Background People of minority ethnic backgrounds may be disproportionately affected by severe COVID-19. Whether this relates to increased infection risk, more severe disease progression, or worse in-hospital survival is unknown. The contribution of comorbidities or socioeconomic deprivation to ethnic patterning of outcomes is also unclear. Methods We conducted a case-control and a cohort study in an inner city primary and secondary care setting to examine whether ethnic background affects the risk of hospital admission with severe COVID-19 and/or in-hospital mortality. Inner city adult residents admitted to hospital with confirmed COVID-19 ( n = 872 cases) were compared with 3,488 matched controls randomly sampled from a primary healthcare database comprising 344,083 people residing in the same region. For the cohort study, we studied 1827 adults consecutively admitted with COVID-19. The primary exposure variable was self-defined ethnicity. Analyses were adjusted for socio-demographic and clinical variables. Findings The 872 cases comprised 48.1% Black, 33.7% White, 12.6% Mixed/Other and 5.6% Asian patients. In conditional logistic regression analyses, Black and Mixed/Other ethnicity were associated with higher admission risk than white (OR 3.12 [95% CI 2.63–3.71] and 2.97 [2.30–3.85] respectively). Adjustment for comorbidities and deprivation modestly attenuated the association (OR 2.24 [1.83–2.74] for Black, 2.70 [2.03–3.59] for Mixed/Other). Asian ethnicity was not associated with higher admission risk (adjusted OR 1.01 [0.70–1.46]). In the cohort study of 1827 patients, 455 (28.9%) died over a median (IQR) of 8 (4–16) days. Age and male sex, but not Black (adjusted HR 1.06 [0.82–1.37]) or Mixed/Other ethnicity (adjusted HR 0.72 [0.47–1.10]), were associated with in-hospital mortality. Asian ethnicity was associated with higher in-hospital mortality but with a large confidence interval (adjusted HR 1.71 [1.15–2.56]). Interpretation Black and Mixed ethnicity are independently associated with greater admission risk with COVID-19 and may be risk factors for development of severe disease, but do not affect in-hospital mortality risk. Comorbidities and socioeconomic factors only partly account for this and additional ethnicity-related factors may play a large role. The impact of COVID-19 may be different in Asians. Funding British Heart Foundation; the National Institute for Health Research; Health Data Research UK.

Potential beneficial pathways by which vitamin K may reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease mortality.

BackgroundA quarter of the population present at least once a year with a musculoskeletal disorder. Primary hip osteoarthritis is a high-volume condition with significant clinical need and population-level costs. There remains much variation in patient outcomes and care delivery costs for this condition.AimsThe study aimed to gauge if pathway redesign based on the principles of value-based healthcare (VBHC) could increase value. The aim was to calculate the value of treatment for primary hip osteoarthritis through measuring outcomes that matter to patients, as well as the costs of delivering them. Additionally it aimed to compare two care pathways to identify which elements may better promote the delivery of high-value clinical care.MethodsTwo care models were evaluated: the first being a traditional model with multiple entry points and without pathway standardisation, and the second an intentionally designed standardised multidisciplinary pathway. Mandated National Health Service patient-reported outcomes were assessed but were restructured into a patient-centred format to assess the impact on pain, function and psychological outcomes. Patient-level pathway economic evaluation was performed. Using these data, outcomes were mapped against cost to calculate value.ResultsThere were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between the two models. The intentionally designed model delivered better value care, having lower pathway costs. This model produced a small but inconsistent positive financial margin.ConclusionsIntentionally designed, integrated elective services offer an opportunity to develop and evaluate VBHC models. Analysis of two care pathways from a VBHC perspective demonstrated that an intentionally designed pathway had higher value. The higher value pathway maximised the benefits of having physiotherapists and orthopaedic surgeons working side by side. Developing and measuring patient-orientated outcomes and performing accurate economic evaluation are the key to understanding and achieving better value care.

No abstract