Search

Background. GPs are daily confronted with mental disorders and psychosomatic problems. The Four-Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire (4DSQ), measuring distress, depression, anxiety and somatization, was purposively developed for primary care. It has been translated into 12 languages and is commonly used in several countries. It was translated into French in 2008, by forward and backward translation, but it has not been validated for a primary care population. Aim. This study aimed to establish whether the French 4DSQ measured the same constructs in the same way as the original Dutch 4DSQ. Method. Two samples of French general practice patients were recruited during routine care to obtain as much variability as possible. One sample included consecutive patients, from the waiting room of rural GPs, over a period of 2 weeks and the other sample included patients with suspected psychological problems or unexplained symptoms. This population was compared to a matched Dutch sample using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and differential item functioning (DIF) analysis. Results. A total of 231 patients, from 15 French GPs, completed the questionnaire (Dutch reference group: 231). Mean age was 42.9 years (Dutch: 42.1); females numbered 71% in both samples. The multigroup CFA assessed configural invariance of one-factor models per 4DSQ scale. Thirteen of the total of 50 items in the 4DSQ, in three scales, were detected with DIF. However, DIF did not impact on the scale scores. Conclusion. French 4DSQ scales have the same latent structures and measure the same traits as the original Dutch 4DSQ. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Multimorbidity, according to the World Health Organization, exists when there are two or more chronic conditions in one patient. This definition seems inaccurate for the holistic approach to Family Medicine (FM) and long-term care. To avoid this pitfall the European General Practitioners Research Network (EGPRN) designed a comprehensive definition of multimorbidity using a systematic literature review. Objective: To translate that English definition into European languages and to validate the semantic, conceptual and cultural homogeneity of the translations for further research. Method: Forward translation of the EGPRN’s definition of multimorbidity followed by a Delphi consensus procedure assessment, a backward translation and a cultural check with all teams to ensure the homogeneity of the translations in their national context. Consensus was defined as 70% of the scores being higher than 6. Delphi rounds were repeated in each country until a consensus was reached Results: 229 European medical expert FPs participated in the study. Ten consensual translations of the EGPRN comprehensive definition of multimorbidity were achieved. Conclusion: A comprehensive definition of multimorbidity is now available in English and ten European languages for further collaborative research in FM and long-term care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Collegium Antropologicum is the property of Croatian Anthropological Society and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Abstract: Background: Multimorbidity is a new concept encompassing all the medical conditions of an individual patient. The concept links into the European definition of family medicine and its core competencies. However, the definition of multimorbidity and its subsequent operationalization are still unclear. The European General Practice Research Network wanted to produce a comprehensive definition of multimorbidity. Method: Systematic review of literature involving eight European General Practice Research Network national teams. The databases searched were PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane (1990–2010). Only articles containing descriptions of multimorbidity criteria were selected for inclusion. The multinational team undertook a methodic data extraction, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Results: The team identified 416 documents, selected 68 abstracts, included 54 articles, and found 132 definitions with 1631 different criteria. These criteria were aggregated into 11 themes that led to the following definition: Multimorbidity is defined as any combination of chronic disease with at least one other disease (acute or chronic) or biopsychosocial factor (associated or not) or somatic risk factor. Any biopsychosocial factor, any risk factor, the social network, the burden of diseases, the health care consumption, and the patient’s coping strategies may function as modifiers (of the effects of multimorbidity). Multimorbidity may modify the health outcomes and lead to an increased disability or a decreased quality of life or frailty. Conclusion: This study has produced a comprehensive definition of multimorbidity. The resulting improvements in the management of multimorbidity, and its usefulness in long term care and in family medicine, will have to be assessed in future studies. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objective. To document family medicine research in the 25 EGPRN member countries in 2010. Design. Semi-structured survey with open-ended questions. Setting. Academic family medicine in 23 European countries, Israel, and Turkey. Subjects. 25 EGPRN national representatives. Main outcome measures. Demographics of the general population and family medicine. Assessments, opinions, and suggestions. Results. EGPRN has represented family medicine for almost half a billion people and > 300 000 general practitioners (GPs). Turkey had the largest number of family medicine departments and highest density of GPs, 2.1/1000 people, Belgium had 1.7, Austria 1.6, and France 1.5. Lowest GP density was reported from Israel 0.17, Greece 0.18, and Slovenia 0.4 GPs per 1000 people. Family medicine research networks were reported by 22 of 25 and undergraduate family medicine research education in 20 of the 25 member countries, and in 10 countries students were required to do research projects. Postgraduate family medicine research was reported by 18 of the member countries. Open-ended responses showed that EGPRN meetings promoted stimulating and interesting research questions such as comparative studies of chronic pain management, sleep disorders, elderly care, healthy lifestyle promotion, mental health, clinical competence, and appropriateness of specialist referrals. Many respondents reported a lack of interest in family medicine research related to poor incentives and low family medicine status in general and among medical students in particular. It was suggested that EGPRN exert political lobbying for family medicine research. Conclusion. Since 1974, EGPRN organizes biannual conferences that unite and promote primary care practice, clinical research and academic family medicine in 25 member countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]