The safety and effectiveness of different methods of earwax removal: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Build-up of earwax is a common reason for attendance in primary care. Current practice for earwax removal generally involves the use of a softening agent, followed by irrigation of the ear if required. However, the safety and benefits of the different methods of removal are not known for certain. OBJECTIVES: To conduct evidence synthesis of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the interventions currently available for softening and/or removing earwax and any adverse events (AEs) associated with the interventions. DATA SOURCES: Eleven electronic resources were searched from inception to November 2008, including: The Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (OVID), PREMEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations (OVID), EMBASE (OVID); and CINAHL. METHODS: Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts for eligibility. Inclusion criteria were applied to the full text or retrieved papers and data were extracted by two reviewers using data extraction forms developed a priori. Any differences were resolved by discussion or by a third reviewer. Study criteria included: interventions - all methods of earwax removal available and combinations of these methods; participants - adults/children presenting requiring earwax removal; outcomes - measures of hearing, adequacy of clearance of wax, quality of life, time to recurrence or further treatment, AEs and measures of cost-effectiveness; design - randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) for clinical effectiveness, cohort studies for AEs and cost-effectiveness, and costing studies for cost-effectiveness. For the economic evaluation, a deterministic decision tree model was developed to evaluate three options: (1) the use of softeners followed by irrigation in primary care; (2) softeners followed by self-irrigation; and (3) a 'no treatment' option. Outcomes were assessed in terms of benefits to patients and costs incurred, with costs presented by exploratory cost-utility analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-six clinical trials conducted in primary care (14 studies), secondary care (8 studies) or other care settings (4 studies), met the inclusion criteria for the review - 22 RCTs and 4 CCTs. The range of interventions included 16 different softeners, with or without irrigation, and in various different comparisons. Participants, outcomes, timing of intervention, follow-up and methodological quality varied between studies. On measures of wax clearance Cerumol, sodium bicarbonate, olive oil and water are all more effective than no treatment; triethanolamine polypeptide (TP) is better than olive oil; wet irrigation is better than dry irrigation; sodium bicarbonate drops followed by irrigation by nurse is more effective than sodium bicarbonate drops followed by self-irrigation; softening with TP and self-irrigation is more effective than self-irrigation only; and endoscopic de-waxing is better than microscopic de-waxing. AEs appeared to be minor and of limited extent. Resuts of the exploratory economic model found that softeners followed by self-irrigation were more likely to be cost-effective [24,433 pounds per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY)] than softeners followed by irrigation at primary care (32,130 pounds per QALY) when compared with no treatment. Comparison of the two active treatments showed that the additional gain associated with softeners followed by irrigation at primary care over softeners followed by self-irrigation was at a cost of 340,000 pounds per QALY. When compared over a lifetime horizon to the 'no treatment' option, the ICERs for softeners followed by self-irrigation and of softeners followed by irrigation at primary care were 24,450 pounds per QALY and 32,136 pounds per QALY, respectively. LIMITATIONS: The systematic review found limited good-quality evidence of the safety, benefits and costs of the different strategies, making it difficult to differentiate between the various methods for removing earwax and rendering the economic evaluation as speculative. CONCLUSIONS: Although softeners are effective, which specific softeners are most effective remains uncertain. Evidence on the effectiveness of methods of irrigation or mechanical removal was equivocal. Further research is required to improve the evidence base, such as a RCT incorporating an economic evaluation to assess the different ways of providing the service, the effectiveness of the different methods of removal and the acceptability of the different approaches to patients and practitioners.

