Coronary heart disease in primary care: accuracy of medical history and physical findings in patients with chest pain - a study protocol for a systematic review with individual patient data.

BACKGROUND: Chest pain is a common complaint in primary care, with coronary heart disease (CHD) being the most concerning of many potential causes. Systematic reviews on the sensitivity and specificity of symptoms and signs summarize the evidence about which of them are most useful in making a diagnosis. Previous meta-analyses are dominated by studies of patients referred to specialists. Moreover, as the analysis is typically based on study-level data, the statistical analyses in these reviews are limited while meta-analyses based on individual patient data can provide additional information. Our patient-level meta-analysis has three unique aims. First, we strive to determine the diagnostic accuracy of symptoms and signs for myocardial ischemia in primary care. Second, we investigate associations between study- or patient-level characteristics and measures of diagnostic accuracy. Third, we aim to validate existing clinical prediction rules for diagnosing myocardial ischemia in primary care. This article describes the methods of our study and six prospective studies of primary care patients with chest pain. Later articles will describe the main results. METHODS/DESIGN: We will conduct a systematic review and IPD meta-analysis of studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of symptoms and signs for diagnosing coronary heart disease in primary care. We will perform bivariate analyses to determine the sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratios of individual symptoms and signs and multivariate analyses to explore the diagnostic value of an optimal combination of all symptoms and signs based on all data of all studies. We will validate existing clinical prediction rules from each of the included studies by calculating measures of diagnostic accuracy separately by study. DISCUSSION: Our study will face several methodological challenges. First, the number of studies will be limited. Second, the investigators of original studies defined some outcomes and predictors differently. Third, the studies did not collect the same standard clinical data set. Fourth, missing data, varying from partly missing to fully missing, will have to be dealt with.Despite these limitations, we aim to summarize the available evidence regarding the diagnostic accuracy of symptoms and signs for diagnosing CHD in patients presenting with chest pain in primary care. REVIEW REGISTRATION: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (University of York): CRD42011001170.

Psychopharmacology in supportive care of cancer: a review for the clinician. III. Antidepressants

This review covers pharmacokinetics, adverse effects and drug interactions of antidepressants and the indications for them, with the aim of assisting the clinician working in palliative and supportive care in the prescription of such drugs. Practical considerations and decision trees to be used prior to the prescription of an antidepressant are also part of this review. Special emphasis is put on the management of depression, which is frequent in patients with advanced cancer and often remains underdetected and undertreated, or is treated at a stage when there is little time for medication to have an effect.

Psychopharmacology in supportive care of cancer: a review for the clinician: II. Neuroleptics.

Neuroleptics are frequently used in patients with advanced cancer. Most relevant and practical aspects of their use in supportive cancer care are reviewed, to assist the clinical oncologist and palliative care specialist when prescribing these drugs. This article reviews pharmacological properties, indications, such as delirium, nausea and vomiting, pain, anxiety and other symptoms, adverse effects, and drug interactions of neuroleptics and compares the profiles of different compounds. Special emphasis is put on the role of neuroleptics in the management of delirium.

Patient, primary care physician and specialist expectations of primary care physician involvement in cancer care.

BACKGROUND: In Canada, many health authorities recommend that primary care physicians (PCP) stay involved throughout their patients' cancer journey to increase continuity of care. Few studies have focused on patient and physician expectations regarding PCP involvement in cancer care. OBJECTIVE: To compare lung cancer patient, PCP and specialist expectations regarding PCP involvement in coordination of care, emotional support, information transmission and symptom relief at the different phases of cancer. DESIGN: Canadian survey of lung cancer patients, PCPs and cancer specialists PARTICIPANTS: A total of 395 patients completed questionnaires on their expectations regarding their PCP participation in several aspects of care, at different phases of their cancer. Also, 45 specialists and 232 community-based PCP involved in these patients' care responded to a mail survey on the same aspects of cancer care. RESULTS: Most specialists did not expect participation of the PCP in coordination of care in the diagnosis and treatment phases (65% and 78% respectively), in contrast with patients (83% and 85%) and PCPs (80% and 59%) (p < 0.0001). At these same phases, the best agreement among the 3 groups was around PCP role in emotional support: 84% and more of all groups had this expectation. PCP participation in symptom relief was another shared expectation, but more unanimously at the treatment phase (p = 0.85). In the advanced phase, most specialists expect a major role of PCP in all aspects of care (from 81% to 97%). Patients and PCP agree with them mainly for emotional support and information transmission. CONCLUSION: Lung cancer patient, PCP and specialist expectations regarding PCP role differ with the phase of cancer and the specific aspect of cancer care. There is a need to reach a better agreement among them and to better define PCP role, in order to achieve more collaborative and integrated cancer care.

