Opinions and attitudes of a sample of Swiss physicians about physical activity promotion in a primary care setting

Little is known about the opinions, beliefs and behavior of Swiss physicians regarding physical activity (PA) promotion in a primary care setting. A qualitative study was performed with semi-structured interviews. We purposively recruited and interviewed 16 physicians in the French speaking part of Switzerland. Their statements and ideas regarding the promotion of PA in a primary care setting were transcribed and synthesized from the tape recorded interviews. Les opinions, les représentations et les comportements des médecins suisses en matière de promotion de l'activité physique au cabinet médical restent largement méconnus en Suisse. Une étude qualitative a été réalisée au moyen d'entretiens semi-structurés. Nous avons intentionnellement recruté et interviewé 16 médecins en Suisse romande. Leurs opinions et attitudes concernant la promotion de l'activité physique au cabinet médical ont été transcrites et synthétisées à partir de l'enregistrement de ces entretiens.

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.

Durcissement des lois sociales et santé des migrants forcés: trois ans après (a Loi sur l'asile (LAsi) [Social policy hardening and forced immigrant's health: 3 years after the Asylum Law (LAsi)'s introduction].

In the canton de Vaud, General Practioners (GPs) caring for asylum seekers under the "aide d'urgence" regime can ask for an adaptation of their housing conditions, by filling out a specific form and addressing it to the medical commission responsible for advising the EVAM (the housing institution for asylum seekers) on these issues. The forms addressed to the commission are indicative of a worrisome state of health in this population, especially for mental health. More than 70% report at least one psychiatric diagnosis. Most frequent are anxiety and depressive disorders, as well as many posttraumatic stress disorders, associated with traumatic events both in the country of origin and in Switzerland. Adapting the housing conditions, based on vulnerabilities that the GP has specifically documented, may contribute to improve the health of the most vulnerable asylum seekers.

Quantifying uncertainty: physicians' estimates of infection in critically ill neonates and children.

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of physicians' prior probability estimates of serious infection in critically ill neonates and children, we conducted a prospective cohort study in 2 intensive care units. Using available clinical, laboratory, and radiographic information, 27 physicians provided 2567 probability estimates for 347 patients (follow-up rate, 92%). The median probability estimate of infection increased from 0% (i.e., no antibiotic treatment or diagnostic work-up for sepsis), to 2% on the day preceding initiation of antibiotic therapy, to 20% at initiation of antibiotic treatment (P<.001). At initiation of treatment, predictions discriminated well between episodes subsequently classified as proven infection and episodes ultimately judged unlikely to be infection (area under the curve, 0.88). Physicians also showed a good ability to predict blood culture-positive sepsis (area under the curve, 0.77). Treatment and testing thresholds were derived from the provided predictions and treatment rates. Physicians' prognoses regarding the presence of serious infection were remarkably precise. Studies investigating the value of new tests for diagnosis of sepsis should establish that they add incremental value to physicians' judgment.

Physicians' attitudes towards prevention: importance of intervention-specific barriers and physicians' health habits.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have explored physicians' attitudes towards prevention and barriers to the delivery of preventive health interventions. However, the relative importance of these previously identified barriers, both in general terms and in the context of a number of specific preventive interventions, has not been identified. Certain barriers may only pertain to a subset of preventive interventions. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine the relative importance of identified barriers to preventive interventions and to explore the association between physicians' characteristics and their attitudes towards prevention. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 496 of the 686 (72.3% response rate) generalist physicians from three Swiss cantons through a questionnaire asking physicians to rate the general importance of eight preventive health strategies and the relative importance of seven commonly cited barriers in relation to each specific preventive health strategy. RESULTS: The proportion of physicians rating each preventive intervention as being important varied from 76% for colorectal cancer screening to 100% for blood pressure control. Lack of time and lack of patient interest were generally considered to be important barriers by 41% and 44% of physicians, respectively, but the importance of these two barriers tended to be specifically higher for counselling-based interventions. Lack of training was most notably a barrier to counselling about alcohol and nutrition. Four characteristics of physicians predicted negative attitudes toward alcohol and smoking counselling: consumption of more than three alcoholic drinks per day [odds ratio (OR) = 8.4], sedentary lifestyle (OR = 3.4), lack of national certification (OR = 2.2) and lack of awareness of their own blood pressure (OR = 2.0). CONCLUSIONS: The relative importance of specific barriers varies across preventive interventions. This points to a need for tailored practice interventions targeting the specific barriers that impede a given preventive service. The negative influence of physicians' own health behaviours indicates a need for associated population-based interventions that reduce the prevalence of high-risk behaviours in the population as a whole.

