慢性疼痛-患病率,人口不平等和医疗保健利用:初级保健数据库分析。

IF 2.5 Q2 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
BJGP Open Pub Date : 2025-02-27 DOI:10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0147
Siddesh Shetty, James Scuffell, Dianne Aitken, Mark Ashworth
{"title":"慢性疼痛-患病率,人口不平等和医疗保健利用:初级保健数据库分析。","authors":"Siddesh Shetty, James Scuffell, Dianne Aitken, Mark Ashworth","doi":"10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0147","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Chronic pain (CP) is an ill-defined condition, often under-recorded in primary care records.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To determine prevalence, evidence of health inequalities, primary care consultation rates and healthcare utilisation costs of CP.</p><p><strong>Design & setting: </strong>Cross-sectional, retrospective study using anonymised primary care data from all GP practices in one inner-city London area.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>CP was defined on the basis of analgesic medication codes and novel inclusion of diagnostic codes for conditions known to be strongly associated with CP. CP prevalence and consultation rates were determined; comparisons were made with 31 other Long-Term Condition (LTCs). Consultation cost estimates were based on health care professional type and consultation mode.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>358 889 adult patients were registered in sample practices, with continuous (12-month) health care records available for 327 800 (91.3%). CP prevalence was 18.6%; the second most prevalent LTC after anxiety at 21.4%. CP mean annual consultation rates were 15.3/patient, the highest LTC consultation rate. CP incurred the highest primary care consultation costs of any of the included LTCs. Age was the strongest predictor of CP, particularly in those aged≥60 years (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR): 9.32; 95% Confidence Interval: 8.83 to 9.84; compared to 18-39-year-olds). Much smaller AORs were found for ethnicity, social deprivation, gender and non-UK country of birth.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CP represents the most demanding LTC, in terms of consultation rates and costs, managed in primary care. Yet there is considerable uncertainty about optimal management and alternatives to long term, high volume primary care consultation rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":36541,"journal":{"name":"BJGP Open","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Chronic pain - prevalence, demographic inequalities and healthcare utilisation: a primary care database analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Siddesh Shetty, James Scuffell, Dianne Aitken, Mark Ashworth\",\"doi\":\"10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0147\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Chronic pain (CP) is an ill-defined condition, often under-recorded in primary care records.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To determine prevalence, evidence of health inequalities, primary care consultation rates and healthcare utilisation costs of CP.</p><p><strong>Design & setting: </strong>Cross-sectional, retrospective study using anonymised primary care data from all GP practices in one inner-city London area.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>CP was defined on the basis of analgesic medication codes and novel inclusion of diagnostic codes for conditions known to be strongly associated with CP. CP prevalence and consultation rates were determined; comparisons were made with 31 other Long-Term Condition (LTCs). Consultation cost estimates were based on health care professional type and consultation mode.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>358 889 adult patients were registered in sample practices, with continuous (12-month) health care records available for 327 800 (91.3%). CP prevalence was 18.6%; the second most prevalent LTC after anxiety at 21.4%. CP mean annual consultation rates were 15.3/patient, the highest LTC consultation rate. CP incurred the highest primary care consultation costs of any of the included LTCs. Age was the strongest predictor of CP, particularly in those aged≥60 years (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR): 9.32; 95% Confidence Interval: 8.83 to 9.84; compared to 18-39-year-olds). Much smaller AORs were found for ethnicity, social deprivation, gender and non-UK country of birth.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CP represents the most demanding LTC, in terms of consultation rates and costs, managed in primary care. Yet there is considerable uncertainty about optimal management and alternatives to long term, high volume primary care consultation rates.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36541,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BJGP Open\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BJGP Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0147\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJGP Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0147","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:慢性疼痛(CP)是一种定义不清的疾病,在初级保健记录中经常记录不足。目的:确定cp的患病率、健康不平等的证据、初级保健咨询率和医疗保健利用成本。设计和设置:横断面、回顾性研究,使用来自伦敦一个市中心地区所有全科医生执业的匿名初级保健数据。方法:根据镇痛药物代码和新纳入的与CP密切相关的诊断代码来定义CP,确定CP患病率和会诊率;与其他31例长期病情(LTCs)进行比较。咨询费用估算基于医疗保健专业人员类型和咨询模式。结果:共有358 889例成人患者登记,其中327 800例(91.3%)有连续(12个月)的医疗记录。CP患病率为18.6%;第二常见的LTC是焦虑,占21.4%。CP平均年问诊率为15.3/例,LTC问诊率最高。在所有纳入的LTCs中,CP的初级保健咨询费用最高。年龄是CP最强的预测因子,尤其是年龄≥60岁的患者(调整优势比:9.32;95%置信区间:8.83 ~ 9.84;与18-39岁的人相比)。种族、社会剥夺、性别和非英国出生国的aor要小得多。结论:在初级保健管理的咨询率和费用方面,CP代表了最严格的LTC。然而,对于长期高容量初级保健咨询率的最佳管理和替代方案存在相当大的不确定性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Chronic pain - prevalence, demographic inequalities and healthcare utilisation: a primary care database analysis.

Background: Chronic pain (CP) is an ill-defined condition, often under-recorded in primary care records.

Aim: To determine prevalence, evidence of health inequalities, primary care consultation rates and healthcare utilisation costs of CP.

Design & setting: Cross-sectional, retrospective study using anonymised primary care data from all GP practices in one inner-city London area.

Method: CP was defined on the basis of analgesic medication codes and novel inclusion of diagnostic codes for conditions known to be strongly associated with CP. CP prevalence and consultation rates were determined; comparisons were made with 31 other Long-Term Condition (LTCs). Consultation cost estimates were based on health care professional type and consultation mode.

Results: 358 889 adult patients were registered in sample practices, with continuous (12-month) health care records available for 327 800 (91.3%). CP prevalence was 18.6%; the second most prevalent LTC after anxiety at 21.4%. CP mean annual consultation rates were 15.3/patient, the highest LTC consultation rate. CP incurred the highest primary care consultation costs of any of the included LTCs. Age was the strongest predictor of CP, particularly in those aged≥60 years (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR): 9.32; 95% Confidence Interval: 8.83 to 9.84; compared to 18-39-year-olds). Much smaller AORs were found for ethnicity, social deprivation, gender and non-UK country of birth.

Conclusion: CP represents the most demanding LTC, in terms of consultation rates and costs, managed in primary care. Yet there is considerable uncertainty about optimal management and alternatives to long term, high volume primary care consultation rates.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BJGP Open
BJGP Open Medicine-Family Practice
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
181
审稿时长
22 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信