Psychopharmacology in supportive care of cancer: a review for the clinician. IV. Other psychotropic agents

Besides benzodiazepine, antidepressant and neuroleptic agents, all of which have established roles in supportive care, other psychotropic drugs deserve consideration in selected conditions affecting patients with advanced cancer. This article briefly reviews relevant aspects of miscellaneous psychotropics available for secondline treatment, including nonbenzodiazepine sedative, hypnotic and anxiolytic drugs, anaesthetic agents, stimulants, and analgesic adjuvants acting on the central nervous system. The proper use of such subsidiary psychotropic agents requires that both their specificities and the particular characteristics of palliative care patients are taken into account.

Training primary care physicians in shared decision making for colorectal cancer screening : Insights from the first statewide colorectal cancer screening program in Switzerland

Background: The State of Vaud has launched the first population-based, organized, colorectal cancer screening program in Switzerland for the population aged 50 to 69. Each primary care physician (PCP) has been invited to participate in an interactive session preparing them to enroll patients in the screening program. We aimed at testing the impact of an interactive seminar for PCPs on their intention to discuss the options of no screening, screening with the fecal-immunological test (FIT) and colonoscopy. We measured attitude, intentions and knowledge through questionnaires filled by PCPs before and after a 2.5 hour-long interactive seminar. The main outcome was the proportion of physicians foreseeing to offer coloscopy vs FIT on an equal basis. Physicians estimated the proportion of their patients prescribed a fecal occult blood test (FOBT) vs coloscopy over the months before the seminar and after the interactive seminar. We used a clinical vignette to test for knowledge about screening indications. The interactive seminar included powerpoint presentations with quizzes and clickers, an 8-minute video presenting a shared decision making (SDM) consultation around CRC screening and distribution of educational materials such as a SDM decision aid and background epidemiological information.

Detecting and measuring deprivation in primary care: development, reliability and validity of a self-reported questionnaire: the DiPCare-Q.

OBJECTIVES: Advances in biopsychosocial science have underlined the importance of taking social history and life course perspective into consideration in primary care. For both clinical and research purposes, this study aims to develop and validate a standardised instrument measuring both material and social deprivation at an individual level. METHODS: We identified relevant potential questions regarding deprivation using a systematic review, structured interviews, focus group interviews and a think-aloud approach. Item response theory analysis was then used to reduce the length of the 38-item questionnaire and derive the deprivation in primary care questionnaire (DiPCare-Q) index using data obtained from a random sample of 200 patients during their planned visits to an ambulatory general internal medicine clinic. Patients completed the questionnaire a second time over the phone 3 days later to enable us to assess reliability. Content validity of the DiPCare-Q was then assessed by 17 general practitioners. Psychometric properties and validity of the final instrument were investigated in a second set of patients. The DiPCare-Q was administered to a random sample of 1898 patients attending one of 47 different private primary care practices in western Switzerland along with questions on subjective social status, education, source of income, welfare status and subjective poverty. RESULTS: Deprivation was defined in three distinct dimensions: material (eight items), social (five items) and health deprivation (three items). Item consistency was high in both the derivation (Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 (KR20) =0.827) and the validation set (KR20 =0.778). The DiPCare-Q index was reliable (interclass correlation coefficients=0.847) and was correlated to subjective social status (r(s)=-0.539). CONCLUSION: The DiPCare-Q is a rapid, reliable and validated instrument that may prove useful for measuring both material and social deprivation in primary care.

Incontinence urinaire chez la femme: prise en charge en médecine de premier recours [Urinary incontinence in women: management in primary care]

Urinary incontinence in women is a largely under-evaluated problem that affects nearly one out of two adult women. Even thouh its physiopathology is complex and its etiologies are multiple (and often intricate), urodynamic investigations are not considered necessary before starting a conservative therapy, which can be initiated by the primary care physician. Conservative management is based upon lifestyle modifications, specialized physiotherapy, and in certain cases medication. In the case of insufficient response after three months, the patient should be recommended to a specialist who can evaluate the need for a surgical procedure.

Adhésion thérapeutique du patient chronique: des concepts a la prise en charge ambulatoire [Medication adherence in chronic patients: from its concepts to its management in primary care].

