Search

Background: Increases in opioid prescriptions have been described; however, recent trends and prescribing patterns of analgesics in Dutch general practice are largely unknown., Objective: To investigate recent changes in the number of analgesic prescriptions, and the indications for prescribing strong opioids. Furthermore, we aim to identify risk factors for chronic opioid use in Dutch general practice., Design and Setting: A retrospective cohort study from 1 July 2013 to 31 June 2022, using a primary care practice based research network., Subjects: Patients with ≥1 prescription for analgesics during the study period were included., Main Outcome Measure: Changes in the number of prescriptions for paracetamol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids in Dutch general practice during the 9-year study period. Moreover, we analyzed indications for prescribing strong opioids by the general practitioner (GP)., Results: A total of 18,433 analgesic users were identified. Over time, prescriptions for paracetamol, NSAIDs and weak opioids decreased, while the number of strong opioid prescriptions increased. General practitioners prescribed more strong opioids for non-malignant pain, whereas prescriptions for malignant pain remained stable over time. Risk factors for chronic opioid use (≥90 days) included older age, lower educational level, smoking status and having a history of a musculoskeletal or psychological disorder, a malignancy or sexual, physical or psychological abuse., Conclusions: Considering the increase in strong opioid prescriptions for benign conditions, GPs need to be vigilant for patients who are at risk for chronic use. Regular monitoring and awareness for psychosocial factors in treatment of chronic pain may be key in preventing harms associated with persistent opioid use.

Purpose: Person-centered care is foundational to good quality primary care and has positive effects on health outcomes and patient satisfaction. The Person-Centered Primary Care Measure (PCPCM) is a recently developed, patient-reported survey able to assess person-centeredness and has demonstrated strong validity and reliability. Little is known, however, about the feasibility of the PCPCM in non-English-speaking settings. We aimed to translate the questionnaire into Dutch, psychometrically evaluate the translated version, and ensure its feasibility for patients in Dutch primary care., Methods: We translated the PCPCM into Dutch using forward-backward translations. We conducted psychometric evaluations to ensure its feasibility among Dutch-speaking primary care patients, with special attention to low literacy populations. Next, we assessed structural validity, convergent validity using the Quality of Care Through the Patient's Eyes (QUOTE) questionnaire, and internal consistency in a cross-sectional study in primary care., Results: Translation and adaptation for low literacy populations required 4 iterations. In 4 general practices, 205 patients completed the survey. Confirmatory factor analyses could not confirm the 1-factor solution. The 3-factor solution was found to be a more optimal fit: comprehensiveness of care, personal relation, and contextual care. Internal reliability was high (Cronbach's α were 0.82, 0.73, and 0.86, respectively). We found a strong correlation between the total PCPCM and QUOTE scores (Spearman's ρ = 0.65, P <.001), indicating good convergent validity., Conclusion: The Dutch version of the PCPCM has acceptable validity and reliability for measuring person-centeredness in primary care among Dutch-speaking populations including those with low literacy., (© 2024 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.)

Background: The effects of many treatments in healthcare are determined by factors other than the treatment itself. Patients' expectations and the relationship with their healthcare provider can significantly affect treatment outcomes and thereby play a major role in eliciting placebo and nocebo effects. We aim to develop and evaluate an innovative communication training, consisting of an e-learning and virtual reality (VR) training, for healthcare providers across all disciplines, to optimize placebo and minimize nocebo effects through healthcare provider-patient communication. The current paper describes the development, mid-term evaluation, optimization, and final evaluation of the communication training, conducted in The Netherlands., Methods: The development of both the e-learning and the VR training consisted of four phases: 1) content and technical development, 2) mid-term evaluation by healthcare providers and placebo/communication researchers, 3) optimization of the training, and 4) final evaluation by healthcare providers. To ensure the success, applicability, authenticity, and user-friendliness of the communication training, there was ongoing structural collaboration with healthcare providers as future end users, experts in the field of placebo/communication research, and educational experts in all phases., Results: Placebo/communication researchers and healthcare providers evaluated the e-learning positively (overall 7.9 on 0-10 scale) and the content was perceived as useful, accessible, and interesting. The VR training was assessed with an overall 6.9 (0-10 scale) and was evaluated as user-friendly and a safe method for practicing communication skills. Although there were some concerns regarding the authenticity of the VR training (i.e. to what extent the virtual patient reacts like a real patient), placebo and communication researchers, as well as healthcare providers, recognized the significant potential of the VR training for the future., Conclusions: We have developed an innovative and user-friendly communication training, consisting of an e-learning and VR training (2D and 3D), that can be used to teach healthcare providers how to optimize placebo effects and minimize nocebo effects through healthcare provider-patient communication. Future studies can work on improved authenticity, translate the training into other languages and cultures, expand with additional VR cases, and measure the expected effects on providers communication skills and subsequently patient outcomes., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Sex and gender-related factors are strongly associated with patients' illness trajectories, underscoring their essential role in epidemiological research and healthcare. Ignoring sex and gender in research and health inevitably results in inequities between women and men in terms of detection of disease, preventative measures, and effectiveness of treatment. Historical influences, including ideas of female inferiority and conservative notions of women's health only comprising reproductive health, reinforced the perceived irrelevance of sex and gender to health. Currently, these ideas are largely abandoned and epidemiology is becoming increasingly sensitive to sex. Gender-sensitivity, however, is lagging behind. This is potentially due to lacking knowledge and awareness about the relevance of both sex and gender to health and challenges in operationalizing gender in epidemiological research. Here, we thoroughly discuss the relevance of sex and gender to health, and pay special attention to the time, place, and culture-dependent embodiment of gender. We also discuss the operationalization of gender via composite gender scores in epidemiological studies. We argue to move beyond solely using these. Rather we should consider sex and gender in the initial stages of designing a study, to facilitate relevant, reproducible, and person-centric research., Competing Interests: JR, ToH and AB received funding from ZonMw (project number 84900013). AB received additional funding from ZonMw (project numbers 849800001 and 50018423). No further competing interests are declared., (© 2024 The Author(s).)