Suivi de l'adhésion thérapeutique des patients hypertendus ou dyslipi- démiques par les cercles de qualité médecins-pharmaciens [Monitoring drug adherence for hypertensive and dyslipidemic patients in networks of community-based pharmacists and physicians].

Patient adherence is often poor for hypertension and dyslipidaemia. A monitoring of drug adherence might improve these risk factors control, but little is known in ambulatory care. We conducted a randomised controlled study in networks of community-based pharmacists and physicians in the canton of Fribourg to examine whether monitoring drug adherence with an electronic monitor (MEMS) would improve risk factor control among treated, but uncontrolled hypertensive and dyslipidemic patients. The results indicate that MEMS achieve a better blood pressure control and lipid profile, although its implementation requires considerable resources. The study also shows the value of collaboration between physicians and pharmacists in the field of patient adherence to improve ambulatory care of patients with cardiovascular risk factors.

Knowledge of Glasgow coma scale by air-rescue physicians.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the theoretical and practical knowledge of the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) by trained Air-rescue physicians in Switzerland. METHODS: Prospective anonymous observational study with a specially designed questionnaire. General knowledge of the GCS and its use in a clinical case were assessed. RESULTS: From 130 questionnaires send out, 103 were returned (response rate of 79.2%) and analyzed. Theoretical knowledge of the GCS was consistent for registrars, fellows, consultants and private practitioners active in physician-staffed helicopters. The clinical case was wrongly scored by 38 participants (36.9%). Wrong evaluation of the motor component occurred in 28 questionnaires (27.2%), and 19 errors were made for the verbal score (18.5%). Errors were made most frequently by registrars (47.5%, p = 0.09), followed by fellows (31.6%, p = 0.67) and private practitioners (18.4%, p = 1.00). Consultants made significantly less errors than the rest of the participating physicians (0%, p < 0.05). No statistically significant differences were shown between anesthetists, general practitioners, internal medicine trainees or others. CONCLUSION: Although the theoretical knowledge of the GCS by out-of-hospital physicians is correct, significant errors were made in scoring a clinical case. Less experienced physicians had a higher rate of errors. Further emphasis on teaching the GCS is mandatory.

Donner la parole aux médecins traitants [Letting the treating physicians speak].

OBJECTIVE: Quality assessment in consultation and liaison psychiatry (CLP) is extremely difficult and must take into account numerous factors. The general practitioner (GP) of the patients seen by CL psychiatrists seems an essential factor to be considered in evaluating CL work. However, as far as we know, no study is doing so. Therefore, we have implied the GP to assess our CL work at the hospital St-Loup-Orbe. METHOD: We put up a qualitative study consisting of semi-structured interviews with 18 GPs caring for 45 patients having been submitted to a psychiatric CL intervention. Furthermore, we invited the GPs to assesses CLP as a specialization as well as CLP practiced at St-Loup-Orbe hospital. RESULTS: Impact is judged by the GPs with regard to the total number as: highly favorable> favorable> indifferent> negative. The GPs' critiques, whether positive or negative, are highly informative. CONCLUSIONS: GPs accept favorably CLP interventions and consider them on the whole as constructive. On the other hand, they are not sufficiently considered as partners during their patients' hospital stay. Furthermore, CLP must evaluate its impact at distance from the consultation and take into account the GPs' assessments to improve CL quality.

