Search

OBJECTIVE To study the effects of a primary care medication review intervention centred around an electronic clinical decision support system (eCDSS) on appropriateness of medication and the number of prescribing omissions in older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy compared with a discussion about medication in line with usual care. DESIGN Cluster randomised clinical trial. SETTING Swiss primary care, between December 2018 and February 2021. PARTICIPANTS Eligible patients were ≥65 years of age with three or more chronic conditions and five or more long term medications. INTERVENTION The intervention to optimise pharmacotherapy centred around an eCDSS was conducted by general practitioners, followed by shared decision making between general practitioners and patients, and was compared with a discussion about medication in line with usual care between patients and general practitioners. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Primary outcomes were improvement in the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) and the Assessment of Underutilisation (AOU) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included number of medications, falls, fractures, and quality of life. RESULTS In 43 general practitioner clusters, 323 patients were recruited (median age 77 (interquartile range 73-83) years; 45% (n=146) women). Twenty one general practitioners with 160 patients were assigned to the intervention group and 22 general practitioners with 163 patients to the control group. On average, one recommendation to stop or start a medication was reported to be implemented per patient. At 12 months, the results of the intention-to-treat analysis of the improvement in appropriateness of medication (odds ratio 1.05, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.87) and the number of prescribing omissions (0.90, 0.41 to 1.96) were inconclusive. The same was the case for the per protocol analysis. No clear evidence was found for a difference in safety outcomes at the 12 month follow-up, but fewer safety events were reported in

BACKGROUND Primary care databases collect electronic medical records with routine data from primary care patients. The identification of chronic diseases in primary care databases often integrates information from various electronic medical record components (EMR-Cs) used by primary care providers. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of selected chronic conditions using a large Swiss primary care database and to examine the importance of different EMR-Cs for case identification. METHODS Cross-sectional study with 120,608 patients of 128 general practitioners in the Swiss FIRE ("Family Medicine Research using Electronic Medical Records") primary care database in 2019. Sufficient criteria on three individual EMR-Cs, namely medication, clinical or laboratory parameters and reasons for encounters, were combined by logical disjunction into definitions of 49 chronic conditions; then prevalence estimates and measures of importance of the individual EMR-Cs for case identification were calculated. RESULTS A total of 185,535 cases (i.e. patients with a specific chronic condition) were identified. Prevalence estimates were 27.5% (95% CI: 27.3-27.8%) for hypertension, 13.5% (13.3-13.7%) for dyslipidaemia and 6.6% (6.4-6.7%) for diabetes mellitus. Of all cases, 87.1% (87.0-87.3%) were identified via medication, 22.1% (21.9-22.3%) via clinical or laboratory parameters and 19.3% (19.1-19.5%) via reasons for encounters. The majority (65.4%) of cases were identifiable solely through medication. Of the two other EMR-Cs, clinical or laboratory parameters was most important for identifying cases of chronic kidney disease, anorexia/bulimia nervosa and obesity whereas reasons for encounters was crucial for identifying many low-prevalence diseases as well as cancer, heart disease and osteoarthritis. CONCLUSIONS The EMR-C medication was most important for chronic disease identification overall, but identification varied strongly by disease. The analysis of the importance of differe

BACKGROUND Financial incentives are often used to improve quality of care in chronic care patients. However, the evidence concerning the effect of financial incentives is still inconclusive. OBJECTIVE To test the effect of financial incentives on quality measures (QMs) in the treatment of patients with diabetes mellitus in primary care. We incentivized a clinical QM and a process QM to test the effect of financial incentives on different types of QMs and to investigate the spill-over effect on non-incentivized QMs. DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS Parallel cluster randomized controlled trial based on electronic medical records database involving Swiss general practitioners (GPs). Practices were randomly allocated. INTERVENTION All participants received a bimonthly feedback report. The intervention group additionally received potential financial incentives on GP level depending on their performance. MAIN MEASURES Between-group differences in proportions of patients fulfilling incentivized QM (process QM of annual HbA1c measurement and clinical QM of blood pressure level below 140/95 mmHg) after 12 months. KEY RESULTS Seventy-one GPs (median age 52 years, 72% male) from 43 different practices and subsequently 3838 patients with diabetes mellitus (median age 70 years, 57% male) were included. Proportions of patients with annual HbA1c measurements remained unchanged (intervention group decreased from 79.0 to 78.3%, control group from 81.5 to 81.0%, OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.90-1.32, p = 0.39). Proportions of patients with blood pressure below 140/95 improved from 49.9 to 52.5% in the intervention group and decreased from 51.2 to 49.0% in the control group (OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.99-1.36, p = 0.06). Proportions of non-incentivized process QMs increased significantly in the intervention group. CONCLUSION GP level financial incentives did not result in more frequent HbA1c measurements or in improved blood pressure control. Interestingly, we could confirm a spill-over effect on non-incentivized proc

