Development of a person-centred care approach for persons with chronic multimorbidity in general practice by means of participatory action research.

BACKGROUND: The management of persons with multimorbidity challenges healthcare systems tailored to individual diseases. A person-centred care approach is advocated, in particular for persons with multimorbidity. The aim of this study was to describe the co-creation and piloting of a proactive, person-centred chronic care approach for persons with multimorbidity in general practice, including facilitators and challenges for successful implementation. METHODS: A participatory action research (PAR) approach was applied in 13 general practices employing four subsequent co-creation cycles between 2019 and 2021. The target population included adults with ≥3 chronic conditions. Participating actors were general practitioners (GPs), practice nurses (PNs), patients (target group), the affiliated care cooperation, representatives of a health insurer and researchers. Each cycle consisted of a try-out period in practice and a reflective evaluation through focus groups with healthcare providers, interviews with patients and analyses of routine care data. In each cycle, facilitators, challenges and follow-up actions for the next cycle were identified. Work satisfaction among GPs and PNs was measured pre and at the end of the final co-creation cycle. RESULTS: Identified essential steps in the person-centred chronic care approach include (1) appropriate patient selection for (2) an extended person-centred consultation, and (3) personalised goalsetting and follow-up. Key facilitators included improved therapeutic relationships, enhanced work satisfaction for care providers, and patient appreciation of extended time with their GP. Deliberate task division and collaboration between GPs and PNs based on patient, local setting, and care personnel is required. Challenges and facilitators for implementation encompassed a prioritisation tool to support GPs appropriately who to invite first for extended consultations, appropriate remuneration and time to conduct extended consultations, training in delivering person-centred chronic care available for all general practice care providers and an electronic medical record system accommodating comprehensive information registration. CONCLUSIONS: A person-centred chronic care approach targeting patients with multimorbidity in general practice was developed and piloted in co-creation with stakeholders. More consultation time facilitated better understanding of persons' situations, their functioning, priorities and dilemma's, and positively impacted work satisfaction of care providers. Challenges need to be tackled before widespread implementation. Future evaluation on the quadruple aims is recommended.

Predicting anticipated benefit from an extended consultation to personalise care in multimorbidity: a development and internal validation study of a prioritisation algorithm in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Persons with multimorbidity may gain from person-centred care compared with the current protocolised chronic-disease management in Dutch general practice. Given time constraints and limited resources, it is essential to prioritise those most in need of an assessment of person-centred chronic-care needs. AIM: To develop and validate a prioritisation algorithm based on routine electronic medical record (EMR) data that distinguishes between patients with multimorbidity who would, and those who would not, benefit from an extended person-centred consultation to assess person-centred chronic-care needs, as judged by GPs. DESIGN AND SETTING: A mixed-methods study was conducted in five general practices in the north-west region of the Netherlands. Four out of the five practices were situated in rural areas. METHOD: Multivariable logistic regression using EMR data to predict the GPs' judgement on patients' anticipated benefit from an extended consultation, as well as a thematic analysis of a focus group exploring GPs' clinical reasoning for this judgement were conducted. Internal validation was performed using 10-fold cross-validation. Multimorbidity was defined as the presence of ≥3 chronic conditions. RESULTS: In total, EMRs from 1032 patients were included in the analysis; of these, 352 (34.1%) were judged to have anticipated benefit. The model's cross-validated C-statistic was 0.72 (95% confidence interval = 0.70 to 0.75). Calibration was good. Presence of home visit(s) and history of myocardial infarction were associated with anticipated benefit. Thematic analysis revealed three dimensions feeding anticipated benefit: GPs' cause for concern, patients' mindset regarding their conditions, and balance between received care/expected care needed. CONCLUSION: This algorithm may facilitate automated prioritisation, potentially avoiding the need for GPs to personally triage the whole practice population that has multimorbidity. However, external validation of the algorithm and evaluation of actual benefit of consultation is recommended before implementation.

