Search

The World Organization of Family Doctors (WONCA) developed the third edition of the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC-3) to support the shift from a medical perspective to a person-centered perspective in primary health care. The previous editions (ICPC-1 and ICPC-2) allowed description of 3 important elements of health care encounters: the reason for the encounter, the diagnosis and/or health problem, and the process of care. The ICPC-3 adds function-related information as a fourth element, thereby capturing most parts of the encounter in a single practical and concise classification. ICPC-3 thus has the potential to give more insight on patients' activities and functioning, supporting physicians in shifting from a strict medical/disease-based approach to care to a more person-centered approach. The ICPC-3 is also expanded with a new chapter for visits pertaining to immunizations and for coding of special screening examinations and public health promotion; in addition, it contains classes for programs related to reported conditions (eg, a cardiovascular program, a heart failure program) and can accommodate relevant national or regional classes. Classes are selected based on what is truly and frequently occurring in daily practice. Each class has its own codes. Less frequently used concepts pertaining to morbidity are captured as inclusions within the main classes. Implementation of the ICPC-3 in an electronic health record allows provision of meaningful feedback to primary care, and supports the exchange of information within teams and between primary and secondary care. It also gives policy makers and funders insight into what is happening in primary care and thus has the potential to improve provision of care. Key words: ICPC-3; classification; primary care; health data; patient-centered care; functioning; prevention; health programs; medical informatics; population health, INTRODUCTION For a long time, family physicians have been recording routine clinical data in health records. Use of these primary care data for clinical decision support, quality assessment, research, and [...]

We studied the changes in presented health problems and demand for primary care since the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the Netherlands. We analyzed prominent symptom features of COVID-19, and COVID-19 itself as the reason for encounter. Also, we analyzed the number and type of encounters for common important health problems. Respiratory tract symptoms related to COVID-19 were presented more often in 2020 than in 2019. We observed a dramatic increase of telephone/e-mail/Internet consultations in the months after the outbreak. Contacts for other health problems such as prevention and acute and chronic conditions plummeted substantially (P Key words: COVID-19; coronavirus; general practice; delivery of healthcare; primary care; the Netherlands https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2625, INTRODUCTION The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the Netherlands started at the end of February 2020. Following a steep rise in the number of cases in March 2020, the [...]

The burden of symptoms is a subjective experience of distress. Little is known on the burden of feeling unwell in patients with persistent symptom diagnoses. The aim of this study was to assess the burden in primary care patients with persistent symptom diagnoses compared to other primary care patients. A cross-sectional study was performed in which an online survey was sent to random samples of 889 patients with persistent symptom diagnoses (>1 year) and 443 other primary care patients after a transactional identification in a Dutch primary care data registry. Validated questionnaires were used to assess the severity of symptoms (PHQ-15), Symptom Intensity and Symptom Interference questionnaires, depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (GAD-7), quality of life (SF-12 and EQ-5D-5L)) and social functioning (SPF-ILs). Overall, 243 patients completed the survey: 178 (73.3%) patients in the persistent symptom diagnoses group and 65 (26.7%) patients in the control group. In the persistent group, 65 (36.5%) patients did not have persistent symptom(s) anymore according to the survey response. Patients who still had persistent symptom diagnoses (n = 113, 63.5%) reported significantly more severe somatic symptoms (mean difference = 3.6, [95% CI: 0.24, 4.41]), depression (mean difference = 3.0 [95% CI: 1.24, 3.61]) and anxiety (mean difference = 2.3 [95% CI: 0.28, 3.10]) and significantly lower physical functioning (mean difference = − 6.8 [95% CI: −8.96, −3.92]). Patients with persistent symptom diagnoses suffer from high levels of symptoms burden. The burden in patient with persistent symptoms should not be underestimated as awareness of this burden may enhance person-centered care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In primary care, a shift from a disease‐oriented approach for patients with multimorbidity towards a more person‐centred approach is needed. Aim: To transform a self‐report questionnaire for patients with chronic conditions in primary care, the Primary Care Functioning Scale (PCFS), into an understandable, visually attractive and feasible consultation tool for patients and health care providers. The consultation tool consists of a web‐based version of the PCFS, which is filled in by the patient and is processed to a feedback report that summarizes and visualizes the main findings. The feedback report can be discussed with the patient to facilitate a more person‐centred conversation for patients with chronic conditions and multimorbidity in general practice. Design and Setting: In this qualitative study, we developed the consultation tool by using design thinking in a participatory developmental process. Methods: In the first phase, we constructed five different feedback