A double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial of topical intranasal corticosteroids in 4- to 11-year-old children with persistent bilateral otitis media with effusion in primary care.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of topical mometasone in children with bilateral otitis media with effusion (OME). DESIGN: A double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial with an intention to treat analysis; the 10.6% of patients lost to follow-up at 1 month were censored in the analysis. SETTING: 76 Medical Research Council General Practice Research Framework practices throughout the UK between 2004 and 2007. PARTICIPANTS: A sample of 217 children aged 4-11 years was selected from those presenting to their GP with one or more episodes of otitis media or ear-related problems in the previous 12 months whom the research nurse confirmed had bilateral glue ear using microtympanometry (B B or B C2 types using a modified Jerger classification) at randomisation. INTERVENTIONS: Mometasone 50 micrograms in each nostril or placebo spray once daily for 3 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the proportions of children cleared of OME assessed by tympanometry at 1 month. Secondary outcomes included clearance at 3 months and 9 months; adverse events; OM8-30 scores (a functional health status responsive disease-specific measure); hearing loss; days with otalgia; cost-effectiveness; and health utilities. RESULTS: Of the topical steroid group, 40.6% (39/96) demonstrated tympanometric clearance (C1 or A type) in one or both ears at 1 month, compared with 44.9% (44/98) of the placebo group. The absolute risk reduction at 1 month was -4.3% (95% CI -18.05% to 9.26%); the odds ratio (OR) was 0.84 (95% CI 0.48 to 1.48). Four covariates were pre-specified for inclusion in logistic regression analysis: age as a continuous variable (p = 0.94), season (p = 0.70), atopy (p = 0.61) and clinical severity (p = 0.006). The adjusted OR (AOR) at 1 month for the main outcome was 0.93 (95% CI 0.50 to 1.75). Secondary analysis at 3 months showed 58.1% of the steroid group had resolved and 52.3% of the placebo group, AOR 1.45 (95% CI 0.74 to 2.84). At 9 months 55.6% of the treated group remained clear in at least one ear and 65.3% of the placebo group, AOR 0.82 (95% CI 0.39 to 1.75). Adverse events (although relatively minor) occurred in 7-22% of children and included nasal stinging, epistaxis, dry throat and cough. The OM8-30 scores (p = 0.55) reported hearing difficulty (p = 0.08), and days with otalgia (p = 0.46) were not significantly different between groups at 3 months. The economic evaluation found the active treatment arm to be dominated by placebo, accruing slightly (but not significantly) higher costs and fewer quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), with a 24.2% probability that topical steroids are a cost-effective use of NHS resources at a ceiling ratio of 20,000 pounds per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Use of topical intranasal corticosteroids is very unlikely to be a clinically effective treatment for OME (glue ear) in the primary care setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN38988331.

Dipsticks and diagnostic algorithms in urinary tract infection: development and validation, randomised trial, economic analysis, observational cohort and qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate clinical and dipstick predictors of infection and develop and test clinical scores; to compare management using clinical and dipstick scores with commonly used alternative strategies; to estimate the cost-effectiveness of each strategy; and to understand the natural history of urinary tract infection (UTI) and women's concerns about its presentation and management. DESIGN: There were six studies: (1) validation development for diagnostic clinical and dipstick scores; (2) validation of the scores developed; (3) observation of the natural history of UTI; (4) randomised controlled trial (RCT) of scores developed in study 1; (5) economic analysis of the RCT; (6) qualitative study of patients in the RCT. SETTING: Primary care. PARTICIPANTS: Women aged 17-70 with suspected UTI. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomised to five management approaches: empirical antibiotics; empirical delayed antibiotics; target antibiotics based on a higher symptom score; target antibiotics based on dipstick results; or target antibiotics based on a positive mid-stream specimen of urine (MSU). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Antibiotic use, use of MSUs, rates of reconsultation and duration, and severity of symptoms. RESULTS: (1) 62.5% of women had confirmed UTI. Only nitrite, leucocyte esterase and blood independently predicted diagnosis of UTI. A dipstick rule--based on having nitrite or both leucocytes and blood--was moderately sensitive (77%) and specific (70%) [positive predictive value (PPV) 81%, negative predictive value (NPV) 65%]. A clinical rule--based on having two of urine cloudiness, offensive smell, reported moderately severe dysuria, moderately severe nocturia--was less sensitive (65%) (specificity 69%, PPV 77%, NPV 54%). (2) 66% of women had confirmed UTI. The predictive values of nitrite, leucocyte esterase and blood were confirmed. The dipstick rule was moderately sensitive (75%) but less specific (66%) (PPV 81%, NPV 57%). (3) Symptoms rated as moderately bad or worse lasted 3.25 days on average for infections sensitive to antibiotics; resistant infections lasted 56% longer, infections not treated with antibiotics 62% longer and symptoms associated with urethral syndrome 33% longer. Symptom duration was shorter if the doctor was perceived to be positive about prognosis, and longer with frequent somatic symptoms, previous history of cystitis, urinary frequency and more severe symptoms at baseline. (4) 66% of the MSU group had laboratory-confirmed UTI. Women suffered 3.5 days of moderately bad symptoms if they took antibiotics immediately but 4.8 days if they delayed taking antibiotics for 48 hours. Taking bicarbonate or cranberry juice had no effect. (5) The MSU group was more costly over 1 month but not over 1 year. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves showed that for a value per day of moderately bad symptoms of over 10 pounds, the dipstick strategy is most likely to be cost-effective. (6) Fear of spread to the kidneys, blood in the urine, and the impact of symptoms on vocational and leisure activities were important triggers for seeking help. When patients are asked to delay taking antibiotics the uncomfortable and worrying journey from 'person to patient' needs to be acknowledged and the rationale behind delaying the antibiotics made clear. CONCLUSIONS: To achieve good symptom control and reduce antibiotic use clinicians should either offer a 48-hour delayed antibiotic prescription to be used at the patient's discretion or target antibiotic treatment by dipsticks (positive nitrite or positive leucocytes and blood) with the offer of a delayed prescription if dipstick results are negative.