Medication nonadherence is common and its determinants are diverse. Adherence is influenced by many parameters, such as patient's self-efficacy, knowledge of health risk, outcome expectations, benefits of change, and barriers and facilitators. The sociocognitive theory helps professionals to structure their approach and to support patients in managing their treatment. Professionals need skills and time, and benefit from coordination in care, in particular between physicians and pharmacists. This article presents the key elements of a medication adherence program as well as tools and some useful questions.

Detecting and measuring deprivation in primary care: development, validity and reliability of a self-reported questionnaire - the DiPCare-Q

Background: General practitioners play a central role in taking deprivation into consideration when caring for patients in primary care. Validated questions to identify deprivation in primary-care practices are still lacking. For both clinical and research purposes, this study therefore aims to develop and validate a standardized instrument measuring both material and social deprivation at an individual level. Methods: The Deprivation in Primary Care Questionnaire (DiPCare-Q) was developed using qualitative and quantitative approaches between 2008 and 2011. A systematic review identified 199 questions related to deprivation. Using judgmental item quality, these were reduced to 38 questions. Two focus groups (primary-care physicians, and primary-care researchers), structured interviews (10 laymen), and think aloud interviews (eight cleaning staff) assured face validity. Item response theory analysis was then used to derive the DiPCare-Q index using data obtained from a random sample of 200 patients who were to complete the questionnaire a second time over the phone. For construct and criterion validity, the final 16 questions were administered to a random sample of 1,898 patients attending one of 47 different private primary-care practices in western Switzerland (validation set) along with questions on subjective social status (subjective SES ladder), education, source of income, welfare status, and subjective poverty. Results: Deprivation was defined in three distinct dimensions (table); material deprivation (eight items), social deprivation (five items) and health deprivation (three items). Item consistency was high in both the derivation (KR20 = 0.827) and the validation set (KR20 = 0.778). The DiPCare-Q index was reliable (ICC = 0.847). For construct validity, we showed the DiPCare-Q index to be correlated to patients' estimation of their position on the subjective SES ladder (rs = 0.539). This position was correlated to both material and social deprivation independently suggesting two separate mechanisms enhancing the feeling of deprivation. Conclusion: The DiPCare-Q is a rapid, reliable and validated instrument useful for measuring both material and social deprivation in primary care. Questions from the DiPCare-Q are easy to use when investigating patients' social history and could improve clinicians' ability to detect underlying social distress related to deprivation.

Prise en charge de la candidose oesophagienne en médecine de premier recours [Management of the esophageal candidiasis by the primary care physician].

La candidose oesophagienne est l'une des infections opportunistes les plus fréquentes chez les patients infectés par le VIH. Ce diagnostic se rencontre également chez des patients sans immunodéficience manifeste. Certains facteurs de risque sont également associés à cette pathologie, tels que les traitements corticoïdes systémiques et inhalés ou les traitements par inhibiteurs de la pompe à protons et les antihistaminiques H2. En l'absence de facteur de risque identifié, un déficit immunitaire primaire devrait être recherché. La prévention de la candidose oesophagienne est basée en premier lieu sur l'identification des facteurs de risque, ainsi qu'un meilleur contrôle de ceux-ci. Cet article présente en détail la physio-pathologie, la clinique et la prise en charge par le médecin de premier recours de la candidose oesophagienne. Nous aborderons également les moyens de prévention de la candidose oesophagienne quand il y a lieu. Esophageal candidiasis is one of the most common opportunistic infections in patients infected by human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). This pathology is also found in patients without overt immunodeficiency. Other risk factors are known to be associated with this disease like inhaled or systemic corticosteroid treatment or proton-pump inhibitors and H2 receptor antagonists. In the absence of identified risk factors, a primary immune deficiency should be sought. Prevention of esophageal candidiasis is based primarily on the identification of risk factors, and a better control of them. This article presents a review of the physiopathology, clinical presentation and management of esophageal candidiasis by primary care physicians. We will also discuss ways of preventing esophageal candidiasis when necessary.