Purpose: The frequency of medication prescribing and polypharmacy has increased in recent years in different settings, including Swiss general practice. We aimed to describe patient age- and sex-specific rates of polypharmacy and of prescriptions of the most frequent medication classes, and to explore practitioner variability in prescribing.Methods: Retrospective cross-sectional study based on anonymized electronic medical records data of 111 811 adult patients presenting to 116 Swiss general practitioners in 2019. We used mixed-effects regression analyses to assess the association of patient age and sex with polypharmacy (≥5 medications) and with the prescription of specific medication classes (second level of the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification System). Practitioner variability was quantified in terms of the random effects distributions.Results: The prevalence of polypharmacy increased with age from 6.4% among patients aged 18–40 years to 19.7% (41–64 years), 45.3% (65–80 years), and 64.6% (81–92 years), and was higher in women than in men, particularly at younger ages. The most frequently prescribed medication classes were antiinflammatory and antirheumatic products (21.6% of patients), agents acting on the renin-angiotensin system (19.9%), analgesics (18.7%), and drugs for acid related disorders (18.3%). Men were more often prescribed agents targeting the cardiovascular system, whereas most other medications were more often prescribed to women. The highest practitioner variabilities were observed for vitamins, for antiinflammatory and antirheumatic products, and for mineral supplements.Conclusion: Based on practitioner variability, prevalence, and risk potential, antiinflammatory drugs and polypharmacy in older patients appear to be the most pressing issues in current drug prescribing routines.

Aims Heart failure is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide, but little is known on heart failure epidemiology and treatment in primary care. This study described patients with heart failure treated by general practitioners, with focus on drug prescriptions and especially on the only specific treatment for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, namely sacubitril/valsartan. Methods and results This was a retrospective cross‐sectional study using data from an electronic medical record database of Swiss general practitioners from 2016 to 2019. Multilevel logistic regression was used to find determinants of sacubitril/valsartan prescription; odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported. We identified 1288 heart failure patients (48.5% women; age: median 85 years, interquartile range 77–90 years) by means of diagnosis code, representing 0.5% of patients consulting a general practitioner during the observation period. About 73.6% received a renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system inhibitor, 67.8% a beta‐blocker, 34.6% a calcium channel blocker, 86.1% a diuretic, and 40.1% another cardiac drug. Sacubitril/valsartan was prescribed in 6% predominantly male patients (OR 2.10, CI 1.25–3.84), of younger age (OR 0.59 per increase in 10 years, CI 0.49–0.71), with diabetes mellitus (OR 1.76, CI 1.07–2.90). The recommended starting dose for sacubitril/valsartan was achieved in 67.1% and the target dose in 28.6% of patients. Conclusions Prevalence of heart failure among patients treated by general practitioners was low. Considering the disease burden and association with multimorbidity, awareness of heart failure in primary care should be increased, with the aim to optimize heart failure therapy.