Background: Several studies showed that during the pandemic patients have refrained from visiting their general practitioner (GP). This resulted in medical care being delayed, postponed or completely forgone. The provision of low-value care, i.e. care which offers no net benefit for the patient, also could have been affected. We therefore assessed the impact of the COVID-19 restrictions on three types of low-value GP care: 1) imaging for back or knee problems, 2) antibiotics for otitis media acuta (OMA), and 3) repeated opioid prescriptions, without a prior GP visit., Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study using registration data from GPs part of an academic GP network over the period 2017-2022. The COVID-19 period was defined as the period between April 2020 to December 2021. The periods before (January 2017 to April 2020) and after the COVID-19 period (January 2022 to December 2022) are the pre- and post-restrictions periods. The three clinical practices examined were selected by two practicing GPs from a top 30 of recommendations originating from the Dutch GP guidelines, based on their perceived prevalence and relevance in practice (van Dulmen et al., BMC Primary Care 23:141, 2022). Multilevel Poisson regression models were built to examine changes in the incidence rates (IR) of both registered episodes and episodes receiving low-value treatment., Results: During the COVID-19 restrictions period, the IRs of episodes of all three types of GP care decreased significantly. The IR of episodes of back or knee pain decreased by 12%, OMA episodes by 54% and opioid prescription rate by 13%. Only the IR of OMA episodes remained significantly lower (22%) during the post-restrictions period. The provision of low-value care also changed. The IR of imaging for back or knee pain and low-value prescription of antibiotics for OMA both decreased significantly during the COVID-restrictions period (by 21% and 78%), but only the low-value prescription rate of antibiotics for OMA remained significantly lower (by 63%) during the post-restrictions period. The IR of inappropriately repeated opioid prescriptions remained unchanged over all three periods., Conclusions: This study shows that both the rate of episodes as well as the rate at which low-value care was provided have generally been affected by the COVID-19 restrictions. Furthermore, it shows that the magnitude of the impact of the restrictions varies depending on the type of low-value care. This indicates that deimplementation of low-value care requires tailored (multiple) interventions and may not be achieved through a single disruption or intervention alone., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Care for persistent somatic symptoms and functional disorders (PSS/FD) is often fragmented. Collaborative care networks (CCNs) may improve care quality for PSS/FD. Effectiveness likely depends on their functioning, but we lack a straightforward quality evaluation system. We therefore aimed to develop quality indicators to evaluate CCNs for PSS/FD., Method: Using an online three-round modified Delphi process, an expert panel provided, selected and ranked quality indicators for CCNs in PSS/FD. Recruited experts were diverse healthcare professionals with relevant experience in PSS/FD care in the Netherlands., Results: The expert panel consisted of 86 professionals representing 15 disciplines, most commonly physiotherapists, psychologists and medical specialists. 58% had more than 10 years experience in PSS/FD care. Round one resulted in 994 quotations, which resulted in 46 unique quality indicators. These were prioritised in round two and ranked in round three by the panel, resulting in a final top ten. The top three indicators were: "shared vision of care for PSS/FD", "pathways tailored to the individual patient", and "sufficiently-experienced caregivers for PSS/FD"., Conclusions: The identified quality indicators to evaluate CCNs in the field of PSS/FD can be implemented in clinical practice and may be useful in improving services and when assessing effectiveness., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent lockdown measures had serious implications for community-dwelling older people with dementia. While the short-term impacts of the pandemic on this population have been well studied, there is limited research on its long-term impacts. Quantifying the long-term impacts may provide insights into whether healthcare adaptations are needed after the acute phase of the pandemic to balance infection prevention measures with healthcare provision. This study aims to examine patterns of psychotropic drug prescriptions and general practice consultations in community-dwelling older people with dementia during the first two years of the pandemic., Methods: We utilised routine electronic health records from three Dutch academic general practice research networks located in the North, East, and South, between 2019 and 2021. We (1) compared the weekly prescription rates of five groups of psychotropic drugs and two groups of tracer drugs, and weekly general practice consultation rates per 1000 participants, between the first two years of the pandemic and the pre-pandemic phase, (2) calculated changes in these rates during three lockdowns and two relaxation phases relative to the corresponding weeks in 2019, and (3) employed interrupted time series analyses for the prescription rates. Analyses were performed for each region separately., Results: The study population sizes in the North, East, and South between 2019 and 2021 were 1726 to 1916, 93 to 117, and 904 to 960, respectively. Data from the East was excluded from the statistical analyses due to the limited sample size. During the first two years of the pandemic, the prescription rates of psychotropic drugs were either lower or similar to those in the pre-pandemic phase, with differences varying from -2.6‰ to -10.2‰. In contrast, consultation rates during the pandemic were higher than in the pre-pandemic phase, increasing by around 38‰., Conclusions: This study demonstrates a decrease in psychotropic drug prescriptions, but an increase in general practice consultations among community-dwelling older people with dementia during the first two years of the pandemic. However, reasons for the decrease in psychotropic drug prescriptions are unclear due to limited information on the presence of neuropsychiatric symptoms and the appropriateness of prescribing., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Primary care (PC) is a unique clinical specialty and research discipline with its own perspectives and methods. Research in this field uses varied research methods and study designs to investigate myriad topics. The diversity of PC presents challenges for reporting, and despite the proliferation of reporting guidelines, none focuses specifically on the needs of PC. The Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care (CRISP) Checklist guides reporting of PC research to include the information needed by the diverse PC community, including practitioners, patients, and communities. CRISP complements current guidelines to enhance the reporting, dissemination, and application of PC research findings and results. Prior CRISP studies documented opportunities to improve research reporting in this field. Our surveys of the international, interdisciplinary, and interprofessional PC community identified essential items to include in PC research reports. A 2-round Delphi study identified a consensus list of items considered necessary. The CRISP Checklist contains 24 items that describe the research team, patients, study participants, health conditions, clinical encounters, care teams, interventions, study measures, settings of care, and implementation of findings/results in PC. Not every item applies to every study design or topic. The CRISP guidelines inform the design and reporting of (1) studies done by PC researchers, (2) studies done by other investigators in PC populations and settings, and (3) studies intended for application in PC practice. Improved reporting of the context of the clinical services and the process of research is critical to interpreting study findings/results and applying them to diverse populations and varied settings in PC. Annals "Online First" article., (© 2023 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.)

NAPCRG celebrated 50 years of leadership and service at its 2022 meeting. A varied team of primary care investigators, clinicians, learners, patients, and community members reflected on the organization's past, present, and future. Started in 1972 by a small group of general practice researchers in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom, NAPCRG has evolved into an international, interprofessional, interdisciplinary, and intergenerational group devoted to improving health and health care through primary care research. NAPCRG provides a nurturing home to researchers and teams working in partnership with individuals, families, and communities. The organization builds upon enduring values to create partnerships, advance research methods, and nurture a community of contributors. NAPCRG has made foundational contributions, including identifying the need for primary care research to inform primary care practice, practice-based research networks, qualitative and mixed-methods research, community-based participatory research, patient safety, practice transformation, and partnerships with patients and communities. Landmark documents have helped define classification systems for primary care, responsible research with communities, the central role of primary care in health care systems, opportunities to revitalize generalist practice, and shared strategies to build the future of family medicine. The future of health and health care depends upon strengthening primary care and primary care research with stronger support, infrastructure, training, and workforce. New technologies offer opportunities to advance research, enhance care, and improve outcomes. Stronger partnerships can empower primary care research with patients and communities and increase commitments to diversity and quality care for all. NAPCRG offers a home for all partners in this work., (© 2023 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.)

Objective: Women are reported to consult general practitioners (GPs) more frequently than men. However, previous studies on sex differences in help-seeking behavior for somatic symptoms do not distinguish between sex and gender, do not account for sex differences in presented symptoms, and are frequently conducted in clinical settings, automatically excluding non-help seekers. Therefore, we aim to assess the independent associations of sex and gender with primary care help-seeking for somatic symptoms in the general population., Design and Setting: Records from the longitudinal population-based Lifelines Cohort Study were linked to routine electronic health records from GPs., Subjects: Participants reporting new-onset common somatic symptoms., Main Outcome Measures: Associations between sex and gender, operationalized via a novel gender-index, with primary care help-seeking for somatic symptoms and differences in the strength of the association between gender and help-seeking for somatic symptoms between women and men., Results: Of 20,187 individuals with linked data, 8325 participants (67.5% female; mean age = 44.5 years [SD = 12.9]) reported at least one new-onset somatic symptom. Hereof, 255 (3.1%) consulted the GP within 6 weeks of symptom onset. Female sex was positively associated with consulting the GP (OR = 1.78; 95%CI = 1.13-2.80), whereas feminine gender was not (OR = 0.67; 95%CI = 0.39-1.16). The latter association did not differ in strength between men and women. More paid working days are negatively associated with help-seeking (OR = 0.95; 95%CI = 0.91-0.98)., Conclusions: The results suggest that female sex rather than feminine gender is associated with primary care help-seeking behavior for somatic symptoms. Nevertheless, clinicians should be aware that gender-related variables, such as mean paid working days, may be associated with help-seeking behavior.

