Model-Informed Precision Dosing Using Machine Learning for Levothyroxine in General Practice: Development, Validation and Clinical Simulation Trial.

Levothyroxine is one of the most prescribed drugs in the western world. Dosing is challenging due to high-interindividual differences in effective dosage and the narrow therapeutic window. Model-informed precision dosing (MIPD) using machine learning could assist general practitioners (GPs), but no such models exist for primary care. Furthermore, introduction of decision-support algorithms in healthcare is limited due to the substantial gap between developers and clinicians' perspectives. We report the development, validation, and a clinical simulation trial of the first MIPD application for primary care. Stable maintenance dosage of levothyroxine was the model target. The multiclass model generates predictions for individual patients, for different dosing classes. Random forest was trained and tested on a national primary care database (n = 19,004) with a final weighted AUC across dosing options of 0.71, even in subclinical hypothyroidism. TSH, fT4, weight, and age were most predictive. To assess the safety, feasibility, and clinical impact of MIPD for levothyroxine, we performed clinical simulation studies in GPs and compared MIPD to traditional prescription. Fifty-one GPs selected starting dosages for 20 primary hypothyroidism cases without and then with MIPD 2 weeks later. Overdosage and underdosage were defined as higher and lower than 12.5 µg relative to stable maintenance dosage. MIPD decreased overdosage in number (30.5 to 23.9%, P < 0.01) and magnitude (median 50 to 37.5 µg, P < 0.01) and increased optimal starting dosages (18.3 to 30.2%, P < 0.01). GPs considered lab results more often with MIPD and most would use the model frequently. This study demonstrates the clinical relevance, safety, and effectiveness of MIPD for levothyroxine in primary care.

Trends in low-value GP care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Several studies showed that during the pandemic patients have refrained from visiting their general practitioner (GP). This resulted in medical care being delayed, postponed or completely forgone. The provision of low-value care, i.e. care which offers no net benefit for the patient, also could have been affected. We therefore assessed the impact of the COVID-19 restrictions on three types of low-value GP care: 1) imaging for back or knee problems, 2) antibiotics for otitis media acuta (OMA), and 3) repeated opioid prescriptions, without a prior GP visit. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using registration data from GPs part of an academic GP network over the period 2017-2022. The COVID-19 period was defined as the period between April 2020 to December 2021. The periods before (January 2017 to April 2020) and after the COVID-19 period (January 2022 to December 2022) are the pre- and post-restrictions periods. The three clinical practices examined were selected by two practicing GPs from a top 30 of recommendations originating from the Dutch GP guidelines, based on their perceived prevalence and relevance in practice (van Dulmen et al., BMC Primary Care 23:141, 2022). Multilevel Poisson regression models were built to examine changes in the incidence rates (IR) of both registered episodes and episodes receiving low-value treatment. RESULTS: During the COVID-19 restrictions period, the IRs of episodes of all three types of GP care decreased significantly. The IR of episodes of back or knee pain decreased by 12%, OMA episodes by 54% and opioid prescription rate by 13%. Only the IR of OMA episodes remained significantly lower (22%) during the post-restrictions period. The provision of low-value care also changed. The IR of imaging for back or knee pain and low-value prescription of antibiotics for OMA both decreased significantly during the COVID-restrictions period (by 21% and 78%), but only the low-value prescription rate of antibiotics for OMA remained significantly lower (by 63%) during the post-restrictions period. The IR of inappropriately repeated opioid prescriptions remained unchanged over all three periods. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that both the rate of episodes as well as the rate at which low-value care was provided have generally been affected by the COVID-19 restrictions. Furthermore, it shows that the magnitude of the impact of the restrictions varies depending on the type of low-value care. This indicates that deimplementation of low-value care requires tailored (multiple) interventions and may not be achieved through a single disruption or intervention alone.

