Somatisation in primary care: experiences of primary care physicians involved in a training program and in a randomised controlled trial

Background: A new intervention aimed at managing patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) based on a specific set of communication techniques was developed, and tested in a cluster randomised clinical trial. Due to the modest results obtained and in order to improve our intervention we need to know the GPs' attitudes towards patients with MUS, their experience, expectations and the utility of the communication techniques we proposed and the feasibility of implementing them. Physicians who took part in 2 different training programs and in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) for patients with MUS were questioned to ascertain the reasons for the doctors' participation in the trial and the attitudes, experiences and expectations of GPs about the intervention. Methods: A qualitative study based on four focus groups with GPs who took part in a RCT. A content analysis was carried out. Results: Following the RCT patients are perceived as true suffering persons, and the relationship with them has improved in GPs of both groups. GPs mostly valued the fact that it is highly structured, that it made possible a more comfortable relationship and that it could be applied to a broad spectrum of patients with psychosocial problems. Nevertheless, all participants consider that change in patients is necessary; GPs in the intervention group remarked that that is extremely difficult to achieve. Conclusion: GPs positively evaluate the communication techniques and the interventions that help in understanding patient suffering, and express the enormous difficulties in handling change in patients. These findings provide information on the direction in which efforts for improving intervention should be directed.

Efficacy of a cognitive and behavioural psychotherapy applied by primary care psychologists in patients with mixed anxiety-depressive disorder: a research protocol

Background: In contrast with the recommendations of clinical practice guidelines, the most common treatment for anxiety and depressive disorders in primary care is pharmacological. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of a cognitive-behavioural psychological intervention, delivered by primary care psychologists in patients with mixed anxiety-depressive disorder compared to usual care. Methods/Design: This is an open-label, multicentre, randomized, and controlled study with two parallel groups. A random sample of 246 patients will be recruited with mild-to-moderate mixed anxiety-depressive disorder, from the target population on the lists of 41 primary care doctors. Patients will be randomly assigned to the intervention group, who will receive standardised cognitive-behavioural therapy delivered by psychologists together with usual care, or to a control group, who will receive usual care alone. The cognitive-behavioural therapy intervention is composed of eight individual 60-minute face-to face sessions conducted in eight consecutive weeks. A follow-up session will be conducted over the telephone, for reinforcement or referral as appropriate, 6 months after the intervention, as required. The primary outcome variable will be the change in scores on the Short Form-36 General Health Survey. We will also measure the change in the frequency and intensity of anxiety symptoms (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory) and depression (Beck Depression Inventory) at baseline, and 3, 6 and 12 months later. Additionally, we will collect information on the use of drugs and health care services. Discussion: The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of a primary care-based cognitive-behavioural psychological intervention in patients with mixed anxiety-depressive disorder. The international scientific evidence has demonstrated the need for psychologists in primary care. However, given the differences between health policies and health services, it is important to test the effect of these psychological interventions in our geographical setting.

Efficacy and safety of autologous platelet rich plasma for the treatment of vascular ulcers in primary care: Phase III study

Background: Vascular ulcers are commonly seen in daily practice at all levels of care and have great impact at personal, professional and social levels with a high cost in terms of human and material resources. Given that the application of autologous platelet rich plasma has been shown to decrease healing times in various different studies in the hospital setting, we considered that it would be interesting to assess the efficacy and feasibility of this treatment in primary care. The objectives of this study are to assess the potential efficacy and safety of autologous platelet rich plasma for the treatment of venous ulcers compared to the conventional treatment (moist wound care) in primary care patients with chronic venous insufficiency (C, clinical class, E, aetiology, A, anatomy and P, pathophysiology classification C6). Design: We will conduct a phase III, open-label, parallel-group, multicentre, randomized study. The subjects will be 150 patients aged between 40 and 100 years of age with an at least 2-month history of a vascular venous ulcer assigned to ten primary care centres. For the treatment with autologous platelet rich plasma, all the following tasks will be performed in the primary care setting: blood collection, centrifugation, separation of platelet rich plasma, activation of coagulation adding calcium chloride and application of the PRP topically after gelification. The control group will receive standard moist wound care. The outcome variables to be measured at baseline, and at weeks 5 and 9 later include: reduction in the ulcer area, Chronic Venous Insufficiency Quality of Life Questionnaire score, and percentage of patients who require wound care only once a week. Discussion: The results of this study will be useful to improve the protocol for using platelet rich plasma in chronic vascular ulcers and to favour wider use of this treatment in primary care.

Social, economic, and health impact of the respiratory syncytial virus: a systematic search

Background: Bronchiolitis caused by the respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and its related complications are common in infants born prematurely, with severe congenital heart disease, or bronchopulmonary dysplasia, as well as in immunosuppressed infants. There is a rich literature on the different aspects of RSV infection with a focus, for the most part, on specific risk populations. However, there is a need for a systematic global analysis of the impact of RSV infection in terms of use of resources and health impact on both children and adults. With this aim, we performed a systematic search of scientific evidence on the social, economic, and health impact of RSV infection. Methods: A systematic search of the following databases was performed: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Spanish Medical Index, MEDES-MEDicina in Spanish, Cochrane Plus Library, and Google without time limits. We selected 421 abstracts based on the 6,598 articles identified. From these abstracts, 4 RSV experts selected the most relevant articles. They selected 65 articles. After reading the full articles, 23 of their references were also selected. Finally, one more article found through a literature information alert system was included. Results: The information collected was summarized and organized into the following topics: 1. Impact on health (infections and respiratory complications, mid-to long-term lung function decline, recurrent wheezing, asthma, other complications such as otitis and rhino-conjunctivitis, and mortality; 2. Impact on resources (visits to primary care and specialists offices, emergency room visits, hospital admissions, ICU admissions, diagnostic tests, and treatments); 3. Impact on costs (direct and indirect costs); 4. Impact on quality of life; and 5. Strategies to reduce the impact (interventions on social and hygienic factors and prophylactic treatments). Conclusions: We concluded that 1. The health impact of RSV infection is relevant and goes beyond the acute episode phase; 2. The health impact of RSV infection on children is much better documented than the impact on adults; 3. Further research is needed on mid-and long-term impact of RSV infection on the adult population, especially those at high-risk; 4. There is a need for interventions aimed at reducing the impact of RSV infection by targeting health education, information, and prophylaxis in high-risk populations.