Search

Introduction: Self-management is considered a potential answer to the increasing demand for family medicine by people suffering from a chronic condition or multi-morbidity. A key element of self-management is goal setting. Goal setting is often defined as a moment of agreement between a professional and a patient. In the self-management literature, however, goal setting is regarded as a circular process. Still, it is unclear how professionals working in family medicine can put it into practice. This background paper aims to contribute to the understanding of goal setting within self-management and to identify elements that need further development for practical use. Debate: Four questions for debate emerge in this article: (1) What are self-management goals? (2) What is necessary to accomplish the process of goal setting within self-management? (3) How can professionals decide on the degree of support needed for goal setting within self-management? (4) How can patients set their goals and how can they be supported?, Implications: Self-management goals can be set for different (life) domains. Using a holistic framework will help in creating an overview of patients' goals that do not merely focus on medical issues. It is a challenge for professionals to coach their patients to think about and set their goals themselves. More insight in patients' willingness and ability to set self-management goals is desirable. Moreover, as goal setting is a circular process, professionals need to be supported to go through this process with their patients.

Background: Many patients who consult their GP are worried about their health, but there is little empirical data on strategies for effective reassurance. To gain a better understanding of mechanisms for effective patient reassurance, we explored cognitions underlying patients' worries, cognitions underlying reassurance and factors supporting patients' reassuring cognitions., Methods: In a qualitative study, we conducted stimulated recall interviews with 21 patients of 12 different GPs shortly after their consultation. We selected consultations in which the GPs aimed to reassure worried patients and used their videotaped consultation as a stimulus for the interview. The interviews were analysed with thematic coding and by writing interpretive summaries., Results: Patients expressed four different core cognitions underlying their concerns: 'I have a serious illness', 'my health problem will have adverse physical effects', 'my treatment will have adverse effects' and 'my health problem will negatively impact my life'. Patients mentioned a range of person-specific and context-specific cognitions as reasons for these core cognitions. Patients described five core reassuring cognitions: 'I trust my doctor's expertise', 'I have a trusting and supporting relationship with my doctor', 'I do not have a serious disease', 'my health problem is harmless' and 'my health problem will disappear.' Factors expressed as reasons for these reassuring cognitions were GPs' actions during the consultation as well as patients' pre-existing cognitions about their GP, the doctor-patient relationship and previous events. Patients' worrying cognitions were counterbalanced by specific reassuring cognitions, i.e. worrying and reassuring cognitions seemed to be interrelated., Conclusions: Patients described a wide range of worrying cognitions, some of which were not expressed during the consultation. Gaining a thorough understanding of the specific cognitions and tailoring reassuring strategies to them should be an effective way of achieving reassurance. The identified reassuring cognitions can guide doctors in applying these strategies in their daily practice.