Background: Persistent fatigue after COVID-19 is common; however, the exact incidence and prognostic factors differ between studies. Evidence suggests that age, female sex, high body mass index, and comorbidities are risk factors for long COVID., Aim: To investigate the prevalence of persistent fatigue after COVID-19 in patients with a mild infection (managed in primary care) during the first wave of the pandemic and to determine prognostic factors for persistent fatigue., Design and Setting: This was a prospective cohort study in Dutch general practice, combining online questionnaires with data from electronic health records., Method: Patients who contacted their GP between March and May 2020 and were diagnosed with COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic were included. Patients were matched to controls without COVID-19 based on age, sex, and GP practice. Fatigue was measured at 3, 6, and 15 months, using the Checklist of Individual Strength., Results: All the participants were GP attendees and included 179 with suspected COVID-19, but who had mild COVID and who had not been admitted to hospital with COVID, and 122 without suspected COVID-19. Persistent fatigue was present in 35% (49/142) of the suspected COVID-19 group and 13% (14/109) of the non-COVID-19 group (odds ratio 3.65; 95% confidence interval = 1.82 to 7.32). Prognostic factors for persistent fatigue included low education level, absence of a partner, high neuroticism (using the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Revised-Short Form), low resilience, high frequency of GP contact, medication use, and threatening experiences in the past. The latter three factors appeared to be prognostic factors for persistent fatigue specifically after COVID-19 infection., Conclusion: GP patients with COVID-19 (who were not admitted to hospital with COVID) have a fourfold higher chance of developing persistent fatigue than GP patients who had not had COVID-19. This risk is even higher in psychosocially vulnerable patients who had COVID-19., (© The Authors.)

Background: The high demand for mental health care is increasing the pressure on Dutch basic and specialized mental health care. Consultative psychiatry in primary care may help to support primary mental health care. These consultations are increasingly used nationwide. However, little is known about how this help takes shape in practice and what the experiences of both patients and caregivers are., Method: We carried out a database and file study into the characteristics of the patients who received psychiatric consultation, in which we also examined the consultation questions of the general practitioners (GP) and the given advice. In addition, 15 semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with patients, general practitioners, mental healthcare nurse practitioners and psychiatrists, after which the transcripts were coded and analyzed thematically., Aim: To explore for which patients the GP requests a psychiatric consultation, what the consultation questions are and the advice given, and to identify the experiences of patients and healthcare providers with consultative psychiatry in general practice., Results: The database study showed that consultative psychiatry was mainly used for patients with a psychiatric history, multiple psychiatric diagnosis and current psychopharmaceutical use. The consultation question usually concerned medication or treatment advice. In addition to advice regarding the consultation question, the psychiatrist often gave additional advice. Consultative psychiatry was experienced positively by both health care providers and patients due to the low threshold of the general practice, the mutual trust that is involved, the short waiting times compared to the second and third line psychiatry and the expertise of the psychiatrist., Conclusion: Consultative psychiatry in general practice is widely applicable, but is mainly applied to patients with multiple psychiatric diagnoses and current psychopharmaceutical use. It is experienced as positive by both patients and healthcare providers.

Objective: Reporting guidelines can improve dissemination and application of findings and help avoid research waste. Recent studies reveal opportunities to improve primary care (PC) reporting. Despite increasing numbers of guidelines, none exists for PC research. This study aims to prioritise candidate reporting items to inform a reporting guideline for PC research., Design: Delphi study conducted by the Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care (CRISP) Working Group., Setting: International online survey., Participants: Interdisciplinary PC researchers and research users., Main Outcome Measures: We drew potential reporting items from literature review and a series of international, interdisciplinary surveys. Using an anonymous, online survey, we asked participants to vote on and whether each candidate item should be included, required or recommended in a PC research reporting guideline. Items advanced to the next Delphi round if they received>50% votes to include. Analysis used descriptive statistics plus synthesis of free-text responses., Results: 98/116 respondents completed round 1 (84% response rate) and 89/98 completed round 2 (91%). Respondents included a variety of healthcare professions, research roles, levels of experience and all five world regions. Round 1 presented 29 potential items, and 25 moved into round 2 after rewording and combining items and adding 2 new items. A majority of round 2 respondents voted to include 23 items (90%-100% for 11 items, 80%-89% for 3 items, 70%-79% for 3 items, 60%-69% for 3 items and 50%-59% for 3 items)., Conclusion: Our Delphi study identified items to guide the reporting of PC research that has broad endorsement from the community of producers and users of PC research. We will now use these results to inform the final development of the CRISP guidance for reporting PC research., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: Physicians' interruptions have long been considered intrusive, masculine actions that inhibit patient participation, but a systematic analysis of interruptions in clinical interaction is lacking. This study aimed to examine when and how primary care physicians and patients interrupt each other during consultations., Methods: We coded and quantitatively analyzed interruption type (cooperative vs intrusive) in 84 natural interactions between 17 primary care physicians and 84 patients with common somatic symptoms. Data were analyzed using a mixed-effects logistic regression model, with role, gender, and consultation phase as predictors., Results: Of the 2,405 interruptions observed, 82.9% were cooperative. Among physicians, men were more likely to make an intrusive interruption than women (β = 0.43; SE, 0.21; odds ratio [OR] = 1.54; 95% CI, 1.03-2.31), whereas among patients, men were less likely to make an intrusive interruption than women (β = -0.35; SE, 0.17; OR = 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50-0.98). Patients' interruptions were more likely to be intrusive than physicians' interruptions in the phase of problem presentation (β = 0.71; SE, 0.23; OR = 2.03; 95% CI, 1.30-3.20), but not in the phase of diagnosis and/or treatment plan discussion (β = -0.17; SE, 0.15; OR = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.63-1.15)., Conclusions: Most interruptions in clinical interaction are cooperative and may enhance the interaction. The nature of physicians' and patients' interruptions is the result of an interplay between role, gender, and consultation phase., (© 2022 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.)

