Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Research

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on incidence of long-term conditions in Wales: a population data linkage study using primary and secondary care health records

Cathy Qi, Tim Osborne, Rowena Bailey, Alison Cooper, Joe P Hollinghurst, Ashley Akbari, Ruth Crowder, Holly Peters, Rebecca-Jane Law, Ruth Lewis, Deb Smith, Adrian Edwards and Ronan A Lyons
British Journal of General Practice 6 March 2023; BJGP.2022.0353. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2022.0353
Cathy Qi
Population Data Science, Swansea University Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Health & Life Science, Swansea University, Swansea.
Roles: Statistician and research officer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Cathy Qi
Tim Osborne
Population Data Science, Swansea University Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Health & Life Science, Swansea University, Swansea.
Roles: Data scientist and research officer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Tim Osborne
Rowena Bailey
Population Data Science, Swansea University Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Health & Life Science, Swansea University, Swansea.
Roles: Statistician and senior research officer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Rowena Bailey
Alison Cooper
Wales COVID-19 Evidence Centre, Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff.
Roles: Clinical research fellow
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Alison Cooper
Joe P Hollinghurst
Population Data Science, Swansea University Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Health & Life Science, Swansea University, Swansea.
Roles: Statistician and senior research officer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ashley Akbari
Population Data Science, Swansea University Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Health & Life Science, Swansea University, Swansea.
Roles: Associate professor of population data science research
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ashley Akbari
Ruth Crowder
Directorate of Primary Care and Mental Health, Health and Social Services Group, Welsh Government, Cardiff.
Roles: Chief allied health professions advisor
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Holly Peters
Centre for Medical Education, Cardiff University, Cardiff.
Roles: Clinical lecturer in assessments
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rebecca-Jane Law
Technical Advisory Cell, Health and Social Services Group, Welsh Government, Cardiff.
Roles: Research and evidence lead
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ruth Lewis
North Wales Centre for Primary Care Research, PRIME Centre Wales, Bangor University, Bangor.
Roles: Senior lecturer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Deb Smith
Wales COVID-19 Evidence Centre, Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff.
Roles: Patient and public involvement
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Adrian Edwards
Wales COVID-19 Evidence Centre, Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff.
Roles: Professor of general practice
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Adrian Edwards
Ronan A Lyons
Population Data Science, Swansea University Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Health & Life Science, Swansea University, Swansea.
Roles: Professor of public health
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ronan A Lyons
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has directly and indirectly had an impact on health service provision owing to surges and sustained pressures on the system. The effects of these pressures on the management of long-term or chronic conditions are not fully understood.

Aim To explore the effects of COVID-19 on the recorded incidence of 17 long-term conditions.

Design and setting This was an observational retrospective population data linkage study on the population of Wales using primary and secondary care data within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank.

Method Monthly rates of new diagnosis between 2000 and 2021 are presented for each long-term condition. Incidence rates post-2020 were compared with expected rates predicted using time series modelling of pre-2020 trends. The proportion of annual incidence is presented by sociodemographic factors: age, sex, social deprivation, ethnicity, frailty, and learning disability.

Results A total of 5 476 012 diagnoses from 2 257 992 individuals are included. Incidence rates from 2020 to 2021 were lower than mean expected rates across all conditions. The largest relative deficit in incidence was in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease corresponding to 343 (95% confidence interval = 230 to 456) undiagnosed patients per 100 000 population, followed by depression, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, anxiety disorders, and asthma. A GP practice of 10 000 patients might have over 400 undiagnosed long-term conditions. No notable differences between sociodemographic profiles of post- and pre-2020 incidences were observed.

Conclusion There is a potential backlog of undiagnosed patients with multiple long-term conditions. Resources are required to tackle anticipated workload as part of COVID-19 recovery, particularly in primary care.

