Abstract
Background The daily management of long-term conditions falls primarily on individuals and their informal carers, but the household context and its impact on health and social care activity among people with multimorbidity is understudied.
Methods Linked data from health providers and local government in Barking and Dagenham provided a retrospective cohort of people aged 50+ in two-person households between April 2016 and March 2018. Two-part regression models were applied to estimate annualised use and cost of hospital, primary, community, mental health and social care by multimorbidity status of individuals and co-residents, adjusted for age, gender and deprivation. Applicability at the national level was tested using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink.
Results Over 45% of multimorbid people in two-person households were co-resident with another multimorbid person. They were 1.14 (95% CI 1.00, 1.30) times as likely to have any community care activity and 1.24 (95% CI 0.99,1.54) times as likely to have any mental health care activity compared to those co-resident with a healthy person. They had more primary care visits (8.5 (95% CI 8.2,8.8) vs 7.9 (95% CI 7.7,8.2)) and higher primary care costs. Outpatient care and elective admissions did not differ between these groups. Findings in the national data were similar.
Conclusions Care utilisation for people with multimorbidity varies by household context. There may be potential for connecting health and other community service input across household members.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by The Health Foundation as part of core activity of members of staff at The Health Foundation.
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
We used two dataets for these analyses. A local sample was drawn from residents in Barking and Dagenham. De-identified data on their use of health and care services was available from linked data from local government services, health providers and health commissioners in the area. Information about accessing the data can be found here: https://www.carecity.london/your-blog/180-linking-datasets-for-better-population-health-management A national sample was drawn from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). Data access for this project has been approved (ISAC 17_150RMn2). Data used for this analysis is not publically available but anonymised patient datasets can be extracted for researchers against specific study specifications, following protocol approval from the Independent Scientific Advisory Committee (ISAC) https://www.cprd.com/