Background: It is expected that GPs are increasingly confronted with a large group of patients with symptoms persisting three weeks after initial symptoms of a mild (managed in the outpatient setting) COVID-19 infection. Currently, research on these persistent symptoms mainly focuses on patients with severe infections (managed in an inpatient setting) whereas patients with mild disease are rarely studied., Objective: The main objective of this systematic review was to create an overview of the nature and frequency of persistent symptoms experienced by patients after mild COVID-19 infection., Methods: Systematic literature searches were performed in Pubmed, Embase and PsychINFO on 2 February 2021. Quantitative studies, qualitative studies, clinical lessons and case reports were considered eligible designs., Results: In total, nine articles were included in this literature review. The frequency of persistent symptoms in patients after mild COVID-19 infection ranged between 10% and 35%. Symptoms persisting after a mild COVID-19 infection can be distinguished into physical, mental and social symptoms. Fatigue was the most frequently described persistent symptom. Other frequently occurring persistent symptoms were dyspnoea, cough, chest pain, headache, decreased mental and cognitive status and olfactory dysfunction. In addition, it was found that persisting symptoms after a mild COVID-19 infection can have major consequences for work and daily functioning., Conclusion: There is already some evidence that symptoms of mild COVID-19 persist after 3 weeks in a third of patients. However, there is a lack of data about symptoms persisting after 3 months (long-COVID). More research is needed to help GPs in managing long-COVID., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Objectives: To explore the perceived working mechanisms of psychosomatic therapy according to patients with persistent somatic symptoms (PSS) and their psychosomatic therapists., Design: Qualitative study using semistructured face-to-face interviews and focus groups. All interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed, by two researchers independently, based on the thematic analysis., Setting: Alongside a randomised controlled trial to establish the (cost-)effectiveness of psychosomatic therapy in patients with PSS in primary care, we conducted a process evaluation with a qualitative study. Patients were recruited in general practice in three regions in the Netherlands., Participants: Interviews were conducted with twenty patients with PSS who received psychosomatic therapy and 25 psychosomatic therapists. In addition, two focus groups were conducted with six and seven psychosomatic therapists, respectively., Intervention: Psychosomatic therapy, delivered by specialised exercise and physical therapists, is a multimodal and tailored treatment based on the biopsychosocial model., Outcome Measures: Experiences, opinions and views from patients' and therapists' perspective on psychosomatic therapy were identified., Results: A total of 37 interviews with patients, 25 interviews and two focus groups with therapists were analysed. Three main themes emerged from the data of the patients: (1) continuous alternation of psychosocial conversations and body-oriented exercises; (2) awareness of body-mind connection and (3) good relationship with therapist. Four main themes emerged from the data of the therapists (1) building rapport; (2) continuously searching for common ground; (3) making patients aware of the interaction between body and mind; and (4) continuous alternation between exploration and treatment., Conclusion: According to patients as well as therapists, the continuous alternation of psychosocial conversations and body-oriented exercises to provide awareness of the interaction between body and mind are the perceived working mechanism of psychosomatic therapy. Therapeutic alliance and finding common ground between patient and therapist are prerequisites for the success of psychosomatic therapy., Trial Registration Number: NL7157 (NTR7356)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Recently it was shown that the relative lack of diagnostic interventions conducted in women mediated the negative association between female sex and diagnosed disease. However, it remains unknown whether women and men receive disease diagnoses in an equal frequency after diagnostic interventions have been performed in general practice., Methods: We used generalized linear mixed-effect models to assess the association between diagnostic interventions and disease diagnoses when patients presented with common somatic symptoms and studied whether the association differed between female and male patients. RESULTS: In 34,268 episodes of care (61.4% female) physical examinations and specialist referrals were associated with more disease diagnoses (OR = 2.32; 95% CI = 2.17-2.49 and OR = 1.38; 95% CI = 1.27-1.49, respectively), whereas laboratory diagnostics were associated with fewer disease diagnoses (OR = 0.50; 95% CI = 0.47-0.54). Significant interaction terms showed that women presenting with back pain, tiredness, arm and/or leg symptoms and tingling extremities were provided with fewer disease diagnoses after diagnostic interventions were performed than men. We found no significant interaction term that indicated that men were provided with fewer disease diagnoses after a diagnostic intervention than women. CONCLUSION: Especially when patients present with the mentioned symptoms, general practitioners should be aware that diagnostic interventions yield fewer disease diagnoses in female patients than in men. Yet, performing fewer diagnostic interventions in women with these symptoms will further exacerbate sex differences in disease diagnoses., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: The authors have no competing interests to report., (© Copyright 2022 by the American Board of Family Medicine.)

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) results in debilitating long-term symptoms, often referred to as Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 Infection (PASC), in a substantial subgroup of patients. One of the most prevalent symptoms following COVID-19 is severe fatigue. Prompt delivery of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), an evidence-based treatment that has shown benefit in reducing severe fatigue in other conditions, may reduce post-COVID-19 fatigue. Based on an existing CBT protocol, a blended intervention of 17 weeks, Fit after COVID, was developed to treat severe fatigue after the acute phase of infection with SARS-CoV-2., Method: The ReCOVer study is a multicentre 2-arm randomised controlled trial (RCT) to test the efficacy of Fit after COVID on severe post-infectious fatigue. Participants are eligible if they report severe fatigue 3 up to and including 12 months following COVID-19. One hundred and fourteen participants will be randomised to either Fit after COVID or care as usual (ratio 1:1). The primary outcome, the fatigue severity subscale of the Checklist Individual Strength (CIS-fatigue), is assessed in both groups before randomisation (T0), directly post CBT or following care as usual (T1), and at follow-up 6 months after the second assessment (T2). In addition, a long-term follow-up (T3), 12 months after the second assessment, is performed in the CBT group only. The primary objective is to investigate whether CBT will lead to a significantly lower mean fatigue severity score measured with the CIS-fatigue across the first two follow-up assessments (T1 and T2) as compared to care as usual. Secondary objectives are to determine the proportion of participants no longer being severely fatigued (operationalised in different ways) at T1 and T2 and to investigate changes in physical and social functioning, in the number and severity of somatic symptoms and in problems concentrating across T1 and T2., Discussion: This is the first trial testing a cognitive behavioural intervention targeting severe fatigue after COVID-19. If Fit after COVID is effective in reducing fatigue severity following COVID-19, this intervention could contribute to alleviating the long-term health consequences of COVID-19 by relieving one of its most prevalent and distressing long-term symptoms., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register NL8947 . Registered on 14 October 2020., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Primary care (PC) is an essential building block for any high quality healthcare system, and has a particularly positive impact on vulnerable patients. It contributes to the overall performance of health systems, and countries that reorient their health system towards PC are better prepared to achieve universal health coverage. Monitoring the actual performance of PC in health systems is essential health policy to support PC. However, current indicators are often too narrowly defined to account for quality of care in the complex populations with which PC deals. This article reviews a number of conceptual frameworks developed to capture PC values in robust measures and indicators that can inform policy and practice performance. Each have benefits and limitations. Further work is needed to develop meaningful primary health care (PHC) and PC measures to inform strategic action by policymakers and governments for improved overall performance of health systems., (Copyright © 2021, The Authors.)

