An Australian comparison of specialist care of acute myocardial infarction

Objective. To determine whether patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in an Australian setting receive better pharmacological care if managed by cardiologists than by non-cardiologists. Design. Retrospective chart review of patients hospitalized between 1 January 1997 and 30 June 1998, undertaken by abstractors blind to study objectives. Setting. One tertiary and two community hospitals in south-east Queensland, Australia, in which all patients admitted with AMI were cared for by cardiologists and general physicians, respectively. Study participants. Two cohorts of consecutive patients satisfying diagnostic criteria for AMI: 184 in the tertiary hospital and 207 in the community hospitals. Main outcome measures. Frequency of use, in highly eligible patients, of thrombolysis, P-blockers, aspirin, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, lipid-lowering agents, nitrates, and calcium antagonists. Cohorts were compared for differences in prognostic factors or illness severity. Results. In community hospital patients, there was greater use of thrombolysis [100% versus 83% in the tertiary hospital; difference 17%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 11-26%; P < 0.001] and of ACE inhibitors (84% versus 66%; difference 18%, 95% CI 3-34%; P = 0.02), and lower median length of stay (6.0 days versus 7.0 days; P = 0.001) compared with tertiary hospital patients. Frequency of use of other drugs, and adjusted rates of death and re-infarction were the same for both cohorts. Conclusions. With respect to pharmacological management of patients hospitalized with AMI, cardiologists and general physicians appear to provide care of similar quality and achieve equivalent outcomes. Further studies are required to confirm the generalizability of these results to Australian practice as a whole.

Views of general practitioners and benzodiazepine users on benzodiazepines: A qualitative analysis

Effectively assisting benzodiazepine users to cease use requires a greater understanding of general practitioners' (GPs) and benzodiazepine users' views on using and ceasing benzodiazepines. This paper reports the findings from a qualitative study that examined the views of 28 GPs and 23 benzodiazepine users (BUs) in Cairns, Australia. A semi-structured interview was conducted with all participants and the information gained was analysed using the Consensual Qualitative Research Approach, which allowed comparisons to be made between the views of the two groups of interviewees. There was commonality between GPs and BUs on reasons for commencing benzodiazepines, the role of dependence in continued use, and the importance of lifestyle change in its cessation. However, several differences emerged regarding commencement of use and processes of cessation. In particular, users felt there was greater need for GPs to routinely advise patients about non-pharmacological management of their problems and potential adverse consequences of long-term use before commencing benzodiazepines. Cessation could be discussed with all patients who use benzodiazepines for longer than 3 months, strategies offered to assist in management of withdrawal and anxiety, and referral to other health service providers for additional support. Lifestyle change could receive greater focus at all stages of treatment. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Quality of life compared during pharmacological treatments and clinical monitoring for non-localized prostate cancer: a randomized controlled trial

To investigate the effects of different management strategies for non-localized prostate cancer on men's quality of life and cognitive functioning. Men with prostate cancer were randomly assigned to one of four treatment arms: leuprorelin, goserelin, cyproterone acetate (CPA), or close clinical monitoring. In a repeated-measures design, men were assessed before treatment (baseline) and after 6 and 12 months of treatment. A community comparison group of men of the same age with no prostate cancer participated for the same length of time. The men were recruited from public and private urology departments from university teaching hospitals. All those with prostate cancer who were eligible for hormonal therapy had no symptoms requiring immediate therapy. In all, 82 patients were randomized and 62 completed the 1-year study, and of the 20 community participants, 15 completed the study. The main outcome measures were obtained from questionnaires on emotional distress, existential satisfaction, physical function and symptoms, social and role function, subjective cognitive function, and sexual function, combined with standard neuropsychological tests of memory, attention, and executive functions. Sexual dysfunction increased for patients on androgen-suppressing therapies, and emotional distress increased in those assigned to CPA or close clinical monitoring. Compared with before treatment there was evidence of an adverse effect of leuprorelin, goserelin, and CPA on cognitive function. In deciding the timing of androgen suppression therapy for prostate cancer, consideration should be given to potential adverse effects on quality of life and cognitive function.