Are specialist-provided end-of-life scenarios key to initiation of advance care planning in primary care? A mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVES: Specialist-provided end-of-life scenarios (SP-EOLS) may improve advance care planning (ACP) implementation in primary care by helping overcome barriers such as uncertain prognosis and poor interprofessional collaboration. We aimed to explore the current use and potential impact of SP-EOLS on ACP in Dutch primary care. METHODS: We performed a mixed-methods study. From patients discussed in a hospital-based academic palliative care multidisciplinary team meeting between 2016 and 2019 and died, we collected primary care electronic medical records data on SP-EOLS, actual EOLS, and ACP initiation and applied descriptive and comparative analyses. Subsequently, we interviewed general practitioners (GPs) and thematically analyzed the transcripts. RESULTS: In 69.7% of 66 reviewed patient files, SP-EOLS were found. In patients whose GP had received SP-EOLS, ACP conversations were more often reported (92.0 vs. 61.0%, p = 0.006). From 11 GP interviews, we identified 4 themes: (1) SP-EOLS guide GPs, patients, and relatives when dealing with an uncertain future perspective; (2) SP-EOLS provide continuity of care between primary and secondary/tertiary care; (3) SP-EOLS should be tailored to the individual patient; and (4) SP-EOLS need to be personalized and uniformly transferred to GPs. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: SP-EOLS may facilitate ACP conversations by GPs. They have the potential to help overcome existing barriers to ACP implementation by providing guidance and supporting interprofessional collaboration. Future research should focus on improving SP-EOLS and tailor them to the needs of all end users, focusing on improving their effect on ACP conversations.

Needs and challenges among general practitioners in the management of actinic keratosis: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Because of the increasing incidence of actinic keratosis (AK), optimal use of limited healthcare resources is essential. Although most patients can be managed in primary care, dermatology referrals are common. More profound knowledge of general practitioners' (GPs) considerations might assist in enhancing AK care. METHODS: The aim of the current study was to gain insight into AK management in primary care by exploring the needs and challenges among GPs in the Netherlands. A qualitative study was conducted based on semi-structured in-depth interviews with 15 conveniently sampled Dutch GPs, focusing on the needs and challenges in AK management. A literature-informed, predefined topic list guided the interviews, which were recorded, transcribed ad verbatim, and thematically analysed using the Framework Method. RESULTS: All GPs reported AK to be a clinical diagnosis and most GPs indicated that most AK patients could be managed in primary care. Cryotherapy was preferred and experience with 5-FU therapy was limited. Most GPs applied cryotherapy without discussing other treatment options with patients. Reasons for dermatology referrals included an incomplete treatment response, extensive lesions, difficult-to-treat areas, and serious doubts about the diagnosis. GPs reported a need for more education, especially on 5-FU therapy. Their main challenges were dealing with diagnostic uncertainty, treating extensive lesions, managing treatment-related skin reactions, and reconciling patient misconceptions. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows various AK management approaches among Dutch GPs with suboptimal guideline compliance due to diverse underlying barriers. It suggests that more education might contribute to a more standardised and uniform AK management and supports further transition of AK care from hospital to primary care.

Diagnosing knee osteoarthritis in patients, differences between general practitioners and orthopedic surgeons: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: knee complaints are one of the most common reasons to consult the general practitioners in the Netherlands and contribute to the increasing burden on general practitioners. A proportion of patients that are referred to orthopedic outpatient clinics are potentially referred unnecessarily. We believe osteoarthritis is not always considered by general practitioners as the cause of atraumatic knee complaints. This may impede early recognition and timely care of osteoarthritis complaints and lead to unnecessary referrals. METHODS: the aim of this study was to compare the frequency of (differential) diagnosis of osteoarthritis mentioned in referral letters of general practitioners with the frequency of osteoarthritis mentioned as orthopedic diagnosis at the outpatient clinic. Therefore we conducted a retrospective cohort study based on data collected from referral letters and the corresponding outpatient clinic reports of patients with atraumatic knee complaints of 45 years or older referred to a regional hospital in Nijmegen, The Netherlands in the period from 1-6-2019 until 1-01-2020. RESULTS: a total of 292 referral letters were included. In the younger aged patients (45-54 years) osteoarthritis was mentioned less frequent and meniscal lesions were mentioned more frequent in referral letters when compared to diagnoses made at the outpatient clinic. Differences in differential diagnosis of osteoarthritis as well as meniscal lesions between orthopedic surgeon and general practitioners were found (both p < 0.001, McNemar). Matching diagnoses were present in 58.2% when all referral letters were analyzed (n = 292) and 75.2% when only referrals containing a differential diagnosis were analyzed (n = 226). Matching diagnoses were present in 31.6% in the younger age categories (45-54 years). A linear trend showing fewer matching diagnoses in younger patient categories was observed (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Osteoarthritis was less frequently mentioned in general practitioner referral letters among the differential diagnosis then it was diagnosed at the outpatient clinic, especially in younger patients (45-54 years). Also matching diagnoses in younger patients were evidently lower than in older patients, partly explained by underdiagnosing of osteoarthritis in younger patients in this cohort. Better recognition of osteoarthritis in younger patients and changing the diagnostic approach of general practitioners might improve efficacy in knee care. Future research should focus on the effectiveness of musculoskeletal triage, the need for multidisciplinary educational programs for patients and promotion of conservative treatment modalities among general practitioners.