Introduction: Persistent somatic symptoms (PSS) are common both in the general population and primary care. They are bothersome in terms of psychological and somatic symptom burden. Health professionals often struggle with communication, as there is a lack of scientifically supported explanatory models for PSS or a focus merely on somatic aspects of the complaints, which both frustrate patients' needs. The objective of the present study is therefore to develop a psychoeducational intervention based on a current evidence-based explanatory model, to examine its feasibility and form the basis for a large-scale randomised controlled trial., Methods and Analysis: In a randomised controlled mixed-methods pilot trial, 75 adult psychosomatic outpatients with PSS (duration of symptoms ≥6 months) and accompanying psychological (Somatic Symptom B-Criteria Scale total score ≥18) and somatic symptom burden (Patient Health Questionnaire-15 score >10) and no prior psychosomatic treatment will be eligible. Participants will be presented with either the explanatory model without (intervention group 1, n=25) or with elements of personalisation (intervention group 2, n=25). Participants in the control group (n=25) will receive information on current PSS guidelines. Participants will be blinded to group assignment and interventions will be shown on tablet computers at the outpatient clinic. After 1 month, qualitative follow-up telephone interviews will be conducted. As primary outcomes, mean changes in psychological and somatic symptom burden will quantitatively be compared between groups, respectively. Behavioural change mechanisms and feasibility of the three interventions will be evaluated using quantitative and qualitative measures., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethics approval has been granted by the medical ethics board of the Hamburg Medical Chamber (PV5653). Results from this study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conferences., Trial Registration Number: DRKS00018803., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Many general practitioners (GPs) experience communication problems in medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) consultations as they are insufficiently equipped with adequate communication skills or do not apply these in MUS consultations., Objective: To define the most important learnable communication elements during MUS consultations according to MUS patients, GPs, MUS experts and teachers and to explore how these elements should be taught to GPs and GP trainees., Methods: Five focus groups were conducted with homogeneous groups of MUS patients, GPs, MUS experts and teachers. MUS patients and GPs formulated a list of important communication elements. MUS experts identified from this list the most important communication elements. Teachers explored how these elements could be trained to GPs and GP trainees. Two researchers independently analysed the data applying the principles of constant comparative analysis., Results: MUS patients and GPs identified a list of important communication elements. From this list, MUS experts selected five important communication elements: (1) thorough somatic and psychosocial exploration, (2) communication with empathy, (3) creating a shared understanding of the problem, (4) providing a tangible explanation and (5) taking control. Teachers described three teaching methods for these communication elements: (1) awareness and reflection of GPs about their feelings towards MUS patients, (2) assessment of GPs' individual needs and (3) training and supervision in daily practice., Conclusion: Teachers consider a focus on personal attitudes and needs, which should be guided by opportunities to practice and receive supervision, as the best method to teach GPs about communication in MUS consultations.KEY POINTSMany GPs experience difficulties in communication with patients with MUS.There is a need to equip GPs with communication skills to manage MUS consultations more adequately.Role-playing with simulation patients, reflection on video-consultations and joint consultations with the supervisor may increase the GPs' awareness of their attitude towards MUS patients and may help GPs to identify their individual learning-points.

Background: Differences between women and men play an important role in lung physiology and epidemiology of respiratory diseases, but also in the health care processes., Objective: To analyse sex differences in patients encountering their general practitioner (GP) with respiratory symptoms with regard to incidence, GP's management and final diagnoses., Methods: Retrospective cohort study, using data of the Dutch Practice Based Research Network. All patients who encountered their GP from 01-07-2013 until 30-06-2018 with a new episode of care starting with a reason for encounter in the respiratory category (R) of the ICPC-2 classification were included (n = 16 773). Multi-level logistic regression was used to analyse influence of patients' sex on management of GPs with adjustment for possible confounders., Results: We found a significant higher incidence of respiratory symptoms in women than in men: 230/1000 patient years [95% confidence interval (CI) 227-232] and 186/1000 patient years (95% CI 183-189), respectively. When presenting with cough, GPs are more likely to perform physical examination [odds ratio (OR) 1.22; 95% CI 1.11-1.35] and diagnostic radiology (OR 1.25; 95% CI 1.08-1.44), but less likely to prescribe medication (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.82-0.95) in men. When visiting the GP with dyspnoea, men more often undergo diagnostic imaging (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.05-1.66) and are more often referred to a specialist (OR 1.35; 95% CI 1.13-1.62)., Conclusions: Women encounter their GP more frequently with respiratory symptoms than men and GPs perform more diagnostic investigations in men. We suggest more research in general practice focussing on sex differences and possible confounders., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: Empirical studies on the clinical characteristics of older persons with medically unexplained symptoms are limited to uncontrolled pilot studies. Therefore, we aim to examine the psychiatric characteristics of older patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) compared to older patients with medically explained symptoms (MES), also across healthcare settings., Methods: A case-control study including 118 older patients with MUS and 154 older patients with MES. To include patients with various developmental and severity stages, patients with MUS were recruited in the community (n = 12), primary care (n = 77), and specialized healthcare (n = 29). Psychopathology was assessed according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) criteria (Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview) and by dimensional measures (e.g., psychological distress, hypochondriasis, and depressive symptoms)., Results: A total of 69/118 (58.5%) patients with MUS met the criteria for a somatoform disorder according to DSM-IV-TR criteria, with the highest proportion among patients recruited in specialized healthcare settings (p = 0.008). Patients with MUS had a higher level of psychological distress and hypochondriasis compared to patients with MES. Although psychiatric disorders (beyond somatoform disorders) were more frequently found among patients with MUS compared to patients with MES (42.4 vs. 24.8%, p = 0.008), this difference disappeared when adjusted for age, sex, and level of education (odds ratio = 1.7 [95% confidence interval: 1.0-3.0], p = 0.070)., Conclusions: Although psychological distress is significantly higher among older patients with MUS compared to those with MES, psychiatric comorbidity rates hardly differ between both patient groups. Therefore, treatment of MUS in later life should primarily focus on reducing psychological distress, irrespective of the healthcare setting patients are treated in.

Background: General practice is the centre of care for patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS). Providing explanations for MUS, i.e. making sense of symptoms, is considered to be an important part of care for MUS patients. However, little is known how general practitioners (GPs) do this in daily practice., Objective: This study aimed to explore how GPs explain MUS to their patients during daily general practice consultations., Methods: A thematic content analysis was performed of how GPs explained MUS to their patients based on 39 general practice consultations involving patients with MUS., Results: GP provided explanations in nearly all consultations with MUS patients. Seven categories of explanation components emerged from the data: defining symptoms, stating causality, mentioning contributing factors, describing mechanisms, excluding explanations, discussing the severity of symptoms and normalizing symptoms. No pattern of how GPs constructed explanations with the various categories was observed. In general, explanations were communicated as a possibility and in a patient-specific way; however, they were not very detailed., Conclusion: Although explanations for MUS are provided in most MUS consultations, there seems room for improving the explanations given in these consultations. Further studies on the effectiveness of explanations and on the interaction between patients and GP in constructing these explanations are required in order to make MUS explanations more suitable in daily primary care practice., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.)

Background: It is currently not known when in the consultation GPs label symptoms as medically unexplained and what triggers this., Aim: To establish the moment in primary care consultations when a GP labels symptoms as medically unexplained and to explore what triggers them to do so., Design and Setting: This was a qualitative study. Data were collected in the Netherlands in 2015., Method: GPs' consultations were video-recorded. GPs stated whether the consultation was about medically unexplained symptoms (MUS). The GP was asked to reflect on the video-recorded consultation and to indicate the moment when they labelled symptoms as MUS. Qualitative interviewing and analysis were performed to explore the triggers GPs perceived that caused them to label the symptoms as MUS., Results: A total of 43 of the 393 video-recorded consultations (11%) were labelled as MUS. The mean time until GPs labelled symptoms as medically unexplained was about 4 minutes for newly presented symptoms and 2 minutes for symptoms for which the patients had already visited the GP before. GPs were triggered to label symptoms as MUS in the consultation by: the way patients presented their symptoms; the symptoms not fitting into a specific pattern; patients attributing the symptoms to a psychosocial context; and a discrepancy between symptom presentation and objective findings., Conclusion: Most GPs labelled the presented symptoms as medically unexplained soon after the start of the consultation. GPs are triggered to label symptoms as medically unexplained by patients' symptom presentation, symptom patterns, and symptom attribution. This suggests that non-analytical reasoning was a central component in their thought process., (© British Journal of General Practice 2020.)