  • anxiety
  • chronic disease
  • COVID-19
  • diagnosis
  • primary health care

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has had both a direct and indirect impact on the health and care system.1 Direct effects are those of COVID-19-related illnesses.2 Indirect effects are highly heterogeneous and include delays in cancer services and postponement of elective surgery and other non-urgent treatments owing to surge pressures on the system. 1

For example, it has been estimated that around 28 million operations were cancelled or postponed globally during the peak 12 weeks of the pandemic’s first wave.3 The impact on non-urgent treatments include harm from cessation or delay of screening services and the management of long-term conditions.1

A ‘long-term’ or chronic condition is a condition that cannot presently be cured but is controlled by medication and/or other treatment/therapies, for example, diabetes and asthma.4 Long-term conditions are associated with increasing age and deprivation, and the number of people with multiple long-term conditions (multimorbidity) is increasing.4 Patients with long-term conditions are more intensive users of health and social care services, and before the pandemic accounted for 50% of GP appointments, 64% of outpatient appointments, and 70% of all inpatient bed days.4

In primary care, a call and recall system is used to manage long-term conditions, which is offered to patients after a specific diagnosis is made and recorded in condition registries. Primary care activity was substantially reduced in the early months of the pandemic and, when activity returned to more usual levels in late 2020, acute care displaced much planned care such as long-term condition monitoring and review.5 It is unknown whether this has resulted in ongoing delays in diagnosis and management for long-term conditions.

Routinely collected data provide an opportunity to examine changes in recorded diagnoses. The Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank (www.saildatabank.com) contains data from 84% of the GPs and all hospital inpatient and day case activity in Wales.6–8 In the current study, historic trends in the incidence rates of 17 long-term conditions were examined, and rates in 2020 and 2021 compared with expected rates over these 2 years had the previous trends continued without interruption. In addition, changes in the characteristics of patients with recorded diagnoses were examined to inform resource allocation.

Studies have reported reduced recording of long-term or chronic condition incidence early in the COVID-19 pandemic. Evidence for the presence and the severity of lags in diagnoses across multiple long-term conditions during the pandemic, and the current status of these lags, is limited. Over 2020 and 2021, recorded incidence across multiple long-term conditions lagged behind projected expectations, representing a substantial backlog of undiagnosed patients, who are unlikely to be receiving systematic monitoring and management. Differences in the sociodemographic profile of diagnosed patients post-2020 compared with years pre-2020 were not evident, making targeted catch-up initiatives unlikely to be feasible.

How this fits in

METHOD

This was an observational retrospective study reported according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines.

Data sources

Anonymised individual-level, population-scale data sources were accessed within the SAIL Databank.6–11 Conditions treated in hospital are recorded using International Classification of Diseases version 10 (ICD-10) codes in the Patient Episode Dataset for Wales (PEDW) dataset. Diagnoses from GP records are coded using Read v2 codes in the Welsh Longitudinal General Practice (WLGP) dataset. The Welsh Demographic Service Dataset was used to link birth, death, sex, and lower layer super output area (LSOA). LSOAs are an output geography created for the 2011 Census and, on average, an LSOA contains the homes of 1500 residents.12 Ethnicity categories were identified from 26 linked data sources (Supplementary Table S1).

Study cohort

Residents of Wales diagnosed for the first time with at least one of 17 long-term conditions between January 2000 and December 2021 were identified using ICD-10 or Read v2 codes (Supplementary Tables S2 and S3). The conditions included were anxiety disorders, asthma, atrial fibrillation, coronary heart disease (CHD), chronic kidney disease (CKD), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), dementia, depression, diabetes mellitus, epilepsy, heart failure, hypertension, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), osteoporosis, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), rheumatoid arthritis, and stroke and transient ischaemic attack (TIA). These conditions comprise most of the general practice ‘Quality and Outcomes (QOF) Framework’.13 In addition, individuals diagnosed with three diabetes subtypes (type 1, type 2, undetermined) were identified using an algorithm.14 ‘Undetermined type diabetes’ was assigned when criteria for type 1 or type 2 were not met.

The final study dataset excluded records missing week of birth or sex, or where the diagnosis date was before birth or after death dates.