Background: The effect of financial incentives on the quality of primary care is of high interest, and so is its sustainability after financial incentives are withdrawn.Objective: To assess both long-term effects and sustainability of financial incentives for general practitioners (GPs) in the treatment of patients with diabetes mellitus based on quality indicators (QIs) calculated from routine data from electronic medical records.Design/Participants: Randomized controlled trial using routine data from electronic medical records of patients with diabetes mellitus of Swiss GPs.Intervention: During the study period of 24 months, all GPs received bimonthly feedback reports with information on their actual treatment as reflected in QIs. In the intervention group, the reports were combined with financial incentives for quality improvement. The incentive was stopped after 12 months.Measurements: Proportion of patients meeting the process QI of annual HbA1c measurements and the clinical QI of blood pressure levels below 140/85 mmHg.Results: A total of 71 GPs from 43 different practices were included along with 3,854 of their patients with diabetes mellitus. Throughout the study, the proportion of patients with annual HbA1c measurements was stable in the intervention group (78.8–78.9%) and decreased slightly in the control group (81.5–80.2%) [odds ratio (OR): 1.21; 95% CI: 1.04–1.42, p < 0.05]. The proportion of patients achieving blood pressure levels below 140/85 mmHg decreased in the control group (51.2–47.2%) and increased in the intervention group (49.7–51.9%) (OR: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.04–1.35, p < 0.05) where it peaked at 54.9% after 18 months and decreased steadily over the last 6 months.Conclusion: After the withdrawal of financial incentives for the GPs after 12 months, some QIs still improved, indicating that 1 year might be too short to observe the full effect of such interventions. The decrease in QI achievement rates after 18 months suggests that the positive

Nachhaltigkeit ist eines der Kernthemen des IUNR – das verpflichtet. Der erste Nachhaltigkeitsbericht 2015/16 hat gezeigt, dass Verbesserungen nötig und möglich sind. Er hat aber auch zur Erkenntnis geführt, dass die Umsetzung von Zielen und Massnahmen grosse Anstrengungen erfordert. Der zweite Bericht ist ein Zwischenhalt: Was haben wir erreicht? Wir sind unterwegs, aber längst nicht angekommen. Mit neuen Zielen und Massnahmen strebt das IUNR weiterhin danach, seine Zukunftsfähigkeit zu verbessern und innerhalb des Instituts, aber auch gegen aussen, eine entsprechende Wirkung zu erzielen.

Guidelines recommend initiation of statins depending on cardiovascular risk and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. In this retrospective cohort study, we aimed to assess guideline concordance of statin treatment decisions and to find determinants of undertreatment in Swiss primary care in the period 2016–2019. We drew on electronic medical records of 8060 statin-naive patients (50.0% female, median age 59 years) with available LDL-C levels and cardiovascular risk. Guideline concordance was assessed based on the recommendations of the European Society of Cardiology, and multilevel logistic regression was performed to find determinants of undertreatment. We found that statin treatment was initiated in 10.2% of patients (50.0% female, median age 59 years) during one year of follow up. Treatment decisions were classified as guideline-concordant in 63.0%, as undertreatment in 35.8% and as overtreatment in 1.2%. Among determinants of undertreatment were small deviation from LDL-C treatment thresholds (odds ratio per decrease by 1 mmol/L: 2.09 [95% confidence interval 1.87–2.35]), high compared with very high cardiovascular risk (1.64 [1.30–2.05]), female sex (1.31 [1.05–1.64]), and being treated by older general practitioners (per 10 year decrease: 0.74 [0.61–0.90]). In conclusion, undertreatment of patients at high or very high cardiovascular risk was common, but general practitioners considered cardiovascular risk and LDL-C in their treatment decisions.

