Search

Abstract: Introduction and objective: The ODHIN trial found that training and support and financial reimbursement increased the proportion of patients that were screened and given advice for their heavy drinking in primary health care. However, the impact of these strategies on professional accuracy in delivering screening and brief advice is underresearched and is the focus of this paper. Method: From 120 primary health care units (24 in each jurisdiction: Catalonia, England, the Netherlands, Poland, and Sweden), 746 providers participated in the baseline and the 12‐week implementation periods. Accuracy was measured in 2 ways: correctness in completing and scoring the screening instrument, AUDIT‐C; the proportion of screen‐negative patients given advice, and the proportion of screen‐positive patients not given advice. Odds ratios of accuracy were calculated for type of profession and for intervention group: training and support, financial reimbursement, and internet‐based counselling. Results: Thirty‐two of 36 711 questionnaires were incorrectly completed, and 65 of 29 641 screen‐negative patients were falsely classified. At baseline, 27% of screen‐negative patients were given advice, and 22.5% screen‐positive patients were not given advice. These proportions halved during the 12‐week implementation period, unaffected by training. Financial reimbursement reduced the proportion of screen‐positive patients not given advice (OR = 0.56; 95% CI, 0.31‐0.99; P < .05). Conclusion: Although the use of AUDIT‐C as a screening tool was accurate, a considerable proportion of risky drinkers did not receive advice, which was reduced with financial incentives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper focuses on the diversity in patients' experience of biomedicine and contrasts it with the normative view characteristic of health professionals. Ethnographic fieldwork among Polish migrant women in London, Barcelona and Berlin included interviews about their experiences with local healthcare and health professionals. Themes drawn from the narratives are differences between the cities in terms of communication between patients and health professionals, respect for patients' choices and dignity, attitudes to pregnancy and birth (different levels of medicalization), and paediatric care. It is argued that patients continuously negotiate among their own views and expectations based on previous experiences and knowledge from personal communication; internet forums and publications; and the offer of medical services in the countries of their settlement. Patients experience pluralism of therapeutic traditions within and outside bio-medicine. In turn, representatives of bio-medicine are rarely aware of other medical practices and beliefs and this leads to various misunderstandings. By highlighting the pluralism of medical practices in European countries and the increasing mobility of patients, this case study has useful implications for medical anthropologists and health professionals in a broader Western context, such as raising sensitivity to different communication strategies and a diversity of curing traditions and expectations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]