Variables

Monthly incidence was derived from the number of individuals diagnosed with a long-term condition for the first time, each month. Age at the earliest found diagnosis date was categorised (<20, 20–29, 30–39, 40–49, 50–59, 60–69, 70–79, 80–89, ≥90 years). Sex was male/female. Ethnic groups were analysed using harmonised Office for National Statistics (ONS) categories (White/Black/Asian/Mixed/other/unknown). Deprivation was derived from the LSOA code at the time of diagnosis mapped to the 2019 Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation15 and categorised in quintiles (1, most deprived, to 5, least deprived).

Frailty was based on an internationally established cumulative deficit model that utilises an electronic Frailty Index (eFI).16–18 eFI scores were used to categorise individuals as: fit, mild, moderate, or severely frail using 10 years of previous WLGP data from date of diagnosis. Individuals without sufficient coverage of GP data were assigned to a missing category. Learning disability status (yes/no) was identified for the study cohort using Read v2 codes (Supplementary Table S4). Socioeconomic categories with one to four counts were rounded to five to prevent accidental disclosure and the excess counts deducted from an unknown/missing/adjacent category.

Outcomes

The primary outcome measure was the monthly incidence rates for each long-term condition. This was derived for the full study period from January 2000 to December 2021. The primary analysis used data from January 2015 to December 2021; the primary outcome was the relative difference between observed and expected incidence rates from 2020 to 2021. The secondary outcome was the annual number and proportion of incident cases by each sociodemographic and clinical subgroup.

Statistical analysis

Monthly incidence rates were derived from the number of new diagnoses occurring each month × 100 000/population size and presented descriptively for the full study period. Population size was estimated from individuals registered to GPs in Wales on 1 July of each year; a breakdown by age group, sex, and social deprivation was presented to check population stability over time. The population size of Wales published by the ONS19 was extracted to estimate coverage achieved by the GP-registered population size. Three-month rolling averages were derived from the mean rate of the month in question, the previous, and the following month. A seasonal autoregressive integrated moving average (SARIMA) model on monthly incidence data from January 2015 to December 2019 was fitted to predict the expected incidence rate (and 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) for each month in 2020 and 2021. Model selection is described in Supplementary Box S1. The difference between the total observed and predicted (lower and upper 95% CI bound) rates was calculated over the 2-year period, and for 2020 and 2021 separately. Percentage differences were (observed – expected) × 100/expected rates. Counts and percentages of individuals by demographic groups were presented for each year from 2000 to 2021, and for 2015–2019 and 2020–2021. Each of the 17 long-term conditions and three diabetes subgroups was examined and analysed separately. As sensitivity analyses, the primary analysis was repeated on the number of cases, unadjusted for population. Statistical analyses were performed using R V4.1.2.

Public involvement

A public partner contributed public or patient perspective to stakeholder discussions at each stage of the study, including interpretation of the significance and potential impact of the results.

RESULTS

There were 5 476 012 diagnoses of long-term conditions identified between January 2000 and December 2021 belonging to 2 257 992 individuals after minor exclusions (Figure 1). Coverage of the population of Wales using GP data in SAIL (Supplementary Table S5) was high (>80% from 2003, and >85% from 2015). Supplementary Table S6 shows that population demographics in the GP population were generally stable from 2000 to 2021.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Study flowchart: numbers presented are number of diagnoses (number of individuals). Data were extracted in two ways: (a) via using a ‘diabetes algorithm’ to identify individuals diagnosed with type 1, type 2, or undetermined type diabetes, (b) via using International Classification of Diseases (version 10) and Read codes to identify individuals diagnosed with one or more of 17 conditions (including diabetes mellitus). For (a), the identification algorithm selected the earliest diagnosis date per individual. For (b), the number of diagnoses refers to the number of unique diagnosis dates available, where a diagnosis date is defined as having one or more diagnosis codes recorded on that day. The final dataset included the earliest recorded diagnosis date for each individual per condition. CHD = coronary heart disease. CKD = chronic kidney disease. COPD = chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. IBD = inflammatory bowel disease. PEDW = Patient Episode Database for Wales. PVD = peripheral vascular disease. TIA = transient ischaemic attack. WLGP = Welsh Longitudinal General Practice.

