Recruitment and Consent in an observational study.

OBJECTIVE: The study sought to explore the consent rate and associated potential bias across a cohort in a large longitudinal population based study. RESEARCH DESIGN: Data were taken from a study designed to examine the effects of the reintroduction of community water fluoridation on children's oral health over a five-year period. Children were recruited from a fluoridated and non-fluoridated area in Cumbria, referred to as Group 1 and Group 2. RESULTS: Data were available for 3138 individuals. The consent rate was 12.91 percentage points lower in Group 2 than Group 1 (95% CI -16.27 to -9.56, p⟨0.001). The population in Group 2 was more deprived (higher Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD)) than Group 1 before consent was taken. Consent was not associated with deprivation in either group. CONCLUSION: The cohort appeared to be unaffected by IMD-related non-consent. However there was a difference in consent rate between the two groups. With the population in Group 1 being more deprived than Group 2, it will be important to incorporate these differences into the analysis at the end of this longitudinal study.

Sociodemographic disparities in non-diabetic hyperglycaemia and the transition to type 2 diabetes: evidence from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing.

AIM: To explore whether there are social inequalities in non-diabetic hyperglycaemia (NDH) and in transitions to type 2 diabetes mellitus and NDH low-risk status in England. METHODS: Some 9143 men and women aged over 50 years were analysed from waves 2, 4, 6 and 8 (2004-2016) of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA). Participants were categorized as: NDH 'low-risk' [HbA1c < 42 mmol/mol (< 6.0%)], NDH [HbA1c 42-47 mmol/mol (6.0-6.4%)] and type 2 diabetes [HbA1c > 47 mmol/mol (> 6.4%)]. Logistic regression models estimated the association between sociodemographic characteristics and NDH, and the transitions from NDH to diagnosed or undiagnosed type 2 diabetes and low-risk status in future waves. RESULTS: NDH was more prevalent in older participants, those reporting a disability, those living in deprived areas and in more disadvantaged social classes. Older participants with NDH were less likely to progress to undiagnosed type 2 diabetes [odds ratio (OR) 0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08, 0.96]. NDH individuals with limiting long-standing illness (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.16, 2.53), who were economically inactive (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.02, 2.51) or from disadvantaged social classes (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.02, 2.61) were more likely to progress to type 2 diabetes. Socially disadvantaged individuals were less likely (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.41, 0.98) to progress to NDH low-risk status. CONCLUSIONS: There were socio-economic differences in NDH prevalence, transition to type 2 diabetes and transition to NDH low-risk status. Disparities in transitions included the greater likelihood of disadvantaged social groups with NDH developing type 2 diabetes and greater likelihood of advantaged social groups with NDH becoming low-risk. These socio-economic differences should be taken into account when targeting prevention initiatives.

Chemsex and new HIV diagnosis in gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men attending sexual health clinics.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to analyse associations between chemsex and new HIV and sexually transmitted infection (STI) diagnoses among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) accessing sexual health clinics. METHODS: A retrospective case note review was carried out for all GBMSM attending two London sexual health clinics between 1 June 2014 and 31 July 2015. RESULTS: Chemsex status was documented for 1734 of 1840 patients. Overall, 27.1% (n = 463) disclosed current recreational drug use, of whom 286 (16.5%) disclosed chemsex participation and 74 of 409 (18.1%) injected drugs. GBMSM who were already HIV positive were more likely to disclose chemsex participation [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 2.55; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.89-3.44; P < 0.001]. Those disclosing chemsex participation had higher odds of being newly diagnosed with HIV infection (AOR 5.06; 95% CI 2.56-10.02; P < 0.001), acute bacterial STIs (AOR 3.94; 95% CI 3.00-5.17; P < 0.001), rectal STIs (AOR 4.45; 95% CI 3.37-6.06; P < 0.001) and hepatitis C (AOR 9.16; 95% CI 2.31-36.27; P = 0.002). HIV-negative chemsex participants were also more likely to have accessed post-exposure prophylaxis for HIV in the study period and to report sex with a discordant HIV- or hepatitis C virus-infected partner (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Chemsex disclosure in sexual health settings is associated with higher rates of STI diagnoses, including HIV infection and hepatitis C. GBMSM attending sexual health services should therefore be assessed for chemsex participation and disclosure should prompt health promotion, harm minimization and wellbeing interventions.

Chemsex and the city: sexualised substance use in gay bisexual and other men who have sex with men attending sexual health clinics.

The objective of this study was to analyse associations between sexualised substance use (chemsex), STI diagnoses and sexual behaviour among gay bisexual and other men who have sex with men accessing sexual health clinics to better inform clinical pathways. A retrospective case notes review was undertaken following the introduction of more detailed and holistic profomas for all gay bisexual and other men who have sex with men attending two London sexual health clinics between 1 June 2014 and 31 January 2015. Chemsex status was documented for 655/818. Overall, 30% disclosed recreational drug use of whom 113 (57%) disclosed chemsex and 27 (13.5%) injecting drugs. HIV-positive gay bisexual and other men who have sex with men were more likely to disclose chemsex (AOR 6.68; 95% CI 3.91-11.42; p < 0.001). Those disclosing chemsex had a higher incidence of acute bacterial STIs (AOR 2.83 CI 1.79-4.47; p < 0.001), rectal STIs (AOR 3.10 CI 1.81-5.32; p < 0.001) or hepatitis C (AOR 15.41 CI 1.50-158.17; p = 0.021). HIV incidence in the study period was 1.8% (chemsex) vs. 0.9% (no chemsex) (p = 0.61). Chemsex was associated with having more sexual partners, transactional sex, group sex, fisting, sharing sex toys, injecting drug use, higher alcohol consumption and the use of 'bareback' sexual networking applications (p < 0.004). Chemsex participants were also more likely to have accessed post-exposure prophylaxis for HIV in the study period and report sex with a discordant HIV or hepatitis C-infected partner (p < 0.001). Chemsex disclosure is associated with higher risk-taking behaviours, acute bacterial STIs, rectal STIs and hepatitis C incidence. HIV incidence was higher but not significantly so in the study period. Chemsex disclosure in sexual health clinics should prompt an opportunity for prevention, health promotion and wellbeing interventions.

Impacts of pay for performance on the quality of primary care.

Increasingly, financial incentives are being used in health care as a result of increasing demand for health care coupled with fiscal pressures. Financial incentive schemes are one approach by which the system may incentivize providers of health care to improve productivity and/or adapt to better quality provision. Pay for performance (P4P) is an example of a financial incentive which seeks to link providers' payments to some measure of performance. This paper provides a discussion of the theoretical underpinnings of P4P, gives an overview of the health P4P evidence base, and provide a detailed case study of a particularly large scheme from the English National Health Service. Lessons are then drawn from the evidence base. Overall, we find that the evidence for the effectiveness of P4P for improving quality of care in primary care is mixed. This is to some extent due to the fact that the P4P schemes used in primary care are also mixed. There are many different schemes that incentivize different aspects of care in different ways and in different settings, making evaluation problematic. The Quality and Outcomes Framework in the United Kingdom is the largest example of P4P in primary care. Evidence suggests incentivized quality initially improved following the introduction of the Quality and Outcomes Framework, but this was short-lived. If P4P in primary care is to have a long-term future, the question about scheme effectiveness (perhaps incorporating the identification and assessment of potential risk factors) needs to be answered robustly. This would require that new schemes be designed from the onset to support their evaluation: control and treatment groups, coupled with before and after data.