A prospective randomised comparison of minor surgery in primary and secondary care. The MiSTIC trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there is equivalence in the competence of GPs and hospital doctors to perform a range of elective minor surgical procedures, in terms of the safety, quality and cost of care. DESIGN: A prospective randomised controlled equivalence trial was undertaken in consenting patients presenting at general practices and needing minor surgery. SETTING: The study was conducted in the south of England. PARTICIPANTS: Consenting patients presenting at general practices who needed minor surgery in specified categories for whom the recruiting doctor felt able to offer treatment or to be able to refer to a colleague in primary care. INTERVENTIONS: On presentation to their GP, patients were randomised to either treatment within primary care or treatment at their local hospital. Evaluation was by assessment of clinical quality and safety of outcome, supplemented by examination of patient satisfaction and cost-effectiveness. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Two independent observers assessed surgical quality by blinded assessment of wound appearance, between 6 and 8 weeks postsurgery, from photographs of wounds. Other measures included satisfaction with care, safety of surgery in terms of recognition of and appropriate treatment of skin malignancies, and resource use and implications. RESULTS: The 568 patients recruited (284 primary care, 284 hospital) were randomised by 82 GPs. In total, 637 skin procedures plus 17 ingrowing toenail procedures were performed (313 primary care, 341 hospital) by 65 GPs and 60 hospital doctors. Surgical quality was assessed for 273 (87%) primary care and 316 (93%) hospital lesions. Mean visual analogue scale score in hospital was significantly higher than that in primary care [mean difference=5.46 on 100-point scale; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.925 to 9.99], but the clinical importance of the difference was uncertain. Hospital doctors were better at achieving complete excision of malignancies, with a difference that approached statistical significance [7/16 GP (44%) versus 15/20 hospital (75%), chi(2)=3.65, p=0.056]. The proportion of patients with post-operative complications was similar in both groups. The mean cost for hospital-based minor surgery was 1222.24 pounds and for primary care 449.74 pounds. Using postoperative complications as an outcome, both effectiveness and costs of the alternative interventions are uncertain. Using completeness of excision of malignancy as an outcome, hospital minor surgery becomes more cost-effective. The 705 skin procedures undertaken in this trial generated 491 lesions with a traceable histology report: 36 lesions (7%) from 33 individuals were malignant or premalignant. Chance-corrected agreement (kappa) between GP diagnosis of malignancy and histology was 0.45 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.54) for lesions and 0.41 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.51) for individuals affected by malignancy. Sensitivity of GPs for detection of malignant lesions was 66.7% (95% CI 50.3 to 79.8) for lesions and 63.6% (95% CI 46.7 to 77.8) for individuals affected by malignancy. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of minor surgery carried out in general practice is not as high as that carried out in hospital, using surgical quality as the primary outcome, although the difference is not large. Patients are more satisfied if their procedure is performed in primary care, largely because of convenience. However, there are clear deficiencies in GPs' ability to recognise malignant lesions, and there may be differences in completeness of excision when compared with hospital doctors. The safety of patients is of paramount importance and this study does not demonstrate that minor surgery carried out in primary care is safe as it is currently practised. There are several alternative models of minor surgery provision worthy of consideration, including ones based in primary care that require all excised tissue to be sent for histological examination, or that require further training of GPs to undertake the necessary work. The results of this study suggest that a hospital-based service is more cost-effective. It must be concluded that it is unsafe to leave minor surgery in the hands of doctors who have never been trained to do it. Further work is required to determine GPs' management of a range of skin conditions (including potentially life-threatening malignancies), rather than just their recognition of them. Further economic modelling work is required to look at the potential costs of training sufficient numbers of GPs and GPs with special interests to meet the demand for minor surgery safely in primary care, and of the alternative of transferring minor surgery large-scale to the hospital sector. Different models of provision need thorough testing before widespread introduction.

