Concepción Violán

Comparison of the information provided by electronic health records data and a population health survey to estimate prevalence of selected health conditions and multimorbidity

BackgroundHealth surveys (HS) are a well-established methodology for measuring the health status of a population. The relative merit of using information based on HS versus electronic health records (EHR) to measure multimorbidity has not been established. Our study had two objectives: 1) to measure and compare the prevalence and distribution of multimorbidity in HS and EHR data, and 2) to test specific hypotheses about potential differences between HS and EHR reporting of diseases with a symptoms-based diagnosis and those requiring diagnostic testing.MethodsCross-sectional study using data from a periodic HS conducted by the Catalan government and from EHR covering 80% of the Catalan population aged 15 years and older. We determined the prevalence of 27 selected health conditions in both data sources, calculated the prevalence and distribution of multimorbidity (defined as the presence of ≥2 of the selected conditions), and determined multimorbidity patterns. We tested two hypotheses: a) health conditions requiring diagnostic tests for their diagnosis and management would be more prevalent in the EHR; and b) symptoms-based health problems would be more prevalent in the HS data.ResultsWe analysed 15,926 HS interviews and 1,597,258 EHRs. The profile of the EHR sample was 52% women, average age 47 years (standard deviation: 18.8), and 68% having at least one of the selected health conditions, the 3 most prevalent being hypertension (20%), depression or anxiety (16%) and mental disorders (15%). Multimorbidity was higher in HS than in EHR data (60% vs. 43%, respectively, for ages 15-75+, P <0.001, and 91% vs. 83% in participants aged ≥65 years, P <0.001). The most prevalent multimorbidity cluster was cardiovascular. Circulation disorders (other than varicose veins), chronic allergies, neck pain, haemorrhoids, migraine or frequent headaches and chronic constipation were more prevalent in the HS. Most symptomatic conditions (71%) had a higher prevalence in the HS, while less than a third of conditions requiring diagnostic tests were more prevalent in EHR.ConclusionsPrevalence of multimorbidity varies depending on age and the source of information. The prevalence of self-reported multimorbidity was significantly higher in HS data among younger patients; prevalence was similar in both data sources for elderly patients. Self-report appears to be more sensitive to identifying symptoms-based conditions. A comprehensive approach to the study of multimorbidity should take into account the patient perspective.

Multimorbidity Patterns in Elderly Primary Health Care Patients in a South Mediterranean European Region: A Cluster Analysis

Objective The purpose of this study was to identify clusters of diagnoses in elderly patients with multimorbidity, attended in primary care. Design Cross-sectional study. Setting 251 primary care centres in Catalonia, Spain. Participants Individuals older than 64 years registered with participating practices. Main outcome measures Multimorbidity, defined as the coexistence of 2 or more ICD-10 disease categories in the electronic health record. Using hierarchical cluster analysis, multimorbidity clusters were identified by sex and age group (65–79 and ≥80 years). Results 322,328 patients with multimorbidity were included in the analysis (mean age, 75.4 years [Standard deviation, SD: 7.4], 57.4% women; mean of 7.9 diagnoses [SD: 3.9]). For both men and women, the first cluster in both age groups included the same two diagnoses: Hypertensive diseases and Metabolic disorders. The second cluster contained three diagnoses of the musculoskeletal system in the 65- to 79-year-old group, and five diseases coincided in the ≥80 age group: varicose veins of the lower limbs, senile cataract, dorsalgia, functional intestinal disorders and shoulder lesions. The greatest overlap (54.5%) between the three most common diagnoses was observed in women aged 65–79 years. Conclusion This cluster analysis of elderly primary care patients with multimorbidity, revealed a single cluster of circulatory-metabolic diseases that were the most prevalent in both age groups and sex, and a cluster of second-most prevalent diagnoses that included musculoskeletal diseases. Clusters unknown to date have been identified. The clusters identified should be considered when developing clinical guidance for this population.

