SummaryBackgroundFrailty is associated with older age and multimorbidity (two or more long-term conditions); however, little is known about its prevalence or effects on mortality in younger populations. This paper aims to examine the association between frailty, multimorbidity, specific long-term conditions, and mortality in a middle-aged and older aged population.MethodsData were sourced from the UK Biobank. Frailty phenotype was based on five criteria (weight loss, exhaustion, grip strength, low physical activity, slow walking pace). Participants were deemed frail if they met at least three criteria, pre-frail if they fulfilled one or two criteria, and not frail if no criteria were met. Sociodemographic characteristics and long-term conditions were examined. The outcome was all-cause mortality, which was measured at a median of 7 years follow-up. Multinomial logistic regression compared sociodemographic characteristics and long-term conditions of frail or pre-frail participants with non-frail participants. Cox proportional hazards models examined associations between frailty or pre-frailty and mortality. Results were stratified by age group (37–45, 45–55, 55–65, 65–73 years) and sex, and were adjusted for multimorbidity count, socioeconomic status, body-mass index, smoking status, and alcohol use.Findings493 737 participants aged 37–73 years were included in the study, of whom 16 538 (3%) were considered frail, 185 360 (38%) pre-frail, and 291 839 (59%) not frail. Frailty was significantly associated with multimorbidity (prevalence 18% [4435/25 338] in those with four or more long-term conditions; odds ratio [OR] 27·1, 95% CI 25·3–29·1) socioeconomic deprivation, smoking, obesity, and infrequent alcohol consumption. The top five long-term conditions associated with frailty were multiple sclerosis (OR 15·3; 99·75% CI 12·8–18·2); chronic fatigue syndrome (12·9; 11·1–15·0); chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (5·6; 5·2–6·1); connective tissue disease (5·4; 5·0–5·8); and diabetes (5·0; 4·7–5·2). Pre-frailty and frailty were significantly associated with mortality for all age strata in men and women (except in women aged 37–45 years) after adjustment for confounders.InterpretationEfforts to identify, manage, and prevent frailty should include middle-aged individuals with multimorbidity, in whom frailty is significantly associated with mortality, even after adjustment for number of long-term conditions, sociodemographics, and lifestyle. Research, clinical guidelines, and health-care services must shift focus from single conditions to the requirements of increasingly complex patient populations.FundingCSO Catalyst Grant and National Health Service Research for Scotland Career Research Fellowship.

Background Multimorbidity is associated with higher mortality, but the relationship with cancer and cardiovascular mortality is unclear. The influence of demographics and type of condition on the relationship of multimorbidity with mortality remains unknown. We examine the relationship between multimorbidity (number/type) and cause of mortality and the impact of demographic factors on this relationship. Methods Data source: the UK Biobank; 500,769 participants; 37-73 years; 53.7% female. Exposure variables: number and type of long-term conditions (LTCs) ( N = 43) at baseline, modelled separately. Cox regression models were used to study the impact of LTCs on all-cause/vascular/cancer mortality during median 7-year follow-up. All-cause mortality regression models were stratified by age/sex/socioeconomic status. Results All-cause mortality is 2.9% (14,348 participants). Of all deaths, 8350 (58.2%) were cancer deaths and 2985 (20.8%) vascular deaths. Dose-response relationship is observed between the increasing number of LTCs and all-cause/cancer/vascular mortality. A strong association is observed between cardiometabolic multimorbidity and all three clinical outcomes; non-cardiometabolic multimorbidity (excluding cancer) is associated with all-cause/vascular mortality. All-cause mortality risk for those with ≥ 4 LTCs was nearly 3 times higher than those with no LTCs (HR 2.79, CI 2.61–2.98); for ≥ 4 cardiometabolic conditions, it was > 3 times higher (HR 3.20, CI 2.56–4.00); and for ≥ 4 non-cardiometabolic conditions (excluding cancer), it was 50% more (HR 1.50, CI 1.36–1.67). For those with ≥ 4 LTCs, morbidity combinations that included cardiometabolic conditions, chronic kidney disease, cancer, epilepsy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression, osteoporosis and connective tissue disorders had the greatest impact on all-cause mortality. In the stratified model by age/sex, absolute all-cause mortality was higher among the 60–73 age group with an increasing number of LTCs; however, the relative effect size of the increasing number of LTCs on higher mortality risk was larger among those 37–49 years, especially men. While socioeconomic status was a significant predictor of all-cause mortality, mortality risk with increasing number of LTCs remained constant across different socioeconomic gradients. Conclusions Multimorbidity is associated with higher all-cause/cancer/vascular mortality. Type, as opposed to number, of LTCs may have an important role in understanding the relationship between multimorbidity and mortality. Multimorbidity had a greater relative impact on all-cause mortality in middle-aged as opposed to older populations, particularly males, which deserves exploration. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12916-019-1305-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

