Research

Objectives: To evaluate the impact of the Victorian Stroke Telemedicine (VST) program during its first 12 months on the quality of care provided to patients presenting with suspected stroke to hospitals in regional Victoria. Design: Historical controlled cohort study comparing outcomes during a 12‐month control period with those for the initial 12 months of full implementation of the VST program at each hospital. Setting: 16 hospitals in regional Victoria that participated in the VST program between 1 January 2010 and 30 January 2016. Participants: Adult patients with suspected stroke presenting to the emergency departments of the participating hospitals. Main outcome measures: Indicators for key processes of care, including symptom onset‐to‐arrival, door‐to‐first medical review, and door‐to‐CT times; provision and timeliness of provision of thrombolysis to patients with ischaemic stroke. Results: 2887 patients with suspected stroke presented to participating emergency departments during the control period, 3178 during the intervention period; the patient characteristics were similar for both periods. A slightly larger proportion of patients with ischaemic stroke who arrived within 4.5 hours of symptom onset received thrombolysis during the intervention than during the control period (37% v 30%). Door‐to‐CT scan time (median, 25 min [IQR, 13–49 min] v 34 min [IQR, 18–76 min]) and door‐to‐needle time for stroke thrombolysis (73 min [IQR, 56–96 min] v 102 min [IQR, 77–128 min]) were shorter during the intervention. The proportions of patients who received thrombolysis and had a symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage (4% v 16%) or died in hospital (6% v 20%) were smaller during the intervention period. Conclusions: Telemedicine has provided Victorian regional hospitals access to expert care for emergency department patients with suspected acute stroke. Eligible patients with ischaemic stroke are now receiving stroke thrombolysis more quickly and safely.

Chris F Bladin · Joosup Kim · Kathleen L Bagot · Michelle Vu · Natasha Moloczij · Sonia Denisenko · Chris Price · Nancy Pompeani · Lauren Arthurson · Casey Hair · Justin Rabl · Mick O'Shea · Patrick Groot · Leslie Bolitho · Bruce CV Campbell · Helen M Dewey · Geoffrey A Donnan · Dominique A Cadilhac

Objectives: To describe the first isolation and sequencing of SARS‐CoV‐2 in Australia and rapid sharing of the isolate. Setting: SARS‐CoV‐2 was isolated from a 58‐year‐old man from Wuhan, China who arrived in Melbourne on 19 January 2020 and was admitted to the Monash Medical Centre, Melbourne from the emergency department on 24 January 2020 with fever, cough, and progressive dyspnoea. Major outcomes: Clinical course and laboratory features of the first reported case of COVID‐19 (the illness caused by SARS‐CoV‐2) in Australia; isolation, whole genome sequencing, imaging, and rapid sharing of virus from the patient. Results: A nasopharyngeal swab and sputum collected when the patient presented to hospital were each positive for SARS‐CoV‐2 (reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction). Inoculation of Vero/hSLAM cells with material from the nasopharyngeal swab led to the isolation of SARS‐CoV‐2 virus in culture. Electron microscopy of the supernatant confirmed the presence of virus particles with morphology characteristic of viruses of the family Coronaviridae. Whole genome sequencing of the viral isolate and phylogenetic analysis indicated the isolate exhibited greater than 99.99% sequence identity with other publicly available SARS‐CoV‐2 genomes. Within 24 hours of isolation, the first Australian SARS‐CoV‐2 isolate was shared with local and overseas reference laboratories and major North American and European culture collections. Conclusions: The ability to rapidly identify, propagate, and internationally share our SARS‐CoV‐2 isolate is an important step in collaborative scientific efforts to deal effectively with this international public health emergency by developing better diagnostic procedures, vaccine candidates, and antiviral agents.

Leon Caly · Julian Druce · Jason Roberts · Katherine Bond · Thomas Tran · Renata Kostecki · Yano Yoga · William Naughton · George Taiaroa · Torsten Seemann · Mark B Schultz · Benjamin P Howden · Tony M Korman · Sharon R Lewin · Deborah A Williamson · Mike G Catton

Objectives: To assess the efficacy of corticosteroid treatment of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). Design, setting: Observational study in the two COVID‐19‐designated hospitals in Wuhu, Anhui province, China, 24 January – 24 February 2020. Participants: Thirty‐one patients infected with the severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) treated at the two designated hospitals. Main outcome measures: Virus clearance time, length of hospital stay, and duration of symptoms, by treatment type (including or not including corticosteroid therapy). Results: Eleven of 31 patients with COVID‐19 received corticosteroid treatment. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis indicated no association between corticosteroid treatment and virus clearance time (hazard ratio [HR], 1.26; 95% CI, 0.58–2.74), hospital length of stay (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.33–1.78), or duration of symptoms (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.40–1.83). Univariate analysis indicated that virus clearance was slower in two patients with chronic hepatitis B infections (mean difference, 10.6 days; 95% CI, 6.2–15.1 days). Conclusions: Corticosteroids are widely used when treating patients with COVID‐19, but we found no association between therapy and outcomes in patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome. An existing HBV infection may delay SARS‐CoV‐2 clearance, and this association should be further investigated.

