Search

Meteorism, abdominal pain and changes in bowel movements are frequent reasons for consultations in the family doctor's office. They can be signs of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), a heterogeneous gastrointestinal complex of symptoms, whose cause is not yet fully understood. Careful anamnesis and evidence-based step-by-step diagnostics are the foundation of IBS workup. In diarrhea-dominant IBS and in mixed forms, treatable differential diagnoses are common. There is no standard therapy due to the heterogeneity of the disease. The basis of successful IBS treatment is patient education and the introduction of an individualized biopsychosocial disease model. Diet should be based on individual symptom triggers. Evidence for use of probiotics in IBS is positive. Pharmacological treatment should be considered depending on the leading symptoms. Multimodal therapy concepts are more effective than monotherapies and are best implemented together with patients and in collaboration with specialists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: While gout is a well-known entity, little research has been conducted on its pathophysiology. There is growing evidence that women with hyperuricemia are at higher cardiovascular risk than men with hyperuricemia. We aim to evaluate whether gender-specific cut-offs should be considered.Study Design: Cross-sectional study (the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Adults; DEGS1).Main Outcome Measures: Self-reported gout or hyperuricemia and uric acid level.Results: Of 6,918 participants (mean age 47.2 years; 50.5% females), 9.7% had had a diagnosis of hyperuricemia or gout at least once in their lifetime. Men were nearly twice as often affected as women (12.9 vs. 6.5%). In women, the prevalence of cardiovascular and renal diseases increased with higher uric acid level to a much greater extent than in men. This association remained in multivariate analyses.Conclusions: No commonly accepted cut-off value for uric acid has been established. Overall, women were at lower risk of hyperuricemia. However, women were at higher risk of having cardiovascular and renal comorbidities, even at lower uric acid levels. Our results are in line with the accumulating evidence that we should consider gender in gout and hyperuricemia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Provision of ambulatory care by medical specialists for nursing home residents (NHR) is discussed to be inadequate in Germany, however with only incomplete evidence on this topic. We wanted to know whether the transition to a nursing home is associated with a general decrease in medical specialist care and therefore compared contact rates before and after institutionalization.Methods: Claims data of 18,779 newly admitted NHR in 2013 were followed for the whole year prior to and up to two years after admission. The frequencies of contacts to specialists were assessed and stratified by sex, age, care level, dementia diagnosis and chronic conditions. Multivariate analyses were conducted to identify predictors for contacts to specialists.Results: One year after institutionalization the most pronounced decrease was found in contacts with ophthalmologists (38.4% vs. 30.6%) whereas with most other specialties only small changes were found. The only specialty with a large increase were neurologists and psychiatrists (27.2% vs. 43.0%). Differences depending on sex and age were rather small while NHR with dementia or a higher care level had lower contact rates after institutionalization. Before institutionalization most patients were referred to a specialist by a general practitioner (61.7-73.9%) while thereafter this proportion decreased substantially (27.8-58.6%). The strongest predictor for a specialist contact after admission to a nursing home was a contact to a specialist before (OR 8.8, CI 7.96-9.72 for contacts to neurologists or psychiatrists). A higher nursing care level and a higher age were also predictors for specialist contacts.Conclusions: Relevant decreases of ambulatory specialist care utilization after institutionalization are restricted to ophthalmologists. NHR of higher age and higher nursing care level had a lower chance for a specialist contact. The assessment of the adequacy of the provided care after institutionalization remains inconclusive due to little investigated but assumable changes in care needs of NHR. The decreased coordination of care by general practitioners after institutionalization conflicts with health policy goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The primary objective was to describe outpatient treatment of epistaxis among different physicians based on a large patient population over a period of 10 years. The secondary objective was to evaluate the value of the practice fee as an instrument of allocation in patients with epistaxis. Methods: Anonymized statutory health insurance data (AOK Lower Saxony) of patients with a diagnosis of epistaxis treated between 2007 and 2016 were examined. Demographic data, accompanying diagnoses, medication and involved medical groups (general practitioners (GP), pediatricians, ear, nose and throat (ENT) specialists or other) were analyzed. Furthermore, we assessed whether the use of specialist groups changed after abolition of the practice fee in 2013. Results: Epistaxis was responsible for 302,782 cases (160,963 patients). The distribution of cases was slightly in favor of ENT specialists vs. GP (119,170 vs. 110,352). The cases seen by GP and ENT specialists were comparable with regard to age and sex distribution. Hypertension, atrial fibrillation/flutter and an antithrombotic therapy were slightly more common among cases consulting a GP. The GP recorded more co-diagnoses than the ENT. The use of outpatient care and the proportions of the involved physicians scarcely fluctuated during the study period. Overall, 23,118 patients (14.4%) were diagnosed by both, GP and ENT during a relatively short time period. The practice fee remuneration had no impact on the consultation of the physician groups. Conclusion: The outpatient treatment of epistaxis constitutes a considerable medical and economic burden in Germany. Strengthening the primary medical sector (GP-centered care) is necessary to reach the goal of initially directing patients to primary care, providing specialists more time for severe cases and reducing the impact on public health balance sheets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is wide variation in clinical practice for the early detection of prostate cancer, not least because of the ongoing debate about the benefits of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. In this study, we aimed to assess the approaches, attitudes, and knowledge of general practitioners (GPs) regarding PSA testing in primary care in the Netherlands, particularly regarding recommendations for prostate cancer. Methods: Questionnaire surveys were sent to 179 GPs in the north-east of the Netherlands, of which 65 (36%) were completed and returned. We also surveyed 23 GPs attending a postgraduate train-the-trainer day (100%). In addition to demographic data and practice