Search

Abstract Background Long-COVID is a new multisectoral healthcare challenge. This study aims at understanding experiences, knowledge, attitudes and (information) needs that GPs had and have in relation to Long-COVID and how these evolved since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods The study used an exploratory qualitative research design using semistructured interviews. A total of 30 semistructured interviews with GPs in different primary care settings (single practices, group practices, primary care centres) were conducted between February and July 2022. The data were analysed using qualitative thematic content analysis with the software Atlas.ti. Results This is the first study that empirically investigated Long-COVID management by GPs in Austria during the third year of the pandemic. All GPs indicated having experience with Long-COVID. In cities, GPs tended to have slightly better networks with specialists. The GPs who already worked in teams tended to find the management of Long-COVID easier. The symptoms that the physicians described as Long-COVID symptoms corresponded to those described in the international literature, but it is unclear whether syndromes and symptomes such as Post-Exertional-Malaise, autonomic dysfunction such as postural tachycardia syndrome or Mast-Cell-Overactivation-Syndrom, and cognitive dysfunctions were also recognized and correctly classified since they were never mentioned. Most GPs reacted quickly by granting the needed sick leaves and by seeing and discussing with the patients often.The treatment of the patients is described as an enormous challenge and frustrating for patient and GP if the treatment does not yield to significantly improved health also due to the high costs for the patient. Conclusion Long-COVID will continue to preoccupy our health care systems for a long time to come, as new variants of COVID-19 will continue to produce new patients without adequate prevention strategies. Therefore, it is not a question of if but when good support for GPs and adequate care pathways for people with Long-COVID will be implemented. Specific contact points that are familiar with therapy-refractory postacute infection syndromes like the postacute COVID condition as a subgroup of Long-COVID are urgently needed.

Abstract Background Long COVID-19 challenges health and social systems globally. International research finds major inequalities in prevalence and healthcare utilization as patients describe difficulties with accessing health care. In order to improve long-term outcomes it is vital to understand any underlying access barriers, for which relevant evidence on long COVID-19 is thus far lacking in a universal healthcare system like Austria. This study aims to comprehensively identify access barriers and facilitators faced by long COVID-19 patients in Austria and explore potential socioeconomic and demographic drivers in health and social care access. Methods Applying an exploratory qualitative approach, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 experts including medical professionals and senior health officials as well as focus groups with 18 patients with confirmed long COVID-19 diagnosis reflecting varying participant characteristics (age, gender, urbanicity, occupation, education, insurance status) (July-Nov 2023). Data were analysed following a thematic framework approach, drawing on a comprehensive ‘access to health care’ model. Results Based on expert and patient experiences, several access barriers and facilitators emerged along all dimensions of the model. Main themes included scepticism and stigma by medical professionals, difficulties in finding knowledgeable doctors, limited specialist capacities in the ambulatory care sector, long waiting times for specialist care, and limited statutory health insurance coverage of treatments resulting in high out-of-pocket payments. Patients experienced constant self-organization of their patient pathway as stressful, emphasizing the need for multidisciplinary care and centralized coordination. Facilitators included supportive social environments, telemedicine, and informal information provided by a nationwide patient-led support group. Differences in patient experiences emerged, among others, as women and younger patients faced gender- and age-based stigmatization. Complementary health insurance reduced the financial strain, however, did not ease capacity constraints, which were particularly challenging for those living in rural areas. Conclusions The findings of this study indicate a call for action to improve the long COVID-19 situation in Austria by empowering both providers and patients via increased information offerings, strengthened interdisciplinary treatment structures and telemedicine offerings as well as research funding. Our insights on potentially relevant socioeconomic and demographic drivers in access barriers lay the necessary foundation for future quantitative inequality research.