Personal Continuity and Appropriate Prescribing in Primary Care.

PURPOSE: Personal continuity between patient and physician is a core value of primary care. Although previous studies suggest that personal continuity is associated with fewer potentially inappropriate prescriptions, evidence on continuity and prescribing in primary care is scarce. We aimed to determine the association between personal continuity and potentially inappropriate prescriptions, which encompasses potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs), by family physicians among older patients. METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort study using routine care data from patients enlisted in 48 Dutch family practices from 2013 to 2018. All 25,854 patients aged 65 years and older having at least 5 contacts with their practice in 6 years were included. We calculated personal continuity using 3 established measures: the usual provider of care measure, the Bice-Boxerman Index, and the Herfindahl Index. We used the Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions (STOPP) and the Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment (START) specific to the Netherlands version 2 criteria to calculate the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescriptions. To assess associations, we conducted multilevel negative binomial regression analyses, with and without adjustment for number of chronic conditions, age, and sex. RESULTS: The patients' mean (SD) values for the usual provider of care measure, the Bice-Boxerman Continuity of Care Index, and the Herfindahl Index were 0.70 (0.19), 0.55 (0.24), and 0.59 (0.22), respectively. In our population, 72.2% and 74.3% of patients had at least 1 PIM and PPO, respectively; 30.9% and 34.2% had at least 3 PIMs and PPOs, respectively. All 3 measures of personal continuity were positively and significantly associated with fewer potentially inappropriate prescriptions. CONCLUSIONS: A higher level of personal continuity is associated with more appropriate prescribing. Increasing personal continuity may improve the quality of prescriptions and reduce harmful consequences.

Patients with Clinically Suspected Gallstone Disease: A More Selective Ultrasound May Improve Treatment Related Outcomes.

This study aimed to quantify the confirmation of gallstones on ultrasound (US) in patients with suspicion of gallstone disease. To aid general practitioners (GPs) in diagnostic workup, a model to predict gallstones was developed. A prospective cohort study was conducted in two Dutch general hospitals. Patients (≥18 years) were eligible for inclusion when referred by GPs for US with suspicion of gallstones. The primary outcome was the confirmation of gallstones on US. A multivariable regression model was developed to predict the presence of gallstones. In total, 177 patients were referred with a clinical suspicion of gallstones. Gallstones were found in 64 of 177 patients (36.2%). Patients with gallstones reported higher pain scores (VAS 8.0 vs. 6.0, p < 0.001), less frequent pain (21.9% vs. 54.9%, p < 0.001), and more often met criteria for biliary colic (62.5% vs. 44.2%, p = 0.023). Predictors for the presence of gallstones were a higher pain score, frequency of pain less than weekly, biliary colic, and an absence of heartburn. The model showed good discrimination between patients with and without gallstones (C-statistic 0.73, range: 0.68-0.76). Clinical diagnosis of symptomatic gallstone disease is challenging. The model developed in this study may aid in the selection of patients for referral and improve treatment related outcomes.

Beliefs of rheumatologists and general practitioners on urate lowering therapy: a cross-sectional study.

Objective: To describe beliefs of physicians and patients in primary and secondary care about urate-lowering therapy (ULT), to examine differences in physicians' medication beliefs and to examine the association of physicians' medication beliefs with the prescribed dosage of ULT, gout outcomes and patients' medication beliefs. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study among rheumatologists and general practitioners (GPs) and their patients using ULT in The Netherlands. All participants filled out the Beliefs About Medication Questionnaire (BMQ). Demographics of physicians were collected through questionnaires. Patient and disease characteristics were collected through questionnaires and electronic medical records. Differences between rheumatologists and GPs in the BMQ subscales Necessity and Concern and the necessity-concern difference (NCD) score were analysed by two-sample t-tests. Multilevel analyses were performed to examine the association of physicians' BMQ scores with the prescribed dosage of ULT, gout outcomes (number of gout flares, serum urate) and patients' BMQ scores. Results: A total of 28 rheumatologists, 443 rheumatology patients, 45 GPs and 294 GP patients were included. The mean NCD scores were 7.1 (s.d. 3.6), 4.0 (s.d. 4.0), and 4.2 (s.d. 5.0) for rheumatologists, GPs and patients, respectively. Rheumatologists scored higher on necessity beliefs [mean difference 1.4 (95% CI 0.0, 2.8)] and lower on concern beliefs [mean difference -1.7 (95% CI -2.7, -0.7)] compared with GPs. No associations between physicians' beliefs and prescribed dosage of ULT, gout outcomes or patients' beliefs were found. Conclusion: Rheumatologists had higher necessity and lower ULT concern beliefs compared with GPs and patients. Physicians' beliefs were not related to prescribed ULT dosage and patient outcomes. The role of physicians' beliefs in gout management in patients using ULT seems limited. Future qualitative research can provide more insights into physicians' views of gout management.