report templates to summarize and display the results of a completed PCFS questionnaire in a series of two expert meetings with patients and general practitioners (GPs). In the second phase, we performed an exploratory qualitative interview study involving dyads of patients with chronic conditions and their practice nurses. In an iterative process, we explored their experiences with the consultation tool. Results: Patients, as well as GPs, preferred a clear manner of presenting the results of the questionnaire in a feedback report. In 18 interviews with patients and practice nurses during three different interview rounds, we adjusted the feedback report and consultation tool based on the input from patients and practice nurses. After the final interview round, patients and practice nurses consented that the consultation tool was useful for having a more in‐depth consultation about functioning and patients' preferences when integrated into the regularly scheduled consultations. Conclusion: We were able to develop an understandable and feasible consultation tool that is applicable in already existing chronic disease management programmes in general practice in the Netherlands. Patient or Public Contribution: To increase the understandability and feasibility of the consultation tool, we collaborated with end‐users and actively involved patients, GPs and practice nurses in a participatory development process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The World Organization of Family Doctors (WONCA) developed the third edition of the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC-3) to support the shift from a medical perspective to a person-centered perspective in primary health care. The previous editions (ICPC-1 and ICPC-2) allowed description of 3 important elements of health care encounters: the reason for the encounter, the diagnosis and/or health problem, and the process of care. The ICPC-3 adds function-related information as a fourth element, thereby capturing most parts of the encounter in a single practical and concise classification. ICPC-3 thus has the potential to give more insight on patients' activities and functioning, supporting physicians in shifting from a strict medical/disease-based approach to care to a more person-centered approach. The ICPC-3 is also expanded with a new chapter for visits pertaining to immunizations and for coding of special screening examinations and public health promotion; in addition, it contains classes for programs related to reported conditions (eg, a cardiovascular program, a heart failure program) and can accommodate relevant national or regional classes. Classes are selected based on what is truly and frequently occurring in daily practice. Each class has its own codes. Less frequently used concepts pertaining to morbidity are captured as inclusions within the main classes. Implementation of the ICPC-3 in an electronic health record allows provision of meaningful feedback to primary care, and supports the exchange of information within teams and between primary and secondary care. It also gives policy makers and funders insight into what is happening in primary care and thus has the potential to improve provision of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Recent reports have suggested declining age-specific incidence rates of dementia in high-income countries over time. Improved education and cardiovascular health in early age have been suggested to be bringing about this effect. The aim of this study was to estimate the age-specific dementia incidence trend in primary care records from a large population in the Netherlands. Methods and findings A dynamic cohort representative of the Dutch population was composed using primary care records from general practice registration networks (GPRNs) across the country. Data regarding dementia incidence were obtained using general-practitioner-recorded diagnosis of dementia within the electronic health records. Age-specific dementia incidence rates were calculated for all persons aged 60 y and over; negative binomial regression analysis was used to estimate the time trend. Nine out of eleven GPRNs provided data on more than 800,000 older people for the years 1992 to 2014, corresponding to over 4 million person-years and 23,186 incident dementia cases. The annual growth in dementia incidence rate was estimated to be 2.1% (95% CI 0.5% to 3.8%), and incidence rates were 1.08 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.13) times higher for women compared to men. Despite their relatively low numbers of person-years, the highest age groups contributed most to the increasing trend. There was no significant overall change in incidence rates since the start of a national dementia program in 2003 (-0.025; 95% CI -0.062 to 0.011). Increased awareness of dementia by patients and doctors in more recent years may have influenced dementia diagnosis by general practitioners in electronic health records, and needs to be taken into account when interpreting the data. Conclusions Within the clinical records of a large, representative sample of the Dutch population, we found no evidence for a declining incidence trend of dementia in the Netherlands. This could indicate true stability in incidence rates, or a balance between increased detection and a true reduction. Irrespective of the exact rates and mechanisms underlying these findings, they illustrate that the burden of work for physicians and nurses in general practice associated with newly diagnosed dementia has not been subject to substantial change in the past two decades. Hence, with the ageing of Western societies, we still need to anticipate a dramatic absolute increase in dementia occurrence over the years to come., Author(s): Emma F. van Bussel 1,*, Edo Richard 2,3, Derk L. Arts 1, Astrid C. J. Nooyens 4, Preciosa M. Coloma 5, Margot W. M. de Waal 6, Marjan van [...]