Alcohol Brief Intervention in Primary Care: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the present review was to evaluate the evidence of the effectiveness of brief interventions aimed at reducing chronic alcohol use and harm related to alcohol consumption, conducted among individuals actively attending primary care but who were not seeking help for alcohol problems. METHODS: Randomised trials reporting at-least one outcome related to alcohol consumption and conducted in outpatients who were actively attending primary care centre or provider were selected using Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, ISI Web of Science, ETOH database, and bibliographies of the retrieved references and previous reviews. Selection and data abstraction were performed independently and in duplicate. We assessed validity of the studies and performed a meta-analysis for studies reporting alcohol consumption at 6 or 12 months follow up. RESULTS: We included 24 reports, reporting results of 19 trials and including 5,639 individuals. Seventeen trials reported a measure of alcohol consumption, eight reporting a significant effect of intervention. The meta-analysis showed a mean pooled difference of -41 (95% CI: −54; −28) g of pure ethanol per week in favour of brief intervention group. Evidences for other outcomes (laboratory values, health related quality of life, morbidity and mortality, health care utilisation) were inconclusive. CONCLUSION: Our systematic review indicated that brief intervention might be effective for both men and women in reducing alcohol consumption compared to a controlled intervention, in a primary health care population. The meta-analysis confirmed the reduction in alcohol consumption at 6 and 12 month. Further research should precise the components of effectiveness of brief intervention and the evidence of effects on morbidity, mortality, and quality of life related outcomes.

Prise en charge par le praticien des infections après transplantation d'organes solides [Management of infection after organ transplantation by the primary care physician]

The primary care physician is frequently consulted in first line for infectious complications in organ transplant recipients. Many infections without signs of severity can nowadays be managed on an outpatient basis. However, a number of clinical situations specific to transplant recipients may require special attention and knowledge. In particular, the general practitioner must be aware of the potential interactions between immunosuppressive and antimicrobial therapies, the risk of renal dysfunction as a consequence of diarrhea or urinary tract infection, and the diagnostic of CMV disease as a cause of fever without obvious source occurring several months after transplantation. Collaboration with the transplantation specialists is recommended in order to assure an optimal management of these patients.

Patient and physician gender concordance in preventive care in university primary care settings.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of preventive care according to physician and patient gender in a country with universal health care coverage. METHODS: We assessed a retrospective cohort study of 1001 randomly selected patients aged 50-80years followed over 2years (2005-2006) in 4 Swiss university primary care settings (Basel, Geneva, Lausanne, Zürich). We used indicators derived from RAND's Quality Assessment Tools and examined percentages of recommended preventive care. Results were adjusted using hierarchical multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: 1001 patients (44% women) were followed by 189 physicians (52% women). Female patients received less preventive care than male patients (65.2% vs. 72.1%, p<0.001). Female physicians provided significantly more preventive care than male physicians (p=0.01) to both female (66.7% vs. 63.6%) and male patients (73.4% vs. 70.7%). After multivariate adjustment, differences according to physician (p=0.02) and patient gender (p<0.001) remained statistically significant. Female physicians provided more recommended cancer screening than male physicians (78.4 vs. 71.9%, p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In Swiss university primary care settings, female patients receive less preventive care than male patients, with female physicians providing more preventive care than male physicians. Greater attention should be paid to female patients in preventive care and to why female physicians tend to provide better preventive care.

Older persons' perceptions of general practitioner or specialist primary care physicians : same point of view?

BACKGROUND: Identification of a Primary Care Physician (PCP) by older patients is considered as essential for the coordination of care, but the extent to which identified PCPs are general practitioners or specialists is unknown. This study described older patients' experiences with their PCP and tested the hypothesis of differences between patients who identify a specialist as their PCP (SP PCP) and those who turn to a general practitioner (GP PCP). METHODS: In 2012, a cross-sectional postal survey on care was conducted in the 68+ year old population of the canton of Vaud. Data was provided by 2,276 participants in the ongoing Lausanne cohort 65+ (Lc65+), a study of those born between 1934 and 1943, and by 998 persons from an additional sample drawn to include the population outside of Lausanne or born before 1934. RESULTS: Participants expressed favourable perceptions, at rates exceeding 75% for most items. However, only 38% to 51% responded positively for out-of-hours availability, easy access and at home visits, likelihood of prescribing expensive medication if needed, and doctors' awareness of over-the-counter drugs. 12.0% had an SP PCP, in 95.9% specialised in a discipline implying training in internal medicine. Bivariate and multivariate analyses did not result in significant differences between GP and SP PCPs regarding perceptions of accessibility/availability, doctor-patient relationship, information and continuity of care, prevention, spontaneous use of the emergency department or ambulatory care utilisation. CONCLUSIONS: Experiences of old patients were mostly positive despite some lack in reported hearing, memory testing, and colorectal cancer screening. We found no differences between GP and SP PCP groups.