Search

Objective Management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) requires frequent monitoring of patients. Within a collective care group setting, doubts on the clinical effects of registration are a barrier for full adoption of T2DM registration in general practice. We explored whether full monitoring of biomedical and lifestyle-related target indicators within a care group approach is associated with lower HbA1c levels. Design Observational, real-life cohort study. Setting Primary care data registry from the Hadoks (EerstelijnsZorggroepHaaglanden) care group. Exposure The care group provides general practitioners collectively with organisational support to facilitate structured T2DM primary care. Patients are offered quarterly medical and lifestyle-related consultation. Main outcome measure Full monitoring of each target indicator in patients with T2DM which includes minimally one measure of HbA1c level, systolic blood pressure, LDL, BMI, smoking behaviour and physical exercise between January and December 2014; otherwise, patients were defined as 'incompletely monitored'. HbA1c levels of 8137 fully monitored and 3958 incompletely monitored patients were compared, adjusted for the confounders diabetes duration, age and gender. Since recommended HbA1c values depend on age, medication use and diabetes duration, analyses were stratified into three HbA1c profile groups. Linear multilevel analyses enabled adjustment for general practice. Results Compared with incompletely monitored patients, fully monitored patients had significantly lower HbA1c levels (95% CI) in the first (-2.03 [-2.53 to -1.52] mmol/mol) (-0.19% [-0.23% to -0.14%]), second (-3.36 [-5.28 to -1.43] mmol/mol) (-0.31% [-0.48% to -0.13%]) and third HbA1c profile group (-1.89 [-3.76 to -0.01] mmol/mol) (-0.17% [-0.34% to 0.00%]). Conclusions/interpretation This study shows that in a care group setting, fully monitored patients had significantly lower HbA1c levels compared with incompletely monitored patients. Since this difference might have considerable clinical impact in terms of T2DM-related risks, this might help general practices in care group settings to overcome barriers on adequate registration and thus improve structured T2DM primary care. From population health management perspective, we recommend a systematic approach to adjust the structured care protocol for incompletely monitored subgroups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of topical miconazole or amorolfine compared to placebo for mild to moderately severe onychomycosis., Design: Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, with computer-generated treatment allocation at a 1:1:1 ratio., Setting: Primary care, recruitment from February 2020 to August 2022., Participants: 193 patients with suspected mild to moderately severe onychomycosis were recruited via general practices and from the general public, 111 of whom met the study criteria. The mean age of participants was 51 (SD 13.1), 51% were female and onychomycosis was moderately severe (mean OSI 12.1 (SD 8.0))., Interventions: Once-daily miconazole 20 mg/g or once-weekly amorolfine 5% nail lacquer solution was compared with placebo (denatonium benzoate solution)., Main Outcome Measures: Complete, clinical and mycological cure at 6 months. Secondary outcomes were clinical improvement, symptom burden, quality of life, adverse effects, compliance, patient-perceived improvement and treatment acceptability., Results: Based on intention-to-treat analysis, none of the participants receiving miconazole or amorolfine reached complete cure compared with two in the placebo group (OR not estimable (n.e.), p=0.493 and OR n.e., p=0.240, respectively). There was no evidence of a significant difference between groups regarding clinical cure (OR n.e., p=0.493 and OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.04 to 5.45, p=0.615) while miconazole and amorolfine were less effective than placebo at reaching both mycological cure (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.98, p=0.037 and OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.92, p=0.029, respectively) and clinical improvement (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.91, p=0.028 and OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.85, p=0.021, respectively). There was no evidence of a significant difference in disease burden, quality of life, adverse reactions, compliance, patient-perceived improvement or treatment acceptability., Conclusions: Topical miconazole and amorolfine were not effective in achieving a complete, clinical or mycological cure of mild to moderately severe onychomycosis, nor did they significantly alleviate the severity or symptom burden. These treatments should, therefore, not be advised as monotherapy to treat onychomycosis., Trial Registration Number: WHO ICTRP NL8193., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Chest pain is a common reason for consultation in primary care. To rule out acute coronary syndrome (ACS), general practitioners (GP) refer 40%-70% of patients with chest pain to the emergency department (ED). Only 10%-20% of those referred, are diagnosed with ACS. A clinical decision rule, including a high-sensitive cardiac troponin-I point-of-care test (hs-cTnI-POCT), may safely rule out ACS in primary care. Being able to safely rule out ACS at the GP level reduces referrals and thereby alleviates the burden on the ED. Moreover, prompt feedback to the patients may reduce anxiety and stress., Methods and Analysis: The POB HELP study is a clustered randomised controlled diagnostic trial investigating the (cost-)effectiveness and diagnostic accuracy of a primary care