William Hinton

Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre (RCGP RSC) sentinel network: a cohort profile

Purpose The Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre (RCGP RSC) is one of the longest established primary care sentinel networks. In 2015, it established a new data and analysis hub at the University of Surrey. This paper evaluates the representativeness of the RCGP RSC network against the English population. Participants and method The cohort includes 1 042 063 patients registered in 107 participating general practitioner (GP) practices. We compared the RCGP RSC data with English national data in the following areas: demographics; geographical distribution; chronic disease prevalence, management and completeness of data recording; and prescribing and vaccine uptake. We also assessed practices within the network participating in a national swabbing programme. Findings to date We found a small over-representation of people in the 25–44 age band, under-representation of white ethnicity, and of less deprived people. Geographical focus is in London, with less practices in the southwest and east of England. We found differences in the prevalence of diabetes (national: 6.4%, RCPG RSC: 5.8%), learning disabilities (national: 0.44%, RCPG RSC: 0.40%), obesity (national: 9.2%, RCPG RSC: 8.0%), pulmonary disease (national: 1.8%, RCPG RSC: 1.6%), and cardiovascular diseases (national: 1.1%, RCPG RSC: 1.2%). Data completeness in risk factors for diabetic population is high (77–99%). We found differences in prescribing rates and costs for infections (national: 5.58%, RCPG RSC: 7.12%), and for nutrition and blood conditions (national: 6.26%, RCPG RSC: 4.50%). Differences in vaccine uptake were seen in patients aged 2 years (national: 38.5%, RCPG RSC: 32.8%). Owing to large numbers, most differences were significant (p<0.00015). Future plans The RCGP RSC is a representative network, having only small differences with the national population, which have now been quantified and can be assessed for clinical relevance for specific studies. This network is a rich source for research into routine practice.

Real-world evidence studies into treatment adherence, thresholds for intervention and disparities in treatment in people with type 2 diabetes in the UK

Purpose The University of Surrey-Lilly Real World Evidence (RWE) diabetes cohort has been established to provide insights into the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). There are 3 areas of study due to be conducted to provide insights into T2DM management: exploration of medication adherence, thresholds for changing diabetes therapies, and ethnicity-related or socioeconomic-related disparities in management. This paper describes the identification of a cohort of people with T2DM which will be used for these analyses, through a case finding algorithm, and describes the characteristics of the identified cohort. Participants A cohort of people with T2DM was identified from the Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre (RCGP RSC) data set. This data set comprises electronic patient records collected from a nationally distributed sample of 130 primary care practices across England with scope to increase the number of practices to 200. Findings to date A cohort (N=58 717) of adults with T2DM was identified from the RCGP RSC population (N=1 260 761), a crude prevalence of diabetes of 5.8% in the adult population. High data quality within the practice network and an ontological approach to classification resulted in a high level of data completeness in the T2DM cohort; ethnicity identification (82.1%), smoking status (99.3%), alcohol use (93.3%), glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c; 97.9%), body mass index (98.0%), blood pressure (99.4%), cholesterol (87.4%) and renal function (97.8%). Data completeness compares favourably to other, similarly large, observational cohorts. The cohort comprises a distribution of ages, socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds, diabetes complications, and comorbidities, enabling the planned analyses. Future plans Regular data uploads from the RCGP RSC practice network will enable this cohort to be followed prospectively. We will investigate medication adherence, explore thresholds and triggers for changing diabetes therapies, and investigate any ethnicity-related or socioeconomic-related disparities in diabetes management.

Systematic review of adherence rates by medication class in type 2 diabetes: a study protocol

Introduction Treatment options for type 2 diabetes are becoming increasingly complex with people often prescribed multiple medications, and may include both oral and injectable therapies. There is ongoing debate about which drug classes provide the optimum second-line and third-line treatment options. In the real world, patient adherence and persistence determines medication effectiveness. A better understanding of adherence may help inform the choice of second-line and third-line drug classes. Methods and analysis This systematic review will compare adherence and persistence rates across the different classes of medication available to people with type 2 diabetes. It will include all identified studies comparing medication adherence or persistence between two or more glucose-lowering medications in people with type 2 diabetes. Research databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, The Register of Controlled Trials, PsychINFO and CINAHL) will be searched for relevant articles, using a comprehensive search strategy. All identified medication trials and observational studies will be included which compare adherence or persistence across classes of diabetes medication. The characteristics and outcomes of all the included studies will be reported along with a study quality grade, assessed using the Cochrane Risk Assessment Tool. The quality of adjustment for confounders of adherence or persistence will be reported for each study. Where multiple (n ≥3) studies provide compare adherence or persistence across the same 2 medication classes, a meta-analysis will be performed. Ethics and dissemination No ethics approval is required. This review and meta-analysis (where possible) will provide important information on the relative patient adherence and persistence, with the different classes of diabetes therapies. Once complete, the results will be made available by peer-reviewed publication. Trial registration number CRD42015027865.

