Gender scores in epidemiological research: methods, advantages and implications.

Sex and gender-related factors are strongly associated with patients' illness trajectories, underscoring their essential role in epidemiological research and healthcare. Ignoring sex and gender in research and health inevitably results in inequities between women and men in terms of detection of disease, preventative measures, and effectiveness of treatment. Historical influences, including ideas of female inferiority and conservative notions of women's health only comprising reproductive health, reinforced the perceived irrelevance of sex and gender to health. Currently, these ideas are largely abandoned and epidemiology is becoming increasingly sensitive to sex. Gender-sensitivity, however, is lagging behind. This is potentially due to lacking knowledge and awareness about the relevance of both sex and gender to health and challenges in operationalizing gender in epidemiological research. Here, we thoroughly discuss the relevance of sex and gender to health, and pay special attention to the time, place, and culture-dependent embodiment of gender. We also discuss the operationalization of gender via composite gender scores in epidemiological studies. We argue to move beyond solely using these. Rather we should consider sex and gender in the initial stages of designing a study, to facilitate relevant, reproducible, and person-centric research.

Dutch Translation and Psychometric Evaluation of the Person-Centered Primary Care Measure.

PURPOSE: Person-centered care is foundational to good quality primary care and has positive effects on health outcomes and patient satisfaction. The Person-Centered Primary Care Measure (PCPCM) is a recently developed, patient-reported survey able to assess person-centeredness and has demonstrated strong validity and reliability. Little is known, however, about the feasibility of the PCPCM in non-English-speaking settings. We aimed to translate the questionnaire into Dutch, psychometrically evaluate the translated version, and ensure its feasibility for patients in Dutch primary care. METHODS: We translated the PCPCM into Dutch using forward-backward translations. We conducted psychometric evaluations to ensure its feasibility among Dutch-speaking primary care patients, with special attention to low literacy populations. Next, we assessed structural validity, convergent validity using the Quality of Care Through the Patient's Eyes (QUOTE) questionnaire, and internal consistency in a cross-sectional study in primary care. RESULTS: Translation and adaptation for low literacy populations required 4 iterations. In 4 general practices, 205 patients completed the survey. Confirmatory factor analyses could not confirm the 1-factor solution. The 3-factor solution was found to be a more optimal fit: comprehensiveness of care, personal relation, and contextual care. Internal reliability was high (Cronbach's α were 0.82, 0.73, and 0.86, respectively). We found a strong correlation between the total PCPCM and QUOTE scores (Spearman's ρ = 0.65, P <.001), indicating good convergent validity. CONCLUSION: The Dutch version of the PCPCM has acceptable validity and reliability for measuring person-centeredness in primary care among Dutch-speaking populations including those with low literacy.

Optimizing placebo and minimizing nocebo effects through communication: e-learning and virtual reality training development.

BACKGROUND: The effects of many treatments in healthcare are determined by factors other than the treatment itself. Patients' expectations and the relationship with their healthcare provider can significantly affect treatment outcomes and thereby play a major role in eliciting placebo and nocebo effects. We aim to develop and evaluate an innovative communication training, consisting of an e-learning and virtual reality (VR) training, for healthcare providers across all disciplines, to optimize placebo and minimize nocebo effects through healthcare provider-patient communication. The current paper describes the development, mid-term evaluation, optimization, and final evaluation of the communication training, conducted in The Netherlands. METHODS: The development of both the e-learning and the VR training consisted of four phases: 1) content and technical development, 2) mid-term evaluation by healthcare providers and placebo/communication researchers, 3) optimization of the training, and 4) final evaluation by healthcare providers. To ensure the success, applicability, authenticity, and user-friendliness of the communication training, there was ongoing structural collaboration with healthcare providers as future end users, experts in the field of placebo/communication research, and educational experts in all phases. RESULTS: Placebo/communication researchers and healthcare providers evaluated the e-learning positively (overall 7.9 on 0-10 scale) and the content was perceived as useful, accessible, and interesting. The VR training was assessed with an overall 6.9 (0-10 scale) and was evaluated as user-friendly and a safe method for practicing communication skills. Although there were some concerns regarding the authenticity of the VR training (i.e. to what extent the virtual patient reacts like a real patient), placebo and communication researchers, as well as healthcare providers, recognized the significant potential of the VR training for the future. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed an innovative and user-friendly communication training, consisting of an e-learning and VR training (2D and 3D), that can be used to teach healthcare providers how to optimize placebo effects and minimize nocebo effects through healthcare provider-patient communication. Future studies can work on improved authenticity, translate the training into other languages and cultures, expand with additional VR cases, and measure the expected effects on providers communication skills and subsequently patient outcomes.