Home-based initiatives for acute management of COVID-19 patients needing oxygen: differences across The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: During the COVID-19 pandemic new collaborative-care initiatives were developed for treating and monitoring COVID-19 patients with oxygen at home. Aim was to provide a structured overview focused on differences and similarities of initiatives of acute home-based management in the Netherlands. METHODS: Initiatives were eligible for evaluation if (i) COVID-19 patients received oxygen treatment at home; (ii) patients received structured remote monitoring; (iii) it was not an 'early hospital discharge' program; (iv) at least one patient was included. Protocols were screened, and additional information was obtained from involved physicians. Design choices were categorised into: eligible patient group, organization medical care, remote monitoring, nursing care, and devices used. RESULTS: Nine initiatives were screened for eligibility; five were included. Three initiatives included low-risk patients and two were designed specifically for frail patients. Emergency department (ED) visit for an initial diagnostic work-up and evaluation was mandatory in three initiatives before starting home management. Medical responsibility was either assigned to the general practitioner or hospital specialist, most often pulmonologist or internist. Pulse-oximetry was used in all initiatives, with additional monitoring of heart rate and respiratory rate in three initiatives. Remote monitoring staff's qualification and authority varied, and organization and logistics were covered by persons with various backgrounds. All initiatives offered remote monitoring via an application, two also offered a paper diary option. CONCLUSIONS: We observed differences in the organization of interprofessional collaboration for acute home management of hypoxemic COVID-19 patients. All initiatives used pulse-oximetry and an app for remote monitoring. Our overview may be of help to healthcare providers and organizations to set up and implement similar acute home management initiatives for critical episodes of COVID-19 (or other acute disorders) that would otherwise require hospital care.

Study protocol for a nationwide implementation of internet-based vestibular rehabilitation for patients with chronic vestibular symptoms (I-RECOVER).

BACKGROUND: Vestibular rehabilitation is a safe and effective exercise-based treatment for patients with chronic vestibular symptoms. However, it is underused in general practice. Internet-based vestibular rehabilitation (Vertigo Training), which has proven to be effective as well, was developed to increase uptake. We now aim to improve the quality of care for patients with vestibular symptoms by carrying out a nationwide implementation of Vertigo Training. We will evaluate the effect of this implementation on primary care. METHODS: Our implementation study consists of three successive phases: 1) We will perform a retrospective observational cohort study and a qualitative interview study to evaluate the current management of patients with vestibular symptoms in primary care, in particular anti-vertigo drug prescriptions, and identify areas for improvement. We will use the results of this phase to tailor our implementation strategy to the needs of general practitioners (GPs) and patients. 2) This phase entails the implementation of Vertigo Training using a multicomponent implementation strategy, containing: guideline adaptations; marketing strategy; pharmacotherapeutic audit and feedback meetings; education; clinical decision support; and local champions. 3) In this phase, we will evaluate the effect of the implementation in three ways. a. Interrupted time series. We will use routine primary care data from adult patients with vestibular symptoms to compare the number of GP consultations for vestibular symptoms, referrals for vestibular rehabilitation, prescriptions for anti-vertigo drugs, and referrals to physiotherapy and secondary care before and after implementation. b. Prospective observational cohort study. We will extract data from Vertigo Training to investigate the usage and the characteristics of participants. We will also determine whether these characteristics are associated with successful treatment. c. Qualitative interview study. We will conduct interviews with GPs to explore their experiences with the implementation. DISCUSSION: This is one of the first studies to evaluate the effect of a nationwide implementation of an innovative treatment on Dutch primary care. Implementation strategies have been researched before, but it remains unclear which ones are the most effective and under what conditions. We therefore expect to gain relevant insights for future projects that aim to implement innovations in primary care.

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.

Digital health for all: How digital health could reduce inequality and increase universal health coverage.

Digital transformation in health care has a lot of opportunities to improve access and quality of care. However, in reality not all individuals and communities are benefiting equally from these innovations. People in vulnerable conditions, already in need of more care and support, are often not participating in digital health programs. Fortunately, numerous initiatives worldwide are committed to make digital health accessible to all citizens, stimulating the long-cherished global pursuit of universal health coverage. Unfortunately initiatives are not always familiar with each other and miss connection to jointly make a significant positive impact. To reach universal health coverage via digital health it is necessary to facilitate mutual knowledge exchange, both globally and locally, to link initiatives and apply academic knowledge into practice. This will support policymakers, health care providers and other stakeholders to ensure that digital innovations can increase access to care for everyone, leading towards Digital health for all.

Walking the line between assessment, improvement and learning: a qualitative study on opportunities and risks of incorporating peer discussion of audit and feedback within quality improvement in general practice.