Abstract The term long COVID (LC) effectively describes the broad long-term disease burden of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections, encompassing individual suffering and significant socioeconomic impacts. However, its general use hampers precise epidemiological research, diagnostics and therapeutic strategies. Misinterpretations occur, for example, when population surveys are compared to studies using health record data, because both refer to these data as LC. This also emphasizes the need for different terminology. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) rapid guideline differentiates ongoing symptomatic COVID-19 from post-COVID conditions, yet real-world observations challenge these two subgroup definitions. We propose refining the term LC into three subgroups: ongoing symptomatic COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 induced or exacerbated diseases and post-acute COVID condition. This stratification aids targeted diagnostics, treatment and epidemiological research. Subgroup-specific documentation using the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes ensures accurate tracking and understanding of long-term effects. The subgroup of post-acute COVID condition again includes various symptoms, syndromes and diseases like post-exertional malaise (PEM), dysautonomia or cognitive dysfunctions. In this regard, differentiation, especially considering PEM, is crucial for effective diagnostics and treatment.

Background The COVID-19 vaccination campaign in several European countries involved collaboration between public health and Primary Health Care (PHC).Objective To highlight the role of PHC professionals in the COVID-19 vaccination rollout, specifically in terms of vaccine administration, communication and contributing to vaccination population coverage.Methods A descriptive retrospective study of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign across 28 European countries was conducted, covering data from December 2020 to November 2021. Data were collected by key informants recruited from each country, who were health professionals involved in their national vaccination campaigns. Utilising an ad-hoc semi-structured questionnaire, information was gathered on organisation, communication strategies, priority groups, vaccine types, and vaccination pathways in PHC.Results PHC participated in communication strategies in 10 out of 28 countries, and vaccination was voluntary in most of them. The priority groups for vaccination varied across Europe, and the availability of vaccines in PHC differed between countries within the European Union (EU) and non-EU countries. The BioNTech Pfizer vaccine was the most widely available vaccine in most countries, followed by Moderna and AstraZeneca. PHC administered COVID-19 vaccines to the population, being the nurses the most involved, followed by general practitioners. Vaccination appointments were available online in 18/28 or by phone in 15/28, direct appointments at health centres were available in 8/28. In several countries, healthcare professionals who administered vaccines were given extra compensation for their role.Conclusion PHC professionals played a crucial role in the successful distribution and administration of COVID-19 vaccines in European countries.

Abstract Background Recruitment for surveys has been a great challenge, especially in general practice. Methods Here, we reported recruitment strategies, data collection, participation rates (PR) and representativeness of the PRICOV-19 study, an international comparative, cross-sectional, online survey among general practices (GP practices) in 37 European countries and Israel. Results Nine (24%) countries reported a published invitation; 19 (50%) had direct contact with all GPs/GP practices; 19 (50%) contacted a sample of GPs /GP practices; and 7 (18%) used another invitation strategy. The median participation rate was 22% (IQR = 10%, 28%). Multiple invitation strategies (P-value 0.93) and multiple strategies to increase PR (P-value 0.64) were not correlated with the PR. GP practices in (semi-) rural areas, GP practices serving more than 10,000 patients, and group practices were over-represented (P-value

Abstract Background Primary Health Care (PHC) plays a crucial role in managing the COVID-19 pandemic, with only 8% of cases requiring hospitalization. However, PHC COVID-19 data often goes unnoticed on European government dashboards and in media discussions. This project aims to examine official information on PHC patient care during the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe, with specific objectives: (1) Describe PHC’s clinical pathways for acute COVID-19 cases, including long-term care facilities, (2) Describe PHC COVID-19 pandemic indicators, (3) Develop COVID-19 PHC activity indicators, (4) Explain PHC’s role in vaccination strategies, and (5) Create a PHC contingency plan for future pandemics. Methods A mixed-method study will employ two online questionnaires to gather retrospective PHC data on COVID-19 management and PHC involvement in vaccination strategies. Validation will occur through focus group discussions with medical and public health (PH) experts. A two-wave Delphi survey will establish a European PHC indicators dashboard for future pandemics. Additionally, a coordinated health system action plan involving PHC, secondary care, and PH will be devised to address future pandemic scenarios. Analysis: Quantitative data will be analysed using STATA v16.0 for descriptive and multivariate analyses. Qualitative data will be collected through peer-reviewed questionnaires and content analysis of focus group discussions. A Delphi survey and multiple focus groups will be employed to achieve consensus on PHC indicators and a common European health system response plan for future pandemics. The Eurodata research group involving researchers from 28 European countries support the development. Discussion While PHC manages most COVID-19 acute cases, data remains limited in many European countries. This study collects data from numerous countries, offering a comprehensive perspective on PHC’s role during the pandemic in Europe. It pioneers the development of a PHC dashboard and health system plan for pandemics in Europe. These results may prove invaluable in future pandemics. However, data may have biases due to key informants’ involvement and may not fully represent all European GP practices. PHC has a significant role in the management of the COVID-19 pandemic, as most of the cases are mild or moderate and only 8% needed hospitalization. However, PHC COVID-19 activity data is invisible on governments’ daily dashboards in Europe, often overlooked in media and public debates.