Improving Diagnosis and Care for Patients With Sarcoma: Do Real-World General Practitioners Data and Prospective Data Collections Have a Place Next to Clinical Trials?

There has been growing interest in the use of real-world data (RWD) to address clinically and policy-relevant (research) questions that cannot be answered with data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) alone. This is, for example, the case in rare malignancies such as sarcomas as limited patient numbers pose challenges in conducting RCTs within feasible timeliness, a manageable number of collaborators, and statistical power. This narrative review explores the potential of RWD to generate real-world evidence (RWE) in sarcoma research, elucidating its application across different phases of the patient journey, from prediagnosis to the follow-up/survivorship phase. For instance, examining electronic health records (EHRs) from general practitioners (GPs) enables the exploration of consultation frequency and presenting symptoms in primary care before a sarcoma diagnosis. In addition, alternative study designs that integrate RWD with well-designed observational RCTs may offer relevant information on the effectiveness of clinical treatments. As, especially in cases of ultrarare sarcomas, it can be an extreme challenge to perform well-powered randomized prospective studies. Therefore, it is crucial to support the adaptation of novel study designs. Regarding the follow-up/survivorship phase, examining EHR from primary and secondary care can provide valuable insights into identifying the short- and long-term effects of treatment over an extended follow-up period. The utilization of RWD also comes with several challenges, including issues related to data quality and privacy, as described in this study. Notwithstanding these challenges, this study underscores the potential of RWD to bridge, at least partially, gaps between evidence and practice and holds promise in contributing to the improvement of sarcoma care.

Strategies to improve implementation of collaborative care for functional disorders and persistent somatic symptoms: A qualitative study using a Research World Café design.

INTRODUCTION: Persistent somatic symptoms and functional disorders (PSS/FD) are often complex conditions requiring care from multiple disciplines. One way of bringing the different disciplines together is through collaborative care. Little is known about the implementation barriers faced and relevant strategies to tackle the barriers in this field. Therefore, using expert knowledge, we aim to develop realistic strategies for dealing with implementation barriers of collaborative care in PSS/FD. METHODS: The Research World Café method is a single-session, expert-based method with multiple focus-groups forming and reforming to answer a set of inter-related questions, under the guidance of moderators. Using this method, participants involved in PSS/FD care across different areas of healthcare in the Netherlands developed several realistic strategies for dealing with ten implementation barriers for collaborative care in PSS/FD that were previously identified in a Delphi study. Strategies were grouped into strategy clusters using a card-sorting task. RESULTS: Thirty-three participants took part, representing ten different disciplines, most commonly physiotherapists, psychologists, and physicians. In total, 54 strategies, identified in response to the ten barriers, were grouped into eight strategy clusters. The strategy clusters were professional education, communication, care coordination, care pathways, joint consults, funding, patient involvement, and prevention. CONCLUSION: We identified a number of useful strategies for dealing with implementation barriers for collaborative care in PSS/FD. Many strategies provided ways to deal with multiple barriers at once. The effects of applying these strategies in collaborative care in PSS/FD will need testing through implementation studies, as well as in other areas needing multidisciplinary care.

Shared decision-making in undergraduate nursing and medical education: An explorative dual-method study.

