Health status and health care utilisation of patients in complementary and conventional primary care in Switzerland--an observational study

BACKGROUND: The study is part of a nationwide evaluation of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in primary care in Switzerland. OBJECTIVES: Patient health status with respect to demographic attributes such as gender, age, and health care utilisation pattern was studied and compared with conventional primary care. METHODS: The study was performed as a cross-sectional survey including 11932 adult patients seeking complementary or conventional primary care. Patients were asked to document their self-perceived health status by completing a questionnaire in the waiting room. Physicians were performing conventional medicine and/or various forms of complementary primary care such as homeopathy, anthroposophic medicine, neural therapy, herbal medicine, or traditional Chinese medicine. Additional information on patient demographics and yearly consultation rates for participating physicians was obtained from the data pool of all Swiss health insurers. These data were used to confirm the survey results. RESULTS: We observed considerable and significant differences in demographic attributes of patients seeking complementary and conventional care. Patients seeking complementary care documented longer lasting and more severe main health problems than patients in conventional care. The number of previous physician visits differed between patient groups, which indicates higher consumption of medical resources by CAM patients. CONCLUSIONS: The study supports the hypothesis of differences in socio-demographic and behavioural attributes of patients seeking conventional medicine or CAM in primary care. The study provides empirical evidence that CAM users are requiring more physician-based medical services in primary care than users of conventional medicine.

Patient satisfaction with primary care: an observational study comparing anthroposophic and conventional care

BACKGROUND: This study is part of a cross-sectional evaluation of complementary medicine providers in primary care in Switzerland. It compares patient satisfaction with anthroposophic medicine (AM) and conventional medicine (CON). METHODS: We collected baseline data on structural characteristics of the physicians and their practices and health status and demographics of the patients. Four weeks later patients assessed their satisfaction with the received treatment (five items, four point rating scale) and evaluated the praxis care (validated 23-item questionnaire, five point rating scale). 1946 adult patients of 71 CON and 32 AM primary care physicians participated. RESULTS: 1. Baseline characteristics: AM patients were more likely female (75.6% vs. 59.0%, p < 0.001) and had higher education (38.6% vs. 24.7%, p < 0.001). They suffered more often from chronic illnesses (52.8% vs. 46.2%, p = 0.015) and cancer (7.4% vs. 1.1%). AM consultations lasted on average 23,3 minutes (CON: 16,8 minutes, p < 0.001). 2. Satisfaction: More AM patients expressed a general treatment satisfaction (56.1% vs. 43.4%, p < 0.001) and saw their expectations completely fulfilled at follow-up (38.7% vs. 32.6%, p < 0.001). AM patients reported significantly fewer adverse side effects (9.3% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.003), and more other positive effects from treatment (31.7% vs. 17.1%, p < 0.001). Europep: AM patients appreciated that their physicians listened to them (80.0% vs. 67.1%, p < 0.001), spent more time (76.5% vs. 61.7%, p < 0.001), had more interest in their personal situation (74.6% vs. 60.3%, p < 0.001), involved them more in decisions about their medical care (67.8% vs. 58.4%, p = 0.022), and made it easy to tell the physician about their problems (71.6% vs. 62.9%, p = 0.023). AM patients gave significantly better rating as to information and support (in 3 of 4 items p [less than or equal to] 0.044) and for thoroughness (70.4% vs. 56.5%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: AM patients were significantly more satisfied and rated their physicians as valuable partners in the treatment. This suggests that subject to certain limitations, AM therapy may be beneficial in primary care. To confirm this, more detailed qualitative studies would be necessary.

Is perioperative point-of-care prothrombin time testing accurate compared to the standard laboratory test?