Background: Differences between women and men play an important role in lung physiology and epidemiology of respiratory diseases, but also in the health care processes.Objective: To analyse sex differences in patients encountering their general practitioner (GP) with respiratory symptoms with regard to incidence, GP's management and final diagnoses.Methods: Retrospective cohort study, using data of the Dutch Practice Based Research Network. All patients who encountered their GP from 01-07-2013 until 30-06-2018 with a new episode of care starting with a reason for encounter in the respiratory category (R) of the ICPC-2 classification were included (n = 16 773). Multi-level logistic regression was used to analyse influence of patients' sex on management of GPs with adjustment for possible confounders.Results: We found a significant higher incidence of respiratory symptoms in women than in men: 230/1000 patient years [95% confidence interval (CI) 227-232] and 186/1000 patient years (95% CI 183-189), respectively. When presenting with cough, GPs are more likely to perform physical examination [odds ratio (OR) 1.22; 95% CI 1.11-1.35] and diagnostic radiology (OR 1.25; 95% CI 1.08-1.44), but less likely to prescribe medication (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.82-0.95) in men. When visiting the GP with dyspnoea, men more often undergo diagnostic imaging (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.05-1.66) and are more often referred to a specialist (OR 1.35; 95% CI 1.13-1.62).Conclusions: Women encounter their GP more frequently with respiratory symptoms than men and GPs perform more diagnostic investigations in men. We suggest more research in general practice focussing on sex differences and possible confounders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: GP in Japan are encouraged to conduct home visits for older adults. However, most previous studies on home visits were based on secondary analyses of billing data that did not include reasons for the encounter.Objectives: This study aimed to describe home visit care by GP in Japan, including reasons for encounter, health problems, episodes of care, comprehensiveness and multimorbidity.Methods: This multicentre descriptive cross-sectional study used the International Classification of Primary Care, second edition, and was conducted in Japan from 1 October 2016 to 31 March 2017. Participants were patients who received home visits from 10 enrolled GPs working in urban and rural areas across Japan. The main outcome measures were reasons for encounter, health problems and multimorbidity.Results: Of 253 potential patient participants, 250 were included in this analysis; 92.4% were aged 65 years and older. We registered 1,278 regular home visits and 110 emergency home visits. The top three reasons for encounters home visits were associated with cardiovascular and gastrointestinal disorders: prescriptions for cardiovascular diseases (n = 796), medical examination/health evaluation for cardiovascular diseases (n = 758) and prescriptions for gastrointestinal problems (n = 554). About 50% of patients had multimorbidity. Cardiovascular, endocrine and neuropsychological diseases were the most frequent problems in patients with multimorbidity.Conclusions: The main reasons for encounter were prescriptions for chronic conditions. Emergency visits accounted for 8% of all visits. Around half of the patients had multimorbidity. This information may help GPs and policy makers to better assess home visit patients' needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The reason why patients contact a care provider, the reason for encounter (RFE), reflects patients' personal needs and expectations regarding medical care. RFEs can be symptoms or complaints, but can also be requests for diagnostic or therapeutic interventions.Objectives: Over the past 30 years, we aim to analyse the frequency with which patients consult a GP to request an intervention, and to analyse the impact of these requests on the subsequent diagnostic process.Methods: We included all patients with a request for diagnostics, medication prescription or referral from 1985 to 2014. We analysed the number of requests, granted requests and interventions originating from a request. We compared the final diagnosis (symptom or disease diagnosis) between patients with and without a request.Design and Setting: This is a retrospective cohort study with data from Family Medicine Network, a Dutch primary healthcare registration network.Results: Over time, patients more often present to their GP with a request for intervention. GPs are increasingly compliant with these requests. Patients presenting with a request for intervention are more likely to be diagnosed with a symptom rather than a disease.Conclusion: This study provides insight into the changes in patients' and GPs' behaviour and patients' influence on the medical process, and confirms the clinical relevance of the RFE. This study could support GPs in daily practice when deciding whether or not to grant a request. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Primary care (PC) is an essential building block for any high quality healthcare system, and has a particularly positive impact on vulnerable patients. It contributes to the overall performance of health systems, and countries that reorient their health system towards PC are better prepared to achieve universal health coverage. Monitoring the actual performance of PC in health systems is essential health policy to support PC. However, current indicators are often too narrowly defined to account for quality of care in the complex populations with which PC deals. This article reviews a number of conceptual frameworks developed to capture PC values in robust measures and indicators that can inform policy and practice performance. Each have benefits and limitations. Further work is needed to develop meaningful primary health care (PHC) and PC measures to inform strategic action by policymakers and governments for improved overall performance of health systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The routine application of a primary care classification system to patients' medical records in general practice/primary care is rare in the African region. Reliable data are crucial to understanding the domain of primary care in Nigeria, and this may be actualized through the use of a locally validated primary care classification system such as the International Classification of Primary Care, 2nd edition (ICPC-2). Although