Prognostic factors for persistent fatigue after COVID-19: a prospective matched cohort study in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Persistent fatigue after COVID-19 is common; however, the exact incidence and prognostic factors differ between studies. Evidence suggests that age, female sex, high body mass index, and comorbidities are risk factors for long COVID. AIM: To investigate the prevalence of persistent fatigue after COVID-19 in patients with a mild infection (managed in primary care) during the first wave of the pandemic and to determine prognostic factors for persistent fatigue. DESIGN AND SETTING: This was a prospective cohort study in Dutch general practice, combining online questionnaires with data from electronic health records. METHOD: Patients who contacted their GP between March and May 2020 and were diagnosed with COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic were included. Patients were matched to controls without COVID-19 based on age, sex, and GP practice. Fatigue was measured at 3, 6, and 15 months, using the Checklist of Individual Strength. RESULTS: All the participants were GP attendees and included 179 with suspected COVID-19, but who had mild COVID and who had not been admitted to hospital with COVID, and 122 without suspected COVID-19. Persistent fatigue was present in 35% (49/142) of the suspected COVID-19 group and 13% (14/109) of the non-COVID-19 group (odds ratio 3.65; 95% confidence interval = 1.82 to 7.32). Prognostic factors for persistent fatigue included low education level, absence of a partner, high neuroticism (using the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Revised-Short Form), low resilience, high frequency of GP contact, medication use, and threatening experiences in the past. The latter three factors appeared to be prognostic factors for persistent fatigue specifically after COVID-19 infection. CONCLUSION: GP patients with COVID-19 (who were not admitted to hospital with COVID) have a fourfold higher chance of developing persistent fatigue than GP patients who had not had COVID-19. This risk is even higher in psychosocially vulnerable patients who had COVID-19.

General practice and patient characteristics associated with personal continuity: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Personal continuity of care is a core value of general practice. It is increasingly threatened by societal and healthcare changes. AIM: To investigate the association between personal continuity and both practice and patient characteristics; and to incorporate GPs' views to enrich and validate the quantitative findings. DESIGN AND SETTING: A mixed-methods study based on observational, routinely collected healthcare data from 269 478 patients from 48 Dutch general practices (2013-2018) and interviews with selected GPs. METHOD: First, four different personal continuity outcome measures were calculated relating to eight practice and 12 patient characteristics using multilevel linear regression analyses. Second, a thematic analysis was performed of semi-structured interviews with 10 GPs to include their views on factors contributing to personal (dis) continuity. These GPs worked at the 10 practices with the largest difference between calculated and model-estimated personal continuity. RESULTS: Both a larger number of usual GPs working in a practice and a larger percentage of patient contacts with locum GPs were dose-dependently associated with lower personal continuity (highest versus lowest quartile -0.094 and -0.092, respectively, P<0.001), whereas days since registration with the general practice was dose-dependently associated with higher personal continuity (highest versus lowest quartile +0.017, P<0.001). Older age, number of chronic conditions, and contacts were also associated with higher personal continuity. The in-depth interviews identified three key themes affecting personal continuity: team composition, practice organisation, and the personal views of the GPs. CONCLUSION: Personal continuity is associated with practice and patient characteristics. The dose-dependent associations suggest a causal relationship and, complemented by GPs' views, may provide practical targets to improve personal continuity directly.

[Overtreatment of patients with basal cell carcinoma: active surveillance should be considered more often]. / Overbehandeling van patiënten met basaalcelcarcinoom.