characteristics, the 31-item questionnaire covered the attitudes, clinical practice, adherence to PSA screening recommendations, and knowledge concerning the recommendations for prostate cancer early detection. Statistical analysis was limited to the descriptive level. Results: Most GPs (95%; n = 82) stated that they had at least read the Dutch GP guideline, but just half (50%; n = 43) also stated that they knew the content. Almost half (46%; n = 39) stated they would offer detailed counseling before ordering a PSA test to an asymptomatic man requesting a test. Overall, prostate cancer screening was reported to be of minor importance compared to other types of cancer screening. Conclusions: Clinical PSA testing in primary care in this region of the Netherlands seems generally to be consistent with the relevant guideline for Dutch GPs that is restrictive to PSA testing. The next step will be to further evaluate the effects of the several PSA testing strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Erythema migrans represents an early cutaneous and most common manifestation of Lyme borreliosis. Recommendations regarding pharmacological agents, dose and duration of treatment are subject of intense debate. This review aims to explore differences in efficacy and safety between pharmacological treatments and control treatment. Methods: To identify relevant studies, we will conduct a systematic literature search. We will include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs. Eligible comparative studies need to (1) consider patients with a diagnosis of erythema migrans resulting from Lyme borreliosis and (2) compare different pharmacological agents against each other, against any other non-pharmacological treatment, placebo or no treatment. Two review authors will independently assess included studies for risk of bias according to the methods of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and related to specific study designs. We will address patient-relevant outcomes including clinical remission of cutaneous symptoms, any treatment-related adverse events, quality of life and progressive symptoms such as neuroborreliosis or Lyme carditis and flu-like symptoms. Provided that the identified trials are comparable in terms of clinical issues, combined estimates will be provided. Estimations of treatment effects will be calculated based on a random effects model. Heterogeneity will be evaluated based on I² and chi-square test. In case of significant heterogeneity, a pooled estimate will not be provided, but heterogeneity will be investigated on the basis of methodological and clinical study aspects. We plan subgroup analysis to reveal potential differences in the effect estimates between patient populations and treatment specifications. We will consider risk of bias using sensitivity analyses to decide whether to rely on the pooled estimates. The quality of a body of evidence for individual outcomes will be assessed using the GRADE approach. Discussion: Benefits and harms of pharmacological treatment in erythema migrans have not yet been adequately assessed. This systematic review will evaluate and summarise available evidence addressing benefits and harms of different pharmacological treatments. In addition, this summary of clinical evidence will inform decision-making between clinicians and patients and will play an important part in patient care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Antibiotic resistance is a worldwide problem and inappropriate prescriptions are a cause. Especially among children, prescriptions tend to be high. It is unclear how they differ in bordering regions. This study therefore examined the antibiotic prescription prevalence among children in primary care between northern Netherlands and north-west of Germany. Methods: Two datasets were used: The Dutch (IADB) comprises representative data of pharmacists in North Netherland and the German (BARMER GEK) includes nationwide health insurance data. Both were filtered using postal codes to define two comparable bordering regions with patients under 18 years for 2010. Results: The proportion of primary care patients receiving at least one antibiotic was lower in northern Netherlands (29.8 %; 95 % confidence interval [95 % CI]: 29.3-30.3), compared to north-west Germany (38.9 %; 95 % CI: 38.2-39.6). Within the respective countries, there were variations ranging from 27.0 to 44.1 % between different areas. Most profound was the difference in second-generation cephalosporins: for German children 25 % of the total prescriptions, while for Dutch children it was less than 0.1 %. Conclusions: This study is the first to compare outpatient antibiotic prescriptions among children in primary care practices in bordering regions of two countries. Large differences were seen within and between the countries, with overall higher prescription prevalence in Germany. Considering increasing cross-border healthcare, these comparisons are highly valuable and help act upon antibiotic resistance in the first line of care in an international approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Due to the increasing number of non-urgent visits to emergency departments, it is becoming increasingly important to also investigate emergency care in out-of-hours (OOH) primary care. The aim of this study was to provide an insight into the care structures of an OOH primary care centre, to evaluate the reasons for encounter (RFE) and to assess the urgency of the treatment from the physicians´ point of view. Methods: In the summer of 2017, we conducted a cross-sectional study over four weeks in the OOH primary care centre of Oldenburg, a city in Lower Saxony with about 160,000 inhabitants. We collected socio-demographic data, RFE and the duration of the complaints. The International Classification for Primary Care 2nd Edition (ICPC-2) was used to categorize symptoms. The attending physicians supplemented information on further treatment (including hospitalization) and the urgency of consultation in the OOH primary care centre. Results: A total of 892 of the 1098 OOH patients which were visiting the OOH primary care centre took part in the study (participation: 81.2%). More than half of the patients were between 18 and 39 years old. A quarter of all RFE named by study participants were in the ICPC-2 category "skin". More than 60% of patients had the symptoms for more than two days before visiting the OOH primary care centre. In 34.5% of all cases no medication was prescribed and one in six patients received further diagnostic tests such as urinalysis and blood tests (15.8%). From the physicians' point of view, 26.3% of all study participants could have been treated by the family doctor during the regular consultation hours. Conclusion: The study shows that in the OOH primary care centre about a quarter of all patients could have waited until regular consultation hours. Mostly young patients used the easily accessible and free care in the OOH primary care centre. Further studies are necessary to better understand the individual reasons of patients to use the OOH primary care centre. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]