: National health and pharmaceutical dispensing data were used to derive the study cohort, identify patients who were admitted to hospital with ACS and/or heart failure before cohort entry and during follow-up, and ascertain drug use. RESULTS: The study cohort included 83 435 patients aged ≥45 years, with 290 400 person-years of follow-up. Among 2637 patients with ≥1 ACS admission during follow-up, only 56.6% received a beta-blocker in the 6 months following the first admission, while 87.7% and 81%, respectively, received aspirin and a statin. Patients with higher COPD severity were less likely to receive a beta-blocker than those with lower severity, as were those with no history of previous ACS and/or heart failure. CONCLUSION: Use of beta-blockers following an ACS admission was much lower than expected based on the findings of general audits of ACS management in New Zealand. Along with the higher proportions using aspirin and statins, and the differences in beta-blocker dispensing by COPD severity, this suggests a particular reluctance to prescribe beta-blockers to patients with COPD.

Co-prescribing of contraindicated and use-with-caution drugs in a national cohort of new users of simvastatin: how well are prescribing guidelines followed?

AIM: To describe the use of contraindicated and use-with-caution medicines among new users of simvastatin. METHODS: We used information from Ministry of Health national datasets to establish a cohort of all patients aged >18 years who initiated simvastatin use between January 2006 and December 2013 (n=349,371). We estimated the cumulative incidences of the first dispensing of contraindicated and use-with-caution medicines during simvastatin use, and explored factors associated with co-prescription, using Kaplan-Meir and Cox regression methods, respectively. RESULTS: Eleven percent and 16% of patients were dispensed a contraindicated and use-with-caution medicine, respectively, during the first two years of simvastatin use; by seven years, the figures were 17% and 26%. Thirty-six percent of patients were co-prescribed a contraindicated medicine on >1 occasion; the corresponding proportion for use-with-caution medicines was 84%. For a substantial proportion of those co-prescribed a use-with-caution medicine, the concomitant daily dose of simvastatin exceeded the maximum dose recommended at the time of prescribing. In the majority of cases, the prescriber of simvastatin and the contraindicated or use-with-caution medicine were the same. Co-prescribing of contraindicated medicines varied by sex, age, ethnicity and comorbidity. CONCLUSIONS: The prescription of contraindicated and use-with-caution drugs to patients taking simvastatin is not uncommon in New Zealand.