Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on England's national prescriptions of oral vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs): an interrupted time series analysis (January 2019-February 2021)

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cardiovascular disease prevention and corresponding geographical inequalities in England: interrupted time series analysis

BACKGROUND

There has been disruption to the detection and management of those with hypertension and atrial fibrillation (AF) during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is likely to vary geographically and could have implications for future mortality and morbidity. We aimed to estimate the change in diagnosed prevalence, treatment and prescription indicators for AF and hypertension and assess corresponding geographical inequalities.

METHODS

Using the Quality and Outcomes Framework (2016/17 to 2021/22) and the English Prescribing Datasets (2018 to 2022), we described age standardised prevalence, treatment and prescription item rates for hypertension and AF by geography and over time. Using an interrupted time-series (ITS) analysis, we estimated the impact of the pandemic (from April 2020) on missed diagnoses and on the percentage change in medicines prescribed for these conditions. Finally, we described changes in treatment indicators against Public Health England 2029 cardiovascular risk targets.

RESULTS

We observed 143,822 fewer (-143,822, 95%CI:-226,144, -61,500, p = 0.001) diagnoses of hypertension, 60,330 fewer (-60,330, 95%CI: -83,216, -37,444, p = 0.001) diagnoses of AF and 1.79% fewer (-1.79%, 95%CI: -2.37%, -1.22%), p < 0.0001) prescriptions for these conditions over the COVID-19 impact period. There was substantial variation across geography in England in terms of the indirect impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnosis, prescription, and treatment rates of hypertension and AF. 20% of Sub Integrated Care Boards account for approximately 62% of all missed diagnoses of hypertension. The percentage of individuals who had their hypertension controlled fell from 75.8% in 2019/20 to 64.1% in 2021/22 and the percentage of individuals with AF who were risk assessed fell from 97.2% to 90.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypertension and AF detection and management were disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic. The disruption varied considerably across diseases and geography. This highlights the utility of administrative and geographically granular datasets to inform targeted efforts to mitigate the indirect impacts of the pandemic through applied secondary prevention measures.

Prevention of perioperative stroke in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery

About 300 million adults undergo non-cardiac surgery annually. Although, in this setting, the incidence of perioperative stroke is low, the absolute number of patients experiencing a stroke is substantial. Furthermore, most patients with this complication will die or end up with severe disability. Covert brain infarctions are more frequent than overt strokes and are associated with postoperative delirium, cognitive decline, and cerebrovascular events at 1 year after surgery. Evidence shows that traditional stroke risk factors including older age, hypertension, and atrial fibrillation are also associated with perioperative stroke; previous stroke is the strongest risk factor for perioperative stroke. Increasing evidence also suggests the pathogenic role of perioperative events, such as hypotension, new atrial fibrillation, paradoxical embolism, and bleeding. Clinicians involved in perioperative care should be aware of this evidence on prevention strategies to improve patient outcomes after non-cardiac surgery.

Prescribing of low-dose rivaroxaban in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands

AIMS

Low-dose rivaroxaban has been indicated for the management of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) after recent (2019-2020) updates to European guidelines. We aimed to describe prescription trends of low-dose rivaroxaban in ASCVD patients over the period 2015-2022 in two European countries, to compare the trends before and after guideline changes, and to determine the characteristics of users.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional interrupted time series analysis, utilization of low-dose rivaroxaban (2.5 mg, twice daily) was measured in Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum (United Kingdom [UK]) and the PHARMO Database Network (the Netherlands) from 1 January 2015 to 28 February 2022 in patients with an ASCVD diagnosis. Incidence rates (IRs) and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of new use (within 182 days) compared to the reference period, 2015-2018, were calculated. Age, sex and comorbidities of users were compared to those of nonusers.