BackgroundExperts estimate that in up to 10% of the infected, SARS-CoV-2 would cause persistent symptoms, activity limitations and reduced quality of life. Referred to as long COVID, these conditions might, in the future, specifically impact German-speaking countries due to their higher rates of unvaccinated people compared to other Western countries. Accurate measurement of symptom burden and its consequences is needed to manage conditions such as long COVID, and several tools have been developed to do so. However, no patient-reported instrument existed in the German language at the time of writing.ObjectiveThis study, therefore, aimed to develop a German version of the COVID-19 Yorkshire Rehabilitation Scale (C19-YRS).MethodsWe conducted a translation and qualitative evaluation, including cultural adaptation, of the C19-YRS and assessed its face validity. After creating a preliminary version, 26 individuals (14 women [53%]) participated in cognitive interviews (January 2022 to March 2022). Using cognitive debriefing interviews, we ensured the content’s comprehensibility. The matrix-framework method guided the qualitative data analysis.ResultsCompared to the original English version, adaptations were necessary, resulting in changes to the introductory text, while the items for recording persistent symptoms were hardly changed.ConclusionThe German version of the C19-YRS is expected to support standardized long COVID care.

Abstract Background Primary care is internationally recognised as one of the cornerstones of health care. During the COVID-19 pandemic, primary care physicians were assigned a variety of tasks and thus made a significant contribution to a country’s pandemic response. They were expected to perform a variety of tasks, such as diagnosing and treating people with COVID-19, maintaining health care for all other patients, as well as several public health tasks, such as diagnostic testing and vaccination, protecting patients and staff from infection, and serving as community trusted persons. In Austria, there are no structured levels of care, no definition of the role of the general practitioner during a pandemic is given, and no specific support structures are present. The aim of this study was to assess the views and experiences of primary care physicians regarding supportive and hindering factors for pandemic preparedness in Austria. Methods Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. A total of 30 general practitioners were interviewed, with particular attention to an equitable distribution in small, medium and large primary care facilities. Qualitative content analysis was performed. Results Interviewees described a wide range of infection control, organisational and communication measures that they had implemented. They made changes to practise equipment, found makeshift solutions when supplies were scarce, and established communication and information pathways when official communication lines were inadequate. Conclusion General practitioners took on essential tasks and showed a high level of understanding of their role in the pandemic response. This was achieved mainly at an informal level and with high personal commitment. Their functioning in the absence of structural regulations and support shows that they had a clear intrinsic understanding of their responsibilities. To ensure reliability and sustainability and to reduce their burden, it will be necessary to clarify the role and tasks of a general practitioner and to provide the necessary support. This concerns both infrastructural support and communication and information strategies. As part of the reform to strengthen primary care, primary care needs to be seen, valued and involved in decision-making processes.