Comparison of medication adherence and persistence in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Limited medication adherence and persistence with treatment are barriers to successful management of type 2 diabetes (T2D). We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Register of Controlled Trials, PsychINFO and CINAHL for observational and interventional studies that compared the adherence or persistence associated with 2 or more glucose‐lowering medications in people with T2D. Where 5 or more studies provided the same comparison, a random‐effects meta‐analysis was performed, reporting mean difference (MD) or odds ratio (OR) for adherence or persistence, depending on the pooled study outcomes. We included a total of 48 studies. Compared with metformin, adherence (%) was better for sulphonylureas (5 studies; MD 10.6%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.5‐14.7) and thiazolidinediones (TZDs; 6 studies; MD 11.3%, 95% CI 2.7%‐20.0%). Adherence to TZDs was marginally better than adherence to sulphonylureas (5 studies; MD 1.5%, 95% CI 0.1‐2.9). Dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 inhibitors had better adherence than sulphonylureas and TZDs. Glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonists had higher rates of discontinuation than long‐acting analogue insulins (6 studies; OR 1.95; 95% CI 1.17‐3.27). Long‐acting insulin analogues had better persistence than human insulins (5 studies; MD 43.1 days; 95% CI 22.0‐64.2). The methods used to define adherence and persistence were highly variable.

The association between diabetes, level of glycaemic control and eye infection: Cohort database study

AIM To examine whether diabetes and the degree of glycaemic control is associated with an increased risk of acute eye infection, and prescribing of ocular antimicrobial agents. DESIGN AND SETTING A retrospective cohort study was carried out using the Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre database (RCGP RSC), a large primary care database in the United Kingdom. We compared ocular infection rates in people aged ≥15 years without diabetes to those with diabetes, both type 1 and type 2. We developed logistic regression models to assess the excess risk in diabetes of: conjunctivitis, blepharitis, stye/chalzion, periorbital cellulitis, keratitis/keratoconjunctivitis, lacrimal gland infection, endopthalmitis, and ocular antimicrobial prescriptions over a six-year period (2010-2015). We also analysed the impact of glycaemic control on infection rates in those with diabetes. All models were adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS We analysed infection risk in 889,856 people without diabetes and 48,584 people with diabetes (3273 type 1, and 45,311 type 2). After adjustment for confounders both type 1 and type 2 were associated with increased incidence of conjunctivitis (OR 1.61; 95% CI 1.38-1.88; p<0.0001 and OR 1.11; 95% CI 1.06-1.16; p<0.0001 respectively). No association was found with blepharitis, stye/chalzion, periorbital cellulitis, keratitis/keratoconjunctivitis, lacrimal gland infection, and endopthalmitis in the whole population. In subgroup analyses blepharitis was more common in those with type 1 diabetes under 50 years old and endopthalmitis in those under 50 with type 2 diabetes. Glycaemic control was not found to be associated with any infection. Diabetes was also associated with an increased incidence of antimicrobial prescriptions (Type 1 OR 1.69; 95% CI 1.51-1.88; p<0.0001 and type 2 OR 1.17; 95% CI 1.13-1.20; p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS Conjunctivitis is recorded more frequently in people with diabetes. However, no substantial increase in recording of other ocular infections was noted. Infection risk was not found to be associated with the degree of glycaemic control.

Understanding the relationship between diabetes, retinopathy, glycaemic control, acute uveitis, and scleritis or episcleritis: A cohort database study

AIM To characterize the risk uveitis, scleritis or episcleritis in relation to diabetes, glycaemic control, and co-existence of retinopathy. METHODS Using the Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre database, we established the prevalence of acute uveitis and scleritis or episcleritis over a six-year period among populations without(n = 889,856) and with diabetes(n = 48,584). We evaluated the impact of glycaemic control on disease risk. Regression modeling was used to identify associations, adjusting for clinical and demographic confounders. RESULTS Incidence of acute uveitis was higher among patients with diabetes; Type 1 OR:2.01 (95% CI 1.18-3.41; p = 0.009), and Type 2 OR:1.23 (1.05-1.44; p = 0.01). Glycaemic control was established as an important effect modifier for uveitis risk, whereby those with poorer control suffered higher disease burden. Results confirmed a dose-response relationship such that very poor glycaemic control OR:4.72 (2.58-8.65; p < 0.001), poor control OR:1.57 (1.05-2.33; p = 0.03) and moderate control OR:1.20 (0.86-1.68; p = 0.29) were predictive of uveitis. Similar results were observed when evaluating retinopathy staging: proliferative retinopathy OR:2.42 (1.25-4.69; p = 0.01). These results were not maintained for scleritis or episcleritis. CONCLUSION Acute uveitis is more common in patients with diabetes; at highest risk are those with type 1 disease with poor glycaemic control. Glycaemic improvements may prevent recurrence.Please cite this article as: Abdus Samad Ansari, Simon de Lusignan, William Hinton, Neil Munro, Simon Taylor, Andrew McGovern , Understanding the relationship between diabetes, retinopathy, glycaemic control, acute uveitis, and scleritis or episcleritis: A cohort database study. The address for the corresponding author was captured as affiliation for all authors. Please check if appropriate. Jdc(2018), doi:10.1016/ j.jdiacomp.2018.03.008

