Search

Objectives: This study determined associations between respiratory viruses and subsequent illness course in primary care adult patients presenting with acute cough and/or suspected lower respiratory tract infection., Methods: A prospective European primary care study recruited adults with symptoms of lower respiratory tract infection between November 2007 and April 2010. Real-time in-house polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was performed to test for six common respiratory viruses. In this secondary analysis, symptom severity (scored 1 = no problem, 2 = mild, 3 = moderate, 4 = severe) and symptom duration were compared between groups with different viral aetiologies using regression and Cox proportional hazard models, respectively. Additionally, associations between baseline viral load (cycle threshold (Ct) value) and illness course were assessed., Results: The PCR tested positive for a common respiratory virus in 1354 of the 2957 (45.8%) included patients. The overall mean symptom score at presentation was 2.09 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.07-2.11) and the median duration until resolution of moderately bad or severe symptoms was 8.70 days (interquartile range 4.50-11.00). Patients with influenza virus, human metapneumovirus (hMPV), respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), coronavirus (CoV) or rhinovirus had a significantly higher symptom score than patients with no virus isolated (0.07-0.25 points or 2.3-8.3% higher symptom score). Time to symptom resolution was longer in RSV infections (adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) 0.80, 95% CI 0.65-0.96) and hMPV infections (AHR 0.77, 95% CI 0.62-0.94) than in infections with no virus isolated. Overall, baseline viral load was associated with symptom severity (difference 0.11, 95% CI 0.06-0.16 per 10 cycles decrease in Ct value), but not with symptom duration., Conclusions: In healthy, working adults from the general community presenting at the general practitioner with acute cough and/or suspected lower respiratory tract infection other than influenza impose an illness burden comparable to influenza. Hence, the public health focus for viral respiratory tract infections should be broadened., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: In twin pregnancies, the rates of adverse perinatal outcome and subsequent long-term morbidity are substantial, and mainly result from preterm birth (PTB)., Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of progestogen treatment in the prevention of neonatal morbidity or PTB in twin pregnancies using individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA)., Search Strategy: We searched international scientific databases, trial registration websites, and references of identified articles., Selection Criteria: Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of 17-hydroxyprogesterone caproate (17Pc) or vaginally administered natural progesterone, compared with placebo or no treatment., Data Collection and Analysis: Investigators of identified RCTs were asked to share their IPD. The primary outcome was a composite of perinatal mortality and severe neonatal morbidity. Prespecified subgroup analyses were performed for chorionicity, cervical length, and prior spontaneous PTB., Main Results: Thirteen trials included 3768 women and their 7536 babies. Neither 17Pc nor vaginal progesterone reduced the incidence of adverse perinatal outcome (17Pc relative risk, RR 1.1; 95% confidence interval, 95% CI 0.97-1.4, vaginal progesterone RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.77-1.2). In a subgroup of women with a cervical length of ≤25 mm, vaginal progesterone reduced adverse perinatal outcome when cervical length was measured at randomisation (15/56 versus 22/60; RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.47-0.70) or before 24 weeks of gestation (14/52 versus 21/56; RR 0.56; 95% CI 0.42-0.75)., Author's Conclusions: In unselected women with an uncomplicated twin gestation, treatment with progestogens (intramuscular 17Pc or vaginal natural progesterone) does not improve perinatal outcome. Vaginal progesterone may be effective in the reduction of adverse perinatal outcome in women with a cervical length of ≤25 mm; however, further research is warranted to confirm this finding., (© 2014 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.)

Objective: To assess the accuracy of the Wells rule for excluding deep vein thrombosis and whether this accuracy applies to different subgroups of patients., Design: Meta-analysis of individual patient data., Data Sources: Authors of 13 studies (n = 10,002) provided their datasets, and these individual patient data were merged into one dataset., Eligibility Criteria: Studies were eligible if they enrolled consecutive outpatients with suspected deep vein thrombosis, scored all variables of the Wells rule, and performed an appropriate reference standard., Main Outcome Measures: Multilevel logistic regression models, including an interaction term for each subgroup, were used to estimate differences in predicted probabilities of deep vein thrombosis by the Wells rule. In addition, D-dimer testing was added to assess differences in the ability to exclude deep vein thrombosis using an unlikely score on the Wells rule combined with a negative D-dimer test result., Results: Overall, increasing scores on the Wells rule were associated with an increasing probability of having deep vein thrombosis. Estimated probabilities were almost twofold higher in patients with cancer, in patients with suspected recurrent events, and (to a lesser extent) in males. An unlikely score on the Wells rule (≤ 1) combined with a negative D-dimer test result was associated with an extremely low probability of deep vein thrombosis (1.2%, 95% confidence interval 0.7% to 1.8%). This combination occurred in 29% (95% confidence interval 20% to 40%) of patients. These findings were consistent in subgroups defined by type of D-dimer assay (quantitative or qualitative), sex, and care setting (primary or hospital care). For patients with cancer, the combination of an unlikely score on the Wells rule and a negative D-dimer test result occurred in only 9% of patients and was associated with a 2.2% probability of deep vein thrombosis being present. In patients with suspected recurrent events, only the modified Wells rule (adding one point for the previous event) is safe., Conclusion: Combined with a negative D-dimer test result (both quantitative and qualitative), deep vein thrombosis can be excluded in patients with an unlikely score on the Wells rule. This finding is true for both sexes, as well as for patients presenting in primary and hospital care. In patients with cancer, the combination is neither safe nor efficient. For patients with suspected recurrent disease, one extra point should be added to the rule to enable a safe exclusion.

Objective: To investigate which determinants are related to poor performance and forced attrition in the first year residency in general practice (GP)., Design: Observational retrospective cohort study., Method: We collected data relating to personal characteristics such as age, sex and clinical experience from residents who started the GP training in Utrecht, the Netherlands, in the period March 2005-August 2007. We also collected competence scores from the domains 'medical expertise', 'doctor-patient communication' and 'professionalism', as well as scores on a national GP knowledge test. The outcome measures were 'poor performance' and 'forced attrition'. Multivariate logistic regression was used to analyse correlations between personal characteristics, competence scores on the 3 domains and knowledge scores in the first trimester on the one hand and poor performance or forced attrition on the other., Results: 215 residents started the GP training. In the first trimester a quarter of the residents had an insufficient score in 1 or more of the domains. Competence scores were mutually correlated, but did not correlate with the knowledge score. 18 residents showed poor performance and 3 were forced to stop their training. Poor performance and forced attrition were correlated with age (adjusted odds ratio (OR): 1.1; 95% CI: 1.0-1.3), insufficient knowledge (adjusted OR: 8.9; 3.0-26.3) and medical expertise (adjusted OR: 2.1; 1.1-4.0) at the beginning of the training., Conclusion: Age, insufficient knowledge of general practice, and insufficient competence in the domain of 'medical expertise' at the beginning of the training are risk factors for poor performance by residents and attrition from their GP training.