Background: Many general practitioners (GPs) struggle with the communication with patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS). This study aims to identify GPs' difficulties in communication during MUS consultations., Methods: We video-recorded consultations and asked GPs immediately after the consultation whether MUS were presented. GPs and patients were then asked to reflect separately on the consultation in a semi-structured interview while watching the consultation. We selected the comments where GPs experienced difficulties or indicated they should have done something else and analysed these qualitatively according to the principles of constant comparative analysis. Next, we selected those video-recorded transcripts in which the patient also experienced difficulties; we analysed these to identify problems in the physician-patient communication., Results: Twenty GPs participated, of whom two did not identify any MUS consultations. Eighteen GPs commented on 39 MUS consultations. In 11 consultations, GPs did not experience any difficulties. In the remaining 28 consultations, GPs provided 84 comments on 60 fragments where they experienced difficulties. We identified three issues for improvement in the GPs' communication: psychosocial exploration, structure of the consultation (more attention to summaries, shared agenda setting) and person-centredness (more attention to the reason for the appointment, the patient's story, the quality of the contact and sharing decisions). Analysis of the patients' views on the fragments where the GP experienced difficulties showed that in the majority of these fragments (n = 42) the patients' comments were positive. The video-recorded transcripts (n = 9) where the patient experienced problems too were characterised by the absence of a dialogue (the GP being engaged in exploring his/her own concepts, asking closed questions and interrupting the patient)., Conclusion: GPs were aware of the importance of good communication. According to them, they could improve their communication further by paying more attention to psychosocial exploration, the structure of the consultation and communicating in a more person-centred way. The transcripts where the patient experienced problems too, were characterised by an absence of dialogue (focussing on his/her own concept, asking closed questions and frequently interrupting the patient).

Background: Medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) are highly prevalent and pose a burden both on patients and on health care. In a pilot study psychosomatic therapy delivered by specialised therapists for patients with MUS showed promising results with regard to patient's acceptability, feasibility and effects on symptoms. The aim of this study is to establish whether psychosomatic therapy by specialised psychosomatic exercise therapists is cost- effective in decreasing symptoms and improving functioning in patients who frequently consult their general practitioner (GP) with MUS., Methods: A randomised effectiveness trial with an economic evaluation in primary care with 158 patients aged 18 years and older who are frequently consulting their GP with MUS. Patients will be assigned to psychosomatic therapy in addition to usual care or usual care only. Psychosomatic therapy is a multi-component and tailored intervention, aiming to empower patients by applying psycho-education, relaxation techniques, mindfulness, cognitive approaches and/or graded activity. Patients assigned to the psychosomatic therapy receive 6 to 12 sessions of psychosomatic therapy, of 30-45 min each, delivered by a specialised exercise or physical therapist. Primary outcome measure is patient-specific functioning and disability, measured with the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS). Secondary outcome measures are symptom severity, consultation frequency and referrals to secondary care, patient satisfaction, quality of life and costs. Assessments will be carried out at baseline, and after 4 and 12 months. An economic evaluation alongside the trial will be conducted from a societal perspective, with quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) as outcome measure. Furthermore, a mixed-methods process evaluation will be conducted., Discussion: We expect that psychosomatic therapy in primary care for patients who frequently attend the GP for MUS will improve symptoms and daily functioning and disability, while reducing consultation frequency and referrals to secondary care. We expect that the psychosomatic therapy provides value for money for patients with MUS., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register, ID: NL7157 (NTR7356). Registered 13 July 2018.

Background: It is unknown whether patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) differ from patients with medically explained symptoms (MES) regarding their expectations and experiences on task-oriented communication (ie, communication in which the primary focus is on exchanging medical content), affect-oriented communication (ie, communication in which the primary focus is on the emotional aspects of the interaction) and therapy-oriented communication (ie, communication in which the primary focus is on therapeutic aspects) of the consultation and the extent to which GPs meet their expectations., Objective: This study aims to explore (a) differences in patients' expectations and experiences in consultations with MUS patients and patients with MES and (b) the influence of patients' experiences in these consultations on their post-visit anxiety level., Study Design: Prospective cohort., Setting: Eleven Dutch general practices., Measurements: Patients completed the QUOTE-COMM (Quality Of communication Through the patients' Eyes) questionnaire before and after the consultation to assess their expectations and experiences and these were related to changes in patients' state anxiety (abbreviated State-Trait Anxiety Inventory; STAI)., Results: Expectations did not differ between patients with MUS and MES. Patients presenting with either MUS or MES rated their experiences for task-related and affect-oriented communication of their GP higher than their expectations. GPs met patients' expectations less often on task-oriented communication in MUS patients compared to MES patients (70.2% vs 80.9%; P = ˂0.001). Affect-oriented communication seems to be most important in reducing the anxiety level of MUS patients (β -0.63, 95% Cl = -1.07 to -0.19)., Discussion: Although the expectations of MUS patients are less often met compared to those of MES patients, GPs often communicate according to patients' expectations. Experiencing affect-oriented communication is associated with a stronger reduction in anxiety in patients with MUS than in those with MES., Conclusion: GPs communicate according to patients' expectations. However, GPs met patients' expectations on task-oriented communication less often in patients with MUS compared to patients with MES. Experiencing affect-oriented communication had a stronger association with the post-consultation anxiety for patients with MUS than MES., (© 2018 The Authors Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Shared decision-making (SDM) is, largely, espoused as the preferred model for making decisions in everyday health care. Studies exploring the application of SDM in primary care practice are still lacking., Objectives: This study explores how GPs involve their patients in decision-making, if application of SDM has increased over time (2007-15), and what factors are associated with it., Methods: We investigated the application of SDM by Dutch GPs by analysing a random set of real-life video-recorded consultations collected in 2007 (n = 50) and 2015 (n = 50). SDM was assessed by observing patient involvement in decision making (OPTION), a reliable and valid instrument measuring the extent to which clinicians involve patients in decision-making by coding 12 behavioural items. In addition, GPs and patients completed questionnaires about their background characteristics. The potential determinants for application of SDM by Dutch GPs (including year of measurement, sex and age of patients and GPs, the nature of complaints, consultation duration and the type of decision discussed) were analysed using multilevel analysis [with patients (Level 1) nested within GPs (Level 2)]., Results: In 2015, GPs applied SDM more often compared with 2007 according to OPTION. In consultations with older patients, there is less application of SDM by GPs., Conclusions: Although application of SDM by Dutch GPs has increased, low overall SDM scores still leave room for improvement. GPs should elicit the patient's preferred role in the decision-making process at any time, in particular in consultations with older patients., (© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Patient-centred communication and empathy are key enablers for patient-centred care. However, several studies suggest a downward trend regarding the empathic communication skills of physicians during medical residency. It is known that communication training can have a positive effect on patient-centred communication, empathy and relational skills. Training residents in patient-centred communication and empathy can be an opportunity to improve the patient-centred care. To evaluate the training a tri-focal perspective will be used., Methods: A 3-day training was developed to improve residents' patient-centred communication and empathy skills at an academic medical health centre, in the Netherlands. The training included: (1) the basics of patient-centred communication and empathy (through presentations, scientific literature), (2) practicing with actors, and (3) reflecting on residents' video recorded consultations (by themselves and communication experts). A pilot study with a pre-post design was conducted to evaluate the training from patient and observer perspectives. Semi-structured interviews were used to get insight into residents' perspective. Nine residents from different specialities followed the training and enrolled in the pilot study. During two random days consultations between residents and patients were video recorded. Patients were asked to fill in two questionnaires, indicating their perspective on residents' empathy and communication skills before as well as after the consultation. All video recorded consultations were coded to rate residents' communication skills, empathy, computer use and agenda-setting. Statistical analysis were performed using multilevel analysis., Results: A total of 137 eligible patients took part in the pilot study. Trained residents showed significant improvement in patient-rated empathy scores. According to observers, residents' computer use improved significantly after the training. The communication skills of trained residents did not improve significantly. Agenda setting by residents showed a downward trend. Almost all residents were satisfied with the training, especially with the video-feedback., Conclusions: A brief training significantly increased residents' empathy scores according to patients and significantly decreased residents' computer use according to observers. These findings indicate that the quality of patient-centred care can be improved by integrating patient-centred communication into residency programs, at an academic medical health centre. The ultimate goal is to structurally embed the training in residents' education program.

