HOW DOES THE HEALTH IMPROVEMENT NETWORK (THIN) DATA ON PREVALENCE OF CHRONIC DISEASES COMPARE WITH NATIONAL FIGURES?

Author(s)

Blak BT, Thompson MCSD EPIC, London, United Kingdom

OBJECTIVES: Primary care patient databases are increasingly used within many different research areas.  These databases reflect everyday care provided to patients in a sample of practices.  Thus, when used for research, information on generalisability to the general population is important.  This study compared chronic condition prevalences from a UK primary care database, THIN, with national figures.  METHODS: The study population was selected from THIN Data.  The National Health Service (NHS) Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF, a national standard used for the measurement of primary care outcomes for payment) disease/drug codelists and rules were used to derive crude prevalence of chronic diseases.  Prevalence and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were derived as of February 14, 2007, March 14, 2007, and April 1, 2007 from practices in Scotland/Northern Ireland, England, and Wales, respectively, to match QOF methodology.  National QOF 2006/2007 prevalence data were used for comparison.      RESULTS: THIN population included 2,783,593 people.  The atrial fibrillation crude prevalence was in THIN 1.42%(±0.01%) versus 1.31% nationally. For asthma these figures were 5.95%(±0.01%) versus 5.79%, cancer 0.85%(±0.003%) versus 0.91%, coronary heart disease  3.89%(±0.01%) versus 3.67%, chronic kidney disease 2.48%(±0.02%) versus 2.33%, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 1.57%(±0.01%) versus 1.48%, dementia 0.47%(±0.003%) versus 0.42%, diabetes 3.52%(±0.01%) versus 3.65%, epilepsy 0.63%(±0.002%) versus 0.62%, heart failure 0.88%(±0.004%) versus 0.80%, hypertension 12.67%(±0.03%) versus 12.56%, learning disability 0.30%(±0.002%) versus 0.27%, mental health 0.74%(±0.004%) versus 0.72%, obesity 8.29%(±0.04%) versus 7.50%, palliative care 0.11%(±0.002%) versus 0.09%, stroke/transient ischaemic attack 1.89%(±0.01%) versus 1.65%, hypothyroidism 2.74%(±0.01%) versus 2.63%.        CONCLUSIONS: THIN and national crude prevalences were close but higher in THIN except for cancer and diabetes.  Differences are likely to be due to factors not controlled for such as demographics, socioeconomics, practice infrastructure, and community.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2009-10, ISPOR Europe 2009, Paris, France

Value in Health, Vol. 12, No. 7 (October 2009)

Code

PHP88

Topic

Patient-Centered Research

Topic Subcategory

Health State Utilities

Disease

Multiple Diseases

Explore Related HEOR by Topic


Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×