OBJECTIVE: This study explores how shared decision-making (SDM) is integrated in undergraduate nursing and medical education. METHODS: A dual-method design was applied. The integration of SDM in medicine and nursing education programs (i.e. SDM on paper) was explored through document analyses; the integration of SDM in curricula (i.e. SDM in class) through interviews with teachers and curriculum coordinators (N = 19). RESULTS: A majority of the education programs featured SDM, mostly non-explicit. In curricula SDM was generally implicitly featured in compulsory courses across all study years. SDM was often integrated into preexisting theories and models and taught through various methods and materials. Generally, teachers and supervisors were not trained in SDM themselves. They assessed students' competence in SDM in a summative manner. CONCLUSION: Overall, SDM was featured in undergraduate nursing and medical education, however, very implicitly.

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.

Quality indicators for collaborative care networks in persistent somatic symptoms and functional disorders: a modified delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Care for persistent somatic symptoms and functional disorders (PSS/FD) is often fragmented. Collaborative care networks (CCNs) may improve care quality for PSS/FD. Effectiveness likely depends on their functioning, but we lack a straightforward quality evaluation system. We therefore aimed to develop quality indicators to evaluate CCNs for PSS/FD. METHOD: Using an online three-round modified Delphi process, an expert panel provided, selected and ranked quality indicators for CCNs in PSS/FD. Recruited experts were diverse healthcare professionals with relevant experience in PSS/FD care in the Netherlands. RESULTS: The expert panel consisted of 86 professionals representing 15 disciplines, most commonly physiotherapists, psychologists and medical specialists. 58% had more than 10 years experience in PSS/FD care. Round one resulted in 994 quotations, which resulted in 46 unique quality indicators. These were prioritised in round two and ranked in round three by the panel, resulting in a final top ten. The top three indicators were: "shared vision of care for PSS/FD", "pathways tailored to the individual patient", and "sufficiently-experienced caregivers for PSS/FD". CONCLUSIONS: The identified quality indicators to evaluate CCNs in the field of PSS/FD can be implemented in clinical practice and may be useful in improving services and when assessing effectiveness.

Patterns of psychotropic drug prescriptions and general practice consultations among community-dwelling older people with dementia during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent lockdown measures had serious implications for community-dwelling older people with dementia. While the short-term impacts of the pandemic on this population have been well studied, there is limited research on its long-term impacts. Quantifying the long-term impacts may provide insights into whether healthcare adaptations are needed after the acute phase of the pandemic to balance infection prevention measures with healthcare provision. This study aims to examine patterns of psychotropic drug prescriptions and general practice consultations in community-dwelling older people with dementia during the first two years of the pandemic. METHODS: We utilised routine electronic health records from three Dutch academic general practice research networks located in the North, East, and South, between 2019 and 2021. We (1) compared the weekly prescription rates of five groups of psychotropic drugs and two groups of tracer drugs, and weekly general practice consultation rates per 1000 participants, between the first two years of the pandemic and the pre-pandemic phase, (2) calculated changes in these rates during three lockdowns and two relaxation phases relative to the corresponding weeks in 2019, and (3) employed interrupted time series analyses for the prescription rates. Analyses were performed for each region separately. RESULTS: The study population sizes in the North, East, and South between 2019 and 2021 were 1726 to 1916, 93 to 117, and 904 to 960, respectively. Data from the East was excluded from the statistical analyses due to the limited sample size. During the first two years of the pandemic, the prescription rates of psychotropic drugs were either lower or similar to those in the pre-pandemic phase, with differences varying from -2.6‰ to -10.2‰. In contrast, consultation rates during the pandemic were higher than in the pre-pandemic phase, increasing by around 38‰. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a decrease in psychotropic drug prescriptions, but an increase in general practice consultations among community-dwelling older people with dementia during the first two years of the pandemic. However, reasons for the decrease in psychotropic drug prescriptions are unclear due to limited information on the presence of neuropsychiatric symptoms and the appropriateness of prescribing.

Improving the Reporting of Primary Care Research: Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care-the CRISP Statement.