Observational study of effect of patient centredness and positive approach on outcomes of general practice consultations.

OBJECTIVE: To measure patients' perceptions of patient centredness and the relation of these perceptions to outcomes. DESIGN: Observational study using questionnaires. SETTING: Three general practices. PARTICIPANTS: 865 consecutive patients attending the practices. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients' enablement, satisfaction, and burden of symptoms. RESULTS: Factor analysis identified five components. These were communication and partnership (a sympathetic doctor interested in patients' worries and expectations and who discusses and agrees the problem and treatment, Cronbach's alpha=0.96); personal relationship (a doctor who knows the patient and their emotional needs, alpha=0.89); health promotion (alpha=0.87); positive approach (being definite about the problem and when it would settle, alpha=0.84); and interest in effect on patient's life (alpha=0.89). Satisfaction was related to communication and partnership (adjusted beta=19.1; 95% confidence interval 17.7 to 20.7) and a positive approach (4.28; 2.96 to 5.60). Enablement was greater with interest in the effect on life (0.55; 0.25 to 0.86), health promotion (0.57; 0.30 to 0.85), and a positive approach (0.82; 0.52 to 1.11). A positive approach was also associated with reduced symptom burden at one month (beta=-0.25; -0.41 to -0.10). Referrals were fewer if patients felt they had a personal relationship with their doctor (odds ratio 0.70; 0.54 to 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: Components of patients' perceptions can be measured reliably and predict different outcomes. If doctors don't provide a positive, patient centred approach patients will be less satisfied, less enabled, and may have greater symptom burden and higher rates of referral.

Preferences of patients for patient centred approach to consultation in primary care: observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify patient's preferences for patient centred consultation in general practice. DESIGN: Questionnaire study. SETTING: Consecutive patients in the waiting room of three doctors' surgeries. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Key domains of patient centredness from the patient perspective. Predictors of preferences for patient centredness, a prescription, and examination. RESULTS: 865 patients participated: 824 (95%) returned the pre-consultation questionnaire and were similar in demographic characteristic to national samples. Factor analysis identified three domains of patient preferences: communication (agreed with by 88-99%), partnership (77-87%), and health promotion (85-89%). Fewer wanted an examination (63%), and only a quarter wanted a prescription. As desire for a prescription was modestly associated with desire for good communication (odds ratio 1.20; 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 1.69), partnership (1.46; 1.01 to 2.09), and health promotion (1.61; 1.12 to 2.31) this study may have underestimated preferences for patient centredness compared with populations with stronger preferences for a prescription. Patients who strongly wanted good communication were more likely to feel unwell (very, moderately, and slightly unwell; odds ratios 1, 0.56, 0.39 respectively, z trend P<0.001), be high attenders (1.70; 1.18 to 2.44), and have no paid work (1.84; 1.21 to 2.79). Strongly wanting partnership was also related to feeling unwell, worrying about the problem, high attendance, and no paid work; and health promotion to high attendance and worry. CONCLUSION: Patients in primary care strongly want a patient centred approach, with communication, partnership, and health promotion. Doctors should be sensitive to patients who have a strong preference for patient centredness-those vulnerable either psychosocially or because they are feeling unwell.

Psychosocial, lifestyle, and health status variables in predicting high attendance among adults.