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common cancer type in the Netherlands and frequently diagnosed in older adults. Unlike other common forms of skin cancer (squamous cell carcinoma and melanoma), BCC generally grows slowly and the risk of metastasis and/or death is extremely small. In the first years after presentation, BCC often causes no or only minor complaints. Nevertheless, the vast majority of patients with BCC are treated immediately after diagnosis, usually with surgical excision. We think that overtreatment of patients with BCC is common and active surveillance may be an excellent alternative for patients with a limited life expectancy and should therefore be considered more often.

[Prediction model for gallstones can support the general practitioner]. / Nieuwe keuzehulp bij galstenen.

The management of gallstones in primary care is challenging. After diagnosis, the GP has to decide which symptomatic patients will profit from referral for surgery. This is complicated, as many patients will continue to have symptoms also after surgery. A prediction model can support the GP in giving a more personalized advice. The prediction model is based on outcome data from randomized trials. These data helps GPs to have the right conversation with patients by predicting the probability of persisting pain after surgery. GPs should be more cautious in case of young age, heartburn, low pain scores and a history of abdominal surgery.

Roles of general practitioners in shared decision-making for patients with cancer: A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: The shared decision-making (SDM) process for the treatment of pancreatic and oesophageal cancer primarily takes place with healthcare professionals (HCPs) in the hospital setting. This study aims to explore the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) on their possible roles during this SDM process, their added value and their requirements for involvement in SDM. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 GPs about their views on SDM for patients with cancer. The interviews were analysed by two researchers using an inductive open coding approach. RESULTS: Five potential roles in SDM were described by the interviewed GPs, of which the role as 'coach' of the patient was mentioned by all. GPs see their main added value as their long-standing relationship with the patient. To be able to participate optimally in SDM, GPs indicated that they need to be kept up to date during the patient's care process and should receive enough medical information about treatment options and contextual information. CONCLUSION: GPs see different potential roles for themselves when involved in SDM. Hospital HCPs that want to facilitate GP involvement should take the initiative, provide the GPs with enough and timely information and must be easy to consult.

Monitoring Opioids in Europe: The Need for Shared Definitions and Measuring Drivers of Opioid Use and Related Harms.

The past 20 years, the USA is facing a serious opioid crisis initiated by an increase in prescription opioid use. Europe has also seen an increase in prescription opioid use, but the extent of related harm is still largely unknown. Given the impact of the US opioid epidemic, it is important to closely monitor signs of emerging opioid-related problems to guarantee early warnings and timely actions. Shared and meaningful definitions for opioid use and related harms, and relevant information about specific drivers for opioid use and related problems are needed for an adequate policy response. In this commentary, we discuss these definitions, the need to know more about the specific drivers for increased opioid use, its related harm, and proposals for strategies to move forward. Policy recommendations include making a distinction between licit and illicit opioids when monitoring and reporting on opioid-related harm, and using oral morphine equivalents to quantify prescription opioid use in a clinically relevant and comparable manner. A major topic of further research is exploring unique and universal drivers of prescription opioid (mis)use across Europe, in particular the role of opioid diversion.

Healthcare utilisation of patients with cholecystolithiasis in primary care: a multipractice comparative analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To examine general practitioners' (GP) management of cholecystolithiasis and to evaluate persisting abdominal complaints in the years after the diagnosis. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of registry data and a subset of individual medical records. SETTING: Seventeen primary care practices affiliated with the Radboudumc Practice Based Research Network in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 633 patients with cholecystolithiasis diagnosed between 2012 and 2016. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome of this study was the healthcare utilisation of patients with cholecystolithiasis diagnosed by the GP in terms of referrals to secondary care, laboratory diagnostics, prescribed medication and the prevalence of concomitant abdominal-related diagnoses in a time interval of 3 years before and 3 years after diagnosis of cholecystolithiasis. For secondary outcomes, electronic medical records were studied from seven practices to assess emergency department visits, operation rates and repeat visits for persistent abdominal symptoms. We compared the non-referred group with the referred group. RESULTS: In 57% of patients, concomitant abdominal-related diagnoses were recorded besides the diagnosis cholecystolithiasis. In-depth analyses of 294 patients showed a referral rate of 79.3% (n=233); 62.9% (n=185) underwent cholecystectomy. After referral, 55.4% (129/233) returned to the GP for persistent abdominal symptoms. Patients returning after referral were more often treated for another abdominal-related diagnosis before cholecystolithiasis was recorded (51.9% vs 28.8%, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients in general practice with gallstones are referred and undergo cholecystectomy. Patients with concomitant abdominal-related diagnoses are likely to return to their physician. GPs should inform patients about these outcomes to improve the shared decision-making process before gallbladder surgery.