Abstract Background The SARS-CoV2 pandemic as well as the implementation of public health measures to decrease the spread of the virus re-sparked the call for “virtual” health or “distance” treatments. This paper aimed to assess the use of video consultations, the up-to-dateness of practice websites, and the views of GPs on whether eHealth is a positive aspect for the future of their practices in publicly -funded primary healthcare facilities in Austria. Methods The cross-sectional online questionnaire, part of the PRICOV-19 study, was conducted from December 2020 until July 2021. We randomly recruited 176 GP practices across Austria. Descriptive statistics as well as binary logistic regression models were applied to examine the associations between telemedicine use and practice factors. Results Compared with before the pandemic (3.8%), 7.6% of publicly funded GP practices have been using video consultations since the pandemic. In line with this, 93.9% of the practices had no increase in video consultation use. Fewer than half (44.3%) had an up-to-date webpage, and 27.8% assumed that the pandemic might have been a positive driver for eHealth in their practices. Positive associations with video consultation use could be found in practices with fewer patients aged 70 years and over than the average and more patients with chronic diseases than the average. Conclusion The use of video consultations in general practice and the readiness for other telemedicine approaches are both very low in Austria. Austria has to urgently follow the example of countries with a transparent and comprehensive national digital health strategy that includes video consultation. Without a proper payment system, patient inclusion, and support with regard to administrative and organizational aspects, no substantial change will occur in spite of an increase in need due to the pandemic and changes in the patient population.

Objective This study aims to understand reasons for vaccine hesitancy (VH) among general practioners (GPs) and paediatricians. We aim to analyse how and when the healthcare workers (HCWs) developed vaccine-hesitant views and how they transfer these to patients.Design and setting Semistructured interviews with vaccine-hesitant GPs and paediatricians were conducted in Austria and Germany using an explorative qualitative research design.Participants We contacted 41 physicians through letters and emails and 10 agreed to participate, five were male and five female.Data collection and analysis Ten interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and anonymised. The material was analysed inductively following a grounded theory approach with open coding using the software atlas.ti.Results Key themes that were identified were education and career path, understanding of medicine and medical profession, experiences with vaccines, doctor–patient interactions and continuous education activities and the link to VH. GPs and paediatricians’ vaccine-hesitant attitudes developed during their medical training and, in particular, during extracurricular training in homeopathy, which most of the participants completed. Most participants work in private practices rather than with contracts with social insurance because they are not satisfied with the health system. Furthermore, they are critical of biomedicine. Most of the interview partners do not consider themselves antivaccination, but are sceptical towards vaccines and especially point out the side effects. Most do not vaccinate in their practices and some do only occasionally. Their vaccine-hesitant views are often fostered through respective online communities of vaccine-hesitant HCWs.Conclusions More studies on a connection between complementary medicine and vaccine-hesitant views of HCWs are needed. Education about vaccines and infectious diseases among healthworkers must increase especially tailored towards the use of internet and social media. Physicians should be made aware that through time and empathy towards their patients they could have a positive impact on undecided patients and parents regarding vaccine decisions.

AbstractBackground Most COVID-19 patients were treated in primary health care (PHC) in Europe.Objectives To demonstrate the scope of PHC workflow during the COVID-19 pandemic emphasising similarities and differences of patient’s clinical pathways in Europe.Methods Descriptive, cross-sectional study with data acquired through a semi-structured questionnaire in PHC in 30 European countries, created ad hoc and agreed upon among all researchers who participated in the study. GPs from each country answered the approved questionnaire. Main variable: PHC COVID-19 acute clinical pathway. All variables were collected from each country as of September 2020.Results COVID-19 clinics in PHC facilities were organised in 8/30. Case detection and testing were performed in PHC in 27/30 countries. RT-PCR and lateral flow tests were performed in PHC in 23/30, free of charge with a medical prescription. Contact tracing was performed mainly by public health authorities. Mandatory isolation ranged from 5 to 14 days. Sick leave certification was given exclusively by GPs in 21/30 countries. Patient hotels or other resources to isolate patients were available in 12/30. Follow-up to monitor the symptoms and/or new complementary tests was made mainly by phone call (27/30). Chest X-ray and phlebotomy were performed in PHC in 18/30 and 23/30 countries, respectively. Oxygen and low-molecular-weight heparin were available in PHC (21/30).Conclusion In Europe PHC participated in many steps to diagnose, treat and monitor COVID-19 patients. Differences among countries might be addressed at European level for the management of future pandemics.