Lei Zha · Shirong Li · Lingling Pan · Boris Tefsen · Yeshan Li · Neil French · Liyun Chen · Gang Yang · Elmer V Villanueva

The potential of modern mass communication techniques for managing chronic disease should be explored further

Yang Si · Xiaoqiang Xiao · Cai Xia · Jiang Guo · Qiukui Hao · Qianning Mo · Yulong Niu · Hongbin Sun

Objective: To investigate changes in sales to pharmacies of over‐the‐counter (OTC) and prescription analgesics, cold and flu products, and cough suppressants after the rescheduling of codeine as a prescription only medicine in February 2018. Design: Interrupted time series analysis of sales to pharmacies. Setting: Pharmaceutical sales to community pharmacies in Australia, March 2015 – March 2019. The period January 2017 (month after rescheduling was announced) to January 2018 (month before rescheduling was implemented) was excluded from the time series analysis. Main outcome measures: Monthly pack and tablet sales per 10 000 population of OTC and prescription analgesics, cold and flu products, and cough suppressants. Results: During 2016, 7586 packs and 248 127 tablets of OTC codeine per 10 000 population were sold to pharmacies; in the 14 months after rescheduling, a small level increase in monthly prescription codeine sales was evident (2247 tablets/capsules per 10 000 population; 95% CI, 1231–3264 per 10 000 population). Monthly OTC analgesic sales increased by 258 (95% CI, 151–365) packs per 10 000 population and 37 856 (95% CI, 26 143–49 569) tablet/capsules per 10 000 population. Monthly sales of single ingredient paracetamol (41 415 [95% CI, 31 374–51 456] tablets/capsules per 10 000 population), ibuprofen (1392 [95% CI 916–1868] tablets/capsules per 10 000 population), paracetamol/ibuprofen (1618 tablets [95% CI, 1567–1669] tablets/capsules per 10 000 population), and other paracetamol combinations (233 [95% CI, 112–353] tablets/capsules per 10 000 population) all increased, but not those of prescription analgesic products not containing codeine. Rises for OTC cold/flu products containing the opioid derivative dextromethorphan were small; sales of OTC cough suppressants containing opioid derivatives (dextromethorphan, pholcodine, dihydrocodeine) did not change. Conclusions: The rescheduling of codeine was followed by increased sales to pharmacies of paracetamol, ibuprofen, and paracetamol combination products. While these products carry no risk of dependence, their inappropriate use is also associated with harms that warrant adverse event monitoring.

Andrea L Schaffer · Rose Cairns · Jared A Brown · Natasa Gisev · Nicholas A Buckley · Sallie‐Anne Pearson

Objectives: To evaluate whether an alternative model of care in aged care facilities, including in‐house general practitioners, influenced health outcomes for residents. Design: Stepped wedge, cluster randomised controlled trial over 90 weeks (31 December 2012 – 21 September 2014), with a 54‐week pre‐trial retrospective data period (start: 19 December 2011) and a 54‐week post‐trial prospective data collection period (to 4 October 2015). Participants, setting: Fifteen residential aged care facilities operated by Bupa Aged Care in metropolitan and regional cities in four Australian states. Intervention: Residential aged care facilities sought to recruit general practitioners as staff members; care staff roles were redefined to allow registered nurses greater involvement in care plan development. Main (primary) outcome measures: Numbers of falls; numbers of unplanned transfers to hospital; polypharmacy. Results: The new model of care could be implemented in all facilities, but four could not recruit in‐house GPs at any time during the trial period. Intention‐to‐treat analyses found no statistically significant effect of the intervention on the primary outcome measures. Contamination‐adjusted intention‐to‐treat analyses identified that the presence of an in‐house GP was associated with reductions in the numbers of unplanned hospital transfers (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.43–0.66) and admissions (IRR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.41–0.64) and of out‐of‐hours GP call‐outs (IRR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.36–0.80), but also with an increase in the number of reported falls (IRR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.20–1.58). Conclusions: Recruiting GPs to work directly in residential aged care facilities is difficult, but may reduce the burden of unplanned presentations to hospitals and increase the reporting of adverse events. Trial registration: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, ACTRN12613000218796 (25 February 2013).