A fully interactive dashboard showing incidence counts and rates from 2000 to 2021 for all 17 long-term conditions and diabetes subtypes is available here: https://envhe.shinyapps.io/wales-cec-ltc-incidence/ (source code: https://gitlab.com/envhe/wales-cec-ltc-incidence-shiny-dashboard). Figure 2 shows monthly incidence rates from 2015 to 2021, and predicted rates from 2020 by condition. There was an abrupt reduction around March to April 2020 across all conditions, followed by a general upward trend in subsequent months.

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Monthly observed number of diagnoses per 100 000 population from 2015 to 2021 for 17 long-term conditions and three diabetes subtypes (type 1/type 2/undetermined). For 2020 and 2021, monthly predicted number of diagnoses per 100 000 are also shown with 95% confidence intervals indicated by the shaded region. Monthly observed data are overlaid with 3-month rolling averages (solid line). CKD = chronic kidney disease. COPD = chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. PVD = peripheral vascular disease. TIA = transient ischaemic attack.

Table 1 shows the difference in the total observed and expected incidence rates over 2020–2021 by condition. Observed incidence was lower than mean expected incidence for all conditions, except type 1 diabetes. Predicted rates are not available for osteoporosis as a SARIMA model was not fitted because of inconsistent trends in 2015–2019 data.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Total observed and predicted incidence rate per 100 000 population in 2020 and 2021 a

Conditions with the largest relative deficit in diagnoses were COPD, depression, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, anxiety disorders, and asthma. Observed rates for COPD were 38.4% (95% CI = 29.5 to 45.4) lower than expected, corresponding to an undiagnosed population of 343 (95% CI = 230 to 456) per 100 000 individuals. Anxiety disorders had the largest absolute undiagnosed population of 830 (95% CI = 281 to 1379) per 100 000. Compared with 2020, estimated differences for 2021 were similar for COPD and anxiety disorders, and smaller, but with larger 95% CIs, among most other conditions (Supplementary Table S7). Figure 2 suggests that there may still be an overall lag in diagnoses in 2021 for most conditions. Incidence rates for some conditions were close to pre-pandemic levels by the end of 2021; others (for example, PVD and stroke and TIA) were approaching predicted rates near the start of 2021 but dropped again towards the end of the year.

The estimated rate of underdiagnosis for diabetes mellitus was 178 (95% CI = 57 to 299) in 2020 and 137 (95% CI = −104 to 378) in 2021, similar to corresponding estimates for type 2 diabetes of 168 (95% CI = 72 to 263) in 2020 and 132 (95% CI = −38 to 302) in 2021, whereas the estimated underdiagnosis for type 1 diabetes was 0 (95% CI = −8 to 7) in 2020 and −3 (95% CI = −11 to 5) in 2021.

Results from analysis of incidence counts unadjusted for population size (Supplementary Tables S8 and S9) were consistent with primary findings. SARIMA model specification and estimated parameters for analysis of incidence rates and counts are shown in Supplementary Tables S10 and S11, respectively.

Supplementary Tables S12 to S31 show annual incidence by sociodemographic factors from 2015 to 2021. The study dashboard (link before) includes data from 2000. There was no notable difference between the distribution of cases among categories in 2020 and/or 2021 compared with preceding years for any of the sociodemographic factors, indicating that, although overall rates of diagnosis decreased, influences of sociodemographic characteristics on being diagnosed did not drastically differ pre- and post-2020.

Type 1 diabetes was the only condition with an estimated mean net gain in incidence of 8.6% (95% CI = −22.8 to 83.3) (Table 1). Given that type 1 diabetes is diagnosed in younger patients (around 75% <50 years old), whether diagnosis trends differed between younger (<50 years) and older (>50 years) populations was investigated (Supplementary Figure S1).

Most conditions were rare in those aged <50 years (monthly rate <10 per 100 000), but among the remaining conditions, trends within age groups were similar to aggregate trends, including for depression, anxiety, and asthma. As further post hoc exploration, Supplementary Figures S2 and S3 show that incidence trends by sex and social deprivation groups were also similar.