Abstract Background Healthcare workers are considered key stakeholders in efforts to address vaccine hesitancy. Midwives’ influence in advising expectant parents on early-childhood vaccinations is unquestioned, yet they remain an understudied group. The literature on midwives’ attitudes towards vaccinations is also inconclusive. We therefore conducted an explorative qualitative study on midwives’ vaccine-hesitant attitudes towards MMR (measles-mumps-rubella) vaccinations in Austria. Methods We conducted 12 in-depth interviews on their knowledge, concerns, and beliefs with midwives who self-identified as hesitant or resistant towards early-childhood MMR vaccinations. We analyzed the data using a grounded theory approach to distill common themes and meanings. Results Healthcare workers’ stewardship to address vaccine hesitancy is commonly framed in terms of the “information deficit model”: disseminate the right information and remedy publics’ information deficits. Our findings suggest that this approach is too simplistic: Midwives’ professional self-understanding, their notions of “good care” and “good parenthood” inflect how they engage with vaccine information and how they address it to their clients. Midwives’ model of care prioritized good counseling rather than sharing scientific information in a “right the wrong”-manner. They saw themselves as critical consumers of that information and as promoting “empowered patients” who were free, and affluent enough, to make their own choices about vaccinations. In so doing, they also often promoted traditional notions of motherhood. Conclusions Research shows that, for parents, vaccine decision-making builds on trust and dialogue with healthcare professionals and is more than a technical issue. In order to foster these interactions, understanding healthcare professionals’ means of engaging with information is key to understanding how they engage with their constituents. Healthcare workers are more than neutral resources; their daily praxis influenced by their professional standing in the healthcare system. Similarly, healthcare professionals’ views on vaccinations cannot be remedied with more information either. Building better and more diverse curricula for different groups of healthcare workers must attend to their respective roles, ethics of care, and professional beliefs. Taken together, better models for addressing vaccine hesitancy can only be developed by espousing a multi-faceted view of decision-making processes and interactions of healthcare workers with constituents.

Abstract Background General practitioners (GPs) should regularly review patients’ medications and, if necessary, deprescribe, as inappropriate polypharmacy may harm patients’ health. However, deprescribing can be challenging for physicians. This study investigates GPs’ deprescribing decisions in 31 countries. Methods In this case vignette study, GPs were invited to participate in an online survey containing three clinical cases of oldest-old multimorbid patients with potentially inappropriate polypharmacy. Patients differed in terms of dependency in activities of daily living (ADL) and were presented with and without history of cardiovascular disease (CVD). For each case, we asked GPs if they would deprescribe in their usual practice. We calculated proportions of GPs who reported they would deprescribe and performed a multilevel logistic regression to examine the association between history of CVD and level of dependency on GPs’ deprescribing decisions. Results Of 3,175 invited GPs, 54% responded (N = 1,706). The mean age was 50 years and 60% of respondents were female. Despite differences across GP characteristics, such as age (with older GPs being more likely to take deprescribing decisions), and across countries, overall more than 80% of GPs reported they would deprescribe the dosage of at least one medication in oldest-old patients (> 80 years) with polypharmacy irrespective of history of CVD. The odds of deprescribing was higher in patients with a higher level of dependency in ADL (OR =1.5, 95%CI 1.25 to 1.80) and absence of CVD (OR =3.04, 95%CI 2.58 to 3.57). Interpretation The majority of GPs in this study were willing to deprescribe one or more medications in oldest-old multimorbid patients with polypharmacy. Willingness was higher in patients with increased dependency in ADL and lower in patients with CVD.