Objective: To understand how recommendations for communication can be brought into alignment with clinical communication routines, we explored how doctors select communicative actions during consultations., Methods: We conducted stimulated recall interviews with 15 GPs (general practitioners), asking them to comment on recordings of two consultations. The data analysis was based on the principles of grounded theory., Results: A model describing how doctors select communicative actions during consultations was developed. This model illustrates how GPs constantly adapt their selection of communicative actions to their evaluation of the situation. These evaluations culminate in the selection of situation-specific goals. These multiple and often dynamic goals require constant revision and adaptation of communication strategies, leading to constant readjustments of the selection of communicative actions. When selecting consultation goals GPs weigh patients' needs and preferences as well as the medical situation and its consequences., Conclusions: GPs' selection of communicative actions during consultations is situational and goal driven., Practice Implications: To help doctors develop communicative competence tailored to the specific situation of each consultation, holistic communication training courses, which pay attention to the selection of consultation goals and matching communication strategies besides training specific communication skills, seem preferable to current generic communication skills training., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Immediate blood testing for patients presenting with unexplained complaints in family practice is superfluous from a diagnostic point of view. However, many general pracitioners (GPs) order tests immediately. Watchful waiting reduces the number of patients to be tested and the number of false-positive results. The objectives of this study are: to determine the feasibility of watchful waiting compared to immediate test ordering; to determine if a special quality improvement strategy can improve this feasibility; and to determine if watchful waiting leads to testing at a later time., Methods: The study is a cluster-randomized clinical trial with three groups, on blood test ordering strategies in patients with unexplained complaints. GPs in group one were instructed to order tests immediately and GPs in group two to apply a watchful waiting approach. GPs in group three received the same instruction as group two, but they were supported by a systematically designed quality improvement strategy. A total of 498 patients with unexplained complaints from 63 practices of Dutch GPs participated. We measured: the percentage of patients for whom tests were ordered and number of tests ordered at the first consultation; performance on the strategy's performance objectives (i.e., ordering fewer tests and specific communication skills); the number of tests ordered after four weeks; and GP and patient characteristics., Results: Immediate test ordering proved feasible in 92% of the patients; watchful waiting in 86% and 84%, respectively, for groups two and three. The two watchful waiting groups did not differ significantly in the achievement of any of the performance objectives. Of the patients who returned after four weeks, none from group one and six from the two watchful waiting groups had tests ordered for them., Conclusions: Watchful waiting is a feasible approach. It does not lead to testing immediately afterwards. Furthermore, watchful waiting was not improved by the quality improvement strategy., Clinical Trial Registration: ISRCTN55755886.

Objective: Newly presented unexplained complaints (UCs) are common in general practice. Factors influencing the transition of newly presented into persistent UCs have been scarcely investigated. We studied the number and the nature of diagnoses made over time, as well as factors associated with UCs becoming persistent. Finally, we longitudinally studied factors associated with quality of life (QoL)., Methods: Prospective cohort study in general practice of patients presenting with a new UC. Data sources were case record forms, patient questionnaires and electronic medical registries at inclusion, 1, 6 and 12 months. Presence of complaints and diagnoses made over time were documented. Potential risk factors were assessed in mixed-effect logistic and linear regression models., Results: Sixty-three GPs included 444 patients (73% women; median age 42) with unexplained fatigue (70%), abdominal complaints (14%) and musculoskeletal complaints (16%). At 12 months, 43% of the patients suffered from their initial complaints. Fifty-seven percent of the UCs remained unexplained. UCs had (non-life-threatening) somatic origins in 18% of the patients. QoL was often poor at presentation and tended to remain poor. Being a male [odds ratio (OR) 0.6; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.4-0.8] and GPs' being more certain about the absence of serious disease (OR 0.9; 95% CI 0.8-0.9) were the strongest predictors of a diminished probability that the complaints would still be present and unexplained after 12 months. The strongest determinants of complaint persistence [regardless of (un)explicability] were duration of complaints >4 weeks before presentation (OR 2.6; 95% CI 1.6-4.3), musculoskeletal complaint at baseline (OR 2.3; 1.2-4.5), while the passage of time acted positively (OR 0.8 per month; 95% CI 0.78-0.84). Musculoskeletal complaints, compared to fatigue, decreased QoL on the physical domain (4.6 points; 2.6-6.7), while presence of psychosocial factors decreased mental QoL (5.0; 3.1-6.9)., Conclusion: One year after initial presentation, a large proportion of newly presented UCs remained unexplained and unresolved. We identified determinants that GPs might want to consider in the early detection of patients at risk of UC persistence and/or low QoL.

Objective: This study aims to identify the facilitators and barriers perceived by General Practitioners (GPs) to maintain a gender perspective in family practice., Methods: Nine semi-structured interviews were conducted among nine pairs of GPs. The data were analysed by means of deductive content analysis using theory-based methods to generate facilitators and barriers to gender sensitivity., Results: Gender sensitivity in family practice can be influenced by several factors which ultimately determine the extent to which a gender sensitive approach is satisfactorily practiced by GPs in the doctor-patient relationship. Gender awareness, repetition and reminders, motivation triggers and professional guidelines were found to facilitate gender sensitivity. On the other hand, lacking skills and routines, scepticism, heavy workload and the timing of implementation were found to be barriers to gender sensitivity., Conclusion: While the potential effect of each factor affecting gender sensitivity in family practice has been elucidated, the effects of the interplay between these factors still need to be determined.