DISCUSSION

Summary

From 2020 to 2021, there were deficits in recorded incidences across multiple long-term conditions, likely an indirect effect of the COVID-19 pandemic. Increasing demand and workforce vacancies could have affected availability of appointments and postponed diagnostic tests. A typical general practice of 10 000 patients might have over 400 undiagnosed long-term conditions (some potentially occurring in the same individuals). Observed incidence for some conditions (for example, heart failure and stroke and TIA) increased and declined again during 2021; this could reflect changes in healthcare pressures between the alpha wave (September 2020 to March 2021) and the delta wave (June 2021 to December 2021) in Wales. Other conditions were approaching pre-pandemic levels towards the end of 2021 (for example, asthma), which could reflect condition-specific ‘catch-up’ activity but an excess would be needed to reach net expected numbers.

Strengths and limitations

This study included multiple conditions, mostly selected from the QOF framework, previously used to monitor and reward performance in primary care, thus electronic coding quality is generally good, although this can vary between individual clinicians and practices. Overall data coverage was close to the full population of Wales. The assumption that trends in 2015–2019 would persist if COVID-19 had not occurred could not be tested. Possible interactions between COVID-19 and prognosis were not accounted for, for example, excess mortality could partially explain the persistent reduction in incidence and could have led to an overestimation of expected rates. However, given that underdiagnosis is evident in a wide range of conditions and in those aged <50 years, non-presentation and recording may be the biggest issue.

Comparison with existing literature

Observational studies conducted in Spain have reported reduced incidence of multiple chronic diseases in 2020,20 and substantial reductions in clinical indicators for control and treatment of chronic disease in March and April 2020.21 A UK-based study using primary care data reported reduced incidences of depression (47.1%) and anxiety (40.8%) in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, especially among working-age adults registered at practices in more deprived areas.22 The current study included longer-term data showing there is likely still a lag for most conditions as services have resumed pre-pandemic activity. Further, the pandemic has exacerbated an already high prevalence of undiagnosed COPD.23,24

UK pandemic guidance to postpone tests that may increase the respiratory transmission of viral infections, including spirometry, likely contributed.25 This might also explain the difference in lag towards the end of 2021 between asthma and COPD, as spirometry is needed to diagnose COPD whereas a diagnosis of asthma is based more on the clinical history. Reductions in hospital admissions for infectious exacerbation of COPD following the national lockdown in Wales26 could also in part explain the reduction in incidence rates.

The absence of deficits in recorded incidence for type 1 diabetes is likely condition-specific, rather than owing to a younger patient population, as type 1 diabetes inevitably presents soon after symptom onset and there were no indications that overall trends were confounded by age. Other studies have reported increased incidence in 2020–2021, mostly in younger patients (<18 years)27–30 and increased risk following COVID-19 infections27,28 although it is unclear if the association is causative.

Implications for research and practice

Rectifying this backlog of case identification and consequent management deficits is likely to require specific strategic and operational planning at the level of primary care organisations. Targeted catch-up initiatives are unlikely to be feasible because of the lack of sociodemographic characterisation of the missing diagnoses. Consideration for specific resource allocation to enable healthcare staff time to be committed to searching records, testing, and screening risk groups (for example, across cardiovascular conditions) is needed. Governments and policymakers may need to identify such specific funding to tackle this workload as part of COVID-19 recovery, alongside other higher-profile patient needs such as cancer care and elective surgery.

General or condition-specific patient advocacy organisations and charitable foundations may have a role in ‘championing’ for patients with potentially relevant symptoms to present to primary care (as advocated also, for example, with potential cancer symptoms),31 or to seek attendance and ‘health checks’ among infrequent attenders.

Further research is ongoing to identify exactly what deficits in condition management, health outcomes, and impact on health services have occurred.

Acknowledgments

This study makes use of anonymised data held in the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank. The authors acknowledge all the data providers who make anonymised data available for research. The authors also acknowledge Mark Walker (senior medical officer at the Directorate of Primary care and Mental Health, Health and Social Services Group, Welsh Government) for his contribution to this study.