Terry P Haines · Andrew J Palmer · Petra Tierney · Lei Si · Andrew L Robinson

Objectives: To assess progress in Australia toward the 2030 WHO hepatitis C elimination targets two years after the introduction of highly effective direct‐acting antiviral (DAA) treatments. Design: Analysis of quarterly data on government‐subsidised hepatitis C RNA testing and hepatitis C treatment in Australia, January 2013 – June 2018. Changes in testing and treatment levels associated with DAA availability were assessed in an autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) statistical model, and the impact by 2030 of different levels of testing and treatment were estimated using a mathematical model. Major outcome measures: Hepatitis C prevalence among people who inject drugs; annual hepatitis C incidence relative to 2015 levels; projections for the hepatitis C care cascade in 2030. Results: The mean annual number of treatments initiated for people with hepatitis C increased from 6747 during 2013–2015 (before the introduction of DAAs) to 28 022 during 2016–18; the mean annual number of diagnostic RNA tests increased from 17 385 to 23 819. If current trends in testing and treatment continue (ie, 2018 testing numbers are maintained but treatment numbers decline by 50%), it is projected that by 2030 only 72% of infected people would be treated (by 2025 all people diagnosed with hepatitis C would be treated). The incidence of hepatitis C in 2030 would be 59% lower than in 2015, well short of the WHO target of an 80% reduction. The identification and testing of people exposed to hepatitis C must be increased by at least 50% for Australia to reach the WHO elimination targets. Conclusion: Hepatitis C elimination programs in Australia should focus on increasing testing rates and linkage with care to maintain adequate levels of treatment.

Nick Scott · Rachel Sacks‐Davis · Amanda J Wade · Mark Stoove · Alisa Pedrana · Joseph S Doyle · Alexander J Thompson · David P Wilson · Margaret E Hellard

Objectives: To characterise the community pharmacy supply of naloxone by supply type — individual prescription, prescriber bag, and non‐dispensed (supplied over the counter or expired) — during 2014–2018; to examine whether the 2016 rescheduling of naloxone as an over‐the‐counter drug influenced non‐dispensed naloxone supply volume. Design, setting: Analysis of monthly naloxone prescriptions (Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme) and sales data (IQVIA), 2014–2018, for Australia and by state and territory; time series analysis of non‐dispensed naloxone supply to assess effect of rescheduling on naloxone supply. Major outcomes: Total naloxone supply to community pharmacies; prescribed and non‐dispensed naloxone supply. Results: During 2014–2018, 372 351 400 μg units of naloxone were sold to community pharmacies: non‐dispensed naloxone accounted for 205 866.5 units (55.3%), prescriber bags for 155 841 units (41.8%), and individual prescriptions for 10 643.5 units (2.9%). Population‐adjusted national naloxone sales to community pharmacies increased between 2014 and 2018 (per year: incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.15; 95% CI, 1.09–2.22). This increase was primarily attributable to increased volumes of prescriber bag naloxone (IRR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.50–1.78) and, to a lesser extent, increased individual prescription supply (IRR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.85–2.26). Non‐dispensed naloxone supply volume was unchanged at the national level (IRR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.85–1.01); changes in non‐dispensed supply immediately following rescheduling and subsequently were not statistically significant in time series analyses for most jurisdictions. Conclusions: Total naloxone supply to community pharmacies in Australia increased between 2014 and 2018, but rescheduling that enabled over‐the‐counter access did not significantly influence the volume of non‐dispensed naloxone.