Background: General practitioners sometimes base clinical decisions on gut feelings alone, even though there is little evidence of their diagnostic and prognostic value in daily practice. Research to validate the determinants and to assess the test properties of gut feelings requires precise and valid descriptions of gut feelings in general practice which can be used as a reliable measuring instrument., Research Question: Can we obtain consensus on descriptions of two types of gut feelings: a sense of alarm and a sense of reassurance?, Methods: Qualitative research including a Delphi consensus procedure with a heterogeneous sample of 27 Dutch and Belgian GPs or ex-GPs involved in academic educational or research programmes., Results: After four rounds, we found 70% or greater agreement on seven of the eleven proposed statements. A "sense of alarm" is defined as an uneasy feeling perceived by a GP as he/she is concerned about a possible adverse outcome, even though specific indications are lacking: There's something wrong here. This activates the diagnostic process by stimulating the GP to formulate and weigh up working hypotheses that might involve a serious outcome. A "sense of alarm" means that, if possible, the GP needs to initiate specific management to prevent serious health problems. A "sense of reassurance" is defined as a secure feeling perceived by a GP about the further management and course of a patient's problem, even though the doctor may not be certain about the diagnosis: Everything fits in., Conclusion: The sense of alarm and the sense of reassurance are well-defined concepts. These descriptions enable us to operationalise the concept of gut feelings in further research.

Background: General practitioners sometimes base clinical decisions on gut feelings alone, even though there is little evidence of their diagnostic and prognostic value in daily practice. Research into these aspects and the use of the concept in medical education require a practical and valid description of gut feelings. The goal of our study was therefore to describe the concept of gut feelings in general practice and to identify their main determinants, Methods: Qualitative research including 4 focus group discussions. A heterogeneous sample of 28 GPs. Text analysis of the focus group discussions, using a grounded theory approach., Results: Gut feelings are familiar to most GPs in the Netherlands and play a substantial role in their everyday routine. The participants distinguished two types of gut feelings, a sense of reassurance and a sense of alarm. In the former case, a GP is sure about prognosis and therapy, although they may not always have a clear diagnosis in mind. A sense of alarm means that a GP has the feeling that something is wrong even though objective arguments are lacking. GPs in the focus groups experienced gut feelings as a compass in situations of uncertainty and the majority of GPs trusted this guide. We identified the main determinants of gut feelings: fitting, alerting and interfering factors, sensation, contextual knowledge, medical education, experience and personality., Conclusion: The role of gut feelings in general practice has become much clearer, but we need more research into the contributions of individual determinants and into the test properties of gut feelings to make the concept suitable for medical education.

Background: Approximately 13% of consultations in general practice involve patients with unexplained complaints (UCs). These consultations often end with general practitioners (GPs) ordering blood tests of questionable diagnostic informativeness., Objective: We studied factors potentially associated with GPs' decisions to order blood tests., Methods: Cross-sectional study. Twenty-seven GPs completed registration forms after each consultation concerning newly presented UCs., Results: Of the 100 analysable patients, 59 had at least one blood test ordered. The median number of ordered tests was 10 (interpercentile range [IPR-90] 2-15). Compared to abdominal complaints, the blood test ordering (BTO) probability for fatigue was five times higher (relative risk [RR] 5.2). Duration of complaints for over 4 weeks also increased this probability (RR 1.6). Factors associated with a lower BTO probability were: likelihood of background psychosocial factors (RR 0.4) and GPs having a syndrome rather than symptom type of working hypothesis (RR 0.5)., Conclusion: We found a high rate of BTO among GPs confronted with patients with UCs. Furthermore, a considerable number of tests were ordered. The selectivity in BTO behaviour of GPs can be improved upon.