Notes

Funding

This work was funded by the Wales COVID-19 Evidence Centre, funded by Health and Care Research Wales. This work was supported by the Con-COV team funded by the Medical Research Council (grant number: MR/V028367/1). This work was supported by Health Data Research UK, which receives its funding from HDR UK Ltd (HDR-9006) funded by the UK Medical Research Council, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, Economic and Social Research Council, Department of Health and Social Care (England), Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates, Health and Social Care Research and Development Division (Welsh Government), Public Health Agency (Northern Ireland), British Heart Foundation (BHF), and the Wellcome Trust. This work was supported by the ADR Wales programme of work. The ADR Wales programme of work is aligned to the priority themes as identified in the Welsh Government’s national strategy: Prosperity for All. ADR Wales brings together data science experts at Swansea University Medical School, staff from the Wales Institute of Social and Economic Research, Data and Methods (WISERD) at Cardiff University, and specialist teams within the Welsh Government to develop new evidence that supports Prosperity for All by using the SAIL Databank at Swansea University, to link and analyse anonymised data. ADR Wales is part of the Economic and Social Research Council (part of UK Research and Innovation) funded ADR UK (grant ES/S007393/1).

Ethical approval

All research conducted has been completed under the permission and approval of the SAIL independent Information Governance Review Panel (IGRP) project number 0911.

Data

The raw data sources are described in detail in the methods, which were accessed and analysed within a Trusted Research Environment (TRE). Extracting the data from the TRE is prohibited as a condition of use. Accredited researchers can apply to access the SAIL Databank via a governed approval process and is independent of the study authors (https://saildatabank.com/). The main datasets used are: Patient Episode Dataset for Wales (PEDW) dataset, Welsh Longitudinal General Practice (WLGP) dataset, and the Welsh Demographic Service Dataset. Tabulated data and results are available for readers to access within the dashboard (link above).

Provenance

Freely submitted; externally peer reviewed.

Competing interests

All authors completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at http://www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work; Adrian Edwards declares a role as Director of the Wales Covid-19 Evidence Centre as part of university employment, receiving no further payments; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous 3 years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work. All other authors have declared no competing interests.

Discuss this article

Contribute and read comments about this article: bjgp.org/letters

  • Received July 5, 2022.
  • Revision requested August 28, 2022.
  • Accepted November 25, 2022.
  • © The Authors
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This article is Open Access: CC BY 4.0 licence (http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/).