Background: GPs have a central position in the care of patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS), but GPs find their care challenging. Currently, little is known about symptom management by GPs in daily practice for patients with MUS., Aim: This study aimed to describe management strategies used by GPs when confronted with patients with MUS in daily practice., Design and Setting: Qualitative study in which videos and transcripts of 39 general practice consultations involving patients with MUS in the region of Nijmegen in the Netherlands in 2015 were analysed., Method: A thematic analysis of management strategies for MUS used by GPs in real-life consultations was performed., Results: The study revealed 105 management strategies in 39 consultations. Nearly half concerned symptom management; the remainder included medication, referrals, additional tests, follow-up consultations, and watchful waiting. Six themes of symptom management strategies emerged from the data: cognitions and emotions, interaction with health professionals, body focus, symptom knowledge, activity level, and external conditions. Advice on symptom management was often non-specific in terms of content, and ambiguous in terms of communication., Conclusion: Symptom management is a considerable part of the care of MUS in general practice. GPs might benefit from support in how to promote symptom management to patients with MUS in specific and unambiguous terms., (© British Journal of General Practice 2019.)

Objectives: Healthcare use in fibromyalgia (FM) is relatively high. Besides disease-related variables, cognitive-behavioural factors have been concurrently associated with healthcare use. It is unknown whether cognitive-behavioural and social factors also predict future healthcare use. The aim of this study was to identify cognitive-behavioural and social factors predicting recurrent secondary healthcare use in FM., Methods: Using self-reported questionnaires, healthcare use, cognitive-behavioural, social, sociodemographic and disease-related variables including comorbidities were collected in 199 patients with FM, in a prospective longitudinal cohort spanning 18 months. Patients were recruited after receiving their diagnosis and protocolled treatment advice by a rheumatologist. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models examined whether and which variables were predictors for recurrent secondary healthcare use. Internal validation was performed to correct for over-fit of the final multivariate model., Results: Recurrent secondary healthcare use was lower than initial secondary healthcare use. Univariate analysis showed that having at least one comorbidity, depressive feelings, severe consequences of FM, low personal control and a high severity of fibromyalgia predicted recurrent secondary healthcare use. In the multivariate model, having at least one comorbidity was the only remaining predictor for recurrent secondary healthcare use., Conclusions: Our results suggest that the existence of comorbidities as communicated by the patient is the strongest warning signal for recurrent secondary healthcare use in FM. There seems no value in using cognitive-behavioural and social factors for early identification of patients with FM at risk for recurrent secondary healthcare use.

Background: Chronically ill patients have to cope with transfers in the level or setting of care. Patients with prevalent disorders such as diabetes mellitus can be supported by their general practitioner (GP) when experiencing such care changes, as the GP already offers them disease-specific care. For community-dwelling patients with low-prevalent diseases such as Parkinson's disease (PD) - for which disease-specific care is provided by medical specialists - tailoring support to handle care changes requires more insight into patients' coping., Objectives: To explore PD patients' coping with care changes., Methods: A qualitative interview study was performed in 2013-2015 with a purposive sample of 16 community-dwelling PD patients in the Netherlands. A research assistant visited patients every month to explore if they had experienced a care change. If so, patients were interviewed face-to-face. An inductive approach to comparative content analysis was used., Results: Patients encountered a variety of care changes such as changes in the level of unpaid care, the purchase of tools, modification of pharmacotherapy or admission to hospital. Being able to anticipate, initiate and independently handle care changes contributes to patients' sense of control and acceptance of the post-change situation. Patients, who commenced care changes themselves, had more realistic expectations of it., Conclusion: Community-dwelling PD patients seem to be able to cope with the care changes they face. Offering education to facilitate their anticipation and initiation of changes in care and their ability to act independently, can contribute to patients' wellbeing. GPs can play a role in this.

Background: In primary and secondary care medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) or functional somatic syndromes (FSS) constitute a major burden for patients and society with high healthcare costs and societal costs. Objectives were to provide an overview of the evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of interventions for MUS or FSS, and to assess the quality of these studies., Methods: We searched the databases PubMed, PsycINFO, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS-EED) and the CEA registry to conduct a systematic review. Articles with full economic evaluations on interventions focusing on adult patients with undifferentiated MUS or fibromyalgia (FM), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), with no restrictions on comparators, published until 15 June 2018, were included. We excluded preventive interventions. Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics and cost-effectiveness data and used the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria Checklist to appraise the methodological quality., Results: A total of 39 studies out of 1,613 articles met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-two studies reported costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and cost-utility analyses (CUAs). In 13 CUAs the intervention conditions dominated the control conditions or had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio below the willingness-to-pay threshold of € 50,000 per QALY, meaning that the interventions were (on average) cost-effective in comparison with the control condition. Group interventions focusing on MUS (n = 3) or FM (n = 4) might be more cost-effective than individual interventions. The included studies were heterogeneous with regard to the included patients, interventions, study design, and outcomes., Conclusion: This review provides an overview of 39 included studies of interventions for patients with MUS and FSS and the methodological quality of these studies. Considering the limited comparability due to the heterogeneity of the studies, group interventions might be more cost-effective than individual interventions., Registration: Study methods were documented in an international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) protocol, registration number: CRD42017060424., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: People with intellectual disabilities (IDs) experience health inequalities. Applying health assessments is one way of diminishing these inequalities. A health assessment instrument can support general practitioners (GPs) in providing better medical care to people with ID., Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine which items should be part of a health assessment instrument for people with ID to be used in primary care., Methods: This Delphi consensus study was conducted among 24 GP experts and 21 ID physicians. We performed three anonymous sequential online questionnaire rounds. We started with 82 'general' items and 14 items concerning physical and additional examinations derived from the international literature and a focus group study among Dutch GPs. We definitely included items if more than 75% of the GP experts agreed on their inclusion., Results: The participation rate in all rounds was above 88%. The expert groups proposed 10 new items. Consensus was reached on 64 'general' items related to highly prevalent diseases, public health and health promotion. Consensus was also reached on 18 physical and additional examination items., Conclusions: For the first time, experts in a Delphi study were able to arrive at a selection of items for a health assessment instrument for people with ID. The overall agreement among the GPs and ID physicians was good. Because the experts prefer that patients complete the health assessment questionnaire at home, questions that cover these items must be formulated clearly.