Background: Primary care systems around the world have implemented nurse practitioners (NPs) to ensure access to high quality care in times of general practitioner (GP) shortages and changing health care needs of a multimorbid, ageing population. In Switzerland, NPs are currently being introduced, and their exact role is yet to be determined. The aim of this study was to get insight into patient characteristics and services provided in NP consultations compared to GP consultations in Swiss primary care. Methods: This case study used retrospective observational data from electronic medical records of a family practice with one NP and two GPs. Data on patient-provider encounters were collected between August 2017 and December 2018. We used logistic regression to assess associations between the assignment of the patients to the NP or GP and patient characteristics and delivered services respectively. Results: Data from 5210 patients participating in 27,811 consultations were analyzed. The average patient age was 44.3 years (SD 22.6), 47.1% of the patients were female and 19.4% multimorbid. 1613 (5.8%) consultations were with the NP, and 26,198 (94.2%) with the two GPs. Patients in NP consultations were more often aged 85+ (OR 3.43; 95%-CI 2.70-4.36), multimorbid (OR 1.37; 95%-CI 1.24-1.51; p < 0.001) and polypharmaceutical (OR 1.28; 95%-CI 1.15-1.42; p < 0.001) in comparison to GP consultations. In NP consultations, vital signs (OR 3.05; 95%-CI 2.72-3.42; p < 0.001) and anthropometric data (OR 1.33; 95%-CI 1.09-1.63; p 0.005) were measured more frequently, and lab tests (OR 1.16; 95%-CI 1.04-1.30; p 0.008) were ordered more often compared to GP consultations, independent of patient characteristics. By contrast, medications (OR 0.35; 95%-CI 0.30-0.41; p < 0.001) were prescribed or changed less frequently in NP consultations. Conclusions: Quantitative data from pilot projects provide valuable insights into NP tasks and activities in Swiss primary care. Our results provid

The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the 2019 published European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) guideline on cardiovascular (CV) risk management compared with its predecessor from 2016 in a cohort in general practice. We performed a cross-sectional retrospective study with data from electronic medical records. The study cohort included 103,351 patients with known CV risk. We assessed changes in CV risk classification and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) target values, the impact on LDL-C achievement rates, and the current lipid-lowering treatments. Under the 2019 ESC guideline, CV risk categories changed in 27.5% of patients, LDL-C target levels decreased in 71.4% of patients, and LDL-C target achievement rate dropped from 31.1% to 16.5%. Among non-achievers according to the 2019 guideline, 52.2% lacked lipid-lowering drugs entirely, and 41.5% had conventional drugs at a submaximal intensity. Of patients in the high-risk and very high-risk categories, at least 5% failed to achieve the LDL-C target level despite treatment at maximal intensity with conventional lipid-lowering drugs, making them eligible for PCSK-9 inhibitors. In conclusion, the 2019 ESC/EAS guideline lowered LDL-C target values for the majority of patients in general practice and halved LDL-C target achievement rates. There is still a large undeveloped potential to lower CV risk by introducing conventional lipid-lowering drugs, particularly in patients at high or very high CV risk. A substantial proportion of the patients can only achieve their LDL-C targets using PCSK-9 inhibitors, which would currently require an at least 10-fold increase in prescribing of these drugs.

INTRODUCTION Quality indicators and pay-for-performance schemes aim to improve processes and outcomes in clinical practice. However, general practitioner and patient characteristics influence quality indicator performance. In Switzerland, no data on the pay-for-performance approach exists and the use of quality indicators has been marginal. The aim of this study was to describe quality indicator performance in diabetes care in Swiss primary care and to analyze associations of practice, general practitioner and patient covariates with quality indicator performance. METHODS For this cross-sectional study, we used medical routine data from an electronic medical record database. Data from 71 general practitioners and all their patients with diabetes were included. Starting in July 2018, we retrieved 12-month retrospective data about practice, general practitioner and patient characteristics, laboratory values, comorbidities and co-medication. Based on this data, we assessed quality indicator performance of process and intermediate outcomes for glycated hemoglobin, blood pressure, cholesterol and associations of practice, general practitioner and patient characteristics with individual and cumulative quality indicator performance. We calculated odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using regression methods. RESULTS We assessed 3,383 patients with diabetes (57% male, mean age 68.3 years). On average, patients fulfilled 3.56 (standard deviation: 1.89) quality indicators, whereas 17.2% of the patients fulfilled all six quality indicators. On practice and general practitioner level, we found no associations with cumulative quality indicator performance. On patient level, gender (ref = male) (OR: 0.83, CI: 0.78-0.88), number of treating general practitioners (OR: 0.94, CI: 0.91-0.97), number of comorbidities (OR: 1.43, CI: 1.38-1.47) and number of consultations (OR: 1.02, CI: 1.02-1.02) were associated with cumulative quality indicator performance. CONCLUSION The