OBJECTIVES: There is a broad call for change towards 'new era' quality systems in healthcare, in which the focus lies on learning and improving. A promising way to establish this in general practice care is to combine audit and feedback with peer group discussion. However, it is not known what different stakeholders think of this type of quality improvement. The aim of this research was to explore the opinions of different stakeholders in general practice on peer discussion of audit and feedback and on its opportunities and risks. Second, their thoughts on transparency versus accountability, regarding this system, were studied. DESIGN: An exploratory qualitative study within a constructivist paradigm. Semistructured interviews and focus group discussions were held and coded using thematic analysis. Included stakeholders were general practitioners (GP), patients, professional organisations and insurance companies. SETTING: General practice in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 22 participants were purposively sampled for eight interviews and two focus group discussions. RESULTS: Three main opportunities of peer discussion of audit and feedback were identified: deeper levels of reflection on data, adding context to numbers and more ownership; and three main risks: handling of unwilling colleagues, lacking a safe group and the necessity of patient involvement. An additional theme concerned disagreement on the amount of transparency to be offered: insurance companies and patients advocated for complete transparency on data and improvement of outcomes, while GPs and professional organisations urged to restrict transparency to giving insight into the process. CONCLUSIONS: Peer discussion of audit and feedback could be part of a change movement, towards a quality system based on learning and trust, that is initiated by the profession. Creating a safe learning environment and involving patients is key herein. Caution is needed when complete transparency is asked, since it could jeopardise practitioners' reflection and learning in safety.

Ethnic minority GP trainees at risk for underperformance assessments: a quantitative cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest that ethnic minority students underperform in standardised assessments commonly used to evaluate their progress. This disparity seems to also hold for postgraduate medical students and GP trainees, and may affect the quality of primary health care, which requires an optimally diverse workforce. AIMS: To address the following: 1) to determine to what extent ethnic minority GP trainees are more at risk of being assessed as underperforming than their majority peers; 2) to investigate whether established underperformance appears in specific competence areas; and 3) to explore first- and second-generation ethnic minority trainees' deviations. DESIGN & SETTING: Quantitative retrospective cohort design in Dutch GP specialty training (start years: 2015-2017). METHOD: In 2020-2021, the authors evaluated files on assessed underperformance of 1700 GP trainees at seven Dutch GP specialty training institutes after excluding five opt-outs and 165 incomplete datasets (17.4% ethnic minority trainees). Underperformance was defined as the occurrence of the following, which was prompted by the training institute: 1) preliminary dropout; 2) extension of the educational pathway; and/or 3) mandatory coaching pathways. Statistics Netherlands (CBS) anonymised the files and added data about ethnic group. Thereafter, the authors performed logistic regression for potential underperformance analysis and χ2 tests for competence area analysis. RESULTS: Ethnic minority GP trainees were more likely to face underperformance assessments than the majority group (odds ratio [OR] 2.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.67 to 3.49). Underperformance was not significantly nested in particular competence areas. First-generation ethnic minority trainees seemed more at risk than their second-generation peers. CONCLUSION: Ethnic minority GP trainees seem more at risk of facing educational barriers than the majority group. Additional qualitative research on underlying factors is essential.

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.

Complaint-driven preferences & trust: patient's views on consulting GP trainees.

BACKGROUND: Work-based learning depends on patients' consent to have trainees involved in their care. However, patients can refuse trainees, which might lead to the loss of learning experiences. Improved understanding of patients' views on consulting trainees may provide useful insights to further optimise learning for trainees. METHODS: We performed a qualitative study with 28 patients in The Netherlands. Participants were recruited from GP practices, and were purposively sampled on (un)willingness to consult GP trainees. In semi-structured interviews patients' perspectives and willingness to consult a trainee were explored. Transcripts were thematically analysed using an inductive approach. RESULTS: Two themes explained patients' views on consulting GP trainees: Presenting complaint-driven preferences and Trust in trainees' capabilities. Patients select their doctor based on complaint-driven preferences and chose trainees if they fulfilled these preferences. For urgent, gender-specific and minor complaints, patients prefer timeliness, gender concordance or availability. Patients with more complex, long-term problems prefer to consult a trusted doctor with whom they have a longitudinal relationship. Through repeated visits and empathic behaviour trainees can become this doctor. Before patients consider consulting a trainee, they need to have trust in the trainee's capabilities. This trust is related to the basic trust patients have in the education of the trainee, their knowledge about trainees' capabilities and supervisory arrangements. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' decision to visit a trainee is fluid. Patients will visit a trainee when their complaint-driven preferences are satisfied. Influencing trainees' fulfilment of these preferences and patients' trust in trainees can make patients more willing to consult trainees.

Serological testing for Lyme Borreliosis in general practice: A qualitative study among Dutch general practitioners.