Wai Chung Tse · Paul Sanfilippo · Tina Lam · Paul Dietze · Suzanne Nielsen

Weather conditions conducive to extreme bushfires are becoming more frequent as a consequence of climate change.1 Such fires have substantial social, ecological, and economic effects, including the effects on public health associated with smoke, such as premature mortality and exacerbation of cardio‐respiratory conditions.2,3 During the final quarter of 2019 and the first of 2020, bushfires burned in many forested regions of Australia, and smoke affected large numbers of people in New South Wales, Queensland, the Australian Capital Territory and Victoria. The scale and duration of these bushfires was unprecedented in Australia. We undertook a preliminary evaluation of the health burden attributable to air pollution generated by bushfires during this period. Using standard methods for assessing the health impact of air pollution,4 we estimated the numbers of excess deaths, hospitalisations for cardiovascular and respiratory problems, and emergency department presentations with asthma in NSW, Queensland, the ACT and Victoria between 1 October 2019 and 10 February 2020 that could be attributed to bushfire smoke exposure. We estimated population exposure to particulate matter less than 2.5 μm in diameter (PM2.5) for the regions of NSW, Queensland, the ACT and Victoria for which publicly available air quality monitoring data were available (for about 90% of the total population of these states). Data were obtained from the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment,5 the Queensland Department of Science,6 ACT Health,7 and the Environmental Protection Agency Victoria.8 We defined bushfire smoke‐affected days as days on which the 24‐hour mean PM2.5 concentration exceeded the 95th percentile of historical daily mean values for individual air quality stations. We estimated daily mean PM2.5 levels by Statistical Area Level 2 (SA2), using station level data whenever at least one monitoring station was within 100 km of the SA2 centroid, and applying inverse distance weighting.9 Published population and health data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics,10,11 the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare,12,13,14,15 and the NSW Ministry of Health were used.16 We quantified health outcomes by combining baseline incidence rates12,13,14,15 for each health outcome with daily exposure data and applying the relevant exposure–response risk coefficients for each outcome.17,18 We also conducted sensitivity analyses with different PM2.5 thresholds for defining bushfire smoke‐affected days. Further methodological details, including underlying assumptions and limitations, are included in the online Supporting Information. Our analysis of publicly available aggregated data did not require ethics approval. During the study period, PM2.5 concentrations exceeding the 95th percentile of historical daily mean values were recorded by at least one monitoring station in the study area on 125 of 133 days (Box 1). We estimated that bushfire smoke was responsible for 417 (95% CI, 153–680) excess deaths, 1124 (95% CI, 211–2047) hospitalisations for cardiovascular problems and 2027 (95% CI, 0–4252) for respiratory problems, and 1305 (95% CI, 705–1908) presentations to emergency departments with asthma (Box 2). Applying lower thresholds for defining bushfire smoke‐affected days (no threshold, 90th percentile of historical values) did not markedly alter our findings; a higher threshold (99th percentile) reduced the estimates by about 20%. The highest population‐weighted PM2.5 exposure level, 98.5 μg/m3 on 14 January 2020 (Box 1), exceeded the national air quality 24‐hour standard (25 μg/m3)19 and was more than fourteen times the historical population‐weighted mean 24‐hour PM2.5 value of 6.8 μg/m3. We have estimated the excess health burden during 19 weeks’ continuous fire activity in the states most severely affected by smoke. Our estimates are based on air quality data from monitoring stations in the four eastern states — that is, we did not include data for smoke from all extreme fires in Australia during the study period — and we did not attempt to estimate health effects for which exposure–response relationships are less well characterised, such as primary health care attendances and ambulance calls. Detailed epidemiological analysis of more comprehensive exposure estimation and empirical health data will provide more complete information about the harms attributable to the severe air pollution associated with these unprecedented fires, but our findings indicate that the smoke‐related health impact was substantial. Smoke is just one of many problems that will intensify with the increasing frequency and severity of major bushfires associated with climate change. Expanded and diversified approaches to bushfire mitigation and adaptation to living in an increasingly hot and fire‐prone country are urgently needed.20 Box 1 – Population‐weighted PM2.5 levels, New South Wales, Queensland, the Australian Capital Territory and Victoria, 1 October 2019 – 10 February 2020* * Data by state are included in the online Supporting Information. Box 2 – Estimated health burden attributable to bushfire smoke, Queensland, New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory and Victoria, 1 October 2019 – 10 February 2020 Outcome Estimated number of cases (95% confidence intervals) Queensland New South Wales Australian Capital Territory Victoria Total Excess deaths (any cause) 47 (17–77) 219 (81–357) 31 (12–51) 120 (44–195) 417 (153–680) Hospital admissions, cardiovascular 135 (25–246) 577 (108–1050) 82 (15–149) 331 (62–602) 1124 (211–2047) Hospital admissions, respiratory 245 (0–513) 1050 (0–2204) 147 (0–308) 585 (0–1227) 2027 (0–4252) Emergency department attendances, asthma 113 (61–165) 702 (379–1026) 89 (48–131) 401 (217–586) 1305 (705–1908)

Nicolas Borchers Arriagada · Andrew J Palmer · David MJS Bowman · Geoffrey G Morgan · Bin B Jalaludin · Fay H Johnston

Percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation (PCI‐S) has revolutionised the management of patients with coronary artery disease at high risk of myocardial infarction and stroke.1 Dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin with clopidogrel, prasugrel or ticagrelor) is superior to aspirin alone for preventing atherothrombotic events, including stent thrombosis, in patients undergoing PCI‐S,2 and is recommended by Australian guidelines.3 We analysed de‐identified, linked Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) and Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) data for a 10% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries provided by the Australian Department of Health, to quantify rates of antiplatelet drug dispensing within 30 days of PCI‐S. We included all patients with MBS claims for PCI‐S (items 38306, 38312, 38318) between 1 January 2013 and 30 September 2014. MBS data on PCI‐S procedures are available only for private patients, who account for about 45% of PCI‐S procedures in Australia.4 The medicines of interest for our analysis were clopidogrel and clopidogrel/aspirin (Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical [ATC] codes B01AC04 and B01AC30), ticagrelor (ATC code B01AC24), and prasugrel (ATC code B01AC22). Aspirin alone was not examined because over‐the‐counter use is not captured in PBS claims data. We assessed the association of several factors with antiplatelet medication dispensing within 30 days of PCI‐S, expressed as odds ratios, by logistic regression modelling. The New South Wales Population and Health Services Research Ethics Committee approved the study (Cancer Institute NSW reference, 2013/11/494). Of 2869 patients who underwent PCI‐S during the study period, 2592 (90%) were dispensed antiplatelet drugs within 30 days of the procedure. Dispensing was more frequent for concessional PBS beneficiaries, patients who had not undergone PCI‐S in the preceding year, patients not dispensed antiplatelet drugs during the preceding six months, and patients dispensed proton pump inhibitors within 30 days of the procedure. Antiplatelet therapy was also more frequent among patients from Victoria or Tasmania, Queensland, and Western Australia than for those from NSW or the Australian Capital Territory (Box). Our findings indicate that 10% of patients undergoing PCI‐S did not receive guideline‐recommended dual antiplatelet therapy within 30 days of their procedure. Cost may have been a barrier, as antiplatelet therapy was less frequent among general than concessional PBS beneficiaries; the maximum out‐of‐pocket cost for any single PBS item in 2013 was $5.90 for concessional beneficiaries, but $36.10 for general beneficiaries, and general beneficiaries may have already experienced significant out‐of‐pocket costs for both health insurance and their procedure. In most states, the Public Hospitals Pharmaceutical Reform Agreement6 ensures that PBS‐subsidised medications can be dispensed to patients when they are discharged from hospital. NSW and the ACT, however, do not participate in this agreement; patients are discharged from public hospitals with unsubsidised medicines sufficient for only 2–7 days, after which they must visit a community doctor for prescribing of PBS‐subsidised medications. This inconvenience may contribute to the lower 30‐day dispensing rate in these jurisdictions. We were unable to evaluate the long term clinical effect of antiplatelet therapy as the analysed datasets do not include information about hospital admissions. The number of PCI‐S procedures in Australia increased from 24 500 MBS claims in 2013 to 29 000 in 2018 (http://medicarestatistics.humanservices.gov.au/statistics/mbs_item.jsp), and the number of patients at risk of early stent thrombosis may also have grown. Why some patients undergoing PCI‐S are not receiving dual antiplatelet therapy directly after their procedure should be further investigated. Box – Characteristics of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation (PCI‐S) in Australia, and their association with dual antiplatelet therapy within 30 days of PCI‐S Number of patients Odds ratio (95% confidence interval) Underwent PCI‐S Antiplatelet therapy within 30 days Univariate models Multivariate model Total number of patients undergoing PCI‐S 2869 2592 (90%) Age (years) 18–54 351 (12%) 307 (87%) 1 1 55–64 711 (25%) 640 (90%) 1.29 (0.87–1.93) 1.26 (0.83–1.91) 65–74 965 (34%) 879 (91%) 1.47 (0.99–2.16) 1.17 (0.76–1.81) 75–84 660 (23%) 605 (92%) 1.58 (1.04–2.40) 1.09 (0.66–1.81) 85 or more 182 (6%) 161 (88%) 1.10 (0.63–1.91) 0.83 (0.66–1.60) Sex Women 670 (23%) 604 (90%) 1 1 Men 2199 (77%) 1988 (90%) 0.97 (0.73–1.30) 0.86 (0.63–1.18) State where PCI‐S was undertaken New South Wales/Australian Capital Territory 1121 (39%) 986 (88%) 1 1 Victoria/Tasmania 752 (26%) 694 (92%) 1.64 (1.19–2.26) 1.56 (1.12–2.17) South Australia/Northern Territory 147 (5%) 129 (88%) 0.98 (0.58–1.66) 0.94 (0.55–1.60) Queensland 549 (19%) 504 (92%) 1.53 (1.08–2.19) 1.47 (1.02–2.13) Western Australia 300 (10%) 279 (93%) 1.82 (1.13–2.94) 2.14 (1.28–3.59) PBS patient category General 1453 (51%) 1293 (89%) 1 1 Concessional 1404 (49%) 1299 (93%) 1.53 (1.18–1.98) 1.63 (1.18–2.26) Previous PCI‐S Preceding 12 months 234 (8%) 199 (85%) 1 1 None 2635 (92%) 2393 (91%) 1.74 (1.19–2.55) 1.41 (0.93–2.13) Previous antiplatelet therapy Preceding 6 months 1135 (40%) 995 (88%) 1 1 None 1734 (60%) 1597 (92%) 1.64 (1.28–2.10) 1.96 (1.45–2.64) Anticoagulant therapy within 30 days of PCI‐S No 84 (3%) 77 (92%) 1 1 Yes 2785 (97%) 2515 (90%) 1.18 (0.54–2.59) 1.04 (0.47–2.33) Proton pump inhibitor therapy within 30 days of PCI‐S No 1002 (35%) 931 (93%) 1 1 Yes 1867 (65%) 1661 (89%) 1.63 (1.23–2.16) 1.42 (1.05–1.92) Comorbid conditions (six months before PCI‐S) None 196 (7%) 169 (86%) 1 1 1 180 (6%) 165 (92%) 1.76 (0.90–3.42) 1.47 (0.72–3.01) 2 259 (9%) 234 (90%) 1.50 (0.84–2.67) 1.34 (0.71–2.56) 3 389 (14%) 356 (92%) 1.72 (1.00–2.96) 1.54 (0.84–2.82) 4 452 (16%) 395 (87%) 1.11 (0.68–1.81) 1.01 (0.57–1.79) 5 or more 1393 (49%) 1273 (91%) 1.70 (1.08–2.65) 1.56 (0.88–2.75) PBS = Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. *Patients were classified as concessional beneficiaries if all PBS dispensing was concessional during year preceding and the three months following the PCI‐S procedure. †Based on RxRisk comorbidity indices.5