There is no accepted way of measuring prothrombin time without time loss for patients undergoing major surgery who are at risk of intraoperative dilution and consumption coagulopathy due to bleeding and volume replacement with crystalloids or colloids. Decisions to transfuse fresh frozen plasma and procoagulatory drugs have to rely on clinical judgment in these situations. Point-of-care devices are considerably faster than the standard laboratory methods. In this study we assessed the accuracy of a Point-of-care (PoC) device measuring prothrombin time compared to the standard laboratory method. Patients undergoing major surgery and intensive care unit patients were included. PoC prothrombin time was measured by CoaguChek XS Plus (Roche Diagnostics, Switzerland). PoC and reference tests were performed independently and interpreted under blinded conditions. Using a cut-off prothrombin time of 50%, we calculated diagnostic accuracy measures, plotted a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and tested for equivalence between the two methods. PoC sensitivity and specificity were 95% (95% CI 77%, 100%) and 95% (95% CI 91%, 98%) respectively. The negative likelihood ratio was 0.05 (95% CI 0.01, 0.32). The positive likelihood ratio was 19.57 (95% CI 10.62, 36.06). The area under the ROC curve was 0.988. Equivalence between the two methods was confirmed. CoaguChek XS Plus is a rapid and highly accurate test compared with the reference test. These findings suggest that PoC testing will be useful for monitoring intraoperative prothrombin time when coagulopathy is suspected. It could lead to a more rational use of expensive and limited blood bank resources.

[Neuromonitoring and neuroprotection in cardiac anaesthesia. Nationwide survey conducted by the Cardiac Anaesthesia Working Group of the German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine]

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this nationwide survey carried out in department of cardiac anesthesia in Germany was to identify current practice with regard to neuromonitoring und neuroprotection. METHODOLOGY: The data are based on a questionnaire sent out to all departments of cardiac anesthesia in Germany between October 2007 und January 2008. The anonymized questionnaire contained 26 questions about the practice of preoperative evaluation of cerebral vessels, intra-operative use of neuromonitoring, the nature und application of cerebral protective measures, perfusion management during cardiopulmonary bypass, postoperative evaluation of neurological status, and training in the field of cerebral monitoring. RESULTS: Of the 80 mailed questionnaires 55% were returned and 90% of department evaluated cerebral vessels preoperatively with duplex ultrasound. The methods used for intra-operative neuromonitoring are electroencephalography (EEG, 60%) for type A dissections (38.1%), for elective surgery on the thoracic and thoraco-abdominal aorta (34.1% and 31.6%, respectively) and in carotid surgery (43.2%) near infrared spectroscopy (40%), evoked potentials (30%) and transcranial Doppler sonography (17.5%), with some centers using combined methods. In most departments the central nervous system is not subjected to monitoring during bypass surgery, heart valve surgery, or minimally invasive surgery. Cerebral protective measures used comprise patient cooling on cardio-pulmonary bypass (CPB 100%), extracorporeal cooling of the head (65%) and the administration of corticosteroids (58%), barbiturates (50%) and antiepileptic drugs (10%). Neuroprotective anesthesia consists of administering inhalation anesthetics (32.5%; sevoflurane 76.5%) and intravenous anesthesia (20%; propofol and barbiturates each accounting for 46.2%). Of the departments 72.5% cool patients as a standard procedure for surgery involving cardiovascular arrest and 37.5% during all surgery using CPB. In 84.6% of department CPB flow equals calculated cardiac output (CO) under normothermia, while the desired mean arterial pressure (MAP) varies between 60 and 70 mmHg (43.9%) and between 50 and 60 mmHg (41.5%), respectively. At body temperatures less than 18 degrees C CPB flow is reduced below the calculated CO (70%) while 27% of departments use normothermic flow rates. The preferred MAP under hypothermia is between 50 and 60 mmHg (59%). The results of intra-operative neuromonitoring are documented on the anesthesia record (77%). In 42.5% of the departments postoperative neurological function is estimated by the anesthesiologist. Continuing education sessions pertaining to neuromonitoring are organized on a regular basis in 32.5% of the departments and in 37.5% individual physicians are responsible for their own neuromonitoring education. CONCLUSION: The present survey data indicate that neuromonitoring and neuroprotective therapy during CPB is not standardized in cardiac anesthesiology departments in Germany. The systemic use of available methods to implement multimodal neuromonitoring would be desirable.

[Foot problems in chronic polyarthritis: shoe advice and foot care]

Inflammatory alterations of the feet due to rheumatoid arthritis very often reduce the patient's quality of life. We present the pathogenetic mechanisms and discuss practicable and efficient prophylactic and therapeutic methods. A method recently developed by our occupational therapist for placing foot pads correctly in shoes is described.