BACKGROUND: Increasing consultation rates have implications for the organisation of health services, the quality of care, and understanding the decision to consult. Most quantitative studies have concentrated on very high attenders--not those attending five or more times a year, who are responsible for most (60%) consultations--and have assessed neither the role of lifestyle nor patients' attitudes. AIMS: To assess associations with higher than average attendance (five or more times ayear). DESIGN OF STUDY: Postal questionnaire sent to a random sample. SETTING: Four thousand adults (one per household) from six general practices. METHOD: Data were analysed to identify predictors significantly associated with higher than average attendance. RESULTS: The response rate was 74%. Sef-reported attendance agreed with the notes (r = 0.80, likelihood ratio for a positive test = 9.4). Higher attendance was independently predicted by the severity of ill health (COOP score = 0-7, 8-9, and 10+; adjusted odds ratios= 1, 1.72, 1.91 respectively; test for trend P<0.001) and the number of reported medical problems (COOP score = 0, 1, 2, and 3+ respectively; adjusted ORs = 1, 2.05, 2.31, 4.29; P<0.001). After controlling for sociodemographic variables, medical problems, the severity of physical ill health, and other confounders, high attendance was more likely in those with medically unexplained somatic symptoms (0, 1-2, 3-5, and 6+ symptoms respectively, ORs = 1, 1.15, 1.48, and 1.62; P<0.001); health anxiety (Whitely Index = 0, 1-5, 6-7 and 8+ respectively, ORs = 1, 1.22, 1.77, and 2.78; P<0.001); and poor perceived health ('very good', 'good', 'poor' respectively, ORs = 1, 1.61, and 2.93; P<0.001). Attendance was less likely in those with negative attitudes to repeated surgery use (OR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.47-0.78), or to doctors (Negdoc scale <18, 18-20, and 21+ respectively; ORs = 1, 0.87, 0.67; P<0.001), in those usually trying the pharmacy first (OR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.48-0.78), and those consuming alcohol (0, 1, 2, 3+ units/day respectively; ORs = 1, 0.62, 0.41, 0.29; P<0.001). Anxiety or depression predicted perceived health, unexplained symptoms, and health anxiety. CONCLUSION: Strategies to manage somatic symptoms, health anxiety, dealing with the causes of--or treating--anxiety and depression, and encouraging use of the pharmacy have the potential both to help patients manage symptoms and in the decision to consult. Sensitivity to the psychological factors contributing to the decision to consult should help doctors achieve a better shared understanding with their patients and help inform appropriate treatment strategies.

Can dietary assessment in general practice target patients with unhealthy diets?

Diet is important in the aetiology and management of many conditions in primary care. Although valid dietary assessment is required for both clinical work and research, no dietary assessment instruments have been validated among patients seen in primary care. A range of simple self-completion dietary assessment questionnaires and established research instruments were compared with an accepted reference standard, a seven-day weighed record, in 111 subjects assessed in a practice nurse-run treatment room. Simple self-completion tools based on food groups and portion sizes perform as well (likelihood ratios for a positive test = 2 to 3) as much more time-consuming instruments. The error in using such instruments is comparable with the error of the standard itself. There is little justification for using time-consuming dietary assessment questionnaires, since simple tools are accurate enough to be clinically useful--to allow practice nurses to target patients for counselling and waste less time on inappropriate counselling--and also useful for research.

The validity of dietary assessment in general practice.

OBJECTIVE: To validate a range of dietary assessment instruments in general practice. METHODS: Using a randomised block design, brief assessment instruments and more complex conventional dietary assessment tools were compared with an accepted "relative" standard--a seven day weighed dietary record. The standard was checked using biomarkers, and by performing test-retest reliability in additional subjects (n = 29). OUTCOMES: Agreement with weighed record. Percentage agreement with weighed record, rank correlation from scatter plot, rank correlation from Bland-Altman plot. Reliability of the weighed record. SETTING: Practice nurse treatment room in a single suburban general practice. SUBJECTS: Patients with risk factors for cardiovascular disease (n = 61) or age/sex stratified general population group (n = 50). RESULTS: Brief self completion dietary assessment tools based on food groups caten during a week show reasonable agreement with the relative standard. For % energy from fat and saturated fat, non-starch polysaccharide, grams of fruit and vegetables and starchy foods consumed the range of agreement with the standard was: median % difference -6% to 12%, rank correlation 0.5 to 0.6. This agreement is of a similar order to the reliability of the weighed record, as good as or better than test standard agreement for more time consuming instruments, and compares favourably with research instruments validated in other settings. Under-reporting of energy intake was common (40%) and more likely if subjects were obese (body mass idex (BMI) > or = 30 60% under-reported; BMI < 30 29%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Under-reporting of absolute energy intake is common, particularly among obese patients. Simple self assessment tools based on food groups, designed for practice nurse dietary assessment, show acceptable agreement with a standard, and suggest such tools are sufficiently accurate for clinical work, research, and possibly population dietary monitoring.

Who is targeted for lifestyle advice? A cross-sectional survey in two general practices.