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Technical Advisory Group, Welsh Government
    (2021) Five harms arising from COVID-19: consideration of potential baseline measures, https://gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2021-07/technical-advisory-group-5-harms-arising-from-covid-19_0.pdf (accessed 17 Feb 2023).
  2. 2.↵
    1. Sanchez-Ramirez DC,
    2. Normand K,
    3. Zhaoyun Y,
    4. Torres-Castro R
    (2021) Long-term impact of COVID-19: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Biomed 9, 8, 900.
    OpenUrl
  3. 3.↵
    1. Carr A,
    2. Smith JA,
    3. Camaradou J,
    4. Prieto-Alhambra D
    (2021) Growing backlog of planned surgery due to Covid-19. BMJ 372, n339.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    1. Department of Health and Social Care
    (2012) Long term conditions compendium of information: third edition, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/long-term-conditions-compendium-of-information-third-edition (accessed 17 Feb 2023).
  5. 5.↵
    1. Watt T,
    2. Firth Z,
    3. Fisher R,
    4. Kelly E
    (Sep 17, 2020) Use of primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic: patient-level data analysis of the impact of COVID-19 on primary care activity in England. The Health Foundation, https://www.health.org.uk/news-and-comment/charts-and-infographics/use-of-primary-care-during-the-covid-19-pandemic (accessed 17 Feb 2023).
  6. 6.↵
    1. Lyons RA,
    2. Jones KH,
    3. John G,
    4. et al.
    (2009) The SAIL databank: linking multiple health and social care datasets. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 9, 3.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.
    1. Ford DV,
    2. Jones KH,
    3. Verplancke JP,
    4. et al.
    (2009) The SAIL Databank: building a national architecture for e-health research and evaluation. BMC Health Serv Res 9, 157.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Jones KH,
    2. Ford DV,
    3. Thompson S,
    4. Lyons RA
    (2019) A profile of the SAIL Databank on the UK secure research platform. Int J Popul Data Sci 4, 2, 1134.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. 9.
    1. Jones KH,
    2. Ford DV,
    3. Jones C,
    4. et al.
    (2014) A case study of the Secure Anonymous Information Linkage (SAIL) Gateway: a privacy-protecting remote access system for health-related research and evaluation. J Biomed Inform 50, 100, 196–204.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.
    1. Rodgers SE,
    2. Demmler JC,
    3. Dsilva R,
    4. Lyons RA
    (2012) Protecting health data privacy while using residence-based environment and demographic data. Health Place 18, 2, 209–217.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Rodgers SE,
    2. Lyons RA,
    3. Dsilva R,
    4. et al.
    (2009) Residential Anonymous Linking Fields (RALFs): a novel information infrastructure to study the interaction between the environment and individuals’ health. J Public Health (Oxf) 31, 4, 582–588.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Office for National Statistics
    (2022) Census geography. https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20220401215420/https:/www.ons.gov.uk/methodology/geography/ukgeographies/censusgeography (accessed 21 Feb 2023).
  13. 13.↵
    1. Welsh Government
    Statistical first release. General Medical Services contract: Quality and Outcomes Framework statistics for Wales, 2018–19. 25 September 2019. https://www.gov.wales/sites/default/files/statistics-and-research/2019-09/general-medical-services-contract-quality-and-outcomes-framework-april-2018-march-20199-599.pdf (accessed 21 Feb 2023).
  14. 14.↵
    1. Rafferty J,
    2. Stephens JW,
    3. Atkinson MD,
    4. et al.
    (2021) A retrospective epidemiological study of type 1 diabetes mellitus in Wales, UK between 2008 and 2018. Int J Popul Data Sci 6, 1, 1387.
    OpenUrl
  15. 15.↵
    1. Office for National Statistics
    Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation (full Index update with ranks): 2019, updated 2020. https://gov.wales/welsh-index-multiple-deprivation-full-index-update-ranks-2019 (accessed 17 Feb 2023).
  16. 16.
    1. Mitnitski AB,
    2. Mogilner AJ,
    3. Rockwood K
    (2001) Accumulation of deficits as a proxy measure of aging. Sci World J 1, 323–336.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  17. 17.
    1. Clegg A,
    2. Bates C,
    3. Young J,
    4. et al.
    (2016) Development and validation of an electronic frailty index using routine primary care electronic health record data. Age Ageing 45, 3, 353–360.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Hollinghurst J,
    2. Fry R,
    3. Akbari A,
    4. et al.
    (2019) External validation of the electronic Frailty Index using the population of Wales within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank. Age Ageing 48, 6, 922–926.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Office for National Statistics
    (2021) Dataset. Lower layer Super Output Area population estimates (supporting information). https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/datasets/lowersuperoutputareamidyearpopulationestimates (accessed 21 Feb 2023).
  20. 20.↵
    1. Sisó-Almirall A,
    2. Kostov B,
    3. Sánchez E,
    4. et al.
    (2022) Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary health care disease incidence rates: 2017 to 2020. Ann Fam Med 20, 1, 63–68.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. 21.↵
    1. Coma E,
    2. Mora N,
    3. Méndez L,
    4. et al.
    (2020) Primary care in the time of COVID-19: monitoring the effect of the pandemic and the lockdown measures on 34 quality of care indicators calculated for 288 primary care practices covering about 6 million people in Catalonia. BMC Fam Pract 21, 208.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Carr MJ,
    2. Steeg S,
    3. Webb RT,
    4. et al.
    (2021) Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary care-recorded mental illness and self-harm episodes in the UK: a population-based cohort study. Lancet Public Health 6, 2, e124–e135.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Almagro P,
    2. Soriano JB
    (2017) Underdiagnosis in COPD: a battle worth fighting. Lancet Respir Med 5, 5, 367–368.
    OpenUrl
  24. 24.↵
    1. Bastin AJ,
    2. Starling L,
    3. Ahmed R,
    4. et al.
    (2010) High prevalence of undiagnosed and severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease at first hospital admission with acute exacerbation. Chron Respir Dis 7, 2, 91–97.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Primary Care Respiratory Society
    (2020) PCRS Position Statement. Diagnostic work up of the patient presenting with respiratory symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic, https://www.pcrs-uk.org/sites/pcrs-uk.org/files/Diagnosis%20of%20asthma%20and%20COPD%20during%20Covid.pdf (accessed 17 Feb 2023).
  26. 26.↵
    1. Alsallakh MA,
    2. Sivakumaran S,
    3. Kennedy S,
    4. et al.
    (2021) Impact of COVID-19 lockdown on the incidence and mortality of acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: national interrupted time series analyses for Scotland and Wales. BMC Med 19, 1, 124.
    OpenUrl
  27. 27.↵
    1. McKeigue PM,
    2. McGurnaghan S,
    3. Blackbourn L,
    4. et al.
    (2022) Relation of incident type 1 diabetes to recent COVID-19 infection: cohort study using e-health record linkage in Scotland. Diabetes Care doi:10.2337/dc22-0385.dc220385.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  28. 28.↵
    1. Barrett CE,
    2. Koyama AK,
    3. Alvarez P,
    4. et al.
    (2022) Risk for newly diagnosed diabetes >30 days after SARS-CoV-2 infection among persons aged <18 years — United States, March 1, 2020–June 28, 2021. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 71, 2, 59–65.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  29. 29.
    1. Unsworth R,
    2. Wallace S,
    3. Oliver NS,
    4. et al.
    (2020) New-onset type 1 diabetes in children during COVID-19: multicenter regional findings in the UK. Diabetes Care 43, 11, e170–e171.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  30. 30.↵
    1. Passanisi S,
    2. Salzano G,
    3. Aloe M,
    4. et al.
    (2022) Increasing trend of type 1 diabetes incidence in the pediatric population of the Calabria region in 2019‒2021. Ital J Pediatr 48, 1, 66.
    OpenUrl
  31. 31.↵
    1. Smith P,
    2. Moody G,
    3. Clarke E,
    4. et al.
    (2022) Protocol for a feasibility study of a cancer symptom awareness campaign to support the rapid diagnostic centre referral pathway in a socioeconomically deprived area: Targeted Intensive Community-based campaign To Optimise Cancer awareness (TIC-TOC). BMJ Open 12, 10, e063280.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

