Search

Objective To evaluate targeting of statin prescribing for primary prevention to those with high cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Design Two cohort studies including the general population and initiators of statins aged 35-74 years. Setting UK primary care records in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Patients 3.8 million general population patients and 300 914 statin users. Intervention Statin prescribing. Main outcome measures Statin prescribing by CVD risk; observed 5-year CVD risks; variability between practices. Results Statin prescribing increased substantially over time to patients with high 10-year CVD risk (=20%): 7.0% of these received a statin prior to 2007, and 30.4% in 2007 onwards. Prescribing to patients with low risk (<15%) also increased (from 1.9% to 5.0%). Only about half the patients initiating statin treatment were high risk according to CVD risk score. The 5-year CVD risks, as observed during statin treatment, reduced over calendar time (from 17.0% to 7.1%). There was a large variation between general practices in the percentage of high-risk patients prescribed a statin in 2007 onwards, ranging from 8.2% to 61.5%. For lowrisk patients, these varied from 2.1% to 29.1%. Conclusions There appeared to be substantive overuse in low CVD risk and underuse in high CVD risk (600 000 and 850 000 patients, respectively, in the UK since 2007). There is wide variation between practices in statin prescribing to patients at high CVD risk. There is a clear need for randomised trials for the best strategy to target statin treatment and manage CVD risk for primary prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the use of routine electronic health records (EHRs) in randomised trials of treatments to determine what to prescribe for patients in general practice with a limited evidence for choice of medication. It discusses the British project aimed at implementing randomised trials in everyday clinical work of general practitioners (GPs) by comparing commonly used treatments using EFR to determine participants and collect results. It explores the potential for improving clinical trials and evidence, while reducing costs and challenges. The authors say that their suggestion of undertaking randomised evaluations of accepted choices in treatment (REACT) trials may encounter challenges that are technical and mostly related to research governance.

The article discusses the importance of public support to the use of large scale health data which can benefit patient care, public health and research. Topics covered include the problem encountered in initiatives intended to improve the accessibility of healthcare records, the key elements for success of big health data projects and the need for the public to access clear, high quality summaries of healthcare improvements.

The article discusses a study to evaluate whether bariatric surgery increases the risk of fracture in morbidly obese patients in Great Britain. The study concluded that bariatric surgery did not affect fracture risk significantly; however, there is an increase in risk after three to five years, and in patients who have a greater decrease in body mass index (BMI) after surgery. Thus, the need for a degree of caution to be exerted before going in for bariatric surgery is highlighted.