Background: Redesigning care has been proposed as a lever for improving chronic illness care. Within primary care, diabetes care is the most widespread example of restructured integrated care. Our goal was to assess to what extent important aspects of restructured care such as multidisciplinary teamwork and different types of organizational culture are associated with high quality diabetes care in small office-based general practices., Methods: We conducted cross-sectional analyses of data from 83 health care professionals involved in diabetes care from 30 primary care practices in the Netherlands, with a total of 752 diabetes mellitus type II patients participating in an improvement study. We used self-reported measures of team climate (Team Climate Inventory) and organizational culture (Competing Values Framework), and measures of quality of diabetes care and clinical patient characteristics from medical records and self-report. We conducted multivariate analyses of the relationship between culture, climate and HbA1c, total cholesterol, systolic blood pressure and a sum score on process indicators for the quality of diabetes care, adjusting for potential patient- and practice level confounders and practice-level clustering., Results: A strong group culture was negatively associated to the quality of diabetes care provided to patients (beta = -0.04; p = 0.04), whereas a more 'balanced culture' was positively associated to diabetes care quality (beta = 5.97; p = 0.03). No associations were found between organizational culture, team climate and clinical patient outcomes., Conclusion: Although some significant associations were found between high quality diabetes care in general practice and different organizational cultures, relations were rather marginal. Variation in clinical patient outcomes could not be attributed to organizational culture or teamwork. This study therefore contributes to the discussion about the legitimacy of the widespread idea that aspects of redesigning care such as teamwork and culture can contribute to higher quality of care. Future research should preferably combine quantitative and qualitative methods, focus on possible mediating or moderating factors and explore the use of instruments more sensitive to measure such complex constructs in small office-based practices.

Objective: About 13% of GPs' consultations involve unexplained complaints (UCs). These complaints can progress to chronic conditions like medically unexplained symptoms, chronic functional symptoms or somatoform disorders. Little is known about the demographic characteristics and quality of life of patients with early stage UCs. Our study objective was to describe these characteristics. Additionally we compared them with other patient groups to serve as a frame of reference., Methods: Descriptive study in general practices. Patients with early stage UCs who had not had elaborate diagnostic investigations were included. Demographic characteristics were compared to a Dutch general practice population. Quality of life scores were measured with the RAND-36 and compared to another Dutch general practice population and to depressed patients., Results: Data of 466 patients were available for analysis. Mean age was 44 years and 74% were females, mostly higher educated. Of the patients, 63% presented with unexplained fatigue. On average, quality of life was poor (mean RAND-36 domain scores 37-73), also in comparison with other groups., Conclusion: General practice patients presenting with UCs have a remarkably poor quality of life. Future research should explore how early identification of patients at risk of developing chronicity can take place. Awareness of potential poor quality of life may influence GPs' medical decision making.

Background: The quality of doctor-patient communication has a major impact on the quality of medical care. Communication guidelines define best practices for doctor patient communication and are therefore an important tool for improving communication. However, adherence to communication guidelines remains low, despite doctors participating in intensive communication skill training. Implementation research shows that adherence is higher for guidelines in general that are user centred and feasible, which implies that they are consistent with users' opinions, tap into users' existing skills and fit into existing routines. Developers of communication guidelines seem to have been somewhat negligent with regard to user preferences and guideline feasibility. In order to promote the development of user centred and practicable communication guidelines, we elicited user preferences and identified which guideline characteristics facilitate or impede guideline use., Methods: Seven focus group interviews were conducted with experienced GPs, communication trainers (GPs and behavioural scientists) and communication learners (GP trainees and medical students) and three focus group interviews with groups of GP trainees only. All interviews were transcribed and analysed qualitatively., Results: The participants identified more impeding guideline characteristics than facilitating ones. The most important impeding characteristic was that guidelines do not easily fit into GPs' day-to-day practice. This is due to rigidity and inefficiency of communication guidelines and erroneous assumptions underpinning guideline development. The most important facilitating characteristic was guideline structure. Guidelines that were structured in distinct phases helped users to remain in control of consultations, which was especially useful in complicated consultations., Conclusion: Although communication guidelines are generally considered useful, especially for structuring consultations, their usefulness is impaired by lack of flexibility and applicability to practice routines. User centred and feasible guidelines should combine the advantages of helping doctors to structure consultations with flexibility to tailor communication strategies to specific contexts and situations.