a few studies from Europe and Australia have reported that ICPC is a reliable and feasible tool for classifying data in primary care, the reliability and validity of the revised version (ICPC-2) is yet to be objectively determined particularly in Africa.Objectives: (i) To determine the convergent validity of ICPC-2 diagnoses codes when correlated with International Statistical Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes, (ii) to determine the inter-coder reliability among local and foreign ICPC-2 experts and (iii) to ascertain the level of accuracy when ICPC-2 is engaged by coders without previous training.Methods: Psychometric analysis was carried out on ICPC-2 and ICD-10 coded data that were generated from physicians' diagnoses, which were randomly selected from general outpatients' clinic attendance registers, using a systematic sampling technique. Participants comprised two groups of coders (ICPC-2 coders and ICD-10 coders) who coded independently a total of 220 diagnoses/health problems with ICPC-2 and/or ICD-10, respectively.Results: Two hundred and twenty diagnoses/health problems were considered and were found to cut across all 17 chapters of the ICPC-2. The dataset revealed a strong positive correlation between selected ICPC-2 codes and ICD-10 codes (r ≈ 0.7) at a sensitivity of 86.8%. Mean percentage agreement among the ICPC-2 coders was 97.9% at the chapter level and 95.6% at the rubric level. Similarly, Cohen's kappa coefficients were very good (κ > 0.81) and were higher at chapter level (0.94-0.97) than rubric level (0.90-0.93) between sets of pairs of ICPC-2 coders. An accuracy of 74.5% was achieved by ICD-10 coders who had no previous experience or prior training on ICPC-2 usage.Conclusion: Findings support the utility of ICPC-2 as a valid and reliable coding tool that may be adopted for routine data collection in the African primary care context. The level of accuracy achieved without training lends credence to the proposition that it is a simple-to-use classification and may be a useful starting point in a setting devoid of any primary care classification system for morbidity and mortality registration at such a critical level of public health importance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

International datasets from general practice enable the comparison of how conditions are managed within consultations in different primary healthcare settings. The Australian Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health (BEACH) and TransHIS from the Netherlands collect in-consultation general practice data that have been used extensively to inform local policy and practice. Obesity is a global health issue with different countries applying varying approaches to management. The objective of the present paper is to compare the primary care management of obesity in Australia and the Netherlands using data collected from consultations. Despite the different prevalence in obesity in the two countries, the number of patients per 1000 patient-years seen with obesity is similar. Patients in Australia with obesity are referred to allied health practitioners more often than Dutch patients. Without quality general practice data, primary care researchers will not have data about the management of conditions within consultations. We use obesity to highlight the strengths of these general practice data sources and to compare their differences. What is known about the topic?: Australia had one of the longest-running consecutive datasets about general practice activity in the world, but it has recently lost government funding. The Netherlands has a longitudinal general practice dataset of information collected within consultations since 1985. What does this paper add?: We discuss the benefits of general practice-collected data in two countries. Using obesity as a case example, we compare management in general practice between Australia and the Netherlands. This type of analysis should start all international collaborations of primary care management of any health condition. Having a national general practice dataset allows international comparisons of the management of conditions with primary care. Without a current, quality general practice dataset, primary care researchers will not be able to partake in these kinds of comparison studies. What are the implications for practitioners?: Australian primary care researchers and clinicians will be at a disadvantage in any international collaboration if they are unable to accurately describe current general practice management. The Netherlands has developed an impressive dataset that requires within-consultation data collection. These datasets allow for person-centred, symptom-specific, longitudinal understanding of general practice management. The possibilities for the quasi-experimental questions that can be answered with such a dataset are limitless. It is only with the ability to answer clinically driven questions that are relevant to primary care that the clinical care of patients can be measured, developed and improved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Morbidity estimates between different GP registration networks show large, unexplained variations. This research explores the potential of modeling differences between networks in distinguishing new (incident) cases from existing (prevalent) cases in obtaining more reliable estimates. Methods: Data from five Dutch GP registration networks and data on four chronic diseases (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD], diabetes, heart failure, and osteoarthritis of the knee) were used. A joint model (DisMod model) was fitted using all information on morbidity (incidence and prevalence) and mortality in each network, including a factor for misclassification of prevalent cases as incident cases. Results: The observed estimates vary considerably between networks. Using disease modeling including a misclassification term improved the consistency between prevalence and incidence rates, but did not systematically decrease the variation between networks. Osteoarthritis of the knee showed large modeled misclassifications, especially in episode of care-based registries. Conclusion: Registries that code episodes of care rather than disease generally provide lower estimates of the prevalence of chronic diseases requiring low levels of health care such as osteoarthritis. For other diseases, modeling misclassification rates does not systematically decrease the variation between registration networks. Using disease