SummaryBackgroundAddressing the causes of low engagement in health care is a prerequisite for reducing health inequalities. People who miss multiple appointments are an under-researched group who might have substantial unmet health needs. Individual-level patterns of missed general practice appointments might thus provide a risk marker for vulnerability and poor health outcomes. We sought to ascertain the contributions of patient and practice factors to the likelihood of missing general practice appointments.MethodsFor this national retrospective cohort analysis, we extracted UK National Health Service general practice data that were routinely collected across Scotland between Sept 5, 2013, and Sept 5, 2016. We calculated the per-patient number of missed appointments from individual appointments and investigated the risk of missing a general practice appointment using a negative binomial model offset by number of appointments made. We then analysed the effect of patient-level factors (including age, sex, and socioeconomic status) and practice-level factors (including appointment availability and geographical location) on the risk of missing appointments.FindingsThe full dataset included information from 909 073 patients, of whom 550 083 were included in the analysis after processing. We observed that 104 461 (19·0%) patients missed more than two appointments in the 3 year study period. After controlling for the number of appointments made, patterns of non-attendance could be differentiated, with patients who were aged 16–30 years (relative risk ratio [RRR] 1·21, 95% CI 1·19–1·23) or older than 90 years (2·20, 2·09–2·29), and of low socioeconomic status (Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation decile 1: RRR 2·27, 2·22–2·31) significantly more likely to miss multiple appointments. Men missed fewer appointments overall than women, but were somewhat more likely to miss appointments in the adjusted model (1·05, 1·04–1·06). Practice factors also substantially affected attendance patterns, with urban practices in affluent areas that typically have appointment waiting times of 2–3 days the most likely to have patients who serially miss appointments. The combination of both patient and practice factors to predict appointments missed gave a higher pseudo R2 value (0·66) than models using either group of factors separately (patients only R2=0·54; practice only R2=0·63).InterpretationThe findings that both patient and practice characteristics contribute to non-attendance of general practice appointments raise important questions for both the management of patients who miss multiple appointments and the effectiveness of existing strategies that aim to increase attendance. Addressing these issues should lead to improvements in provision of services and public health.FundingScottish Government Chief Scientist Office and Data Sharing and Linkage Service of the Scottish Government.

BackgroundRecently, studies have examined the underlying patient and practice factors for missed appointments, but less is known about the impact on patient health. People with one or more long-term conditions who fail to attend appointments may be at risk of premature death. This is the first study to examine the effect of missed primary healthcare appointments on all-cause mortality in those with long-term mental and physical health conditions.MethodsWe used a large, nationwide retrospective cohort (n = 824,374) extracted from routinely collected general practice data across Scotland over a 3-year period from September 2013 until September 2016. This data encompasses appointment history for approximately 15% of the Scottish population, and was linked to Scottish deaths records for patients who had died within a 16-month follow-up period. We generated appointment attendance history, number of long-term conditions and prescriptions data for patients. These factors were used in negative binomial and Cox’s proportional hazards modelling to examine the risk of missing appointments and all-cause mortality.ResultsPatients with a greater number of long-term conditions had an increased risk of missing general practice appointments despite controlling for number of appointments made, particularly among patients with mental health conditions. These patients were at significantly greater risk of all-cause mortality, and showed a dose-based response with increasing number of missed appointments. Patients with long-term mental health conditions who missed more than two appointments per year had a greater than 8-fold increase in risk of all-cause mortality compared with those who missed no appointments. These patients died prematurely, commonly from non-natural external factors such as suicide.ConclusionsMissed appointments represent a significant risk marker for all-cause mortality, particularly in patients with mental health conditions. For these patients, existing primary healthcare appointment systems are ineffective. Future interventions should be developed with a particular focus on increasing attendance by these patients.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12916-018-1234-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background It is now well recognised that the risk of severe COVID-19 increases with some long-term conditions (LTCs). However, prior research primarily focuses on individual LTCs and there is a lack of data on the influence of multimorbidity (≥2 LTCs) on the risk of COVID-19. Given the high prevalence of multimorbidity, more detailed understanding of the associations with multimorbidity and COVID-19 would improve risk stratification and help protect those most vulnerable to severe COVID-19. Here we examine the relationships between multimorbidity, polypharmacy (a proxy of multimorbidity), and COVID-19; and how these differ by sociodemographic, lifestyle, and physiological prognostic factors. Methods and findings We studied data from UK Biobank (428,199 participants; aged 37–73; recruited 2006–2010) on self-reported LTCs, medications, sociodemographic, lifestyle, and physiological measures which were linked to COVID-19 test data. Poisson regression models examined risk of COVID-19 by multimorbidity/polypharmacy and effect modification by COVID-19 prognostic factors (age/sex/ethnicity/socioeconomic status/smoking/physical activity/BMI/systolic blood pressure/renal function). 4,498 (1.05%) participants were tested; 1,324 (0.31%) tested positive for COVID-19. Compared with no LTCs, relative risk (RR) of COVID-19 in those with 1 LTC was no higher (RR 1.12 (CI 0.96–1.30)), whereas those with ≥2 LTCs had 48% higher risk; RR 1.48 (1.28–1.71). Compared with no cardiometabolic LTCs, having 1 and ≥2 cardiometabolic LTCs had a higher risk of COVID-19; RR 1.28 (1.12–1.46) and 1.77 (1.46–2.15), respectively. Polypharmacy was associated with a dose response higher risk of COVID-19. All prognostic factors were associated with a higher risk of COVID-19 infection in multimorbidity; being non-white, most socioeconomically deprived, BMI ≥40 kg/m2, and reduced renal function were associated with the highest risk of COVID-19 infection: RR 2.81 (2.09–3.78); 2.79 (2.00–3.90); 2.66 (1.88–3.76); 2.13 (1.46–3.12), respectively. No multiplicative interaction between multimorbidity and prognostic factors was identified. Important limitations include the low proportion of UK Biobank participants with COVID-19 test data (1.05%) and UK Biobank participants being more affluent, healthier and less ethnically diverse than the general population. Conclusions Increasing multimorbidity, especially cardiometabolic multimorbidity, and polypharmacy are associated with a higher risk of developing COVID-19. Those with multimorbidity and additional factors, such as non-white ethnicity, are at heightened risk of COVID-19.