Background: Concerns are raised about missed, delayed and inappropriate diagnosis of Lyme Borreliosis. Quantitative descriptive studies have demonstrated non-adherence to the guidelines for testing for Lyme Borreliosis.Objectives: To gain insight into the diagnostic practices that general practitioners apply for Lyme Borreliosis, their motives for ordering tests and how they act upon test results.Methods: A qualitative study among 16 general practitioners using semi-structured interviews and thematic content analysis.Results: Five themes were distinguished: (1) recognising localised Lyme Borreliosis and symptoms of disseminated disease, (2) use of the guideline, (3) serological testing in patients with clinically suspect Lyme Borreliosis, (4) serological testing without clinical suspicion of Lyme Borreliosis, and (5) dealing with the limited accuracy of the serological tests. Whereas the national guideline recommends using serological tests for diagnosing, general practitioners also use them for ruling out disseminated Lyme Borreliosis. Reasons for non-adherence to the guideline for testing were to reassure patients with non-specific symptoms or without symptoms who feared to have Lyme disease, confirmation of localised Lyme Borreliosis and routine work-up in patients with continuing unexplained symptoms. Some general practitioners referred all patients who tested positive to medical specialists, where others struggled with the explanation of the results.Conclusion: Both diagnosis and ruling out of disseminated Lyme Borreliosis can be difficult for general practitioners. General practitioners use serological tests to reassure patients and rule out Lyme Borreliosis, thereby deviating from the national guideline. Interpretation of test results in these cases can be difficult.

What motivates general practitioners to change practice behaviour? A qualitative study of audit and feedback group sessions in Dutch general practice.

OBJECTIVES: Adopting an attributional perspective, the current article investigates how audit and feedback group sessions contribute to general practitioners' (GPs) motivation to change their practice behaviour to improve care. We focus on the contributions of the audit and feedback itself (content) and the group discussion (process). METHODS: Four focus groups, comprising a total of 39 participating Dutch GPs, discussed and compared audit and feedback of their practices. The focus groups were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Audit and feedback contributed to GPs' motivation to change in two ways: by raising awareness about aspects of their current care practice and by providing indications of the possible impact of change. For these contributions to play out, the audit and feedback should be reliable and valid, specific, recent and recurrent and concern GPs' own practices or practices within their own influence sphere. Care behaviour attributed to external, uncontrollable or unstable causes would not induce change. The added value of the group is twofold as well: group discussion contributed to GPs' motivation to change by providing a frame of reference and by affording insights that participants would not have been able to achieve on their own. CONCLUSIONS: In audit and feedback group sessions, both audit and feedback information and group discussion can valuably contribute to GPs' motivation to change care practice behaviour. Peer interaction can positively contribute to explore alternative practices and avenues for improvement. Local or regional peer meetings would be beneficial in facilitating reflection and discussion. An important avenue for future studies is to explore the contribution of audit and feedback and small-group discussion to actual practice change.

Trainers' and trainees' expectations of entrustable professional activities (EPAs) in a primary care training programme.

Introducing Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) into primary care postgraduate medical education (PGME) programmes may be challenging, due to the general nature of primary care medicine, but trainers and trainees both stand to benefit from their use. We investigated the expectations of trainers and trainees in a primary care PGME programme regarding the use of EPAs. We held two focus group discussions with trainers and four with trainees from the Dutch General Practice training programme, to explore their views on the use of EPAs in their training programme. Focus group discussions were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were analysed using conventional content analysis. Trainers and trainees felt that the large number of EPAs in the training programme, and the general way they are formulated, made them unsuitable for use in formal assessments. However, they felt that EPAs can be a useful aid to trainee learning. EPAs may help trainers to give trainees specific feedback on their performance. While the use of the classic EPA method in primary care PGME programmes may be challenging, EPAs in such programmes might be more suitable as design and learning tools than as a tool for formal assessment.

The conundrum of acute chest pain in general practice: a nationwide survey in The Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: GPs are frequently confronted with patients with acute onset chest pain. Although usually benign, approximately 5% is due to acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Unfortunately, ACS is not always recognised, leading to a missed diagnosis in 2-5% of presentations. AIM: The authors set out to study the level of risk GPs are willing to accept with regards to missing an ACS diagnosis, and the receptiveness of implementing new clinical decision aids. DESIGN & SETTING: This study involved an online survey among GPs in the Netherlands. METHOD: A concept survey was constructed, which was tested among a panel of 24 GPs. The survey was then modified to achieve content validity. This survey was electronically distributed among 1000 GPs. RESULTS: A total of 313 (31.3%) GPs completed the survey. Of those surveyed, the median age was 50 years (interquartile range 41-57), 53.0% were female, and 6.4% were specialist GPs ('kaderarts') in cardiology or acute care. GPs estimated the missed ACS rate to be <5.0% in clinical practice, most often estimating a chance of 1.0-2.5% (35.2%) or 0.5-1.0% (29.7%). For atypical case presentations, 70% of GPs would accept a 0.1-1.0% missed diagnosis rate, while keeping the referral threshold to a maximum of 50 unnecessary referrals for each ACS case (75% of responders). GPs would welcome additional decision aids, with 79.2% favouring a clinical decision aid, 77.1% favouring troponin point-of-care (POC) testing, and 85.5% favoring a combination of a clinical decision aid and a troponin POC test. CONCLUSION: GPs perceive that they miss more ACS cases than they feel comfortable with, which is reflected in a defensive referral strategy. The vast majority of GPs would welcome the use of clinical decision aids and/or cardiac biomarker POC testing for ruling out ACS, if accompanied by more certainty than based on clinical judgment alone.

