Patient satisfaction of primary care for musculoskeletal diseases: A comparison between Neural Therapy and conventional medicine

Background The main objective of this study was to assess and compare patient satisfaction with Neural Therapy (NT) and conventional medicine (COM) in primary care for musculoskeletal diseases. Methods A cross-sectional study in primary care for musculoskeletal disorders covering 77 conventional primary care providers and 18 physicians certified in NT with 241 and 164 patients respectively. Patients and physicians documented consultations and patients completed questionnaires at a one-month follow-up. Physicians documented duration and severity of symptoms, diagnosis, and procedures. The main outcomes in the evaluation of patients were: fulfillment of expectations, perceived treatment effects, and patient satisfaction. Results The most frequent diagnoses belonged to the group of dorsopathies (39% in COM, 46% in NT). We found significant differences between NT and COM with regard to patient evaluations. NT patients documented better fulfilment of treatment expectations and higher overall treatment satisfaction. More patients in NT reported positive side effects and less frequent negative effects than patients in COM. Also, significant differences between NT and COM patients were seen in the quality of the patient-physician interaction (relation and communication, medical care, information and support, continuity and cooperation, facilities availability, and accessibility), where NT patients showed higher satisfaction. Differences were also found with regard to the physicians' management of disease, with fewer work incapacity attestations issued and longer consultation times in NT. Conclusion Our findings show a significantly higher treatment and care-related patient satisfaction with primary care for musculoskeletal diseases provided by physicians practising Neural Therapy.

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.

Patient information leaflets: informing or frightening? A focus group study exploring patients' emotional reactions and subsequent behavior towards package leaflets of commonly prescribed medications in family practices.

BACKGROUND The purpose of patient information leaflets (PILs) is to inform patients about the administration, precautions and potential side effects of their prescribed medication. Despite European Commission guidelines aiming at increasing readability and comprehension of PILs little is known about the potential risk information has on patients. This article explores patients' reactions and subsequent behavior towards risk information conveyed in PILs of commonly prescribed drugs by general practitioners (GPs) for the treatment of Type 2 diabetes, hypertension or hypercholesterolemia; the most frequent cause for consultations in family practices in Germany. METHODS We conducted six focus groups comprising 35 patients which were recruited in GP practices. Transcripts were read and coded for themes; categories were created by abstracting data and further refined into a coding framework. RESULTS Three interrelated categories are presented: (i) The vast amount of side effects and drug interactions commonly described in PILs provoke various emotional reactions in patients which (ii) lead to specific patient behavior of which (iii) consulting the GP for assistance is among the most common. Findings show that current description of potential risk information caused feelings of fear and anxiety in the reader resulting in undesirable behavioral reactions. CONCLUSIONS Future PILs need to convey potential risk information in a language that is less frightening while retaining the information content required to make informed decisions about the prescribed medication. Thus, during the production process greater emphasis needs to be placed on testing the degree of emotional arousal provoked in patients when reading risk information to allow them to undertake a benefit-risk-assessment of their medication that is based on rational rather than emotional (fearful) reactions.

Internet information and medical consultations: experiences from patients' and physicians' perspectives

OBJECTIVE: Many patients use the Internet to obtain health-related information. It is assumed that health-related Internet information (HRII) will change the consultation practice of physicians. This article explores the strategies, benefits and difficulties from the patients' and physicians' perspective. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted independently with 32 patients and 20 physicians. Data collection, processing and analysis followed the core principles of Grounded Theory. RESULTS: Patients experienced difficulties in the interpretation of the personal relevance and the meaning of HRII. Therefore they relied on their physicians' interpretation and contextualisation of this information. Discussing patients' concerns and answering patients' questions were important elements of successful consultations with Internet-informed patients to achieve clarity, orientation and certainty. Discussing HRII with patients was appreciated by most of the physicians but misleading interpretations by patients and contrary views compared to physicians caused conflicts during consultations. CONCLUSION: HRII is a valuable source of knowledge for an increasing number of patients. Patients use the consultation to increase their understanding of health and illness. Determinants such as a patient-centred consultation and timely resources are decisive for a successful, empowering consultation with Internet-informed patients. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: If HRII is routinely integrated in the anamnestic interview as a new source of knowledge, the Internet can be used as a link between physicians' expertise and patient knowledge. The critical appraisal of HRII during the consultation is becoming a new field of work for physicians.