Online First

Download PDF
Download PowerPoint
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on incidence of long-term conditions in Wales: a population data linkage study using primary and secondary care health records
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on incidence of long-term conditions in Wales: a population data linkage study using primary and secondary care health records
Cathy Qi, Tim Osborne, Rowena Bailey, Alison Cooper, Joe P Hollinghurst, Ashley Akbari, Ruth Crowder, Holly Peters, Rebecca-Jane Law, Ruth Lewis, Deb Smith, Adrian Edwards, Ronan A Lyons
British Journal of General Practice 6 March 2023; BJGP.2022.0353. DOI: 10.3399/BJGP.2022.0353

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on incidence of long-term conditions in Wales: a population data linkage study using primary and secondary care health records
Cathy Qi, Tim Osborne, Rowena Bailey, Alison Cooper, Joe P Hollinghurst, Ashley Akbari, Ruth Crowder, Holly Peters, Rebecca-Jane Law, Ruth Lewis, Deb Smith, Adrian Edwards, Ronan A Lyons
British Journal of General Practice 6 March 2023; BJGP.2022.0353. DOI: 10.3399/BJGP.2022.0353
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • Abstract
    • INTRODUCTION
    • METHOD
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Acknowledgments
    • Notes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • anxiety
  • chronic disease
  • COVID-19
  • diagnosis
  • primary health care

More in this TOC Section

  • The impact of remote care approaches on continuity in primary care: a mixed-studies systematic review
  • Performance of ethnic minority versus White doctors in the MRCGP assessment 2016–2021: a cross-sectional study
  • Trends in the registration of anxiety in Belgian primary care from 2000 to 2021: a registry-based study
Show more Research

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2023 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242