Objective To explore dementia management from a primary care physician perspective. Design One-page seven-item multiple choice questionnaire; free text space for every item; final narrative question of a dementia case story. Inductive explorative grounded theory analysis. Derived results in cluster analyses. Appropriateness of dementia drugs assessed by tertiary care specialist. Setting Twenty-five European General Practice Research Network member countries. Subjects Four hundred and forty-five key informant primary care physician respondents of which 106 presented 155 case stories. Main outcome measures Processes and typologies of dementia management. Proportion of case stories with drug treatment and treatment according to guidelines. Results Unburdening dementia – a basic social process – explained physicians’ dementia management according to a grounded theory analysis using both qualitative and quantitative data. Unburdening starts with Recognizing the dementia burden by Burden Identification and Burden Assessment followed by Burden Relief. Drugs to relieve the dementia burden were reported for 130 of 155 patients; acetylcholinesterase inhibitors or memantine treatment in 89 of 155 patients – 60% appropriate according to guidelines and 40% outside of guidelines. More Central and Northern primary care physicians were allowed to prescribe, and more were engaged in dementia management than Eastern and Mediterranean physicians according to cluster analyses. Physicians typically identified and assessed the dementia burden and then tried to relieve it, commonly by drug prescriptions, but also by community health and home help services, mentioned in more than half of the case stories. Conclusions Primary care physician dementia management was explained by an Unburdening process with the goal to relieve the dementia burden, mainly by drugs often prescribed outside of guideline indications. Implications: Unique data about dementia management by European primary care physicians to inform appropriate stakeholders.Key points Dementia as a syndrome of cognitive and functional decline and behavioural and psychological symptoms causes a tremendous burden on patients, their families, and society. •We found that a basic social process of Unburdening dementia explained dementia management according to case stories and survey comments from primary care physicians in 25 countries. •First, Burden Recognition by Identification and Assessment and then Burden Relief – often by drugs. •Prescribing physicians repeatedly broadened guideline indications for dementia drugs. The more physicians were allowed to prescribe dementia drugs, the more they were responsible for the dementia work-up. Our study provides unique data about dementia management in European primary care for the benefit of national and international stakeholders.

Background: Common cold and influenza result in an increased number of primary care consultations, significant work/school absences and cause a socio-economic burden. Laypeople’s perceptions and knowledge regarding common cold and influenza prevention is poorly understood and under-researched. Objectives: Our study explores laypeople’s knowledge of prevention of common cold and influenza across three European countries. Furthermore, it investigates if there is any distinction between prevention activities focussing on reasons impacting the attitude towards influenza vaccination as well as investigating cross-country variation. Methods: In total, 85 semi-structured individual interviews were performed across three European countries (Austria n = 31, Belgium n = 30, Croatia n = 24). Qualitative thematic content analysis was performed. Results: Most participants across all three countries made no distinction between the prevention of the common cold and influenza and referenced the same preventative measures for both conditions. They mainly expressed negative attitudes towards influenza vaccination possibly effective but only intended for high-risk groups (bedridden/older people, chronic patients or health workers). There were very few cross-country differences in results. Conclusion: The perception of health risk of contracting influenza and a primary healthcare physicians’ recommendation played an important role in shaping participants’ decisions towards vaccination. Primary healthcare physicians are invited to assess and if necessary adjust inappropriate prevention behaviour through their everyday patient consultations as well as add to the knowledge about influenza severity and influenza vaccination benefits to their patients.