Primary care (PC) is a unique clinical specialty and research discipline with its own perspectives and methods. Research in this field uses varied research methods and study designs to investigate myriad topics. The diversity of PC presents challenges for reporting, and despite the proliferation of reporting guidelines, none focuses specifically on the needs of PC. The Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care (CRISP) Checklist guides reporting of PC research to include the information needed by the diverse PC community, including practitioners, patients, and communities. CRISP complements current guidelines to enhance the reporting, dissemination, and application of PC research findings and results. Prior CRISP studies documented opportunities to improve research reporting in this field. Our surveys of the international, interdisciplinary, and interprofessional PC community identified essential items to include in PC research reports. A 2-round Delphi study identified a consensus list of items considered necessary. The CRISP Checklist contains 24 items that describe the research team, patients, study participants, health conditions, clinical encounters, care teams, interventions, study measures, settings of care, and implementation of findings/results in PC. Not every item applies to every study design or topic. The CRISP guidelines inform the design and reporting of (1) studies done by PC researchers, (2) studies done by other investigators in PC populations and settings, and (3) studies intended for application in PC practice. Improved reporting of the context of the clinical services and the process of research is critical to interpreting study findings/results and applying them to diverse populations and varied settings in PC.Annals "Online First" article.

Primary Care Research: Looking Back and Moving Forward With Reflections on NAPCRG's First 50 Years.

NAPCRG celebrated 50 years of leadership and service at its 2022 meeting. A varied team of primary care investigators, clinicians, learners, patients, and community members reflected on the organization's past, present, and future. Started in 1972 by a small group of general practice researchers in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom, NAPCRG has evolved into an international, interprofessional, interdisciplinary, and intergenerational group devoted to improving health and health care through primary care research. NAPCRG provides a nurturing home to researchers and teams working in partnership with individuals, families, and communities. The organization builds upon enduring values to create partnerships, advance research methods, and nurture a community of contributors. NAPCRG has made foundational contributions, including identifying the need for primary care research to inform primary care practice, practice-based research networks, qualitative and mixed-methods research, community-based participatory research, patient safety, practice transformation, and partnerships with patients and communities. Landmark documents have helped define classification systems for primary care, responsible research with communities, the central role of primary care in health care systems, opportunities to revitalize generalist practice, and shared strategies to build the future of family medicine. The future of health and health care depends upon strengthening primary care and primary care research with stronger support, infrastructure, training, and workforce. New technologies offer opportunities to advance research, enhance care, and improve outcomes. Stronger partnerships can empower primary care research with patients and communities and increase commitments to diversity and quality care for all. NAPCRG offers a home for all partners in this work.

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.

Sex and gender differences in primary care help-seeking for common somatic symptoms: a longitudinal study.

OBJECTIVE: Women are reported to consult general practitioners (GPs) more frequently than men. However, previous studies on sex differences in help-seeking behavior for somatic symptoms do not distinguish between sex and gender, do not account for sex differences in presented symptoms, and are frequently conducted in clinical settings, automatically excluding non-help seekers. Therefore, we aim to assess the independent associations of sex and gender with primary care help-seeking for somatic symptoms in the general population. DESIGN AND SETTING: Records from the longitudinal population-based Lifelines Cohort Study were linked to routine electronic health records from GPs. SUBJECTS: Participants reporting new-onset common somatic symptoms. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Associations between sex and gender, operationalized via a novel gender-index, with primary care help-seeking for somatic symptoms and differences in the strength of the association between gender and help-seeking for somatic symptoms between women and men. RESULTS: Of 20,187 individuals with linked data, 8325 participants (67.5% female; mean age = 44.5 years [SD = 12.9]) reported at least one new-onset somatic symptom. Hereof, 255 (3.1%) consulted the GP within 6 weeks of symptom onset. Female sex was positively associated with consulting the GP (OR = 1.78; 95%CI = 1.13-2.80), whereas feminine gender was not (OR = 0.67; 95%CI = 0.39-1.16). The latter association did not differ in strength between men and women. More paid working days are negatively associated with help-seeking (OR = 0.95; 95%CI = 0.91-0.98). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that female sex rather than feminine gender is associated with primary care help-seeking behavior for somatic symptoms. Nevertheless, clinicians should be aware that gender-related variables, such as mean paid working days, may be associated with help-seeking behavior.