Optimising personal continuity for older patients in general practice: a study protocol for a cluster randomised stepped wedge pragmatic trial.

BACKGROUND: Continuity of care, in particular personal continuity, is a core principle of general practice and is associated with many benefits such as a better patient-provider relationship and lower mortality. However, personal continuity is under pressure due to changes in society and healthcare. This affects older patients more than younger patients. As the number of older patients will double the coming decades, an intervention to optimise personal continuity for this group is highly warranted. METHODS: Following the UK Medical Research Council framework for complex Interventions, we will develop and evaluate an intervention to optimise personal continuity for older patients in general practice. In phase 0, we will perform a literature study to provide the theoretical basis for the intervention. In phase I we will define the components of the intervention by performing surveys and focus groups among patients, general practitioners, practice assistants and practice nurses, concluded by a Delphi study among members of our group. In phase II, we will test and finalise the intervention with input from a pilot study in two general practices. In phase III, we will perform a stepped wedge cluster randomised pragmatic trial. The primary outcome measure is continuity of care from the patients' perspective, measured by the Nijmegen Continuity Questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures are level of implementation, barriers and facilitators for implementation, acceptability and feasibility of the intervention. In phase IV, we will establish the conditions for large-scale implementation. DISCUSSION: This is the first study to investigate an intervention for improving personal continuity for older patients in general practice. If proven effective, our intervention will enable General practitioners to improve the quality of care for their increasing population of older patients. The pragmatic design of the study will enable evaluation in real-life conditions, facilitating future implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Netherlands Trial Register, trial NL8132 . Registered 2 November 2019.

Timely identification of patients in need of palliative care using the Double Surprise Question: A prospective study on outpatients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: The Surprise Question ("Would I be surprised if this patient were to die within the next 12 months?") is widely used to identify palliative patients, though with low predictive value. To improve timely identification of palliative care needs, we propose an additional Surprise Question ("Would I be surprised if this patient is still alive after 12 months?") if the original Surprise Question is answered with "no." The combination of the two questions is called the Double Surprise Question. AIM: To examine the prognostic accuracy of the Double Surprise Question in outpatients with cancer. DESIGN: A prospective study. PARTICIPANTS: Twelve medical oncologists completed the Double Surprise Question for 379 patients. RESULTS: In group 1 (original Surprise Question "yes": surprised if dead) 92.1% (176/191) of the patients were still alive after 1 year, in group 2a (original and additional Surprise Question "no": not surprised if dead and not surprised if alive) 60.0% (63/105), and in group 2b (original Surprise Question "no," additional Surprise Question "yes": surprised if alive) 26.5% (22/83) (p < 0.0001). The positive predictive value increased by using the Double Surprise Question; 74% (61/83) vs 55% (103/188). Anticipatory palliative care provision and Advance Care Planning items were most often documented in group 2b. CONCLUSIONS: The Double Surprise Question is a promising tool to more accurately identify outpatients with cancer at risk of dying within 1 year, and therefore, those in need of palliative care. Studies should reveal whether the implementation of the Double Surprise Question leads to more timely palliative care.

Preparing for an orthopedic consultation using an eHealth tool: a randomized controlled trial in patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effect of a stand-alone mobile and web-based educational intervention (eHealth tool) compared to usual preparation of a first orthopedic consultation of patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA) on patients' satisfaction. METHODS: A two-armed randomized controlled trial involving 286 patients with (suspicion of) hip or knee OA, randomly allocated to either receiving an educational eHealth tool to prepare their upcoming consultation (n = 144) or usual care (n = 142). Satisfaction with the consultation on three subscales (range 1-4) of the Consumer Quality Index (CQI - primary outcome) and knowledge (assessed using 22 statements on OA, range 0-22), treatment beliefs (assessed by the Treatment beliefs in OsteoArthritis questionnaire, range 1-5), assessment of patient's involvement in consultation by the surgeon (assessed on a 5-point Likert scale) and patient satisfaction with the outcome of the consultation (numeric rating scale), were assessed. RESULTS: No differences between groups were observed on the 3 subscales of the CQI (group difference (95% CI): communication 0.009 (- 0.10, 0.12), conduct - 0.02 (- 0.12, 0.07) and information provision 0.02 (- 0.18, 0.21)). Between group differences (95% CI) were in favor of the intervention group for knowledge (1.4 (0.6, 2.2)), negative beliefs regarding physical activities (- 0.19 (- 0.37, - 0.002) and pain medication (- 0.30 (- 0.49, - 0.01)). We found no differences on other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: An educational eHealth tool to prepare a first orthopedic consultation for hip or knee OA does not result in higher patient satisfaction with the consultation, but it does influence cognitions about osteoarthritis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register (trial number NTR6262). Registered 30 January 2017.