Background: General practitioners often take their impression of patients' expectations into account in their decision to have blood tests done. It is commonly recommended to involve patients in decision-making during consultations. The study aimed to obtain detailed information on patients' expectations about blood tests., Methods: Qualitative study among patients in waiting rooms of general practices. Each patient was presented with a short questionnaire about their preferences in terms of diagnostics. Patients who would like blood tests to be done were interviewed., Results: Fifty-seven (26%) of the 224 respondents wanted blood tests. Twenty-two were interviewed. Patients overestimated the qualities of blood tests. Favourable test results were regarded as proof of good health. Patients regarded blood tests as a useful instrument to screen for serious disorders, and were confirmed in this belief by people in their social environment and by the media. Many patients expected their GP to take an active test ordering approach, though some indicated that they might be convinced if their GP proposed a wait-and-see policy., Conclusions: GPs' perceptions about patient expectations seem justified: patients appear to have high hopes for testing as a diagnostic tool. They expect diagnostic certainty without mistakes and a proof of good health. The question is whether it would be desirable to remove patients' misconceptions, allowing them to participate in policy decisions on the basis of sound information, or whether it would be better to leave the misconceptions uncontested, in order to retain the 'magic' of additional tests and reassure patients. We expect that clarifying the precise nature of patients' expectations by the GP may be helpful in creating a diagnostic strategy that satisfies both patients and GPs. GPs will have to balance the benefits of reassuring their patients by means of blood tests which may be unnecessary against the benefits of avoiding unnecessary tests. Further research is needed into the effects of different types of patient information and the effects of testing on satisfaction and anxiety.

Background: It is difficult to keep control over prescribing behaviour in general practices. The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of a dissemination strategy of multidisciplinary guidelines on the volume of drug prescribing., Methods: The study included two designs, a quasi-experimental pre/post study with concurrent control group and a random sample of GPs within the intervention group. The intervention area with 53 GPs was compared with a control group of 54 randomly selected GPs in the south and centre of the Netherlands. Additionally, a randomisation was executed in the intervention group to create two arms with 27 GPs who were more intensively involved in the development of the guideline and 26 GPs in the control group. A multidisciplinary committee developed prescription guidelines. Subsequently these guidelines were disseminated to all GPs in the intervention region. Additional effects were studied in the subgroup trial in which GPs were invited to be more intensively involved in the guideline development procedure. The guidelines contained 14 recommendations on antibiotics, asthma/COPD drugs and cholesterol drugs. The main outcome measures were prescription data of a three-year period (one year before and 2 years after guideline dissemination) and proportion of change according to recommendations., Results: Significant short-term improvements were seen for one recommendation: mupirocin. Long-term changes were found for cholesterol drug prescriptions. No additional changes were seen for the randomised controlled study in the subgroup. GPs did not take up the invitation for involvement., Conclusion: Disseminating multidisciplinary guidelines that were developed within a region, has no clear effect on prescribing behaviour even though GPs and specialists were involved more intensively in their development. Apparently, more effort is needed to bring about change.

