Médecine sociate en 2013: quand la précarité précède la pauvrete [Social medicine: does it still make sense in 2013?].

Social medicine is a medicine that seeks to understand the impact of socio-economic conditions on human health and diseases in order to improve the health of a society and its individuals. In this field of medicine, determining the socio-economic status of individuals is generally not sufficient to explain and/or understand the underlying mechanisms leading to social inequalities in health. Other factors must be considered such as environmental, psychosocial, behavioral and biological factors that, together, can lead to more or less permanent damages to the health of the individuals in a society. In a time where considerable progresses have been made in the field of the biomedicine, does the practice of social medicine in a primary care setting still make sense?

Characteristics of HIV patients referred to a medication adherence program in Switzerland.

Background Since August 2004, HIV patients who encounter -or are at risk of -problems with their antiretroviral treatment (ART) are referred by their physician to a medication adherence program at the community pharmacy of the Department of Ambulatory Care and Community Medicine in Lausanne (Switzerland). The program combines motivational interviewing and electronic drug monitoring. Objective To compare the demographic and clinical characteristics as well as ART of HIV patients referred to the adherence program versus those of the entire HIV population followed in the same infection disease department in the same time frame. Method Retrospective descriptive cross-sectional study. Study time frame was defined according to the period with the highest number of HIV patients visiting the adherence program. Results Subjects included in the adherence program had more often a protease inhibitor-based regimen (64 %; 95 % CI [52-75 %] vs. 37 %) and lower CD4 cell counts (419 (252.0, 521.0); 95 % CI [305-472] vs. 500 (351.0, 720.0)) than the entire HIV population. A majority of women were included in the adherence program (66 %; 95 % CI [54-76 %] vs. 39% in the entire HIV population). Conclusion Subjects referred to the adherence program were different from the entire HIV population and showed worse clinical outcomes and were more often under salvage therapy. More women than men were included. Reasons for such a difference need to be further explored.

Toxic substances in blood: an analysis of current recommendations under a Bayesian (decision) approach

This article extends existing discussion in literature on probabilistic inference and decision making with respect to continuous hypotheses that are prevalent in forensic toxicology. As a main aim, this research investigates the properties of a widely followed approach for quantifying the level of toxic substances in blood samples, and to compare this procedure with a Bayesian probabilistic approach. As an example, attention is confined to the presence of toxic substances, such as THC, in blood from car drivers. In this context, the interpretation of results from laboratory analyses needs to take into account legal requirements for establishing the 'presence' of target substances in blood. In a first part, the performance of the proposed Bayesian model for the estimation of an unknown parameter (here, the amount of a toxic substance) is illustrated and compared with the currently used method. The model is then used in a second part to approach-in a rational way-the decision component of the problem, that is judicial questions of the kind 'Is the quantity of THC measured in the blood over the legal threshold of 1.5 μg/l?'. This is pointed out through a practical example.

Sickness certification in primary care: a survey on views and practices among Swiss physicians.

QUESTIONS UNDER STUDY: Studies from several countries (Scandinavia, United Kingdom) report that general practitioners (GPs) experience problems in sickness certification. Our study explored views of Swiss GPs towards sickness certification, their practice and experience, professional skills and problematic interactions with patients. METHODS: We conducted an online survey among GPs throughout Switzerland, exploring behaviour of physicians, patients and employers with regard to sickness certification; GPs' views about sickness certification; required competences for certifying sickness absence, and approaches to advance their competence. We piloted the questionnaire and disseminated it through the networks of the five Swiss academic institutes for primary care. RESULTS: We received 507 valid responses (response rate 50%). Only 43/507 GPs experienced sickness certification as problematic per se, yet 155/507 experienced problems in sickness certification at least once a week. The 507 GPs identified estimating a long-term prognosis about work capacity (64%), handling conflicts with patients (54%), and determining the reduction of work capacity (42%) as problematic. Over 75% would welcome special training opportunities, e.g., on sickness certifications during residency (93%), in insurance medicine (81%), and conflict management (80%). CONCLUSION: Sickness certification as such does not present a major problem to Swiss GPs, which contrasts with the experience in Scandinavian countries and in the UK. Swiss GPs did identify specific tasks of sickness certification as problematic. Training opportunities on sick-leave certification and insurance medicine in general were welcomed.