Benjumin Hsu · Michael O Falster · Andrea L Schaffer · Sallie Pearson · Louisa Jorm · David B Brieger

Objective: To examine the prevalence of psychotropic medicine dispensing before and after older people enter residential care. Design: Retrospective national cohort study; analysis of Registry of Senior Australians (ROSA) data. Setting, participants: All concession card‐holding residents of government‐subsidised residential aged care facilities in Australia who entered residential care for at least three months between 1 April 2008 and 30 June 2015. Main outcome measures: Proportions of residents dispensed antipsychotic, benzodiazepine, or antidepressant medicines during the year preceding and the year after commencing residential care, by quarter. Results: Of 322 120 included aged care residents, 68 483 received at least one antipsychotic (21.3%; 95% CI, 21.1–21.4%), 98 315 at least one benzodiazepine (30.5%; 95% CI, 30.4–30.7%), and 122 224 residents at least one antidepressant (37.9%; 95% CI, 37.8–38.1%) during their first three months of residential care; 31 326 of those dispensed antipsychotics (45.7%), 38 529 of those dispensed benzodiazepines (39.2%), and 25 259 residents dispensed antidepressants (19.8%) had not received them in the year preceding their entry into care. During the first three months of residential care, the prevalence of antipsychotic (prevalence ratio [PR], 3.37; 95% CI, 3.31–3.43) and antidepressant dispensing (PR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.04–1.07) were each higher for residents with than for those without dementia; benzodiazepine dispensing was similar for both groups (PR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.99–1.02). Conclusions: Dispensing of psychotropic medicines to older Australians is high before they enter residential care but increases markedly soon after entry into care. Non‐pharmacological behavioural management strategies are important for limiting the prescribing of psychotropic medicines for older people in the community or in residential care.