Background: General practitioners (GPs) frequently order blood tests when they see patients presenting with unexplained complaints. Due to the low prevalence of serious pathology in general practice, the risk of false-positive test results is relatively high. This may result in unnecessary further testing, leading to unfavourable effects such as patient anxiety, high costs, somatisation and morbidity. A policy of watchful waiting is expected to lower both the number of patients to be tested and the risk of false-positive test results, without missing serious pathology. However, many general practitioners experience barriers when trying to postpone blood testing by watchful waiting. The objectives of this study are (1) to determine the accuracy of blood tests in patients presenting with unexplained complaints in terms of detecting pathology, (2) to determine the accuracy of a watchful waiting strategy and (3) to determine the effects of a quality improvement strategy to promote the postponement of blood test ordering by GPs for patients with unexplained complaints., Design: General practices are randomised over three groups. Group 1 is instructed to order blood tests immediately, group 2 to apply a watchful waiting policy and group 3 also to postpone testing, but supported by our quality improvement strategy. The trial consists of two sub-studies: a diagnostic study at patient level (group 1 versus groups 2 and 3) and a quality improvement study at GP level (group 2 versus group 3). The diagnostic strategy to be used involves of both customary and innovative tests. The quality improvement strategy consists of two small-group meetings and a practice outreach visit. Patient follow-up ends at 12 months after the initial consultation. Primary outcome measures are the accuracy and added value of blood tests for detecting pathology, the effect of a 4-week postponement of test ordering on the blood test characteristics and the quantity of tests ordered. Secondary outcome measures are the course of complaints, quality of life, satisfaction with care, anxiety of patients and practitioners, determinants of physicians' behaviour, health care utilisation and costs., Discussion: The innovative aspect of this trial is that it combines a clinical-epidemiological study and a quality of care study.

Design: Qualitative study. GPs were interviewed after analysing two audiotaped cardiovascular consultations., Setting: Primary health care., Subjects: A sample of 15 GPs who audiotaped 22 consultations., Main Outcome Measures: Barriers hampering GPs from following the guideline., Results: Data saturation was reached after about 13 interviews. The 25 identified barriers were related to the risk table, the GP or to environmental factors. Lack of knowledge and poor communication skills of the GP, along with pressure of work and demanding patients, cause GPs to deviate from the guideline. GPs regard barriers external to themselves as most important., Conclusion: Using the risk table as a key element of the high-risk approach in primary prevention encounters many barriers. Merely incorporating risk tables in guidelines is not sufficient for implementation of the guidelines. Time-efficient implementation strategies dealing in particular with the communication and presentation of cardiovascular risk are needed.

Most quality improvement or change management interventions are currently designed intuitively and their results are often disappointing. While improving the effectiveness of interventions requires systematic development, no specific methodology for composing intervention strategies and programmes is available. This paper describes the methodology of systematically designing quality of care improvement interventions, including problem analysis, intervention design and pretests. Several theories on quality improvement and change management are integrated and valuable materials from health promotion are added. One method of health promotion-intervention mapping-is introduced and applied. It describes the translation of knowledge about barriers to and facilitators of change into a concrete intervention programme. Systematic development of interventions, although time consuming, appears to be worthwhile. Decisions that have to be made during the design process of a quality improvement intervention are visualised, allowing them to serve as a starting point for a systematic evaluation of the intervention.

Objective: To gain insight into general practitioners' (GPs) test-ordering behavior for patients presenting with unexplained complaints. An unexplained complaint's symptoms are not alarming, and there is no plausible medical or psychosocial explanation for it. The Dutch College of General Practitioners (DCGP) recommends a watchful, waiting attitude for test ordering for unexplained complaints., Methods: Observational, cross-sectional study of 567 doctor-patient consultations performed by 21 GPs., Results: On average, 13% of consultations involved complaints considered unexplained by GPs. Unexplained complaints were positively related to test ordering (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 2.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-5.3), despite the DCGP's recommendation. Patients' expectations about testing influenced test ordering even more (adjusted OR = 4.1, 95% CI 2.2-7.6)., Discussion: Unexplained complaints happen daily in general practice. Besides the DCGP's recommendation, factors such as GPs' desire to understand complaints and patients' expectations seem to have impacts. Guideline development and quality improvement projects should respect, next to Bayesian rules, GP- and patient-related determinants of test ordering.