RESULTS

In the UK, from 721 271 eligible subjects the IR of new use of low-dose rivaroxaban in the period 2015-2018, before guideline changes, was 12.4 per 100 000 person-years and after guideline changes in 2020-2022 was 124.0 (IRR 10.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 8.5, 11.8). In the Netherlands from 394 851 subjects, the IR in 2015-2018 was 2.4 per 100 000 person-years and in 2020 was 16.3 (IRR 6.7, 95% CI 4.0, 11.4). Users were younger (UK mean difference [MD] -6.1 years, Netherlands -2.4 years; P < .05) and more likely to be male (UK difference 11.5%, Netherlands 13.4%; P < .001) than nonusers.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a statistically significant increase in the use of low-dose rivaroxaban for the management of ASCVD after guideline changes in the UK and the Netherlands. There were international differences, but low-dose rivaroxaban has not been put into widespread practice.

The Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on the Clinical Practice Patterns in Atrial Fibrillation: A Multicenter Clinician Survey in China

The COVID-19 pandemic has severely impacted healthcare systems worldwide. This study investigated cardiologists’ opinions on how the COVID-19 pandemic impacted clinical practice patterns in atrial fibrillation (AF). A multicenter clinician survey, including demographic and clinical questions, was administered to 300 cardiologists from 22 provinces in China, in April 2022. The survey solicited information about their treatment recommendations for AF and their perceptions of how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted their clinical practice patterns for AF. The survey was completed by 213 cardiologists (71.0%) and included employees in tertiary hospitals (82.6%) and specialists with over 10 years of clinical cardiology practice (53.5%). Most respondents stated that there were reductions in the number of inpatients and outpatients with AF in their hospital during the pandemic. A majority of participants stated that the pandemic had impacted the treatment strategies for all types of AF, although to different extents. Compared with that during the assumed non-pandemic period in the hypothetical clinical questions, the selection of invasive interventional therapies (catheter ablation, percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion) was significantly decreased (all p < 0.05) during the pandemic. There was no significant difference in the selection of non-invasive therapeutic strategies (the management of cardiovascular risk factors and concomitant diseases, pharmacotherapy for stroke prevention, heart rate control, and rhythm control) between the pandemic and non-pandemic periods (all p > 0.05). The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on the clinical practice patterns of AF. The selection of catheter ablation and percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion was significantly reduced, whereas pharmacotherapy was often stated as the preferred option by participating cardiologists.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cardiovascular heart disease medication use: time-series analysis of England's prescription data during the COVID-19 pandemic (January 2019 to October 2020)

BACKGROUND

Management of high blood pressure (BP) typically requires adherence to medication regimes. However, it is known that the COVID-19 pandemic both interrupted access to some routine prescriptions and changed some patient health behaviours.

AIM

This study, therefore, retrospectively investigated prescription reimbursement of cardiovascular (CVD) medicines as a proxy measure for patient adherence and access to medicines during the pandemic.

METHODS

A cohort study of all primary care patients in England prescribed CVD medicines. The exposure was to the global pandemic. Prescriptions were compared before and after the pandemic's onset. Statistical variation was the outcome of interest.

RESULTS

Descriptive statistics show changes to monthly prescriptions, with wide confidence intervals indicating varying underlying practice. Analysis of variance reveals statistically significant differences for bendroflumethiazide, potassium-sparing diuretics, nicorandil, ezetimibe, ivabradine, ranolazine, colesevelam and midodrine. After the pandemic began (March-October 2020), negative parameters are observed for ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, statins, antiplatelet, antithrombotics, ARBs, loop diuretics, doxazosin, bendroflumethiazide, nitrates and indapamide, indicating decelerating monthly prescription items (statistically significant declines of calcium channel blockers, antithrombotic, adrenoreceptor blockers and diuretics) of CVD medicines within the general population. Many data points are not statistically significant, but fluctuations remain clinically important for the large population of patients taking these medications.

CONCLUSION

A concerning decline in uptake of CVD therapies for chronic heart disease was observed. Accessible screening and treatment alongside financial relief on prescription levies are needed. A video abstract is (4 min 51 s) available: https://bit.ly/39gvEHi.