Patrones de multimorbilidad en adultos jóvenes en Cataluña: un análisis de clústeres

Resumen Objetivo Identificar los patrones de multimorbilidad en pacientes de 19-44 años atendidos en atención primaria en Cataluña en el año 2010. Diseño Estudio descriptivo transversal. Emplazamiento Doscientos cincuenta y un centros de salud. Participantes Fueron 530.798 personas con multimorbilidad de 19-44 años. Mediciones principales La multimorbilidad fue definida como la coexistencia de ≥2 diagnósticos de la Clasificación Internacional de Enfermedades registrados en la historia clínica informatizada. Los patrones de multimorbilidad fueron identificados a través de un análisis jerárquico de clústeres y descritos por sexo y grupos de edad (19-24 y 25-44 años). Resultados De las 882.708 personas de la población inicial, 530.798 (60,1%) presentaron multimorbilidad. La media de edad fue de 33,0 años (DT: 7,0) y el 53,3% fueron mujeres. La multimorbilidad fue más alta en el grupo de 25-44 años respecto al grupo más joven (60,5 vs. 58,1%, p < 0,001), siendo más alta en las mujeres. El clúster más prevalente en todos los estratos estuvo constituido por caries dental, tabaquismo, dorsalgia, resfriado común y otros trastornos de ansiedad. En ambos sexos, en los estratos de 25-44 años apareció el patrón cardiovascular-endocrino-metabólico (obesidad, dislipidemias e hipertensión arterial). Conclusiones La multimorbilidad afecta a más de la mitad de personas entre los 19-44 años de edad. El clúster más prevalente está formado por diagnósticos que agrupan enfermedades comunes (caries dental, resfriado común, tabaquismo, trastornos de ansiedad y dorsalgias). Otro patrón a destacar es el cardiovascular-endocrino-metabólico en el grupo de 25-44. El conocimiento de los patrones de multimorbilidad en adultos jóvenes permitiría un enfoque preventivo.

Comparative analysis of methods for identifying multimorbidity patterns: a study of ‘real-world’ data

Objective The aim was to compare multimorbidity patterns identified with the two most commonly used methods: hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA) and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) in a large primary care database. Specific objectives were: (1) to determine whether choice of method affects the composition of these patterns and (2) to consider the potential application of each method in the clinical setting. Design Cross-sectional study. Diagnoses were based on the 263 corresponding blocks of the International Classification of Diseases version 10. Multimorbidity patterns were identified using HCA and EFA. Analysis was stratified by sex, and results compared for each method. Setting and participants Electronic health records for 408 994 patients with multimorbidity aged 45–64 years in 274 primary health care teams from 2010 in Catalonia, Spain. Results HCA identified 53 clusters for women, with just 12 clusters including at least 2 diagnoses, and 15 clusters for men, all of them including at least two diagnoses. EFA showed 9 factors for women and 10 factors for men. We observed differences by sex and method of analysis, although some patterns were consistent. Three combinations of diseases were observed consistently across sex groups and across both methods: hypertension and obesity, spondylopathies and deforming dorsopathies, and dermatitis eczema and mycosis. Conclusions This study showed that multimorbidity patterns vary depending on the method of analysis used (HCA vs EFA) and provided new evidence about the known limitations of attempts to compare multimorbidity patterns in real-world data studies. We found that EFA was useful in describing comorbidity relationships and HCA could be useful for in-depth study of multimorbidity. Our results suggest possible applications for each of these methods in clinical and research settings, and add information about some aspects that must be considered in standardisation of future studies: spectrum of diseases, data usage and methods of analysis.

Pharmacological control of diabetes and hypertension comorbidity in the elderly: A study of “real world” data