Stephanie L Harrison · Janet K Sluggett · Catherine Lang · Craig Whitehead · Maria Crotty · Megan Corlis · Steven L Wesselingh · Maria C Inacio

Objectives: To assess the risks of stroke and cardiovascular mortality for Aboriginal and non‐Aboriginal Australians with atrial fibrillation. Design: Retrospective data linkage cohort study. Setting, participants: All people aged 20–84 years hospitalised with atrial fibrillation in Western Australia during 2000–2012. Main outcome measures: Stroke incidence rates and mortality after hospitalisation for atrial fibrillation, and 10‐year risks of stroke and of cardiovascular and all‐cause mortality. Results: Among 55 482 index admissions with atrial fibrillation, 7.7% of 20–59‐year‐old patients and 1.3% of 60–84‐year‐old patients were Aboriginal Australians. A larger proportion of Aboriginal patients aged 20–59 years had CHA2DS2‐VASc scores of 2 or more (59.8% v 21.8%). In 20–59‐year‐old Aboriginal patients, the incidence during follow‐up (maximum, 10 years; median, 7.1 years) of stroke (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 3.2; 95% CI, 2.5–4.1) and fatal stroke (IRR, 5.7; 95% CI, 3.9–8.9) were markedly higher than for non‐Aboriginal patients. Stroke incidence was higher for 60–84‐year‐old patients, but the difference between Aboriginal and non‐Aboriginal patients was smaller (IRR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.3–2.0). Cardiovascular mortality during follow‐up was also higher for 20–59‐year‐old Aboriginal patients (IRR, 4.4; 95% CI, 4.3–5.9). The hazards of stroke (adjusted HR [aHR], 1.67; 95% CI, 1.22–2.28) and cardiovascular mortality (aHR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.18–1.83) in younger Aboriginal patients remained significantly higher after multivariable adjustment; age/sex, principal diagnosis of atrial fibrillation, and CHA2DS2‐VASc score were the most influential factors. Conclusion: Stroke risk and cardiovascular mortality are markedly higher for Aboriginal than non‐Aboriginal patients with atrial fibrillation, particularly for patients under 60. Strategies for providing evidence‐based therapies and cardiovascular prevention to Aboriginal people with atrial fibrillation must be improved.

Lee Nedkoff · Erin A Kelty · Joseph Hung · Sandra C Thompson · Judith M Katzenellenbogen

Colorectal cancer is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in Australia.1 The National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) aims to detect the disease early by offering faecal occult blood testing (faecal immunochemical test, FIT) to people aged 50–74 years.2 The expansion of the NBCSP has been paralleled by increased numbers of FITs outside the program (community‐initiated FITs) for a number of reasons, including the presence of symptoms. We investigated whether colonoscopy services should provide endoscopies to patients with positive FIT results with the same priority, regardless of whether the test was instigated by the NBCSP, by analysing data from the Newcastle Direct Access Colonoscopy Service (DACS) for the period 2014–18. The DACS manages all patients in the same manner: a positive FIT result leads to assessment for colonoscopy.3,4 Ethics approval was granted by the Hunter New England Human Research Ethics Committee (reference, AU201608‐01). All data were recorded prospectively. Findings were categorised according to surveillance categories endorsed by the Gastroenterological Society of Australia and the Colorectal Surgical Society of Australia and New Zealand.5 Data accuracy was confirmed by reviewing the primary sources for 10% of patients. We identified 2693 patients referred for screening colonoscopy between 1 July 2014 and 30 June 2018; 1439 (53%) had had community‐initiated FITs (Box 1). After excluding 318 patients who did not attend or were lost to follow‐up (community‐initiated, 200; NBCSP, 118) and ten patients with poor bowel preparation and no follow‐up colonoscopy during the study period, 2365 complete screening colonoscopy outcomes were analysed: 1233 following community‐initiated and 1132 following NBCSP testing. With these sample sizes, the study had 80% power to detect differences in colonic neoplasia rate ranging from 16 percentage points (assumed prevalence, 50%) to two percentage points (assumed prevalence, 3%). Z‐tests were used to calculate P values, and Wald tests (two‐tailed) for calculating confidence intervals (CIs) for the differences between the two groups. Differences between the two groups in the proportion of patients with each specific finding are presented with 99% asymptotic CIs to control for multiple testing. Colonoscopy quality was high: the completion rate (defined as either caecal intubation, reaching an ileocolic anastomosis, or reaching an obstructing mass lesion) was 97.1% (community‐initiated, 1193 of 1233, 96.8%; NBCSP, 1104 of 1132, 97.5%), and the adenoma detection rate was 49%, exceeding international benchmarks for either symptomatic or screening patients (for screening: at least 25% in men and 15% in women;6 for populations enriched with patients with positive FIT results: 35%7). The rate of colorectal neoplasia (malignant or pre‐malignant) was similar in the two groups. Importantly, the difference in the rates of adenocarcinoma was not statistically significant (community‐initiated, 4.0%; NBCSP, 2.7%; difference, 1.3 percentage points [99% CI, –0.6 to 3.3 percentage points]; P = 0.09). The only statistically significant difference by type was that the incidence of high risk adenoma was slightly higher in the NBCSP group (22.9% v 17.2%; difference, 5.7 percentage points [99% CI, 1.4–10 percentage points]; P < 0.001) (Box 2). We found that the incidence and detection rates of colorectal neoplasia in people aged 50–74 years were similar for people with positive results for NBCSP or community‐initiated FITs. The large population in our study means that it provides colonoscopy providers strong evidence that evaluation should be performed equally promptly for patients with positive results from NBSCP and community‐initiated FITs. Box 1 – Demographic characteristics of the 2693 patients with positive faecal immunochemical test results and referred to the Newcastle Direct Access Colonoscopy Service for colonoscopy, 2014–18 Faecal immunochemical test Total Community‐initiated NBCSP Number of patients 1439 1254 2693 Sex Women 675 559 1234 Men 764 695 1459 Age (years), mean (SD) 62.9 (6.8) 63.2 (7.3) 63.1 (7.0) Numbers of patients 50–54 years 213 147 360 55–59 years 280 271 551 60–64 years 312 212 524 65–69 years 330 288 618 70–74 years 304 336 640 NBCSP = National Bowel Cancer Screening Program; SD = standard deviation. Box 2 – Differences in colonoscopy outcomes for people who had community‐initiated (1233 patients) or NBCSP (1132 patients) faecal immunochemical tests CI = confidence interval; NBCSP = National Bowel Cancer Screening Program. *Large sessile polyps (> 2 cm) or malignant polyps. † Between values for community‐initiated and NBCSP groups.