Effectiveness of psychosomatic therapy for patients with persistent somatic symptoms: Results from the CORPUS randomised controlled trial in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of psychosomatic therapy versus care as usual in primary care for patients with persistent somatic symptoms (PSS). METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, two-armed, randomised controlled trial among primary care patients with PSS in the Netherlands that included 39 general practices and 34 psychosomatic therapists. The intervention, psychosomatic therapy, consisted of 6-12 sessions delivered by specialised exercise- and physiotherapists. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: patient's level of functioning. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: severity of physical and psychosocial symptoms, health-related quality of life, health-related anxiety, illness behaviour and number of GP contacts. RESULTS: Compared to usual care (n = 85), the intervention group (n = 84) showed no improvement in patient's level of functioning (mean difference - 0.50 [95% CI -1.10 to 0.10]; p = .10), and improvement in health-related anxiety (mean difference - 1.93 [95% CI -3.81 to -0.04]; p = .045), over 12 months. At 5-month follow-up, we found improvement in physical functioning, somatisation, and health-related anxiety. The 12-month follow-up revealed no therapy effects. Subgroup analyses showed an overall effect in patient's level of functioning for the group with moderate PSS (mean difference - 0.91 [95% CI -1.78 to -0.03]; p = .042). In the year after the end of therapy, the number of GP contacts did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSION: We only found effects on some secondary outcome measures, and on our primary outcome measure especially in patients with moderate PSS, the psychosomatic therapy appears promising for further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: the trial is registered in the Netherlands Trial Registry, https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=NTR7356 under ID NTR7356.

Key items for reports of primary care research: an international Delphi study.

OBJECTIVE: Reporting guidelines can improve dissemination and application of findings and help avoid research waste. Recent studies reveal opportunities to improve primary care (PC) reporting. Despite increasing numbers of guidelines, none exists for PC research. This study aims to prioritise candidate reporting items to inform a reporting guideline for PC research. DESIGN: Delphi study conducted by the Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care (CRISP) Working Group. SETTING: International online survey. PARTICIPANTS: Interdisciplinary PC researchers and research users. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We drew potential reporting items from literature review and a series of international, interdisciplinary surveys. Using an anonymous, online survey, we asked participants to vote on and whether each candidate item should be included, required or recommended in a PC research reporting guideline. Items advanced to the next Delphi round if they received>50% votes to include. Analysis used descriptive statistics plus synthesis of free-text responses. RESULTS: 98/116 respondents completed round 1 (84% response rate) and 89/98 completed round 2 (91%). Respondents included a variety of healthcare professions, research roles, levels of experience and all five world regions. Round 1 presented 29 potential items, and 25 moved into round 2 after rewording and combining items and adding 2 new items. A majority of round 2 respondents voted to include 23 items (90%-100% for 11 items, 80%-89% for 3 items, 70%-79% for 3 items, 60%-69% for 3 items and 50%-59% for 3 items). CONCLUSION: Our Delphi study identified items to guide the reporting of PC research that has broad endorsement from the community of producers and users of PC research. We will now use these results to inform the final development of the CRISP guidance for reporting PC research.

Physicians' and Patients' Interruptions in Clinical Practice: A Quantitative Analysis.