modeling provides insight in the reliability of estimates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Primary care serves as an integral part of the health systems of nations especially the African continent. It is the portal of entry for nearly all patients into the health care system. Paucity of accurate data for health statistics remains a challenge in the most parts of Africa because of inadequate technical manpower and infrastructure. Inadequate quality of data systems contributes to inaccurate data. A simple-to-use classification system such as the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC) may be a solution to this problem at the primary care level. Objectives: To apply ICPC-2 for secondary coding of reasons for encounter (RfE), problems managed and processes of care in a Nigerian primary care setting. Furthermore, to analyze the value of selected presented symptoms as predictors of the most common diagnoses encountered in the study setting. Materials and Methods: Content analysis of randomly selected patients' paper records for data collection at the end of clinic sessions conducted by family physicians at the general out-patients' clinics. Contents of clinical consultations were secondarily coded with the ICPC-2 and recorded into excel spreadsheets with fields for sociodemographic data such as age, sex, occupation, religion, and ICPC elements of an encounter: RfE/complaints, diagnoses/problems, and interventions/processes of care. Results: Four hundred and one encounters considered in this study yielded 915 RfEs, 546 diagnoses, and 1221 processes. This implies an average of 2.3 RfE, 1.4 diagnoses, and 3.0 processes per encounter. The top 10 RfE, diagnoses/common illnesses, and processes were determined. Through the determination of the probability of the occurrence of certain diseases beginning with a RfE/complaint, the top five diagnoses that resulted from each of the top five RfE were also obtained. The top five RfE were: headache, fever, pain general/multiple sites, visual disturbance other and abdominal pain/cramps general. The top five diagnoses were: Malaria, hypertension uncomplicated, visual disturbance other, peptic ulcer, and upper respiratory infection. From the determination of the posterior probability given the top five RfE, malaria, hypertension, upper respiratory infection, refractive error, and conjuctivitis were the five most frequent diagnoses that resulted from a complaint of a headache. Conclusion: The study demonstrated that ICPC-2 can be applied to primary care data in the Nigerian context to generate information about morbidity and services provided. It also provided an empirical basis to support diagnosis and prognostication in a primary care setting. In developing countries where the transition to electronic health records is still evolving and fraught with limitations, more reliable data collection can be achieved from paper records through the application of the ICPC-2. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is only limited accurate data on the epidemiology of rhinosinusitis in primary care. This study was conducted to assess the incidence of acute and chronic rhinosinusitis by analysing data from two Dutch general practice registration projects. Several patient characteristics and diseases are related to the diagnosis rhinosinusitis. Methods: The Continuous Morbidity Registration (CMR) and the Transition project (TP) are used to analyse the data on rhinosinusitis in primary practice. Both registries use codes to register diagnoses. Results: In the CMR 3244 patients are registered with rhinosinusitis and in the TP 5424 CMR: The absolute incidence of (acute) rhinosinusitis is 5191 (18.8 per 1000 patient years). Regarding an odds ratio of 5.58, having nasal polyps is strongest related to rhinosinusitis compared to the other evaluated comorbidities. A separate code for chronic rhinosinusitis exists, but is not in use. TP: Acute and chronic rhinosinusitis are coded as one diagnosis. The incidence of rhinosinusitis is 5574 or 28.7 per 1000 patient years. Patients who visit their general practitioner with "symptoms/complaints of sinus", allergic rhinitis and "other diseases of the respiratory system" have the highest chances to be diagnosed with rhinosinusitis. Medication is prescribed in 90.6 % of the cases. Conclusions: Rhinosinusitis is a common diagnosis in primary practice. In the used registries no difference could be made between acute and chronic rhinosinusitis, but they give insight in comorbidity and interventions taken by the GP in case of rhinosinusitis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Unexplained symptoms are associated with depression and anxiety. This association is largely based on cross-sectional research of symptoms experienced by patients but not of symptoms presented to the GP.Aim: To investigate whether unexplained symptoms as presented to the GP predict mental disorders.Design and Setting: Cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of data from a practice-based research network of GPs, the Transition Project, in the Netherlands.Method: All data about contacts between patients (n = 16,000) and GPs (n = 10) from 1997 to 2008 were used. The relation between unexplained symptoms episodes and depression and anxiety was calculated and compared with the relation between somatic symptoms episodes and depression and anxiety. The predictive value of unexplained symptoms episodes for depression and anxiety was determined.Results: All somatoform symptom episodes and most somatic symptom episodes are significantly associated with depression and anxiety. Presenting two or more symptoms episodes gives a five-fold increase of the risk of anxiety or depression. The positive predictive value of all symptom episodes for anxiety and depression was very limited. There was little difference between somatoform and somatic symptom episodes with respect to the prediction of anxiety or depression.Conclusion: Somatoform symptom episodes have a statistically significant relation with anxiety and depression. The same was true for somatic symptom episodes. Despite the significant odds ratios, the predictive value of symptom episodes for anxiety and depression is low. Consequently, screening for these mental health problems in patients presenting unexplained symptom episodes is not justified in primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND. Ordering laboratory tests and diagnostic imaging can be part of the defensive behavior of the physician. How often does this occur