BACKGROUND: Recent health promotion guidelines reimbursed primary health care teams for targeting lifestyle advice to patients at risk of cardiovascular disease. However, it is unclear whether primary health care teams do target advice, who is targeted, and whether the advice is acted upon. AIM: To assess which factors predict the targeting and recall of lifestyle advice. METHOD: A total of 370 patients with, and 192 without, a computer record of risk factors for cardiovascular disease (hypertension, diabetes, ischaemic heart disease/myocardial infarction/angina, a body mass index > or = 30) from two contrasting Wessex practices were sent a postal questionnaire about medical conditions, recall of lifestyle advice, current lifestyle, and their perceptions about the health of their lifestyle. RESULTS: Seventy-seven per cent of patients responded. There was good agreement between listed risk factors and patients reporting a risk factor (kappa = 0.60), which was similar for both sexes and better in older age groups. Recall of lifestyle advice was not significantly affected by practice, but was more likely in patients with listed risk factors (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 4.62, 95% confidence intervals [CI] = 2.89-7.37) and in men (OR = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.07-2.52), and less likely in older age groups (age < or = 64 years = 1.00; 65-74 years = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.27-0.81; 75+ years = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.20-0.60). Of patients with listed risk factors, 27% could not recall having received any advice, and recall varied with medical condition. Only 40% of patients with reported high blood pressure recalled being given advice about salt. Those who recalled advice were more likely to report a healthier current lifestyle. Of those with unhealthy lifestyles, 30-50% were unaware that their lifestyle was unhealthy. CONCLUSION: Lifestyle advice is not recalled for some important risk factors, and some patients are unaware of their unhealthy lifestyle. Although advice is being preferentially targeted to those with risk factors, women and older patients recall advice less. Research is needed to assess the cost-effectiveness of advice for both sexes and different ages.

Dietary and exercise assessment in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Diet and physical activity are important in many conditions managed in primary care. Dietary and physical activity assessment is complex, has inherent inaccuracies related to self-reporting, and is only a small part of a larger context of developing effective intervention in primary care. However, for personalized assessment in routine clinical care, and for the assessment of different intervention strategies in a general practice research setting, validated life-style assessment tools are needed. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to discuss the requirements for assessment tools and to identify feasible validated assessment instruments for use in primary care. METHOD: Potential tools were identified from a Medline search, UK Research Intelligence, and contact with groups known to be working in the area. RESULTS: Several brief instruments assess mainly fat in the US diet, but the limited range of foods covered and the setting of studies limits their generalizability. Only one tool developed for UK use--'DINE', which scores total fat, fibre and unsaturated fat--was identified which is both feasible and has documented reasonable validated characteristics. Even for this tool there are doubts about the validation "standard'. No diet or physical activity validation studies have used both subjects and health professionals from general practice settings. CONCLUSION: There are very few feasible and validated dietary or physical activity assessment tools for use in clinical care or research in general practice, and doubts about the design and settings of published validation studies. Further research is needed to validate and develop a range of feasible life-style assessment tools with specified time and training requirements for use in primary care.

Sore throat management in general practice.

This paper discusses primary care management of sore throat in the context of recent national 'consensus' guidelines from the Drugs and Therapeutics Bulletin. The guidelines advise taking a throat swab, using typical clinical features where swabs are not available, and suggest that antibiotics shorten the duration of symptoms and prevent complications. Systematic reviews and individual studies indicate that the evidence for prescribing antibiotics for most presentations of sore throat in general practice is marginal, and the benefits are probably outweighed by the likely costs of antibiotics. Using clinical scorecards or symptom clusters to identify individuals who would benefit from treatment is insensitive with low predictive value, although inexpensive. Using throat swabs as a gold standard for diagnosis is inappropriate since they are neither very specific nor sensitive, and will greatly increase costs of management. The relative lack of evidence for the efficacy of antibiotics and for the use of throat swabs from primary care research, and also an unbalanced perspective of dangers and complications related predominantly to a secondary care setting, underlines the problem of achieving valid consensus guidelines. Guidelines not firmly based on evidence appropriate to the intended setting are more likely to be received sceptically and hinder getting research into practice.

The treatment of chronic renal failure in New Zealand.

The treatment of chronic renal failure by centre haemodialysis and home haemodialysis are described. Since 1969 there has been a home dialysis programme at Christchurch. Some 63 patients were treated and 17 have died, six deaths occurred during training, four died after renal transplantation and seven died of other causes. The training time was on average 15 weeks. The implications of this form of management are discussed.