decision rule for acute chest pain, consisting of the Marburg Heart Score combined with a hs-cTnI-POCT (limit of detection 1.6 ng/L, 99th percentile 23 ng/L, cut-off value between negative and positive used in this study 3.8 ng/L). General practices are 2:1 randomised to the intervention group (clinical decision rule) or control group (regular care). In total 1500 patients with acute chest pain are planned to be included by GPs in three regions in The Netherlands. Primary endpoints are the number of hospital referrals and the diagnostic accuracy of the decision rule 24 hours, 6 weeks and 6 months after inclusion., Ethics and Dissemination: The medical ethics committee Leiden-Den Haag-Delft (the Netherlands) has approved this trial. Written informed consent will be obtained from all participating patients. The results of this trial will be disseminated in one main paper and additional papers on secondary endpoints and subgroup analyses., Trial Registration Numbers: NL9525 and NCT05827237., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) requires frequent monitoring of patients. Within a collective care group setting, doubts on the clinical effects of registration are a barrier for full adoption of T2DM registration in general practice. We explored whether full monitoring of biomedical and lifestyle-related target indicators within a care group approach is associated with lower HbA 1c levels., Design: Observational, real-life cohort study., Setting: Primary care data registry from the Hadoks (EerstelijnsZorggroepHaaglanden) care group., Exposure: The care group provides general practitioners collectively with organisational support to facilitate structured T2DM primary care. Patients are offered quarterly medical and lifestyle-related consultation., Main Outcome Measure: Full monitoring of each target indicator in patients with T2DM which includes minimally one measure of HbA 1c level, systolic blood pressure, LDL, BMI, smoking behaviour and physical exercise between January and December 2014; otherwise, patients were defined as 'incompletely monitored'. HbA 1c levels of 8137 fully monitored and 3958 incompletely monitored patients were compared, adjusted for the confounders diabetes duration, age and gender. Since recommended HbA 1c values depend on age, medication use and diabetes duration, analyses were stratified into three HbA 1c profile groups. Linear multilevel analyses enabled adjustment for general practice., Results: Compared with incompletely monitored patients, fully monitored patients had significantly lower HbA 1c levels (95% CI) in the first (-2.03 [-2.53 to -1.52] mmol/mol) (-0.19% [-0.23% to -0.14%]), second (-3.36 [-5.28 to -1.43] mmol/mol) (-0.31% [-0.48% to -0.13%]) and third HbA 1c profile group (-1.89 [-3.76 to -0.01] mmol/mol) (-0.17% [-0.34% to 0.00%])., Conclusions/interpretation: This study shows that in a care group setting, fully monitored patients had significantly lower HbA 1c levels compared with incompletely monitored patients. Since this difference might have considerable clinical impact in terms of T2DM-related risks, this might help general practices in care group settings to overcome barriers on adequate registration and thus improve structured T2DM primary care. From population health management perspective, we recommend a systematic approach to adjust the structured care protocol for incompletely monitored subgroups., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: National and international guidelines recommend prompt referral of patients presenting with inflammatory arthritis (IA), but general practitioners (GPs) feel uncertain in their proficiency to detect synovitis through joint examination, the method of choice to identify IA. Our objective was to develop and validate a rule composed of clinical characteristics to assist GPs and other physicians in identifying IA when in doubt., Design: Split-sample derivation and validation study., Setting: The Leiden Early Arthritis Recognition Clinic (EA R C), a screening clinic for patients in whom GPs suspected but were unsure of the presence of IA., Participants: 1288 consecutive patients visiting the EA R C., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: Associations of clinical characteristics with presence of IA were determined using logistic regression in 644 patients, while validating the results in the other 644 patients (split-sample validation). To facilitate application in clinical practice, a simplified rule (with scores ranging from 0 to 7.5) was derived and validated., Results: IA was identified by a rheumatologist in 41% of patients. In univariable analysis, male gender, age ≥60 years, symptom duration <6 weeks, morning stiffness >60 min, a low number of painful joints (1-3 joints), presence of patient-reported joint swelling and difficulty with making a fist were associated with IA in the derivation data set. Using multivariable analysis, a simplified rule consisting of these seven items was derived and validated, yielding an area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.74 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.78) in the derivation data set. Validation yielded an AUC of 0.71 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.75). Finally, the model was repeated to study predicted probabilities with a lower prevalence of inflammatory arthritis to simulate performance in primary care settings., Conclusions: Our rule, composed of clinical parameters, had reasonable discriminative ability for IA and could assist physicians in decision-making in patients with suspected IA, increasing appropriateness of healthcare utilisation., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)