in family practice in the Netherlands? Defensive behavior is defined as a clear deviation from the family physician's usual behavior and from what is considered to be good practice in order to prevent complaints or criticism by the patient or the patient's family. METHODS. Over a 1-year period, 1989-1990, 16 family physicians in 11 practices with 31,343 patients recorded all episodes of care involving an order for laboratory tests or diagnostic imaging or both (n=8897). The physicians selected one or more reasons to order each test from a fixed list of clinical considerations. In addition, they recorded whether they acted defensively for every test order. RESULTS. The participating physicians reported that some degree of defensive medicine was associated with 27% of all test orders. Defensive testing varied with the clinical reasons to order a test: the wish to exclude a disease or to reassure the patient was a much stronger motive for defensive testing than the intention to confirm a diagnosis or to screen. Defensive tests generally resulted in fewer abnormal findings. CONCLUSIONS. Defensive testing is an important phenomenon in Dutch family practice: it forms a well-defined element of practice despite the variations implicit in the different clinical reasons to order a test. Defensive testing is associated with a lower probability of finding an abnormal test result. The analysis of family physicians' clinical reasons for ordering tests becomes more meaningful when defensive testing is included. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the Dutch health care system, general practitioners hold a central position. They store information from all health care providers who are involved with their patients in their electronic health records. Web-based access to the summary record in general practice through a personal health record (PHR) may increase patients' insight into their medical conditions and help them to be involved in their care. Objective: We describe the protocol that we will use to investigate the utilization of patients' digital access to the summary of their medical records in general practice through a PHR and its effects on the involvement of patients in their care. Methods: We will conduct a multilevel mixed-methods study in which the PHR and Web-based access to the summary record will be offered for 6 months to a random sample of 500 polypharmacy patients, 500 parents of children aged <4 years, and 500 adults who do not belong to the former two groups. At the patient level, a controlled before-after study will be conducted using surveys, and concurrently, qualitative data will be collected from focus group discussions, think-aloud observations, and semistructured interviews. At the general practice staff (GP staff) level, focus group discussions will be conducted at baseline and Q-methodology inquiries at the end of the study period. The primary outcomes at the patient level are barriers and facilitators for using the PHR and summary records and changes in taking an active role in decision making and care management and medication adherence. Outcomes at the GP staff level are attitudes before and opinions after the implementation of the intervention. Patient characteristics and changes in outcomes related to patient involvement during the study period will be compared between the users and nonusers of the intervention using chi-square tests and t tests. A thematic content analysis of the qualitative data will be performed, and the results will be used to interpret quantitative findings. Results: Enrollment was completed in May 2017 and the possibility to view GP records through the PHR was implemented in December 2017. Data analysis is currently underway and the first results are expected to be submitted for publication in autumn 2019. Conclusions: We expect that the findings of this study will be useful to health care providers and health care organizations that consider introducing the use of PHR and Web-based access to records and to those who have recently started using these. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A response by the author of the article "Diagnostic Pathways for Interstitial Lung Disease in Primary Care" is presented.

The article looks at the significance of incorporation of a patient's reason for encounter in the analysis of outcome of care in Great Britain. It discusses the impact of a patient's perspectives on the discipline of general practice as well as illustrates the role of the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC) in understanding the process and outcome of care. Reflections on personal needs and expectations are noted as reasons why patients seek for medical care.

Introduction: Symptom diagnoses are diagnoses used in primary care when the relevant diagnostic criteria of a disease are not fulfilled. Although symptom diagnoses often get resolved spontaneously without a clearly defined illness nor treatment, up to 38% of these symptoms persist more than 1 year. It is largely unknown how often symptom diagnoses occur, which symptoms persist, and how general practitioners (GPs) manage them., Aim: Explore morbidity rates, characteristics and management of patients with nonpersistent (≤1 year) and persistent (>1 year) symptom diagnoses., Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed in a Dutch practice-based research network including 28,590 registered patients. We selected symptom diagnosis episodes with at least 1 contact in 2018. We performed descriptive statistics, Student's T and χ 2 tests to summarize and compare patients' characteristics and GP management strategies in the nonpersistent and persistent groups., Results: The incidence rate of symptom diagnoses was 767 episodes per 1000 patient-years. The prevalence rate was 485 patients per 1000 patient-years. Out of the patients who had a contact with their GPs, 58% had at least 1 symptom diagnosis, from which 16% were persistent (>1 year). In the persistent group, we found significantly more females (64% vs 57%), older patients (mean: 49 vs 36 years of age), patients with more comorbidities (71% vs 49%), psychological (17% vs 12%) and social (8% vs 5%) problems. Prescriptions (62% vs 23%) and referral (62.7% vs 30.6%) rates were significantly higher in persistent symptom episodes., Conclusion: Symptom diagnoses are highly prevalent (58%) of which a considerable part (16%) persists more than a year., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: None., (© Copyright by the American Board of Family Medicine.)

