AIMS To classify trajectories of long term HbA1c values in patients after diagnosis of Type 2 diabetes and examine each trajectory's associations with subsequent microvascular and macrovascular events and mortality. METHODS Longitudinal follow-up of 28,016 patients newly diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes. Latent growth mixture modeling to identify ten-year HbA1c trajectories. Cox proportional hazards models to assess how HbA1c trajectories were associated with events (microvascular and macrovascular) and mortality. RESULTS We identified 5 HbA1c trajectories: “low stable” (82.5%), “moderate increasing late” (5.1%), “high decreasing early” (4.9%), “moderate peaking late” (4.1%) and “moderate peaking early” (3.3%). After adjusting for average HbA1c, compared to the low stable trajectory, all non-stable trajectories were associated with higher incidences of microvascular events (hazard ratio (HR) range, 1.28 (95% CI, 1.08-1.53) (high decreasing early) to 1.45 (95% CI, 1.20-1.75) (moderate peaking early). The high decreasing early trajectory was associated with an increased mortality risk (HR, 1.27 (95% CI, 1.03-1.58)). Trajectories were not associated with macrovascular events. CONCLUSIONS Non-stable HbA1c trajectories was associated with greater risk of microvascular events and mortality. These findings suggest a potential benefit of early diabetes detection, prioritizing good glycemic control, and maintaining control over time.

Aim Diabetic foot ulcers are associated with an increased risk of death. We evaluated whether ulcer severity at presentation predicts mortality. Methods Patients from a national, retrospective, cohort of veterans with type 2 diabetes who developed incident diabetic foot ulcers between January 1, 2006 and September 1, 2010, were followed until death or the end of the study period, January 1, 2012. Ulcers were characterized as early stage, osteomyelitis, or gangrene at presentation. Cox proportional hazard regression identified independent predictors of death, controlling for comorbidities, laboratory parameters, and healthcare utilization. Results 66,323 veterans were included in the cohort and followed for a mean of 27.7 months: 1-, 2-, and 5-year survival rates were 80.80%, 69.01% and 28.64%, respectively. Compared to early stage ulcers, gangrene was associated with an increased risk of mortality (HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.57 – 1.83, p<0.001). The magnitude of this effect was greater than diagnosed vascular disease, i.e., coronary artery disease, peripheral arterial disease, or stroke. Conclusion Initial diabetic foot ulcer severity is a more significant predictor of subsequent mortality than coronary artery disease, peripheral arterial disease, or stroke. Unrecognized or under-estimated vascular disease and/or sepsis secondary to gangrene should be explored as possible causal explanations.

Risk for panic disorder with familial bipolar disorder appears to be inherited. Inherited risk for panic disorder with bipolar disorder may indicate a shared genetic etiology for both disorders in some families. The patterns of bipolar disorder and panic disorder comorbidity observed in families imply a complex genetic etiology, which may be elucidated by using endophenotypes.

Primary care lags behind secondary care in the reporting of, and learning from, incidents that put patient safety at risk. In primary care, there is no universally agreed approach to classifying the severity of harm arising from such patient-safety incidents. This lack of an agreed approach limits learning that could lead to the prevention of injury to patients. In a review of research on patient safety in primary care, we identified 21 existing approaches to the classification of harm severity. Using the World Health Organization’s (WHO’s) International Classification for Patient Safety as a reference, we undertook a framework analysis of these approaches. We then developed a new system for the classification of harm severity. To assess and classify harm, most existing approaches use measures of symptom duration (11/21), symptom severity (11/21) and/or the level of intervention required to manage the harm (14/21). However, few of these approaches account for the deleterious effects of hospitalization or the psychological stress that may be experienced by patients and/or their relatives. The new classification system we developed builds on WHO’s International Classification for Patient Safety and takes account not only of hospitalization and psychological stress but also of so-called near misses and uncertain outcomes. The constructs we have outlined have the potential to be applied internationally, across primary-care settings, to improve both the detection and prevention of incidents that cause the most severe harm to patients.

Objective. To identify whether active use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) increases susceptibility to developing suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared to the use of other common analgesics.Methods. We performed a propensity score-matched cohort study with active comparators, using a large UK primary care data set. The cohort consisted of adult patients age ≥18 years with osteoarthritis (OA) who were followed up from January 30 to July 31, 2020. Patients prescribed an NSAID (excluding topical preparations) were compared to those prescribed either co-codamol (paracetamol and codeine) or co-dydramol (paracetamol and dihydrocodeine). A total of 13,202 patients prescribed NSAIDs were identified, compared to 12,457 patients prescribed the comparator drugs. The primary outcome measure was the documentation of suspected or confirmed COVID-19, and the secondary outcome measure was all-cause mortality.Results. During follow-up, the incidence rates of suspected/confirmed COVID-19 were 15.4 and 19.9 per 1,000 person-years in the NSAID-exposed group and comparator group, respectively. Adjusted hazard ratios for suspected or confirmed COVID-19 among the unmatched and propensity score-matched OA cohorts, using data from clinical consultations in primary care settings, were 0.82 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.62-1.10) and 0.79 (95% CI 0.57-1.11), respectively, and adjusted hazard ratios for the risk of all-cause mortality were 0.97 (95% CI 0.75-1.27) and 0.85 (95% CI 0.61-1.20), respectively. There was no effect modification by age or sex. Conclusion.No increase in the risk of suspected or confirmed COVID-19 or mortality was observed among patients with OA in a primary care setting who were prescribed NSAIDs as compared to those who received comparator drugs. These results are reassuring and suggest that in the absence of acute illness, NSAIDs can be safely prescribed during the ongoing pandemic.