[The deaf patient--information for a barrier-free conversation with patients in dentistry]

There are about 650,000 people with hearing problems in Switzerland, 10,000 of whom use sign language. About 100,000 people are hard of hearing. Deaf patients require special treatment in the dental office as they have specific communication needs. This community, like many other minority groups, has a sign language and a culture of its own. To prevent misunderstandings it is therefore very important to provide solutions for an enhanced communication. However, guidelines for the communication with deaf dental patients are still missing. Successful communication between deaf patients and dentist is essential for effective care. This paper is concerned with providing background information and introducing recommendations for unrestricted dentist-patient communication. The aim of this article is to improve dentists' knowledge of the appropriate communication with this patient group.

Ethical procedures and patient consent differ in Europe.

BACKGROUND Research ethics approvals, procedures and requirements for institutional research ethics committees vary considerably by country and by type of organisation. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the requirements and procedures of research ethics committees, details of patient information and informed consent based on a multicentre European trial. DESIGN Survey of European hospitals participating in the prospective observational study on chronic postsurgical pain (euCPSP) using electronic questionnaires. SETTING Twenty-four hospitals in 11 European countries. PARTICIPANTS From the 24 hospitals, 23 local investigators responded; 23 answers were analysed. OUTCOME MEASURES Comparison of research ethics procedures and committee requirements from the perspective of clinical researchers. Comparison of the institutions' procedures regarding patient information and consent. Description of further details such as costs and the duration of the approval process. RESULTS The approval process lasted from less than 2 weeks up to more than 2 months with financial fees varying between 0 and 575 &OV0556;. In 20 hospitals, a patient information sheet of variable length (half page up to two pages) was provided. Requirements for patients' informed consent differed. Written informed consent was mandatory at 12, oral at 10 and no form of consent at one hospital. Details such as enough time for consideration, possibility for withdrawal and risks/benefits of participation were provided in 25 to 30% of the institutions. CONCLUSION There is a considerable variation in the administrative requirements for approval procedures by research ethics committees in Europe. This results in variation of the extent of information and consent procedures for the patients involved. TRIAL REGISTRATION euCPSP in Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01467102; PAIN-OUT in Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02083835.

Mandibular implant overdentures followed for over 10 years: patient compliance and prosthetic maintenance

PURPOSE: The mandibular implant overdenture is a popular treatment modality and is well documented in the literature. Follow-up studies with a long observation period are difficult to perform due to the increasing age of patients. The present data summarize a long-term clinical observation of patients with implant overdentures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 1984 and 1997, edentulous patients were consecutively admitted for treatment with an implant overdenture. The dentures were connected to the implants by means of bars or ball anchors. Regular maintenance was provided with at least one or two scheduled visits per year. Recall attendance and reasons for dropout were analyzed based on the specific history of the patient. Denture maintenance service, relining, repair, and fabrication of new dentures were identified, and complications with the retention devices specified separately. RESULTS: In the time period from 1984 to 2008, 147 patients with a total of 314 implants had completed a follow-up period of >10 years. One hundred one patients were still available in 2008, while 46 patients were not reexamined for various reasons. Compliance was high, with a regular recall attendance of >90%. More than 80% of dentures remained in continuous service. Although major prosthetic maintenance was rather low in relation to the long observation period, visits to a dental hygienist and dentist resulted in an annual visit rate of 1.5 and 2.4, respectively. If new dentures became necessary, these were made in student courses, which increased the treatment time and number of appointments needed. Complications with the retention devices consisted mostly of the mounting of new female retainers, the repair of bars, and the changing of ball anchors. The average number of events and the rate of prosthetic service with ball anchors were significantly higher than those with bars. Twenty-two patients changed from ball anchors to bars; 9 patients switched from a clip bar to a rigid U-shaped bar. CONCLUSIONS: This long-term follow-up study demonstrates that implant overdentures are a favorable solution for edentulous patients with regular maintenance. In spite of specific circumstances in an aging population, it is possible to provide long-term care, resulting in a good prognosis and low risk for this treatment modality. For various reasons the dropout rate can be considerable in elderly patients and prosthetic service must be provided regularly.