Introduction: Structuring patient and practice data into episodes formed the foundation of the earliest evidence base of family medicine. We aim to make patients' narratives part of the evidence base for family medicine by incorporating coded and structured information on the patient's reason to visit the family physician (FP) and adding the patient's personal and contextual characteristics to routine registration data. This documentation allows studies of relations between morbidity and elements of the patient story, providing more insight into the range of problems presented to primary care and in the patient-centeredness applied by FPs., Methods: The Dutch Practice-Based Research Network (PBRN), named FaMe-Net, is the world's oldest PBRN. Seven Dutch family practices provide regular primary care and participate in the PBRN. It contains all morbidity data of the approximately 40,000 listed patients (308,000 patient-years and 2.2 million encounters from 2005 until 2019). All information belonging to 1 health problem is ordered in 1 episode. Morbidity (diagnoses), reasons for encounter (RFE), and interventions are coded according to the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC-2). Registration occurs within the electronic health record (EHR), specially designed to facilitate the extensive registration for the PBRN. Since 2016, the network expanded routine registration with the duration of symptoms and coded personal and contextual characteristics (eg, country of birth, level of education, family history, traumatic events) obtained through the self-reported 'context survey' of listed patients. These data are added to the EHR. Registered data are extracted from the EHR and processed for scientific research.We present data on the differences in RFEs of the most prominent symptoms of COVID-19 between 2019 and 2020; the relation between the diagnosis of pneumonia and presentation of the symptom 'cough,' and how personal determinants influence the chances of final diagnoses. Lastly, we show the relation of self-reported abuse with patient's contact frequency and psychosocial problems., Results: Prompt introduction of registration rules brought insight into COVID-19-related symptoms early in the pandemic. In March 2020, symptoms related to COVID-19 were presented more often than in March 2019. Chronic conditions and prevention showed a collapsing contact frequency. Telephone, email, and video consultations increased from 31% to 53%.Episodes of pneumonia most frequently started with the RFE 'cough.' A combination of 'cough' and 'fever' as RFE increases the likelihood of pneumonia, as does cough in the presence of comorbid COPD among older men. The prevalence of pneumonia is higher among patients with low socioeconomic status., Discussion: The Dutch PBRN FaMe-Net has started to add elements of patients' narratives and context to decades of morbidity registration, creating options for a scientific approach to primary care's core values. Assumptions of 'pre/post chances' of the final diagnosis, already existing implicitly in FPs minds, can be elaborated and quantified by investigating the associations between multiple registered variables, including parts of patients' 'stories.' This way, we aim to make visible what is intuitively already known by FPs., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: None., (© Copyright 2021 by the American Board of Family Medicine.)

Primary care (PC) is an essential building block for any high quality healthcare system, and has a particularly positive impact on vulnerable patients. It contributes to the overall performance of health systems, and countries that reorient their health system towards PC are better prepared to achieve universal health coverage. Monitoring the actual performance of PC in health systems is essential health policy to support PC. However, current indicators are often too narrowly defined to account for quality of care in the complex populations with which PC deals. This article reviews a number of conceptual frameworks developed to capture PC values in robust measures and indicators that can inform policy and practice performance. Each have benefits and limitations. Further work is needed to develop meaningful primary health care (PHC) and PC measures to inform strategic action by policymakers and governments for improved overall performance of health systems., (Copyright © 2021, The Authors.)

