Screening primary-care patients forgoing health care for economic reasons.

BACKGROUND: Growing social inequities have made it important for general practitioners to verify if patients can afford treatment and procedures. Incorporating social conditions into clinical decision-making allows general practitioners to address mismatches between patients' health-care needs and financial resources. OBJECTIVES: Identify a screening question to, indirectly, rule out patients' social risk of forgoing health care for economic reasons, and estimate prevalence of forgoing health care and the influence of physicians' attitudes toward deprivation. DESIGN: Multicenter cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-seven general practitioners working in the French-speaking part of Switzerland enrolled a random sample of patients attending their private practices. MAIN MEASURES: Patients who had forgone health care were defined as those reporting a household member (including themselves) having forgone treatment for economic reasons during the previous 12 months, through a self-administered questionnaire. Patients were also asked about education and income levels, self-perceived social position, and deprivation levels. KEY RESULTS: Overall, 2,026 patients were included in the analysis; 10.7% (CI95% 9.4-12.1) reported a member of their household to have forgone health care during the 12 previous months. The question "Did you have difficulties paying your household bills during the last 12 months" performed better in identifying patients at risk of forgoing health care than a combination of four objective measures of socio-economic status (gender, age, education level, and income) (R(2) = 0.184 vs. 0.083). This question effectively ruled out that patients had forgone health care, with a negative predictive value of 96%. Furthermore, for physicians who felt powerless in the face of deprivation, we observed an increase in the odds of patients forgoing health care of 1.5 times. CONCLUSION: General practitioners should systematically evaluate the socio-economic status of their patients. Asking patients whether they experience any difficulties in paying their bills is an effective means of identifying patients who might forgo health care.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," published in 2004. DESIGN: Modified Delphi method with a consensus conference of 55 international experts, several subsequent meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee. This process was conducted independently of any industry funding. METHODS: We used the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations. A strong recommendation (1) indicates that an intervention's desirable effects clearly outweigh its undesirable effects (risk, burden, cost) or clearly do not. Weak recommendations (2) indicate that the tradeoff between desirable and undesirable effects is less clear. The grade of strong or weak is considered of greater clinical importance than a difference in letter level of quality of evidence. In areas without complete agreement, a formal process of resolution was developed and applied. Recommendations are grouped into those directly targeting severe sepsis, recommendations targeting general care of the critically ill patient that are considered high priority in severe sepsis, and pediatric considerations. RESULTS: Key recommendations, listed by category, include early goal-directed resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm potential source of infection (1C); administration of broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy within 1 hr of diagnosis of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1D); reassessment of antibiotic therapy with microbiology and clinical data to narrow coverage, when appropriate (1C); a usual 7-10 days of antibiotic therapy guided by clinical response (1D); source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method (1C); administration of either crystalloid or colloid fluid resuscitation (1B); fluid challenge to restore mean circulating filling pressure (1C); reduction in rate of fluid administration with rising filing pressures and no improvement in tissue perfusion (1D); vasopressor preference for norepinephrine or dopamine to maintain an initial target of mean arterial pressure > or = 65 mm Hg (1C); dobutamine inotropic therapy when cardiac output remains low despite fluid resuscitation and combined inotropic/vasopressor therapy (1C); stress-dose steroid therapy given only in septic shock after blood pressure is identified to be poorly responsive to fluid and vasopressor therapy (2C); recombinant activated protein C in patients with severe sepsis and clinical assessment of high risk for death (2B except 2C for postoperative patients). In the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage, target a hemoglobin of 7-9 g/dL (1B); a low tidal volume (1B) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure strategy (1C) for acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure in acute lung injury (1C); head of bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); avoiding routine use of pulmonary artery catheters in ALI/ARDS (1A); to decrease days of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay, a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ALI/ARDS who are not in shock (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation/analgesia (1B); using either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation with daily interruptions or lightening (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers, if at all possible (1B); institution of glycemic control (1B), targeting a blood glucose < 150 mg/dL after initial stabilization (2C); equivalency of continuous veno-veno hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1A); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding using H2 blockers (1A) or proton pump inhibitors (1B); and consideration of limitation of support where appropriate (1D). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include greater use of physical examination therapeutic end points (2C); dopamine as the first drug of choice for hypotension (2C); steroids only in children with suspected or proven adrenal insufficiency (2C); and a recommendation against the use of recombinant activated protein C in children (1B). CONCLUSIONS: There was strong agreement among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best current care of patients with severe sepsis. Evidenced-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the first step toward improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

Guidelines for the clinical management of atrial fibrillation: a practical perspective.

