ABSTRACT
Objective To estimate mortality of care home (CH) residents, and matched community-dwelling controls, during the Covid-19 pandemic from primary care electronic health records.
Design Matched cohort study
Setting General practices contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum Database in England.
Participants There were 83,627 CH residents contributing data in 2020, with 26,923 deaths; 80,730 (97%) were matched on age, gender and general practice with 300,445 community-dwelling adults.
Main outcome measures All-cause mortality. Adjusted rate ratios (RR) by negative binomial regression were adjusted for age, gender, number of long-term conditions (LTCs), frailty category, region, calendar month or week, and clustering by general practice.
Results During April 2020, the mortality rate of CH residents was 27.2 deaths per 1,000 patients per week, compared with 2.31 per 1,000 for controls, RR 11.1 (95% confidence interval 10.1 to 12.2). Compared with CH residents, LTCs and frailty were differentially associated with greater mortality in community-dwelling controls. During April 2020, mortality rates per 1,000 patients per week for persons with 9+ LTCs were: CH, 37.9; controls 17.7; RR 2.14 (1.18 to 3.89). In severe frailty, mortality rates were: CH, 29.6; controls 5.1; RR 6.17 (5.74 to 6.62).
Conclusions Individual-patient data from primary care electronic health records may be used to estimate mortality in care home residents. Mortality is substantially higher than for community-dwelling comparators and showed a disproportionate increase in the first wave of the Covid-19 pandemic. Multiple morbidity and frailty were associated with greater absolute risks but lower relative risks because community-dwelling frail or multi-morbid patients also experienced high mortality.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The authors were supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Guys and St Thomas Hospitals. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Scientific and ethical approval of the proposal was provided by the CPRD Independent Scientific Advisory Committee (ISAC) protocol number 20_000214. The CPRD holds over-arching research ethics committee approval for all studies conducted using CPRD data. The study was based on analysis of fully anonymised data and no participant consent was required.
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
Footnotes
Version 2. 13th August 2021. Revised statistical modelling and incorporation of frailty measures.
Data Availability
Data sharing requests should be sent to martin.gulliford{at}kcl.ac.uk. Data release is subject to approval from CPRD.
