Search

Background: GPs frequently use 10-year-risk estimations of cardiovascular disease (CVD) to identify high- risk patients., Aim: To assess the performance of four models for predicting the 10-year risk of CVD in Dutch general practice., Design and Setting: Prospective cohort study. Routine data (2009- 2019) was used from 46 Dutch general practices linked to cause of death statistics., Method: The outcome measures were fatal CVD for SCORE and first diagnosis of fatal or non- fatal CVD for SCORE fatal and non-fatal (SCORE- FNF), Globorisk-laboratory, and Globorisk-office. Model performance was assessed by examining discrimination and calibration., Results: The final number of patients for risk prediction was 1981 for SCORE and SCORE-FNF, 3588 for Globorisk-laboratory, and 4399 for Globorisk- office. The observed percentage of events was 18.6% ( n = 353) for SCORE- FNF, 6.9% ( n = 230) for Globorisk-laboratory, 7.9% ( n = 323) for Globorisk-office, and 0.3% ( n = 5) for SCORE. The models showed poor discrimination and calibration. The performance of SCORE could not be examined because of the limited number of fatal CVD events. SCORE-FNF, the model that is currently used for risk prediction of fatal plus non-fatal CVD in Dutch general practice, was found to underestimate the risk in all deciles of predicted risks., Conclusion: Wide eligibility criteria and a broad outcome measure contribute to the model applicability in daily practice. The restriction to fatal CVD outcomes of SCORE renders it less usable in routine Dutch general practice. The models seriously underestimate the 10-year risk of fatal plus non-fatal CVD in Dutch general practice. The poor model performance is possibly because of differences between patients that are eligible for risk prediction and the population that was used for model development. In addition, selection of higher-risk patients for CVD risk assessment by GPs may also contribute to the poor model performance., (© The Authors.)

Background: Spirometry is an indispensable tool for diagnosis and monitoring of chronic airways disease in primary care., Aim: To establish the quality of routine spirometry tests in general practice, and explore associations between test quality and patient characteristics., Design of Study: Analysis of routine spirometry test records., Setting: Fifteen general practices which had a working agreement with a local hospital pulmonary function laboratory for spirometry assessment regarding test quality and interpretation., Method: Spirometry tests were judged by a pulmonary function technician and a chest physician. Proportions of test adequacy were analysed using markers for manoeuvre acceptability and test reproducibility derived from the 1994 American Thoracic Society spirometry guideline. Associations between quality markers and age, sex, and severity of obstruction were examined using logistic regression., Results: Practices performed a mean of four (standard deviation = 2) spirometry tests per week; 1271 tests from 1091 adult patients were analysed; 96.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 95.6 to 97.2) of all tests consisted of ≥3 blows. With 60.6% of tests, forced expiratory time was the marker with the lowest acceptability rate. An overall 38.8% (95% CI = 36.0 to 41.6) of the tests met the acceptability as well as reproducibility criteria. Age, sex, and severity of obstruction were associated with test quality markers., Conclusion: The quality of routine spirometry tests was better than in previous reports from primary care research settings, but there is still substantial room for improvement. Sufficient duration of forced expiratory time is the quality marker with the highest rate of inadequacy. Primary care professionals should be aware of patient characteristics that may diminish the quality of their spirometry tests. Further research is needed to establish to what extent spirometry tests that are inadequate, according to stringent international expert criteria, result in incorrect clinical interpretations in general practice.

Recently, spirometers have become available for use within general practice as an alternative to peak flow meters. This study investigates whether practice assistants, after comprehensive training, can effectively carry out spirometry with patients suffering from asthma and other chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases. A scoring system, consisting of 20 items, was devised to determine the effectiveness of the assistants' instructions and to assess the patient's subsequent use of the spirometer. About half the instructions and half the patient performance items were considered to be carried out satisfactorily.

Background: A previous two-year study of continuous and on demand bronchodilator therapy in patients with moderate asthma and chronic bronchitis showed a deterioration in lung function in those on continuous therapy., Aim: A two-year follow-up study was undertaken of patients who had been shown in the previous study to have non-steroid dependent (mild) asthma and chronic bronchitis, in order to investigate the effect of continuous and on-demand treatment with bronchodilator therapy., Method: Patients for the study were drawn from 29 general practices in the catchment area of the University of Nijmegen, the Netherlands. A total of 83 patients (27 with asthma and 56 with chronic bronchitis) were selected from a group of 160 patients who had completed the previous two-year bronchodilator trial. During these first two years the selected subjects had been shown to be non-steroid dependent (no rapid decline in lung function and a low number of exacerbations of their condition per year), and they were followed up for another two years of treatment with bronchodilator therapy. At the start of the four-year study, patients were randomly assigned to one of two parallel treatment groups: continuous treatment (dry powder inhalations of either salbutamol 1600 micrograms or ipratropium bromide 160 micrograms daily) or treatment on demand (only during exacerbations or periods of dyspnoea). Outcome parameters were the annual decline in lung function, changes in peak flow rate, bronchial hyper-responsiveness, exacerbation rate, respiratory symptoms and reported health., Results: After correction for possibly confounding variables and for regression to the mean, the decline in lung function was 49 ml year in patients taking bronchodilators continuously and 51 ml year in patients using bronchodilators on demand, irrespective of the drug use. Continuously treated patients, whether suffering from asthma or chronic bronchitis, did not differ from patients treated on demand with respect to mean morning peak flow rate, diurnal (and week to week) variation of the peak flow rate, bronchial hyper-responsiveness, exacerbation rate and reported health. There was no difference between the long-term effects of salbutamol and ipratropium., Conclusion: Continuous use of bronchodilators over four years in patients with non-steroid dependent asthma or chronic bronchitis does not increase the decline in lung function which had been observed previously in patients with moderate asthma or chronic bronchitis during two years of continuous treatment with bronchodilators.