Objective: To compare the prescription behaviour of general practitioners (GP) and gynaecologists regarding 2nd and 3rd generation oral contraceptives (OC) in the period before and after the warning of increased thrombosis risk of 3rd generation pills., Design: Retrospective, descriptive., Method: With the aid of data on OC prescriptions collected by the Institute for Medical Statistics, the numbers of prescriptions from Dutch GPs and gynaecologists in the year before the warning by the British Committee on Safety of Medicines that 3rd-generation OC increased the risk of thrombosis, were compared with the numbers in the year after publication of the guideline of the Dutch General Practitioners Society (NHG), which stated a preference for the 2nd-generation OC, and of the guideline of the Dutch Society for Gynaecology and Obstetrics, which stated no preference., Results: In neither the GP nor the gynaecologist groups did the proportion of 3rd-generation pills in the OC prescriptions decrease significantly. However, in the GP group the proportion of new 3rd generation OC prescriptions decreased significantly from 56 to 40%. However, after a few trimesters it rose again., Conclusion: The changes in prescription behaviour of the GP group were in accordance with the NHG guidelines. However, the proportion of the 3rd-generation OC prescriptions remained relatively large and the effect was of short duration. The only conclusion that could be drawn regarding the gynaecologists, was that the proportion of 3rd-generation OC prescriptions did not change significantly.

Objective: To evaluate the feasibility and implementation needs of a cholesterol guideline by assessing the effectiveness of simple dissemination as well as extensive implementation of this guideline on actual performance of general practitioners (GPs)., Design: Randomized controlled trial., Setting and Subjects: Thirty-two Dutch GPs in 20 general practices, 3950 patient records., Interventions: Guideline dissemination to all 32 GPs, and a 5-month programme for improvement in the intervention group. This programme was developed after barriers to working according to the guideline had been investigated, and consisted of group education, desktop supportive materials, feedback on performance, and face-to-face instruction on location., Main Outcome Measures: The outcome parameters were defined as quality of selective case finding and quality of diagnostic procedures, and were measured by chart audit., Results: The quality of selective case finding, especially the targeting of cholesterol testing to those with positive cardiovascular risk profiles, did not improve following intervention. Performance of the procedure necessary to diagnose hypercholesterolaemia even deteriorated. The quantity of cholesterol testing increased in both groups, but this was probably explained by the increased availability of desktop cholesterol analysers., Conclusions: Neither simple dissemination nor an intensive programme for improvement had measurable impact on actual performance on working according to the cholesterol guideline. Both the validity and the opinion about feasibility of the guideline in daily practice deserve more attention during guideline development.

Background: It is crucial that research findings are implemented in general practice if high-quality care is to be achieved. Multifaceted interventions are usually assumed to be more effective than single interventions, but this hypothesis has yet to be tested for general practice care. This review evaluates the effectiveness of interventions in influencing the implementation of guidelines and adoption of innovations in general practice. A systematic literature study was carried out using MEDLINE searches for the period from January 1980 until June 1994, and 21 medical journals were searched manually. Randomized controlled trials and controlled before and after studies (with pre- and post-intervention measurements in all groups) were selected for the analysis. Clinical area, interventions used, methodological characteristics and effects on clinical behaviour were noted independently by two researchers using a standardized scoring form. Of 143 studies found, 61 were selected for the analysis, covering 86 intervention groups that could be compared with a control group without the intervention. Information transfer alone was effective in two out of 18 groups, whereas combinations of information transfer and learning through social influence or management support were effective in four out of eight and three out of seven groups respectively. Information linked to performance was effective in 10 out of 15 groups, but the combination of information transfer and information linked to performance was effective in only three out of 20 groups. Some, but not all, multifaceted interventions are effective in inducing change in general practice. Social influence and management support can improve the effectiveness of information transfer, but information linked to performance does not necessarily do so. The variation in the effectiveness of interventions needs further analysis.