AIMS The study aimed to determine which drug combinations achieve better control in comorbid diabetes and hypertension in a pragmatic sample of primary health care patients. METHODS Cross-sectional study. SETTING 251 primary health care centres in Catalonia, Spain. PARTICIPANTS individuals ≥65 years old with a dual diagnosis of hypertension and diabetes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES good control criteria were established as glycated haemoglobin ≤7% and blood pressure <140/90mmHg. Antihypertensive and hypoglycaemic drugs and treatment adherence were analysed in relation to their association with good control. RESULTS 27,637 patients (58.0% women) had hypertension and diabetes and met selection criteria. Mean age was 75.9 years (standard deviation [SD]: 6.7). Both diseases were well controlled simultaneously in 34.2% of patients. The combination of biguanides and diuretics achieved the highest association with good control. Adherence to pharmacological treatment was more difficult in diabetes than in hypertension. Lack of control was associated significantly with non-adherence to treatment, 0-12 PHC visits, obesity and increasing number of diabetes prescriptions. CONCLUSIONS Good control of diabetes and hypertension comorbidity with pharmacological treatment in elderly patients is challenging. Some drug combinations achieved better control than others. The greatest effort should focus on improving the low adherence to diabetes treatment.

Safety of the reuse of needles for subcutaneous insulin injection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE Many people with diabetes often reuse disposable needles for subcutaneous insulin injection. We aimed to identify, critically appraise and summarize the available evidence about the safety of this practice. DESIGN Systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. DATA SOURCES MEDLINE (via PubMed), CINALH (via EBSCO), SCOPUS, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Open Grey were searched from their inception to December 2015, with no language restrictions. REVIEW METHODS Epidemiologic and experimental studies assessing adverse effects of reusing needles in people of any age or sex, with or without diabetes, were included. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of included studies using a multi-design tool. RESULTS In total, 25 studies were included. All studies had a high risk of bias and data from only nine studies could be pooled. Five studies showed no association between infection at site of injection and reuse of needles (risk difference=-0.00; 95% confidence interval=-0.12-0.11; P=0.99); heterogeneity between these studies was substantial (I(2)=66%; P=0.02). Five cross-sectional studies showed an association between lipohypertrophy and needle reuse (risk difference=0.16, 95% confidence interval=0.05-0.28, P=0.006); there was strong evidence of heterogeneity between these studies (I(2)=87%; P<0.001). Pooled data of two studies with no evidence of heterogeneity between them showed more perceived pain among reusers (risk difference=0.24; 95% confidence interval=0.06-0.43; P=0.006). Reusing a pen needle or disposable syringe-needle was not associated with worse glycaemic control. CONCLUSIONS There is currently no clear scientific evidence to suggest for or against the reuse of needles for subcutaneous insulin injection. This practice is very common among people with diabetes; consequently, further research is necessary to establish its safety.

Relationship between efficiency and clinical effectiveness indicators in an adjusted model of resource consumption: a cross-sectional study

BackgroundAdjusted clinical groups (ACG®) have been widely used to adjust resource distribution; however, the relationship with effectiveness has been questioned. The purpose of the study was to measure the relationship between efficiency assessed by ACG® and a clinical effectiveness indicator in adults attended in Primary Health Care Centres (PHCs).MethodsResearch design: cross-sectional study. Subjects: 196, 593 patients aged >14 years in 13 PHCs in Catalonia (Spain). Measures: Age, sex, PHC, basic care team (BCT), visits, episodes (diagnoses), and total direct costs of PHC care and co-morbidity as measured by ACG® indicators: Efficiency indices for costs, visits, and episodes (costs EI, visits EI, episodes EI); a complexity or risk index (RI); and effectiveness measured by a general synthetic index (SI). The relationship between EI, RI, and SI in each PHC and BCT was measured by multiple correlation coefficients (r).ResultsIn total, 56 of the 106 defined ACG® were present in the study population, with five corresponding to 44.5% of the patients, 11 to 68.0% of patients, and 30 present in less than 0.5% of the sample. The RI in each PHC ranged from 0.9 to 1.1. Costs, visits, and episodes had similar trends for efficiency in six PHCs. There was moderate correlation between costs EI and visits EI (r = 0.59). SI correlation with episodes EI and costs EI was moderate (r = 0.48 and r = −0.34, respectively) and was r = −0.14 for visits EI. Correlation between RI and SI was r = 0.29.ConclusionsThe Efficiency and Effectiveness ACG® indicators permit a comparison of primary care processes between PHCs. Acceptable correlation exists between effectiveness and indicators of efficiency in episodes and costs.