Background: Reliable information which can only be derived from accurate data is crucial to the success of the health system. Since encoded data on diagnoses and procedures are put to a broad range of uses, the accuracy of coding is imperative. Accuracy of coding with the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision (ICD-10) is impeded by a manual coding process that is dependent on the medical records officers' level of experience/knowledge of medical terminologies., Aim Statement: To improve the accuracy of ICD-10 coding of morbidity/mortality data at the general hospitals in Lagos State from 78.7% to ≥95% between March 2018 and September 2018., Methods: A quality improvement (QI) design using the Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle framework. The interventions comprised the introduction of an electronic diagnostic terminology software and training of 52 clinical coders from the 26 general hospitals. An end-of-training coding exercise compared the coding accuracy between the old method and the intervention. The outcome was continuously monitored and evaluated in a phased approach., Results: Research conducted in the study setting yielded a baseline coding accuracy of 78.7%. The use of the difficult items (wrongly coded items) from the research for the end-of-training coding exercise accounted for a lower coding accuracy when compared with baseline. The difference in coding accuracy between manual coders (47.8%) and browser-assisted coders (54.9%) from the coding exercise was statistically significant. Overall average percentage coding accuracy at the hospitals over the 12-month monitoring and evaluation period was 91.3%., Conclusion: This QI initiative introduced a stop-gap for improving data coding accuracy in the absence of automated coding and electronic health record. It provides evidence that the electronic diagnostic terminology tool does improve coding accuracy and with continuous use/practice should improve reliability and coding efficiency in resource-constrained settings., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: In the Dutch health care system, general practitioners hold a central position. They store information from all health care providers who are involved with their patients in their electronic health records. Web-based access to the summary record in general practice through a personal health record (PHR) may increase patients' insight into their medical conditions and help them to be involved in their care., Objective: We describe the protocol that we will use to investigate the utilization of patients' digital access to the summary of their medical records in general practice through a PHR and its effects on the involvement of patients in their care., Methods: We will conduct a multilevel mixed-methods study in which the PHR and Web-based access to the summary record will be offered for 6 months to a random sample of 500 polypharmacy patients, 500 parents of children aged <4 years, and 500 adults who do not belong to the former two groups. At the patient level, a controlled before-after study will be conducted using surveys, and concurrently, qualitative data will be collected from focus group discussions, think-aloud observations, and semistructured interviews. At the general practice staff (GP staff) level, focus group discussions will be conducted at baseline and Q-methodology inquiries at the end of the study period. The primary outcomes at the patient level are barriers and facilitators for using the PHR and summary records and changes in taking an active role in decision making and care management and medication adherence. Outcomes at the GP staff level are attitudes before and opinions after the implementation of the intervention. Patient characteristics and changes in outcomes related to patient involvement during the study period will be compared between the users and nonusers of the intervention using chi-square tests and t tests. A thematic content analysis of the qualitative data will be performed, and the results will be used to interpret quantitative findings., Results: Enrollment was completed in May 2017 and the possibility to view GP records through the PHR was implemented in December 2017. Data analysis is currently underway and the first results are expected to be submitted for publication in autumn 2019., Conclusions: We expect that the findings of this study will be useful to health care providers and health care organizations that consider introducing the use of PHR and Web-based access to records and to those who have recently started using these., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Registry NTR6395; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=6395 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/71nc8jzwM)., Registered Report Identifier: RR1-10.2196/10193., (©Maria MT Vreugdenhil, Rudolf B Kool, Kees van Boven, Willem JJ Assendelft, Jan AM Kremer. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (http://www.researchprotocols.org), 21.09.2018.)

Purpose: Family physicians (FPs) have to recognize alarm symptoms and estimate the probability of cancer to manage these symptoms correctly. Mostly, patients start the consultation with a spontaneous statement on why they visit the doctor. This is also called the reason for encounter (RFE). It precedes the interaction and interpretation by FPs and patients. The aim of this study is to investigate the predictive value of alarm symptoms as the RFE for diagnosing cancer in primary care., Design and Setting: Retrospective cohort study in a Dutch practice-based research network (Family Medicine Network)., Method: We analyzed all patients >45 years of age listed in the practice-based research network, FaMe-net, in the period 1995 to 2014 (118.219 patient years). We focused on a selection of alarm symptoms as defined by the Dutch Cancer Society and Cancer Research UK. We calculated the positive predictive value (PPV) of alarm symptoms, spontaneously mentioned in the beginning of the consultation by the patient (RFE), for diagnosing cancer., Results: The highest PPVs were found for patients spontaneously mentioning a breast lump (PPV 14.8%), postmenopausal bleeding (PPV 3.9%), hemoptysis (PPV 2.7%), rectal bleeding (PPV 2.6%), hematuria (PPV 2.2%) and change in bowel movements (PPV 1.8%)., Conclusion: Patients think about going to their physician and think about their first uttered statements during the consultation. In the case of cancer, the diagnostic workup during the consultation on alarm symptoms will add to the predictive value of these reasons for encounter. However, it is important to realize that the statement made by the patient entering the consultation room has a significant predictive value in itself., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: none declared., (© Copyright 2017 by the American Board of Family Medicine.)