Asking the generalist - evaluation of a General Practice rounding and consult service.

BACKGROUND: Vascular surgery patients admitted to the hospital are often multimorbid. In case of questions regarding chronic medical problems different specialties are consulted, which leads to a high number of treating physicians and possibly contradicting recommendations. The General Practitioner´s (GP) view could minimize this problem. However, it is unknown for which medical problems a GP would be consulted and if regular GP-involvement during rounds would be considered helpful by the specialists. The aim of this study was to establish and describe a General Practice rounding service (GP-RS), to evaluate if the GP-RS is doable in a tertiary care hospital and beneficial to the specialists and to explore GP-consult indications. METHODS: The GP-RS was established as a pilot project. Between June-December 2020, a board-certified GP from the Department of General Practice and Primary Care, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE) joined the vascular surgery team (UKE) once-weekly on rounds. The project was evaluated using a multi-methods approach: semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with vascular surgery physicians that had either participated in the GP-RS (G1), had not participated (G2), other specialists usually conducting consults on the vascular surgery floor (G3) and with the involved GP (G4). Interviews were analyzed using Kuckartz' qualitative content analysis. In addition, two sets of quantitative data were descriptively analyzed focusing on the reasons for a GP-consult: one set from the GP-RS and one from an established, conventional "as needed" GP-consult service. RESULTS: 15 interviews were conducted. Physicians perceived the GP-RS as beneficial, especially for surgical patients (G1-3). Optimizing medication, avoiding unnecessary consults and a learning effect for physicians in training (G1-4) were named as other benefits. Critical voices saw an increased workload through the GP-RS (G1, G3) and some consult requests as too specific for a GP (G1-3). Based on data from 367 vascular surgery patients and 80 conventional GP-consults, the most common reasons for a GP-consult were cardiovascular diseases including hypertension and diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: A GP-RS is doable in a tertiary care hospital. Studies of GP co-management model with closer follow ups would be needed to objectively improve patient care and reduce the overall number of consults. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

Synergism of an Urgent Care Walk-in Clinic With an Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: The overutilization of hospital emergency departments by low-urgency patients is seen as a growing problem in health-care delivery, and a variety of solutions are under discussion. We studied the change in utilization of a hospital emergency department (ED) by low-urgency patients after an urgent care walk-in clinic (WIC) was opened in the immediate vicinity. METHODS: A prospective, single-center pre-post comparative study was carried out at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE). The ED patient collective consisted of adult walk-in patients who presented to the ED between 4 pm and midnight. The "pre" period consisted of August and September 2019, and the "post" period was from November 2019 (after the opening of the WIC) to January 2020. RESULTS: The study patients consisted of 4765 ED walk-in patients and 1201 WIC patients. 956 (80.5%) of the WIC patients had been referred onward to the WIC after initially presenting to the ED; from this group, 790 patients (82.6%) received definitive care in the WIC. The number of outpatients treated in the ED fell by 37.3% (95% confidence interval [30.9; 43.8]), from 851.5 to 536.7 per month. The most marked decreases were in the areas of dermatology (from 62.5 to 14.3 patients per month), neurology (45.5 to 25), ophthalmology (115 to 64.7), and trauma surgery (211 to 128.7). No decrease was seen in urology, psychiatry, or gynecology. For patients presenting without any referral document, the mean length of stay fell by a mean of 17.6 [7.4; 27.8] minutes from its "pre" value of 172.3 minutes. The rate of patients who left during treatment fell from 76.5 to 28.3 patients per month (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: A GP-led urgent care walk-in clinic next door to an interdisciplinary hospital emergency department is a resource-saving treatment option for walk-in patients who present to the emergency department. Most of the patients referred from the ED to the WIC were able to receive definitive care there.

Screening for Atrial Fibrillation in the Older Population: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a major cause of preventable strokes. Screening asymptomatic individuals for AF may increase anticoagulant use for stroke prevention. Objective: To evaluate 2 home-based AF screening interventions. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter randomized clinical trial recruited individuals from primary care practices aged 75 years or older with hypertension and without known AF. From April 5, 2015, to March 26, 2019, 856 participants were enrolled from 48 practices. Interventions: The control group received standard care (routine clinical follow-up plus a pulse check and heart auscultation at baseline and 6 months). The screening group received a 2-week continuous electrocardiographic (cECG) patch monitor to wear at baseline and at 3 months, in addition to standard care. The screening group also received automated home blood pressure (BP) machines with oscillometric AF screening capability to use twice-daily during the cECG monitoring periods. Main Outcomes and Measures: With intention-to-screen analysis, the primary outcome was AF detected by cECG monitoring or clinically within 6 months. Secondary outcomes included anticoagulant use, device adherence, and AF detection by BP monitors. Results: Of the 856 participants, 487 were women (56.9%); mean (SD) age was 80.0 (4.0) years. Median cECG wear time was 27.4 of 28 days (interquartile range [IQR], 18.4-28.0 days). In the primary analysis, AF was detected in 23 of 434 participants (5.3%) in the screening group vs 2 of 422 (0.5%) in the control group (relative risk, 11.2; 95% CI, 2.7-47.1; P = .001; absolute difference, 4.8%; 95% CI, 2.6%-7.0%; P < .001; number needed to screen, 21). Of those with cECG-detected AF, median total time spent in AF was 6.3 hours (IQR, 4.2-14.0 hours; range 1.3 hours-28 days), and median duration of the longest AF episode was 5.7 hours (IQR, 2.9-12.9 hours). Anticoagulation was initiated in 15 of 20 patients (75.0%) with cECG-detected AF. By 6 months, anticoagulant therapy had been prescribed for 18 of 434 participants (4.1%) in the screening group vs 4 of 422 (0.9%) in the control group (relative risk, 4.4; 95% CI, 1.5-12.8; P = .007; absolute difference, 3.2%; 95% CI, 1.1%-5.3%; P = .003). Twice-daily AF screening using the home BP monitor had a sensitivity of 35.0% (95% CI, 15.4%-59.2%), specificity of 81.0% (95% CI, 76.7%-84.8%), positive predictive value of 8.9% (95% CI, 4.9%-15.5%), and negative predictive value of 95.9% (95% CI, 94.5%-97.0%). Adverse skin reactions requiring premature discontinuation of cECG monitoring occurred in 5 of 434 participants (1.2%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, among older community-dwelling individuals with hypertension, AF screening with a wearable cECG monitor was well tolerated, increased AF detection 10-fold, and prompted initiation of anticoagulant therapy in most cases. Compared with continuous ECG, intermittent oscillometric screening with a BP monitor was an inferior strategy for detecting paroxysmal AF. Large trials with hard clinical outcomes are now needed to evaluate the potential benefits and harms of AF screening. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02392754.