Laboratory tests are frequently ordered by general practitioners (GPs), but little is known about time trends and between-GP variation of their use. In this retrospective longitudinal study, we analyzed over six million consultations by Swiss GPs during the decade 2009–2018. For 15 commonly used test types, we defined specific laboratory testing rates (sLTR) as the percentage of consultations involving corresponding laboratory testing requests. Patient age- and sex-adjusted time trends of sLTR were modeled with mixed-effect logistic regression accounting for clustering of patients within GPs. We quantified between-GP variation by means of intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Nine out of the 15 laboratory test types considered showed significant temporal increases, most eminently vitamin D (ten-year odds ratio (OR) 1.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.71–2.06) and glycated hemoglobin (ten-year OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.82–1.92). Test types both subject to substantial increase and high between-GP variation of sLTR were vitamin D (ICC 0.075), glycated hemoglobin (ICC 0.101), C-reactive protein (ICC 0.202), and vitamin B12 (ICC 0.166). Increasing testing frequencies and large between-GP variation of specific test type use pointed at inconsistencies of medical practice and potential overuse.

BACKGROUND Gout is the most common form of inflammatory arthritis worldwide and its prevalence is rising. In Switzerland, there are no data available on the characteristics and treatment of gout patients. In this study, we aimed to describe numbers of patients affected by gout and hyperuricaemia and unveil approaches Swiss primary care physicians (PCPs) use for the management. METHODS This was a retrospective observational study using electronic medical routine  data provided from 242 Swiss PCPs. Included were all their patients receiving urate-lowering therapy (ULT), with a diagnostic code for gout or who had a serum uric acid (SUA) measurement. According to their disease status, patients were classified into four subgroups (normal urate, hyperuricaemia, untreated gout, treated gout). For treatment analysis, patients with SUA measurements before and after ULT initiation were included. Comorbidities and risk factors for secondary causes relevant in the context of gout were collected. Outcomes were prevalence of gout and hyperuricaemia, characteristics of patients according to subgroup, number of SUA measurements, levels of SUA and patients who reached the treatment goal of a SUA level <360 µmol/l. RESULTS We assessed 15,808 patients and classified them into the subgroups. This yielded a prevalence of 1.0% for gout and 1.2% for hyperuricaemia. 2642 patients were diagnosed with gout of whom 2420 (91.6%) received a ULT. Overall; 41.3% of patients with a gout treatment had at least one SUA measurement; 15.0% of patients with treated gout had a record of SUA measurements before and after ULT initiation; and 57.5% reached the treatment goal of <360 µmol/l after allopurinol treatment. CONCLUSION Swiss gout patients received comprehensive treatment, which is reflected in a high number of patients treated with ULT, laboratory tests per person and a high treatment success rate, although there is no systematic approach to the treatment of gout.

AIMS: Statins decrease the risk of fatal CVD by lowering low-density lipoprotein (LDL) levels. Guidelines suggest that statin treatment strategies should be guided by CV risk, but little is known about statin treatment in Swiss general practice. In this study, we aimed to investigate statin treatment and LDL target achievement rates, including their predictors, in patients treated by Swiss general practitioners (GPs). METHODS: Retrospective observational study of statin-treated patients in 2018 using a general practice electronic medical records database. CV risk categories were defined according to the ESC guidelines published in 2016. We used multilevel logistic regression models to find associations between patient and GP demographic factors and LDL target achievement. RESULTS: We analysed 11,779 statin-treated patients, of whom 59% were at a high or very high risk of fatal CVD. High-intensity statin treatment was used in 39% of patients, and LDL measurement was performed at least once in 54% of patients. Achievement of LDL target levels across CV risk categories was 36% in very high-risk, 56% in high-risk, and 66% in low-/moderate-risk patients, and generally higher for male patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although over half of patients were at a high or very high risk of fatal CVD, the majority did not receive high-intensity statin treatment. Only a third of very high-risk patients achieved LDL target values, and there was a gender gap in LDL target achievement disadvantaging female patients. Results from this study suggest that current treatment may warrant reconsideration in a large proportion of patients treated with statins in Swiss general practice.