PURPOSE: Physicians' interruptions have long been considered intrusive, masculine actions that inhibit patient participation, but a systematic analysis of interruptions in clinical interaction is lacking. This study aimed to examine when and how primary care physicians and patients interrupt each other during consultations. METHODS: We coded and quantitatively analyzed interruption type (cooperative vs intrusive) in 84 natural interactions between 17 primary care physicians and 84 patients with common somatic symptoms. Data were analyzed using a mixed-effects logistic regression model, with role, gender, and consultation phase as predictors. RESULTS: Of the 2,405 interruptions observed, 82.9% were cooperative. Among physicians, men were more likely to make an intrusive interruption than women (ß = 0.43; SE, 0.21; odds ratio [OR] = 1.54; 95% CI, 1.03-2.31), whereas among patients, men were less likely to make an intrusive interruption than women (ß = -0.35; SE, 0.17; OR = 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50-0.98). Patients' interruptions were more likely to be intrusive than physicians' interruptions in the phase of problem presentation (ß = 0.71; SE, 0.23; OR = 2.03; 95% CI, 1.30-3.20), but not in the phase of diagnosis and/or treatment plan discussion (ß = -0.17; SE, 0.15; OR = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.63-1.15). CONCLUSIONS: Most interruptions in clinical interaction are cooperative and may enhance the interaction. The nature of physicians' and patients' interruptions is the result of an interplay between role, gender, and consultation phase.

Persistence of somatic symptoms after COVID-19 in the Netherlands: an observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patients often report various symptoms after recovery from acute COVID-19. Previous studies on post-COVID-19 condition have not corrected for the prevalence and severity of these common symptoms before COVID-19 and in populations without SARS-CoV-2 infection. We aimed to analyse the nature, prevalence, and severity of long-term symptoms related to COVID-19, while correcting for symptoms present before SARS-CoV-2 infection and controlling for the symptom dynamics in the population without infection. METHODS: This study is based on data collected within Lifelines, a multidisciplinary, prospective, population-based, observational cohort study examining the health and health-related behaviours of people living in the north of the Netherlands. All Lifelines participants aged 18 years or older received invitations to digital COVID-19 questionnaires. Longitudinal dynamics of 23 somatic symptoms surrounding COVID-19 diagnoses (due to SARS-CoV-2 alpha [B.1.1.7] variant or previous variants) were assessed using 24 repeated measurements between March 31, 2020, and Aug 2, 2021. Participants with COVID-19 (a positive SARS-CoV-2 test or a physician's diagnosis of COVID-19) were matched by age, sex, and time to COVID-19-negative controls. We recorded symptom severity before and after COVID-19 in participants with COVID-19 and compared that with matched controls. FINDINGS: 76 422 participants (mean age 53·7 years [SD 12·9], 46 329 [60·8%] were female) completed a total of 883 973 questionnaires. Of these, 4231 (5·5%) participants had COVID-19 and were matched to 8462 controls. Persistent symptoms in COVID-19-positive participants at 90-150 days after COVID-19 compared with before COVID-19 and compared with matched controls included chest pain, difficulties with breathing, pain when breathing, painful muscles, ageusia or anosmia, tingling extremities, lump in throat, feeling hot and cold alternately, heavy arms or legs, and general tiredness. In 12·7% of patients, these symptoms could be attributed to COVID-19, as 381 (21·4%) of 1782 COVID-19-positive participants versus 361 (8·7%) of 4130 COVID-19-negative controls had at least one of these core symptoms substantially increased to at least moderate severity at 90-150 days after COVID-19 diagnosis or matched timepoint. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, this is the first study to report the nature and prevalence of post-COVID-19 condition, while correcting for individual symptoms present before COVID-19 and the symptom dynamics in the population without SARS-CoV-2 infection during the pandemic. Further research that distinguishes potential mechanisms driving post-COVID-19-related symptomatology is required. FUNDING: ZonMw; Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Sport; Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs; University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen; Provinces of Drenthe, Friesland, and Groningen.