Objective: To compare the profiles of those patients selected by general practitioners for measurement of serum cholesterol with the recommended profiles for opportunistic cholesterol testing described in the national practice guidelines published by the Dutch College of General Practitioners., Design: Retrospective audit of general practitioners' records., Materials: Practice records of 3577 adult patients systematically sampled from 20 general practices., Main Measures: With criteria set by the national guidelines, the proportion of patients per practice (a) for whom cholesterol testing would be considered justified, and (b) for whom cholesterol testing would be considered unjustified, and the proportion of patients within each of these groups who had had a cholesterol measurement recorded., Results: Cholesterol tests were performed on 415 (11.7%) of the 3577 patients. National guidelines on the management of hypercholesterolaemia state that a positive cardiovascular risk profile is an indication for cholesterol measurement. Just under one fifth (668) of the patients in this study were recorded as having a positive cardiovascular risk profile, but only 31% of these had had their cholesterol measured. Of the patients without recorded evidence of a positive cardiovascular risk profile cholesterol had been measured in 8%. Restricting the analyses to the age group 18-65 (n = 3060) of whom 12.5% had a positive risk profile, did not improve the results. In practices with a computerised information system 37% of patients with recorded evidence of a positive cardiovascular risk profile had had their cholesterol measured., Conclusions: Cholesterol testing was not targeted as selectively as recommended by the national guidelines. The major problem was failure to test those likely to benefit. Improving the targeting of cholesterol measurements would undoubtedly increase the workload of general practitioners. If the national guidelines are to have an effect on health promotion the first step must be to increase the proportion of patients with positive cardiovascular risk profiles who get their cholesterol tested. A major factor in successfully selecting cases seems to be that practices are equipped with a computerised medical information system.

Objective: To examine cholesterol diagnosis and treatment by Dutch general practitioners (GPs) in the period before publication of national guidelines, in order to develop implementation strategies based on discrepancies found between daily practice and the guidelines., Design: Data of the 'Dutch National Survey of General Practice', in which GPs were involved in extensive consultation registration, were used. Patients were included for analysis if serum cholesterol, or the ICPC-code lipid metabolism disorder, or cholesterol-lowering treatment was registered., Setting: General practice., Participants: 161 GPs, 177 practice-nurses., Outcome Measures: Reasons for consultation, diagnoses, therapy, inter-doctor variation., Results: The main discrepancies between daily practice and the guidelines concerned indications for cholesterol measurement, repeated measurements to diagnose hypercholesterolaemia, and attention for diet advice. A remarkable inter-doctor variation in diagnosis, and less so in treatment, was also found., Conclusion: The inter-doctor variation justifies the publication of the standard guidelines. Implementation strategies should aim at indications for cholesterol testing, repeating measurements for diagnosis, and advice on diet.

Objective: We aimed to examine sensitivity and positive predictive value of MEDLINE searching for diagnostic studies, relevant for the primary health care setting.Method: Results of MEDLINE searches were compared with a reference standard collection of studies on two subjects, the diagnostic value of ESR in discriminating between 'pathology' and 'no pathology', and the dipstick method in diagnosing urinary tract infections. The main outcome measures were sensitivity (proportion of the total number of reference standard diagnostic studies that could be identified by the search) and positive predictive value (proportion of the total number of publications retrieved by MEDLINE that were incorporated in the reference standard).Results: The combined MeSH and freetext search was more sensitive than MeSH term searching only, for both the ESR and the dipstick search. With this combined search sensitivities of 0.91 and 0.98 and predictive values of 0.10 and 0.68 were found for ESR and dipstick respectively. By restricting the search with keywords describing the primary health care setting the predictive values increased to 0.72 and 1.00 but sensitivity dropped to 0.10 and 0.07 (ESR and dipstick respectively).Conclusion: Combining freetext and MeSH term searching, without restriction to the primary health care setting, is a valuable strategy in systematically searching for available evidence on the value of a diagnostic test in the scope of a specific disease. The predictive value seems to depend on the breadth of the disease area. MEDLINE should provide a term such as 'diagnostic evaluation study' to be used in the limit field Publication Type to specify diagnostic studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]