Knowledge of Glasgow coma scale by air-rescue physicians

Rapport de synthèse Introduction : Le Glasgow coma score (GCS) est un outil reconnu permettant l'évaluation des patients après avoir subi un traumatisme crânien. Il est réputé pour sa simplicité et sa reproductibilité permettant ainsi aux soignants une évaluation appropriée et continue du status neurologique des patients. Le GCS est composé de trois catégories évaluant la réponse oculaire, verbale et motrice. En Suisse, les soins préhospitaliers aux patients victimes d'un trauma crânien sévère sont effectués par des médecins, essdntiellement à bord des hélicoptères médicalisés. Avant une anesthésie générale nécessaire à ces patients, une évaluation du GCS est essentielle indiquant au personnel hospitalier la gravité des lésions cérébrales. Afin d'évaluer la connaissance du GCS par les médecins à bord des hélicoptères médicalisés en Suisse, nous avons élaboré un questionnaire, contenant dans une première partie des questions sur les connaissances générales du GCS suivi d'un cas clinique. Objectif : Evaluation des connaissances pratiques et théoriques du GCS par les médecins travaillant à bord des hélicoptères médicalisés en Suisse. Méthode : Etude observationnelle prospective et anonymisée à l'aide d'un questionnaire. Evaluation des connaissances générales du GCS et de son utilisation clinique lors de la présentation d'un cas. Résultats : 16 des 18 bases d'hélicoptères médicalisés suisses ont participé à notre étude. 130 questionnaires ont été envoyés et le taux de réponse a été de 79.2%. Les connaissances théoriques du GCS étaient comparables pour tous les médecins indépendamment de leur niveau de formation. Des erreurs dans l'appréciation du cas clinique étaient présentes chez 36.9% des participants. 27.2% ont commis des erreurs dans le score moteur et 18.5% dans le score verbal. Les erreurs ont été répertoriées le plus fréquemment chez les médecins assistants (47.5%, p=0.09), suivi par les chefs de clinique (31.6%, p=0.67) et les médecins installés en cabinet (18.4%, p=1.00). Les médecins cadres ont fait significativement moins d'erreurs que les autres participants (0%, p<0.05). Aucune différence significative n'à été observée entre les différentes spécialités (anesthésie, médecine interne, médecine général et «autres »). Conclusion Même si les connaissances théoriques du GCS sont adéquates parmi les médecins travaillant à bord des hélicoptères médicalisés, des erreurs dans son application clinique sont présentes dans plus d'un tiers des cas. Les médecins avec le moins d'expériences professionnelle font le plus d'erreurs. Au vu de l'importance de l'évaluation correcte du score de Glasgow initial, une amélioration des connaissances est indispensable.

Les urgences: une opportunité d'accès a des interventions préventives en partenariat avec les médecins de premier recours [Preventive medicine in emergency centres: an opportunity of partnership for emergency physicians and primary care physicians].

Whereas preventive interventions for primary care physicians are now well established, the preventive interventions in emergency departments have been only partially and recently evaluated. Emergency departments probably represent however an opportunity for preventive medicine. Indeed, the population, sometimes vulnerable, consulting emergency departments, frequently presents risks factors and risks behaviours. Moreover, the concept of &quot;teachable moment&quot; and the studies recently performed seem to confirm this hypothesis. This article review the currently preventive interventions recommended in emergency departments and discuss the rationale to implement preventive medicine in emergency departments and the limits of this process.

Parents and primary care physicians have different views about copying medical letters to parents after paediatric outpatient visits.

AIM: We assessed how satisfied parents were when they received a copy of the letter sent to their primary care physician after their child attended a hospital outpatient clinic and compared their views with those of the primary care physician. METHODS: Anonymised questionnaires were sent to parents, and their primary care physician, after their child had visited a paediatric nephrology unit. RESULTS: We received responses from 112 parents (46%) and 69 primary care physicians (93%). Most parents (97%) were satisfied with the process, 94% thought that the letter was a true reflection of the outpatient consultation and easy to understand, and 55% read it to their child. However, 21% would have preferred a simpler letter. More than a third (37%) of the primary care physicians did not approve of the parents being sent the letter, and 30% felt that the letter was difficult for the parents to understand and should be replaced with a simpler letter. CONCLUSION: Most parents (97%) appreciated receiving a copy of the letter following their child's outpatient clinic visit, and 95% understood its contents. More than half (55%) read the letter to their child. However, 37% of primary care physicians did not approve of the practice.