Explore the vast range of titles available.

AbstractObjectiveTo describe a novel England-wide electronic health record (EHR) resource enabling whole population research on covid-19 and cardiovascular disease while ensuring data security and privacy and maintaining public trust.DesignData resource comprising linked person level records from national healthcare settings for the English population, accessible within NHS Digital’s new trusted research environment.SettingEHRs from primary care, hospital episodes, death registry, covid-19 laboratory test results, and community dispensing data, with further enrichment planned from specialist intensive care, cardiovascular, and covid-19 vaccination data.Participants54.4 million people alive on 1 January 2020 and registered with an NHS general practitioner in England.Main outcome measuresConfirmed and suspected covid-19 diagnoses, exemplar cardiovascular conditions (incident stroke or transient ischaemic attack and incident myocardial infarction) and all cause mortality between 1 January and 31 October 2020.ResultsThe linked cohort includes more than 96% of the English population. By combining person level data across national healthcare settings, data on age, sex, and ethnicity are complete for around 95% of the population. Among 53.3 million people with no previous diagnosis of stroke or transient ischaemic attack, 98 721 had a first ever incident stroke or transient ischaemic attack between 1 January and 31 October 2020, of which 30% were recorded only in primary care and 4% only in death registry records. Among 53.2 million people with no previous diagnosis of myocardial infarction, 62 966 had an incident myocardial infarction during follow-up, of which 8% were recorded only in primary care and 12% only in death registry records. A total of 959 470 people had a confirmed or suspected covid-19 diagnosis (714 162 in primary care data, 126 349 in hospital admission records, 776 503 in covid-19 laboratory test data, and 50 504 in death registry records). Although 58% of these were recorded in both primary care and covid-19 laboratory test data, 15% and 18%, respectively, were recorded in only one.ConclusionsThis population-wide resource shows the importance of linking person level data across health settings to maximise completeness of key characteristics and to ascertain cardiovascular events and covid-19 diagnoses. Although this resource was initially established to support research on covid-19 and cardiovascular disease to benefit clinical care and public health and to inform healthcare policy, it can broaden further to enable a wide range of research.

BackgroundWe describe the epidemiology of asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and interstitial lung disease (ILD) from 2004 to 2023 in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland (NI) using a harmonised approach.MethodsData from the National Health Service England (NHSE), Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum in England, Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank in Wales, DataLoch in South-East Scotland and the Honest Broker Service in NI were used. A harmonised approach to COPD, asthma and ILD case definitions, study designs and study populations across the four nations was performed. Age-sex-standardised incidence rates and point prevalence were calculated between 2004 and 2023 depending on data availability. Logistic and negative binomial regression compared incidence and prevalence rates between the start and end of each study period. Linear extrapolation projected incidence rates between 2020 and 2023 to illustrate how observed and projected rates differed.ResultsIncidence rates were lower in 2019 versus 2005 for asthma (England: incidence rate ratio 0.89, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.90; Wales: 0.66, 0.65 to 0.68; Scotland: 0.67, 0.64 to 0.71; NI: 0.84, 0.81 to 0.86), COPD (England: 0.83, 0.82 to 0.85; Wales: 0.67, 0.65 to 0.69) and higher for ILD (England: 3.27, 3.05 to 3.50; Wales: 1.39, 1.27 to 1.53; Scotland: 1.63, 1.36 to 1.95; NI: 3.03, 2.47 to 3.72). In NHSE, the incidence of asthma was similar in June 2023 versus November 2019, but lower for COPD and higher for ILD. Prevalence of asthma in 2019 in England, Wales, Scotland and NI was 9.7%, 15.9%, 13.2% and 7.0%, respectively, for COPD 4.5%, 5.1%, 4.4% and 3.0%, and for ILD 0.4%, 0.5%, 0.6% and 0.3%. Projected incidence rates were 2.8, 3.4 and 1.8 times lower for asthma, COPD and ILD compared with observed rates at the height of the pandemic.InterpretationAsthma, COPD and ILD affect over 10 million people across the four nations, and a substantial number of diagnoses were missed during the pandemic.

ObjectivesTo assess the degree to which we can replicate a study between a regional and a national database of electronic health record data in the UK. The original study examined the risk factors associated with hospitalisation following COVID-19 infection in people with diabetes.DesignA replication of a retrospective cohort study.SettingObservational electronic health record data from primary and secondary care sources in the UK. The original study used data from a large, urbanised region (Greater Manchester Care Record, Greater Manchester, UK—2.8 m patients). This replication study used a national database covering the whole of England, UK (NHS England’s Secure Data Environment service for England, accessed via the BHF Data Science Centre’s CVD-COVID-UK/COVID-IMPACT Consortium—54 m patients).ParticipantsIndividuals with a diagnosis of type 1 diabetes or type 2 diabetes prior to a positive COVID-19 test result. The matched controls (3:1) were individuals who had a positive COVID-19 test result, but who did not have a diagnosis of diabetes on the date of their positive COVID-19 test result. Matching was done on age at COVID-19 diagnosis, sex and approximate date of COVID-19 test.Primary and secondary outcome measuresHospitalisation within 28 days of a positive COVID-19 test.ResultsWe found that many of the effect sizes did not show a statistically significant difference, but that some did. Where effect sizes were statistically significant in the regional study, then they remained significant in the national study and the effect size was the same direction and of similar magnitude.ConclusionsThere is some evidence that the findings from studies in smaller regional datasets can be extrapolated to a larger, national setting. However, there were some differences, and therefore replication studies remain an essential part of healthcare research.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic necessitated major reallocation of healthcare services. Our aim was to assess the impact on paediatric congenital heart disease (CHD) procedures during different pandemic periods compared with the prepandemic period, to inform appropriate responses to future major health services disruptions.Methods and resultsWe analysed 26 270 procedures from 17 860 children between 1 January 2018 and 31 March 2022 in England, linking them to primary/secondary care data. The study period included prepandemic and pandemic phases, with the latter including three restriction periods and corresponding relaxation periods. We compared procedure characteristics and outcomes between each pandemic period and the prepandemic period. There was a reduction in all procedures across all pandemic periods, with the largest reductions during the first, most severe restriction period (23 March 2020 to 23 June 2020), and the relaxation period following second restrictions (3 December 2020 to 4 January 2021) coinciding with winter pressures. During the first restrictions, median procedures per week dropped by 51 compared with the prepandemic period (80 vs 131 per week, p=4.98×10−08). Elective procedures drove these reductions, falling from 96 to 44 per week (p=1.89×10−06), while urgent (28 vs 27 per week, p=0.649) and life-saving/emergency procedures (7 vs 6 per week, p=0.198) remained unchanged. Cardiac surgery rates increased, and catheter-based procedure rates reduced during the pandemic. Procedures for children under 1 year were prioritised, especially during the first four pandemic periods. No evidence was found for differences in postprocedure complications (age-adjusted OR 1.1 (95% CI 0.9, 1.4)) or postprocedure mortality (age and case mix adjusted OR 0.9 (95% CI 0.6, 1.3)).ConclusionsPrioritisation of urgent, emergency and life-saving procedures during the pandemic, particularly in infants, did not impact paediatric CHD postprocedure complications or mortality. This information is valuable for future major health services disruptions, though longer-term follow-up of the effects of delaying elective surgery is needed.

Click, click, click, went the electric wires throughout the land, and the news came.