Since the management of atrial fibrillation may be difficult in the individual patient, our purpose was to develop simple clinical recommendations to help the general internist manage this common clinical problem. Systematic review of the literature with evaluation of data-related evidence and framing of graded recommendations. Atrial fibrillation affects some 1% of the population in Western countries and is linked to a significant increase in morbidity and mortality. The management of atrial fibrillation requires individualised evaluation of the risks and benefits of therapeutic modalities, relying whenever possible on simple and validated tools. The two main points requiring a decision in clinical management are 1) whether or not to implement thromboembolic prevention therapy, and 2) whether preference should be given to a "rate control" or "rhythm control" strategy. Thromboembolic prophylaxis should be prescribed after individualised risk assessment: for patients at risk, oral anticoagulation with warfarin decreases the rate of embolic complications by 60% and aspirin by 20%, at the expense of an increased incidence of haemorrhagic complications. "Rate control" and "rhythm control" strategies are probably equivalent, and the choice should also be made on an individualised basis. To assist the physician in making his choices for the care of an atrial fibrillation patient we propose specific tables and algorithms, with graded recommendations. On the evidence of data from the literature we propose simple algorithms and tables for the clinical management of atrial fibrillation in the individual patient.

Diagnosis and workup of 522 consecutive patients with neuroendocrine neoplasms in Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are difficult to diagnose. We used SwissNET data to characterise NEN patients followed in the two academic centres of western Switzerland (WS), and to compare them with patients followed in eastern Switzerland (ES) as well as with international guidelines. METHOD: SwissNET is a prospective database covering data from 522 consecutive patients (285 men, 237 women) from WS (n = 99) and ES (n = 423). RESULTS: Mean ± SD age at diagnosis was 59.0 ± 15.7 years. Overall, 76/522 experienced a functional syndrome, with a median interval of 1.0 (IQR: 1.0-3.0) year between symptoms onset and diagnosis. A total of 51/522 of these tumours were incidental. The primary tumour site was the small intestine (29%), pancreas (21%), appendix (18%) and lung (11%) in both regions combined. In all, 513 functional imaging studies were obtained (139 in WS, 374 in ES). Of these, 381 were 111In-pentetreotide scintigraphies and 20 were 68Ga-DOTATOC PET. First line therapy was surgery in 87% of patients, medical therapy (biotherapy or chemotherapy) in 9% and irradiation in 3% for both regions together. CONCLUSION: Swiss NEN patients appear similar to what has been described in the literature. Imaging by somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS) is widely used in both regions of Switzerland. In good accordance with published guidelines, data on first line therapy demonstrate the crucial role of surgery. The low incidence of biotherapy suggests that long-acting somatostatin analogues are not yet widely used for their anti-proliferative effects. The SwissNET initiative should help improve compliance with ENETS guidelines in the workup and care of NEN patients.

Future development of gastrointestinal cancer incidence and mortality rates in Switzerland: a tumour registry- and population-based projection up to 2030.

QUESTIONS UNDER STUDY: Since tumour burden consumes substantial healthcare resources, precise cancer incidence estimations are pivotal to define future needs of national healthcare. This study aimed to estimate incidence and mortality rates of oesophageal, gastric, pancreatic, hepatic and colorectal cancers up to 2030 in Switzerland. METHODS: Swiss Statistics provides national incidences and mortality rates of various cancers, and models of future developments of the Swiss population. Cancer incidences and mortality rates from 1985 to 2009 were analysed to estimate trends and to predict incidence and mortality rates up to 2029. Linear regressions and Joinpoint analyses were performed to estimate the future trends of incidences and mortality rates. RESULTS: Crude incidences of oesophageal, pancreas, liver and colorectal cancers have steadily increased since 1985, and will continue to increase. Gastric cancer incidence and mortality rates reveal an ongoing decrease. Pancreatic and liver cancer crude mortality rates will keep increasing, whereas colorectal cancer mortality on the contrary will fall. Mortality from oesophageal cancer will plateau or minimally increase. If we consider European population-standardised incidence rates, oesophageal, pancreatic and colorectal cancer incidences are steady. Gastric cancers are diminishing and liver cancers will follow an increasing trend. Standardised mortality rates show a diminution for all but liver cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The oncological burden of gastrointestinal cancer will significantly increase in Switzerland during the next two decades. The crude mortality rates globally show an ongoing increase except for gastric and colorectal cancers. Enlarged healthcare resources to take care of these complex patient groups properly will be needed.