Objective: This study aimed to analyze the Austrian health care system using the ecology of care model. Our secondary aim was to compare data from Austria with those available from other countries. Design: 3508 interviews employing a 30-item questionnaire related to the utilization of the health care system including demographic factors were conducted. Participants were chosen by a Random Digital Dialing procedure. Further, a literature review of studies of other countries use of the ecology of care model was conducted. Main outcome measures: Austria has one of the highest utilization of health care services in any of the assessed categories. The comparison with the literature review shows that Austria has the highest utilization of specialists working in the outpatient sector as well as the highest hospitalization rates. Taiwan and Korea have comparable utilization patterns. Canada, Sweden, and Norway are countries with lower utilization patterns, and the U.S. and Japan are intermediate. Conclusion: In Austria and similarly organized countries, high utilization of all health care services can be observed, in particular, the utilization of specialists and hospitalizations. The over-utilization of all levels of health care in Austria may be due to the lack of a clear demarcation line between the primary and secondary levels of care, and the presence of universal health coverage, which also allows for unrestricted and undirected access to all levels of care. Previous studies have shown that comparable countries lack the health benefits of a strong primary care system with its coordination function.Key points In Austria and similarly organized countries, there appears to be high utilization of health care in general, as well as with particular utilization of specialists and hospitalizations. The high utilization of all levels of care in Austria may be the result of competition, lack of a clear demarcation line between the primary and secondary level of care, and the presence of universal health coverage. Pathways between primary and secondary care should be strengthened as previous studies have shown that comparable countries lack the health benefits of strong primary care and its function for health care coordination.

BackgroundThe best management of hypertension in frail oldest-old (≥80 years of age) remains unclear and we still lack guidelines that provide specific recommendations. Our study aims to investigate guideline use in general practitioners (GPs) and to examine if guideline use relates to different decisions when managing hypertension in frail oldest-old.Design/settingCross-sectional study among currently active GPs from 29 countries using a case-vignettes survey.MethodsGPs participated in a survey with case-vignettes of frail oldest-olds varying in systolic blood pressure (SBP) levels and cardiovascular disease (CVD). GPs from 26 European countries and from Brazil, Israel and New Zealand were invited. We compared the percentage of GPs reporting using guidelines per country and further stratified on the most frequently mentioned guidelines. To adjust for patient characteristics (SBP, CVD and GPs' sex, years of experience, prevalence of oldest-old and location of their practice), we used a mixed-effects regression model accounting for clustering within countries.ResultsOverall, 2,543 GPs from 29 countries were included. 59.4% of them reported to use guidelines. Higher guideline use was found in female (p = 0.031) and less-experienced GPs (pConclusionMany GPs reported using guidelines to manage hypertension in frail oldest-old patients, however guideline users did not decide differently from non-users concerning hypertension treatment decisions. Instead of focusing on the fact if GPs use guidelines or not, we as a scientific community should put an emphasis on what guidelines suggest in frail and oldest-old patients.

Abstract Background There is little research on laypersons’ perceptions regarding common cold and influenza, their symptomatic distinction and considerations of risk. This study investigates understanding of pathogenesis across three European countries and provides a knowledge base from which adequate prevention recommendations and treatment advice can be derived. Methods This is a qualitative research study. Semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted with 85 participants from three European countries (Austria n = 31, Belgium n = 30, Croatia n = 24) about their experiences, perceptions and risk considerations regarding the common cold and influenza. We performed a qualitative thematic content analysis. Results Three main themes were identified: common cold as harmless with individualistic symptoms; influenza as mainly distinguishable by fever, confinement to bed and severity of symptoms, but description about onset and duration are diverse; and views on pathogenesis contain references to disease causing agents and circumstances. Overall we found that risk perception is based largely on personal experience and risk is assumed moderate for both diseases. Conclusions Study participants possessed a fairly good understanding of symptoms, differences and pathogenesis of common cold and influenza; but explanations integrated misconceptions, such as misinterpretation of fever, disease continuums, diverse onset ideas etc. Perceptions were largely based on lived experiences and interventions for prevention and treatment should be led by health care workers and focus on these issues. Basic consultations, awareness raising activities and other knowledge disseminations strategies should include aspects of communicableness and the self-limiting nature of both diseases. An informed understanding of both infectious diseases is crucial and may also increase influenza vaccination coverage in the three respective countries effectively.