Gender stereotyping in medical interaction: A Membership Categorization Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Gender can be a valuable resource in communication but also a problem, perpetuating gender stereotypes. So far, there has been little attention for how healthcare professionals and patients make gender relevant in medical interactions. The approach of Membership Categorization Analysis (MCA) is particularly pertinent to meticulously analyze gender in medical communication. Applying MCA, this study analyzes how activity descriptions implicitly associated with gender stereotypes, e.g., "carrying a laundry basket up the stairs", feature in the course of GPs' explanations of a question or diagnosis. The aim is to provide a new perspective on the relationship between gender and medical interaction, and to increase our understanding of how gender stereotypes are reproduced in the medical setting. METHOD: Two cases of GPs using gendered explanations in Dutch general practice interactions are analyzed turn-by-turn using MCA. RESULTS: The findings show how GPs' descriptions of gendered activities serve the exemplification of technical terms, designed for the specific patient, while also casting the patient in a traditional gender role. CONCLUSION: Invoking gender in medical interaction may serve a communicative goal while also perpetuating stereotypes. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Insight in the subtleties of gender construction in medical interactions could enhance gender awareness and sensitivity in healthcare.

Perceived working mechanisms of psychosomatic therapy in patients with persistent somatic symptoms in primary care: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the perceived working mechanisms of psychosomatic therapy according to patients with persistent somatic symptoms (PSS) and their psychosomatic therapists. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semistructured face-to-face interviews and focus groups. All interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed, by two researchers independently, based on the thematic analysis. SETTING: Alongside a randomised controlled trial to establish the (cost-)effectiveness of psychosomatic therapy in patients with PSS in primary care, we conducted a process evaluation with a qualitative study. Patients were recruited in general practice in three regions in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Interviews were conducted with twenty patients with PSS who received psychosomatic therapy and 25 psychosomatic therapists. In addition, two focus groups were conducted with six and seven psychosomatic therapists, respectively. INTERVENTION: Psychosomatic therapy, delivered by specialised exercise and physical therapists, is a multimodal and tailored treatment based on the biopsychosocial model. OUTCOME MEASURES: Experiences, opinions and views from patients' and therapists' perspective on psychosomatic therapy were identified. RESULTS: A total of 37 interviews with patients, 25 interviews and two focus groups with therapists were analysed. Three main themes emerged from the data of the patients: (1) continuous alternation of psychosocial conversations and body-oriented exercises; (2) awareness of body-mind connection and (3) good relationship with therapist. Four main themes emerged from the data of the therapists (1) building rapport; (2) continuously searching for common ground; (3) making patients aware of the interaction between body and mind; and (4) continuous alternation between exploration and treatment. CONCLUSION: According to patients as well as therapists, the continuous alternation of psychosocial conversations and body-oriented exercises to provide awareness of the interaction between body and mind are the perceived working mechanism of psychosomatic therapy. Therapeutic alliance and finding common ground between patient and therapist are prerequisites for the success of psychosomatic therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NL7157 (NTR7356).

Mind your words: Oncologists' communication that potentially harms patients with advanced cancer: A survey on patient perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Many complaints in medicine and in advanced illnesses are about communication. Little is known about which specific communications harm. This study explored the perspectives of patients with advanced cancer about potentially harmful communication behaviors by oncologists and helpful alternatives. METHODS: An online survey design was used that was based on literature scoping and patient/clinician/researcher input. Patients with advanced cancer (n = 74) reflected on the potential harmfulness of 19 communication situations. They were asked whether they perceived the situation as one in which communication could be harmful (yes/no). If they answered "yes," they were asked whether they perceived the examples as harmful (yes/no) or helpful (yes/no) and to provide open comments. Results were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively (content analysis). RESULTS: Communication regarding information provision, prognosis discussion, decision-making, and empathy could be unnecessarily potentially harmful, and this occurred in various ways, such as making vague promises instead of concrete ones (92%), being too directive in decision-making (qualitative), and not listening to the patient (88%). Not all patients considered other situations potentially harmful (eg, introducing the option of refraining from anticancer therapy [49%] and giving too much [prognostic] information [60%]). Exploring each individual patients' needs/preferences seemed to be a precondition for helpful communication. CONCLUSIONS: This article provides patient perspectives on oncologists' unnecessarily potentially harmful communication behaviors and offers practical tools to improve communication in advanced cancer care. Both preventable pitfalls and delicate challenges requiring an individualized approach, where exploration might help, are described. Although providing difficult and unwelcome news is a core task for clinicians, this study might help them to do so while preventing potentially unnecessary harm.