Professional Care Networks of Frail Older People: An Explorative Survey Study from the Patient Perspective.

BACKGROUND: Frail older people living in the community require multidisciplinary care. Despite the fact that patient participation is high on the public agenda, studies into multidisciplinary care mainly focus on the viewpoints of professionals. Little is known about frail older patients' experiences with care delivered by multidisciplinary teams and their perception of collaboration between professional and informal caregivers. OBJECTIVE: To gain more insight into the experiences of frail older patients with integrated multidisciplinary care by mapping the care networks of this patient group and their perception of the interconnection between professional and informal caregivers. METHODS: Survey study to facilitate a care network analysis. Due to the vulnerable health status of the respondents, questionnaires were completed during interviews. Analysis was performed using an iterative process, using both visual and metric techniques. PARTICIPANTS: 44 older persons, considered 'frail' by their general practitioner. SETTING: Four general practices in The Netherlands. RESULTS: The networks of the participants consisted of an average of 15 actors connected by 54 ties. General practitioners were the most common actors in the networks, and were well connected to medical specialists and in-home care providers. The participants did not always perceive a connection between their general practitioner and their informal caregiver. The network analyses resulted in the identification of three subtypes: simple star (n = 16), complex star (n = 16), and sub-group networks (n = 12). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that the elderly often do not experience the integration of multidisciplinary care as such. This is a real opportunity for MTs to improve their care and to make the patients' experiences better in line with what they are aiming: allowing patients to live at home as healthy and independently as possible for as long as possible. We showed that informal caregivers often form communication bridges between patients and professionals. Having a better knowledge of the patient perspective enables the gaps in professional care networks of frail older people to be filled and facilitates the anticipation of crisis situations.

An Electronic Health Tool to Prepare for the First Orthopedic Consultation: Use and Usability Study.

BACKGROUND: The use of electronic health (eHealth) technology to prepare patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA) for their first orthopedic consultation seems promising. Exploration of the use and usability of an educational eHealth tool may highlight potential modifications that could increase patient engagement and effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to (1) identify the use and usability of a stand-alone educational eHealth tool for patients with suspected hip or knee OA, (2) explore whether the recorded questions in the eHealth tool were in line with an existing widely used question prompt list, and (3) investigate whether user characteristics are related to use and usability. METHODS: We used data from 144 participants in the intervention group of a randomized controlled trial, who were asked to use the educational eHealth tool to prepare for their upcoming first orthopedic consultation. We defined users and nonusers based on whether they had opened the tool at least once. Users were characterized as active or superficial depending on the extent of their use of the tool. The recorded questions for the consultation preparation were categorized into themes fitting 3 predefined questions or in a remaining category. Usability was measured using the System Usability Scale (SUS, 0-100). Data were collected including the patient demographic and clinical characteristics, knowledge of OA, and internet and smartphone usage in daily life. The characteristics associated with users and nonusers were analyzed using a multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 116/144 (80.6%) participants used the educational eHealth tool, of whom 87/116 (75.0%) were active users. Of the three components of the tool (information, my consultation, and medication), medication was the least used (34%). On the basis of recorded questions of the users, the fourth predefined question could be proposed. The mean (SD) SUS score was 64.8 (16.0). No difference was found between the SUS scores of superficial and active users (mean difference 0.04, 95% CI -7.69 to 7.77). Participants with a higher baseline knowledge of OA (odds ratio [OR] 1.2, 95% CI 1.0 to 1.4) and who used the internet less frequently in their daily life (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.5 to 0.9) were more likely to use the educational eHealth tool. We found no differences between the demographics and clinical characteristics of the superficial and active users. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of this study, it can be concluded that the use of an educational eHealth tool to prepare patients with hip and knee OA for the first orthopedic consultation is feasible. Our results suggest some improvements that should be made to the content of the tool to improve its usability. No clear practical implications were found to support the implementation of the educational eHealth tool in specific subgroups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NTR6262; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/6262.