Abstract The current political crisis, conflicts and riots in many Middle Eastern and African countries have led to massive migration waves towards Europe. European countries, receiving these migratory waves as first port of entry (POE) over the past few years, were confronted with several challenges as a result of the sheer volume of newly arriving refugees. This humanitarian refugee crisis represents the biggest displacement crisis of a generation. Although the refugee crisis created significant challenges for all national healthcare systems across Europe, limited attention has been given to the role of primary health care (PHC) to facilitate an integrated delivery of care by enhancing care provision to refugees upon arrival, on transit or even for longer periods. Evidence-based interventions, encompassing elements of patient-centredness, shared decision-making and compassionate care, could contribute to the assessment of refugee healthcare needs and to the development and the implementation of training programmes for rapid capacity-building for the needs of these vulnerable groups and in the context of integrated PHC care. This article reports on methods used for enhancing PHC for refugees through rapid capacity-building actions in the context of a structured European project under the auspices of the European Commission and funded under the 3rd Health Programme by the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (CHAFEA). The methods include the assessment of the health needs of all the people reaching Europe during the study period, and the identification, development, and testing of educational tools. The developed tools were evaluated following implementation in selected European primary care settings.

Objectives: We previously found large variations in general practitioner (GP) hypertension treatment probability in oldest-old (>80 years) between countries. We wanted to explore whether differences in country-specific cardiovascular disease (CVD) burden and life expectancy could explain the differences. Design: This is a survey study using case-vignettes of oldest-old patients with different comorbidities and blood pressure levels. An ecological multilevel model analysis was performed. Setting: GP respondents from European General Practice Research Network (EGPRN) countries, Brazil and New Zeeland. Subjects: This study included 2543 GPs from 29 countries. Main outcome measures: GP treatment probability to start or not start antihypertensive treatment based on responses to case-vignettes; either low (80 years of age). • In this study including 1947 GPs from 29 countries, we found that a high country-specific cardiovascular disease (CVD) burden (i.e. myocardial infarction and/or stroke) was associated with a higher GP treatment probability in patients aged >80 years. • However, the association was modified by country-specific life expectancy at age 60. While there was a positive association for GPs in countries with a low life expectancy at age 60, there was no association in countries with a high life expectancy at age 60. • These findings help explaining some of the large variation seen in the decision as to whether or not to treat hypertension in the oldest-old.

Abstract Background In oldest-old patients (>80), few trials showed efficacy of treating hypertension and they included mostly the healthiest elderly. The resulting lack of knowledge has led to inconsistent guidelines, mainly based on systolic blood pressure (SBP), cardiovascular disease (CVD) but not on frailty despite the high prevalence in oldest-old. This may lead to variation how General Practitioners (GPs) treat hypertension. Our aim was to investigate treatment variation of GPs in oldest-olds across countries and to identify the role of frailty in that decision. Methods Using a survey, we compared treatment decisions in cases of oldest-old varying in SBP, CVD, and frailty. GPs were asked if they would start antihypertensive treatment in each case. In 2016, we invited GPs in Europe, Brazil, Israel, and New Zealand. We compared the percentage of cases that would be treated per countries. A logistic mixed-effects model was used to derive odds ratio (OR) for frailty with 95% confidence intervals (CI), adjusted for SBP, CVD, and GP characteristics (sex, location and prevalence of oldest-old per GP office, and years of experience). The mixed-effects model was used to account for the multiple assessments per GP. Results The 29 countries yielded 2543 participating GPs: 52% were female, 51% located in a city, 71% reported a high prevalence of oldest-old in their offices, 38% and had >20 years of experience. Across countries, considerable variation was found in the decision to start antihypertensive treatment in the oldest-old ranging from 34 to 88%. In 24/29 (83%) countries, frailty was associated with GPs’ decision not to start treatment even after adjustment for SBP, CVD, and GP characteristics (OR 0.53, 95%CI 0.48–0.59; ORs per country 0.11–1.78). Conclusions Across countries, we found considerable variation in starting antihypertensive medication in oldest-old. The frail oldest-old had an odds ratio of 0.53 of receiving antihypertensive treatment. Future hypertension trials should also include frail patients to acquire evidence on the efficacy of antihypertensive treatment in oldest-old patients with frailty, with the aim to get evidence-based data for clinical decision-making.