Background: Empathy has positive effects on a range of healthcare outcomes. It is therefore an important skill for a GP. However, the correlation between GP perception of delivered empathy and patient perception of GP empathic communication during consultations is still unclear., Aim: To investigate the correlation between GP perception of delivered empathy and patient-perceived empathy., Design and Setting: Cross-sectional study in primary care in the Netherlands, between December 2016 and February 2017., Method: GPs and their patients were asked to fill in an empathy questionnaire directly after a consultation. Patient perception of received empathy during the consultation was measured through the Dutch version of the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) questionnaire. GP perception of delivered empathy during the consultation was measured with an adapted version of the CARE questionnaire., Results: The authors obtained questionnaires from 147 consultations by 34 different GPs in 16 primary care practices. A total of 143 consultations were eligible for inclusion in the analysis. Mean patient-perceived empathy score was significantly higher than mean GPs' empathy score (42.1, range 20.0 to 50.0 and 31.6, range 24.0 to 41.0, respectively, P <0.0001). Furthermore, a low correlation ( r = 0.06) was found between GP empathy score and patient-perceived empathy score., Conclusion: GPs rate the delivered empathy during consultations consistently and significantly lower than their patients experience empathy during consultations. Moreover, GPs' impressions of the empathy delivered during the consultation do not predict the actual amount of empathy perceived by their patients. Patients experience a great deal of empathy during their clinical encounter. GPs' self-reports on empathy delivered gives an inaccurate reflection, and underestimates patient-perceived empathy., (© British Journal of General Practice 2018.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Background: Many GPs find the care of patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) challenging. Patients themselves are often not satisfied with the care they receive., Aim: To explore the problems patients with MUS experience in communication during consultations, with the aim of improving such consultations DESIGN AND SETTING: A qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews., Method: GP consultations were videorecorded and the GPs were asked immediately afterwards whether MUS were presented. Patients in these MUS consultations were asked to reflect on the consultation in a semi-structured interview while watching a recording of their own consultation., Results: Of the 393 videorecorded consultations, 43 contained MUS. Patients who did identified six categories of problems. First, they reported a mismatch between the GP's and their own agenda. Second, patients indicated that the GP evoked an uncomfortable feeling in them during the consultation. Third, they found that GPs did not provide a specific management plan for their symptoms. Fourth, patients indicated that the GP was not well prepared for the consultation. Fifth, they perceived prejudices in the GP during the consultation. Finally, one patient found that the GP did not acknowledge a limited understanding of the origin of the symptoms., Conclusion: According to patients, GPs can improve their consultations on MUS by making genuine contact with their patients, by paying more attention to the patient's agenda, and by avoiding evoking uncomfortable feelings and displaying prejudices. They should prepare their consultations and focus on the issues that matter to patients, for example, symptom management. GPs should be honest to patients when they do not understand the origin of symptoms., (© British Journal of General Practice 2017.)

Background: The diagnostic pathway of Parkinson's disease (PD) is often complicated. Experiences during this pathway can affect patients' satisfaction and their confidence and trust in healthcare providers. Although healthcare providers cannot influence the impact of the diagnosis, they can influence how patients experience the pathway. This study, therefore, aims to provide insight into PD patients' dissatisfaction with the diagnostic pathway and to describe the factors that influence it., Methods: We carried out a cross-sectional survey study among 902 patient members of the Dutch Parkinson's Disease Association, who were each asked to write an essay about their diagnostic pathway. A coding format was developed to examine the content of these essays. Inter-observer agreement on coding patient dissatisfaction was calculated using Cohen's kappa. The χ 2 test and a multivariable logistic regression analysis were performed to assess the relation between dissatisfaction and sex, level of education, duration of the pathway, communication with the general practitioner (GP) and the neurologist, the number of healthcare providers involved, whether or not a second opinion had taken place (including the person who initiated it) and diagnostic delay (taking into consideration who caused the delay according to the patient). A subgroup analysis was performed to gain insight into sex-related differences., Results: Of all patients, 16.4% explicitly described they were dissatisfied with the diagnostic pathway, whereas 4.8% were very satisfied. The inter-observer agreement on coding dissatisfaction was κ = 0.82. The chance of dissatisfaction increased with a lower level of education, the involvement of more than one additional healthcare provider, a second opinion initiated by the patient and delay caused by a healthcare provider. When only the GP and the neurologist were involved, women were more likely to be dissatisfied than men., Conclusions: PD patients' dissatisfaction with the diagnostic pathway is related to a lower level of education, a second opinion initiated by the patient and experienced diagnostic delay. GPs can positively influence patients' experiences if they are aware of these risk factors for dissatisfaction and pay extra attention to communication and shared decision making. This will contribute to a trusting therapeutic relationship that is indispensable with progression of the disease.

Background: Specialized Parkinson's disease (PD) care offers advantages to patients. However, specialized health care providers may be unaware of patients' personal context and comorbidity, leading to conflicting treatment regimens. Patients may benefit from a more holistic approach., Objective: To clarify the role community-dwelling PD patients see for general practitioners (GPs) in PD care and to clarify the role GPs see for themselves., Methods: Qualitative interview study with 16 community-dwelling PD patients and 12 GPs in the Netherlands, using a constant comparative approach to analysis., Results: Patients expressed a preference for self-management and autonomy in decision-making. GPs chose a limited, reactive position in early-stage PD care to stimulate patient autonomy. Moreover, GPs felt insufficiently competent to extend their role. Patients also felt GPs lack expert knowledge and skills; they focus on their neurologist for PD care. In addition, GPs observed patients might not realize what accessory role the GP could have, a role GPs described as essential in being aware of patient's well-being. Patients did not describe additional roles for the GP in more advanced disease, whereas GPs mentioned a shift towards a more proactive and extended role., Conclusion: Patients and GPs see a limited role for the GP in early-stage PD care because of patient autonomy and GP's lack of specific knowledge and skills. However, GPs should feel more confident of the added value of their generalist approach to care for patients with a complex chronic disorder as PD. If generalist and specialized care reinforce each other, PD patients benefit., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Many general practitioners (GPs) find the care for patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) challenging. The patients themselves are often not satisfied with the care they receive., Objectives: The aim of this study is to explore what patients with MUS expect from their GP by looking at relevant communication elements in consultations as identified by patients., Methods: We video-recorded everyday consultations with GPs and asked the GPs immediately after the consultation whether MUS were presented. The patients in these MUS consultations were asked to reflect on the consultation during a semi-structured interview while watching a recording of their own MUS consultation. The interviews were analysed qualitatively according to the principles of constant comparative analysis., Results: Of the 393 video-recorded consultations, 43 concerned MUS. All MUS patients said that they wanted to be taken seriously. According to the patients, their feeling of being taken seriously is enhanced when the GP: (i) pays empathic attention to them as individuals, meaning that the GP knows their personal circumstances and has an open and empathic approach, (ii) ensures a good conversation by treating the patient as an equal partner and (iii) is attentive to their symptoms by exploring these symptoms in depth and by acting on them., Conclusion: Like chronic patients, patients with MUS value a personalised approach in which GPs pay attention to patients' personal circumstances, to proper somatic management of their symptoms and to a proper conversation in which they are treated as equal partners. Use of these basic consultation skills may greatly improve care of MUS patients., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)