Association Between Diabetes, Level of Glycemic Control, and Eye Infection: A Cohort Study

Infections of the eyelids, nasolacrimal duct, conjunctiva, and corneal surface and infectious keratitis have all been suggested to occur more frequently in people with diabetes (1,2). However, despite the widespread assumption that people with diabetes are more susceptible to eye infections (3), there is a paucity of systematically collected data to support these assertions. A recent review of observational studies and clinical trials demonstrated a correlation between poor glycemic control and increased risk of a wide variety of infections in people with diabetes (4). We explored whether infectious disease affecting the external eye and surrounding structures is associated with diabetes and if poor glycemic control increases risk of ocular infection in the population with diabetes. A two-stranded study was carried out using data from the Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre database. The two strands consisted of 1 ) a whole-population cohort study to …

Commentary: A lack of a comparator group makes it hard to be sure whether computerised medical record system implementation achieved a better or worse outcome.

Burke et al.[1][1] draw conclusions about the impact of using a computerised medical record (CMR) system. However, we recommend exercising caution about the 5-year finding as there was no comparator group. There is therefore no means of establishing what would have happened to glycated haemoglobin (

Does Real World Use of Liraglutide Match its Use in the LEADER Cardiovascular Outcome Trial? Study Protocol

BackgroundLiraglutide is an injectable therapy to treat type 2 diabetes (T2DM), belonging to the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist class of drugs. The Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcome Results (LEADER) trial established that liraglutide demonstrated glucose-lowering benefits and improved cardiovascular outcomes in those individuals with T2DM at high cardiovascular risk.AimsThe aim of this study is to report the prevalence and characteristics of people treated with liraglutide compared with the LEADER trial. In addition, the remaining portion of the T2DM population will be examined to determine the prevalence of those who meet the inclusion criteria for the LEADER trial but who are not treated with this medication.Study Design and MethodsThis is a cross-sectional analysis of routinely collected primary care data on all people with T2DM included in the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Center (RSC) network database. People with T2DM will be identified from the dataset using a well-established ontological process. Read and other clinical codes will be used to identify people prescribed liraglutide and those at high cardiovascular risk. We will use descriptive statistics to report the characteristics of people with T2DM prescribed liraglutide compared with those of the LEADER trial and the proportion of the wider T2DM cohort that matches the LEADER inclusion criteria. In terms of ethical considerations, this study used pseudonymized data, and was classed as an “Audit of current practice”.Planned OutputsThe results of the study will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal to report the applicability of the results of the LEADER trial to real-world clinical practice.FundingNovo Nordisk Limited.

Incidence and prevalence of cardiovascular disease in English primary care: a cross-sectional and follow-up study of the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC)

Objectives To describe incidence and prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD), its risk factors, medication prescribed to treat CVD and predictors of CVD within a nationally representative dataset. Design Cross-sectional study of adults with and without CVD. Setting The Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC) is an English primary care sentinel network. RCGP RSC is over 50 years old and one of the oldest in Europe. Practices receive feedback about data quality. This database is primarily used to conduct surveillance and research into influenza, infections and vaccine effectiveness but is also a rich resource for the study of non-communicable disease (NCD). The RCGP RSC network comprised 164 practices at the time of study. Results Data were extracted from the records of 1 275 174 adults. Approximately a fifth (21.3%; 95% CI 21.2% to 21.4%) had CVD (myocardial infarction (MI), angina, atrial fibrillation (AF), peripheral arterial disease, stroke/transient ischaemic attack (TIA), congestive cardiac failure) or hypertension. Smoking, unsafe alcohol consumption and obesity were more common among people with CVD. Angiotensin system modulating drugs, 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors (statins) and calcium channel blockers were the most commonly prescribed CVD medications. Age-adjusted and gender-adjusted annual incidence for AF was 28.2/10 000 (95% CI 27.8 to 28.7); stroke/TIA 17.1/10 000 (95% CI 16.8 to 17.5) and MI 9.8/10 000 (95% CI 9.5 to 10.0). Logistic regression analyses confirmed established CVD risk factors were associated with CVD in the RCGP RSC network dataset. Conclusions The RCGP RSC database provides comprehensive information on risk factors, medical diagnosis, physiological measurements and prescription history that could be used in CVD research or pharmacoepidemiology. With the exception of MI, the prevalence of CVDs was higher than in other national data, possibly reflecting data quality. RCGP RSC is an underused resource for research into NCDs and their management and welcomes collaborative opportunities.