Appropriateness of bone density measurement in Switzerland: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: According to the WHO, osteoporosis is one of the most important non- communicable diseases worldwide. Different screening procedures are controversially discussed, especially concerning the concomitant issues of overdiagnosis and harm caused by inappropriate Dual X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA). The aim of this study was to evaluate the frequency and appropriateness of DXA as screening measure in Switzerland considering individual risk factors and to evaluate covariates independently associated with potentially inappropriate DXA screening. METHODS: Retrospective cross-sectional study using insurance claim data of 2013. Among all patients with DXA screening, women < 65 and men < 70 years without osteoporosis or risk factors for osteoporosis were defined as receiving potentially inappropriate DXA. Statistics included descriptive measures and multivariable regressions to estimate associations of relevant covariates with potentially inappropriate DXA screening. RESULTS: Of 1,131,092 patients, 552,973 were eligible. Among those 2637 of 10,000 (26.4%) underwent potentially inappropriate DXA screening. Female sex (Odds ratio 6.47, CI 6.41-6.54) and higher age showed the strongest association with any DXA screening. Female gender (Odds ratio 1.84, CI 1.49-2.26) and an income among the highest 5% (Odds ratio 1.40, CI 1.01-1.98) were significantly positively associated with potentially inappropriate DXA screening, number of chronic conditions (Odds ratio 0.67, CI 0.65-0.70) and living in the central region of Switzerland (Odds ratio 0.67, CI 0.48-0.95) negatively. CONCLUSION: One out of four DXAs for screening purpose is potentially inappropriate. Stakeholders of osteoporosis screening campaigns should focus on providing more detailed information on appropriateness of DXA screening indications (e.g. age thresholds) in order to avoid DXA overuse.

Internists' career choice towards primary care: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Swiss primary care (PC) is facing workforce shortage. Up to 2011 this workforce was supplied by two board certifications: general medicine and internal medicine. To strengthen them against subspecialties, they were unified into one: general internal medicine. However, since unification general practitioners' career options are no longer restrained by early commitment to PC. This may lead to a decrease of future primary care physicians (PCPs). METHODS: To gain insights in timing and factors influencing career choice of internists, we addressed a cross sectional survey to all board certified internists in the years 2000-2010 (n = 1462). Main measures were: final career choice (PCPs, hospital internists or subspecialists), timing and factors influencing career choice, and attractiveness of PCP career during medical school and residency. RESULTS: Response rate was 53.2%, 44.8% were female and median age was 45 years old. Final career choice was PCP for 39.1% of participants, 15.0% chose to become hospital internists, 41.8% became subspecialists and 4.0% other. Timing of career choice significantly differed between groups. Most of the subspecialists have chosen their career during residency (65.3%), while only 21.9% of the PCPs chose during residency. Work experience in an academic hospital was negatively associated with becoming PCP (P < 0.001). Family influence on career choice was more frequently reported among PCPs and chiefs' influence more reported among non-PCPs (P < 0.001). Fifty-nine percent of the participants considered a career as PCP to be attractive during medical school, this proportion decreased over time. CONCLUSIONS: Timing of career choice of PCPs and subspecialists strongly differed. PCPs opted late for their career and potentially modifiable external factors seem to contribute to their decision. This stresses the importance of fostering attractiveness of PC during medical school as well as during and after residency and of tailored residency positions for future PCPs in the hospital-dominated new general internal medicine training.