British Journal of General Practice最新文献

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, global trends of reduced healthcare-seeking behaviour were observed. This raises concerns about the consequences of healthcare avoidance for population health.

Aim: To determine the association between healthcare avoidance during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic and all-cause mortality.

Design and setting: This was a 32-month follow-up within the population-based Rotterdam Study, after sending a COVID-19 questionnaire at the onset of the pandemic in April 2020 to all communty dwelling participants (n = 6241/8732, response rate 71.5%).

Method: Cox proportional hazards models assessed the risk of all-cause mortality among respondents who avoided health care because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Mortality status was collected through municipality registries and medical records.

Results: Of 5656 respondents, one-fifth avoided health care because of the COVID-19 pandemic (n = 1143). Compared with non-avoiders, those who avoided health care more often reported symptoms of depression (n = 357, 31.2% versus n = 554, 12.3%) and anxiety (n = 340, 29.7% versus n = 549, 12.2%), and more often rated their health as poor to fair (n = 336, 29.4% versus n = 457, 10.1%) . Those who avoided health care had an increased adjusted risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.01 to 1.67), which remained nearly identical after adjustment for history of any non-communicable disease (HR 1.20, 95% CI = 0.93 to 1.54). However, this association attenuated after additional adjustment for mental and physical self-perceived health factors (HR 0.93, 95% CI = 0.71 to 1.20).

Conclusion: This study found an increased risk of all-cause mortality among individuals who avoided health care during COVID-19. These individuals were characterised by poor mental and physical self-perceived health. Therefore, interventions should be targeted to these vulnerable individuals to safeguard their access to primary and specialist care to limit health disparities, inside and beyond healthcare crises.

Background: Long-term health conditions are major challenges for care systems. Social prescribing link workers have been introduced via primary care networks (PCNs) across England since 2019 to address the wider determinants of health by connecting individuals to activities, groups, or services within their local community.

Aim: To assess whether the rollout of social prescribing link workers was in areas with the highest need.

Design and setting: A retrospective study of social prescribing link workers in England from 2019 to 2023.

Method: Workforce, population, survey, and area-level data at the PCN-level from April 2020 to October 2023 were combined. Population need before the rollout of link workers was measured using reported lack of support from local services in the 2019 General Practice Patient Survey. To assess if rollout reflected need, linear regression was used to relate provision of link workers (measured by full-time equivalent [FTE] per 10 000 patients) in each quarter to population need for support.

Results: Populations in urban, more deprived areas and with higher proportions of people from minority ethnic groups had the highest reported lack of support. Geographically these were in the North West and London. Initially, there was no association between need and provision; then from July 2022, this became negative and significant. By October 2023, a 10-percentage point higher need for support was associated with a 0.035 (95% confidence interval = -0.634 to -0.066) lower FTE per 10 000 patients.

Conclusion: Rollout of link workers has not been sufficiently targeted at areas with the highest need. Future deployments should be targeted at those areas.

Background: Between 2003 and 2018, incident prescriptions of beta-blockers for anxiety increased substantially, particularly for young adults. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance for anxiety does not recommend beta-blockers, probably due to a lack of evidence to support such use. Recent reports have highlighted the potential risks of beta-blockers.

Aim: To understand when and why GPs prescribe beta-blockers for people with anxiety.

Design and setting: In-depth interviews with 17 GPs in Bristol and the surrounding areas.

Method: Interviews were held by telephone or video call. A topic guide was used to ensure consistency across interviews. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed thematically.

Results: Many GPs viewed beta-blockers as 'low risk', particularly for young adults. Some GPs viewed beta-blockers as an alternative to benzodiazepines, acting quickly and not leading to dependence. GPs reflected that some patients appeared to want an 'immediate fix' to their symptoms, which GPs thought beta-blockers could potentially offer. This is salient in light of substantial waiting lists for talking therapies and delays in antidepressants taking effect. GPs described how some patients seemed more willing to try beta-blockers than antidepressants, as patients did not perceive them as 'mental health drugs' and therefore viewed them as potentially more acceptable and less stigmatising. Further, GPs viewed beta-blockers as 'patient-led', with patients managing their own dose and frequency, without GP input.

Conclusion: Many GPs believe that beta-blockers have a role to play in the management of anxiety. Given recent increases in the prescribing of these drugs in primary care, there is a need to assess their safety and effectiveness as a treatment for people with anxiety disorders.

Background: COVID-19 pandemic restrictions may have influenced behaviours related to weight.

Aim: To describe patterns of weight change among adults living in England with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and/or hypertension during the pandemic.

Design and setting: An observational cohort study using the routinely collected health data of approximately 40% of adults living in England, accessed through the OpenSAFELY service inside TPP.

Method: Clinical and sociodemographic characteristics associated with rapid weight gain (>0.5 kg/m²/year) were investigated using multivariable logistic regression.

Results: Data were extracted on adults with T2D (n = 1 231 455, 43.9% female, and 76.0% White British) or hypertension (n = 3 558 405, 49.7% female, and 84.3% White British). Adults with T2D lost weight overall (median δ = -0.1 kg/m²/year [interquartile range {IQR} -0.7-0.4]). However, rapid weight gain was common (20.7%) and associated with the following: sex (male versus female: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.78 [95% confidence interval {CI} = 0.77 to 0.79]); age (older age reduced odds, for example, aged 60-69 years versus 18-29 years: aOR 0.66 [95% CI = 0.61 to 0.71]); deprivation (least deprived Index of Multiple Deprivation [IMD] quintile versus most deprived IMD quintile: aOR 0.87 [95% CI = 0.85 to 0.89]); White ethnicity (Black versus White: aOR 0.95 [95% CI = 0.92 to 0.98]); mental health conditions (for example, depression: aOR 1.13 [95% CI = 1.12 to 1.15]); and diabetes treatment (non-insulin treatment versus no pharmacological treatment: aOR 0.68 [95% CI = 0.67 to 0.69]). Adults with hypertension maintained stable weight overall (median δ = 0.0 kg/m²/year [IQR -0.6-0.5]); however, rapid weight gain was common (24.7%) and associated with similar characteristics as in T2D.

Conclusion: Among adults living in England with T2D and/or hypertension, rapid pandemic weight gain was more common among females, younger adults, those living in more deprived areas, and those with mental health conditions.