Simon Whitcher · Monique Magnusson · Jon Gani · Christopher Oldmeadow · Peter G Pockney

Patients with ruptured HCC should be treated with the aim of long term survival

Natassia P Tan · Ammar Majeed · Stuart K Roberts · Paul J Gow · Penny Hey · Xianjun Mah · Mark Goodwin · Siddharth Sood · John Lubel · Amanda Nicoll · Anouk Dev · Sally J Bell · William W Kemp

The impact of discharge destination on outcomes after treatment for orthopaedic trauma requires further investigation

Lara A Kimmel · Pamela M Simpson · Anne E Holland · Elton R Edwards · Peter A Cameron · Richard S Steiger · Richard S Page · Raphael Hau · Andrew Bucknill · Jessica Kasza · Belinda J Gabbe

The causes of childhood cancers must be understood before interventions to reduce their incidence can be developed

Danny R Youlden · Peter D Baade · Adèle C Green · Patricia C Valery · Andrew S Moore · Joanne F Aitken

Self-reported wheat sensitivity was reported by 14% of respondents in both 2015 and 2018

Michael DE Potter · Michael P Jones · Marjorie M Walker · Natasha A Koloski · Simon Keely · Gerald Holtmann · Nicholas J Talley AC

Inaccurate recording of Indigenous status in administrative datasets can influence health service decision making

Mary O'Loughlin · Linton Harriss · Jane Mills · Fintan Thompson · Robyn McDermott

SmartStartAllergy faccilitates monitoring of infant feeding practices in primary care and parent-reported reactions to food

Michael O'Sullivan · Sandra Vale · Richard KS Loh · Jessica Metcalfe · Karin Orlemann · Sandra Salter · Ian Peters · Alan Leeb

Cancer overdiagnosis is a substantial problem that urgently requires changes in public health policy

Paul P Glasziou · Mark A Jones · Thanya Pathirana · Alexandra L Barratt · Katy JL Bell

Blood lead levels in the pre-school children in our sample were lower than in previous surveys

Christos Symeonides · Peter Vuillermin · Peter D Sly · Fiona Collier · Victoria Lynch · Sandra Falconer · Angela Pezic · Nicole Wardrop · Terence Dwyer · Sarath Ranganathan · Anne‐Louise B Ponsonby

Survivors of childhood cancer remain at increased risk of a second primary cancer well into adulthood

Danny R Youlden · Peter D Baade · Adèle C Green · Patricia C Valery · Andrew S Moore · Joanne F Aitken

Rates of non-reconstructive, non-reparative arthroscopic procedures in people over 50 years have declined over the past 10 years

So Mang (Simon) Lee · Wasim Awal · Christopher Vertullo

Essential oil exposures are frequent in Australia, and more than half involve children

Kristenbella AYR Lee · Joanna E Harnett · Rose Cairns

Introducing the floor price was followed by a significant reduction in ICU admissions associated with acute alcohol misuse

Paul J Secombe · Penny Stewart · Alex Brown · Michael J Bailey · David Pilcher