Measuring disease prevalence: A comparison of musculoskeletal disease using four general practice consultation databases

Primary Care Musculoskeletal Research Centre, Keele University, Keele.
British Journal of General Practice (Impact Factor: 2.29). 02/2007; 57(534):7-14.
Source: PubMed


Primary care consultation data are an important source of information on morbidity prevalence. It is not known how reliable such figures are.
To compare annual consultation prevalence estimates for musculoskeletal conditions derived from four general practice consultation databases.
Retrospective study of general practice consultation records.
Three national general practice consultation databases: i) Fourth Morbidity Statistics from General Practice (MSGP4, 1991/92), ii) Royal College of General Practitioners Weekly Returns Service (RCGP WRS, 2001), and iii) General Practice Research Database (GPRD, 1991 and 2001); and one regional database (Consultations in Primary Care Archive, 2001).
Age-sex standardized persons consulting annual prevalence rates for musculoskeletal conditions overall, rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis and arthralgia were derived for patients aged 15 years and over.
GPRD prevalence of any musculoskeletal condition, rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis was lower than that of the other databases. This is likely to be due to GPs not needing to record every consultation made for a chronic condition. MSGP4 gave the highest prevalence for osteoarthritis but low prevalence of arthralgia which reflects encouragement for GPs to use diagnostic rather than symptom codes.
Considerable variation exists in consultation prevalence estimates for musculoskeletal conditions. Researchers and health service planners should be aware that estimates of disease occurrence based on consultation will be influenced by choice of database. This is likely to be true for other chronic diseases and where alternative symptom labels exist for a disease. RCGP WRS may give the most reliable prevalence figures for musculoskeletal and other chronic diseases.

Download full-text


Available from: Umesh Kadam, May 22, 2014
  • Source
    • "Use of consultation data also reduces the risk of recall and selection bias, shown to influence questionnaire-based designs (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Furthermore, the CiPCA database has been shown to give comparable musculoskeletal prevalence figures to UK National Primary Care databases (Jordan et al., 2007), and such medical record databases have been shown to be suitable for epidemiological studies (Hassey et al., 2001; Benson, 2011). This study has demonstrated musculoskeletal pain consultation concordance between couples, as well as tested theoretical influences on concordance, which have shown some effect is present. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Musculoskeletal pain conditions are common and create substantial burden for the individual and society. While research has shown concordance between couples for risk of some diseases, e.g. heart disease or diabetes, little information is available on such effects for musculoskeletal pain conditions. Our aims were to investigate the presence of concordance between couples for consultations about pain, and to examine theoretical influences on such concordance. This was a 1-year cross-sectional study of musculoskeletal pain consultations in a UK primary care database. In total 27,014 patients (13,507 couples) aged between 30 and 74 years were included. The main outcome measure was the presence of a musculoskeletal morbidity read code indicating a consultation for musculoskeletal conditions (any, back, neck, knee, shoulder, foot, osteoarthritis). Logistic regression was used to test associations with odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Patients whose partner had a musculoskeletal pain consultation were also more likely to consult for a musculoskeletal condition (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.12-1.32). This association was found to be strongest for shoulder disorders (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.06-3.47). No significant associations were found for other pain conditions. Results show that partner concordance is present for consultations for some musculoskeletal conditions but not others. Possible explanations for concordance include the shared health behaviours between couples leading to potential heightened awareness of symptoms. Given the high prevalence of musculoskeletal pain within populations, it may be worth considering further the mechanisms that explain partner concordance. © 2015 The Authors. European Journal of Pain published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Pain Federation - EFIC®
    Full-text · Article · Jul 2015 · European Journal of Pain
    • "Musculoskeletal problems represent some of the most common reasons for seeking primary health care [1]. Joint hypermobility syndrome (JHS) is a heritable connective * Correspondence: Department of Allied Health Professions, Faculty of Health & Applied Sciences, Glenside Campus, Blackberry Hill, Bristol BS16 1DD, UK. "

    No preview · Article · May 2015 · Physiotherapy
  • Source
    • "The patients were identified through the use of Read Codes indicating a primary care consultation for LBP. Read codes are a common method for the computerized recording of morbidity in UK primary care and are most often entered by the patients' GP at the time of consultation [21,22]. The codes selected were intended to include all cases of nonspecific LBP. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To investigate associations of pain intensity in those with long-term back pain, with their partners' rating of key constructs of relationship quality: cohesion (activities together), consensus (affection, sexual relations), satisfaction (conflict, regrets). Self-report questionnaires on relationship quality (partner-rated), depression (partner-rated), relationship length, and pain intensity (patient-rated) were collected from back pain patients and their partners (N = 71). Linear regression was carried out to test for associations, standardized coefficients (β) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) are reported. There was no main effect between patient pain intensity and partner rating of relationship quality. However, partner ratings of relationship quality were lower if the partner reported increasing depressive symptoms. Adjusting for the effects of partner depression show that ratings of consensus (affection, sexual relations) from partners were actually higher with increasing levels of pain intensity in patients (β 0.54, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.90, P < 0.01). Furthermore lower ratings of consensus were reported where patient pain intensity interacted with partner depression (β -0.11, 95% CI-0.19 to -0.03, P < 0.05). These findings illustrate the association of pain outcomes beyond the patient within a primary care sample. Moderators of the responses about the relationship construct of consensus generated by partners appear to be partners' own level of depressive symptoms and whether their depressive symptoms are associated with the patients' pain intensity. Consultations should consider the social context of patients with pain.
    Full-text · Article · Jan 2014 · Pain Medicine
Show more