Prognosis of primary care patients aged 80 years and older with lower respiratory tract infection.

BACKGROUND: Predictors for a complicated course of a lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) episode among patients aged > or =80 years are unknown. AIM: To determine prognostic factors for hospital admission or death within 30 days after first onset of LRTI among primary care patients aged > or =80 years. DESIGN OF STUDY: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Utrecht General Practitioner Research Network. METHOD: Data were obtained using the computerised database of the research network over the years 1997 to 2003. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was applied to estimate the independent association of predictors with 30-day hospitalisation or death. RESULTS: In all, 860 episodes of LRTI were observed in 509 patients; 13% of patients were hospitalised or died within 30 days. Type of LRTI, diabetes, use of oral glucocorticoids, use of antibiotics in the previous month, and hospitalisation in the previous 12 months were independently associated with the combined outcome. Patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus had a greater risk of 30-day hospitalisation or death compared with patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes. CONCLUSION: Independent of age, serious comorbidity - notably the presence of insulin-dependent diabetes or exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease requiring oral glucocorticoids - increases the risk for complications, including hospital admissions, in patients aged > or =80 years with an LRTI.

Prediction of complicated lower respiratory tract infections in older patients with diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with diabetes have an elevated risk of developing complicated lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs). However, up until now, GPs have not had the tools to assess individual risks. AIM: To assess the applicability of an existing prediction rule for complicated LRTI among patients with diabetes. DESIGN OF STUDY: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: The Utrecht GP Research Network. METHOD: An existing rule that was used estimates the risk of 30-day hospitalisation or death following an episode of LRTI. Predictors were exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or pneumonia, increasing age, heart failure, number of hospitalisations in the previous year, use of antibiotics in the previous month, diabetes medication, and prednisone use. Discriminative capacity of the rule was estimated in patients with diabetes. Other potential predictors from the original study were examined, to test for a potentially improved model. RESULTS: Of 445 episodes of LRTI in patients with diabetes, 68 had an outcome of hospitalisation or death within 30 days of diagnosis of LRTI (15.3%). Results showed good reliability of the model (goodness of fit test P=0.16) and discriminative properties (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve: 0.79, 95% confidence interval=0.73 to 0.86). No other predictors could be added. Patients with a lower-risk assignment (scoreor=7) had a probability of 36.6% for the composite endpoint of hospitalisation or death within 30 days of diagnosis of LRTI. CONCLUSION: The use of a prediction rule may help GPs to assess the risk of hospitalisation or death in patients with diabetes who have an episode of LRTI.

Is co-morbidity taken into account in the antibiotic management of elderly patients with acute bronchitis and COPD exacerbations?

BACKGROUND: Guidelines on acute lower respiratory tract infections recommend restrictive use of antibiotics, however, in patients with relevant co-morbid conditions treatment with antibiotics should be considered. Presently, it is unknown whether GPs adhere to these guidelines and target antibiotic treatment more often at patients with risk-elevating conditions. OBJECTIVES: We assessed whether in elderly primary care patients with acute bronchitis or exacerbations of chronic pulmonary disease (COPD), antibiotics are more often prescribed to patients with risk-elevating co-morbid conditions. METHODS: Using the Utrecht GP research database, we analysed 2643 episodes in patients of 65 years of age or older with a GP-diagnosed acute bronchitis or exacerbation of COPD. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was applied to determine independent determinants of antibiotic use. RESULTS: Antibiotic prescribing rates were high in both acute bronchitis (84%) and in exacerbations of COPD (53%). In acute bronchitis, only age was an independent determinant of antibiotic use [odds ratio (OR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.003-1.048], whereas in exacerbations of COPD antibiotics were more often prescribed to male patients (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0-1.5), patients with diabetes (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.1-2.4) and heart failure (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0-1.7). CONCLUSION: Dutch GPs prescribe antibiotics in the majority of elderly patients with acute bronchitis and in half of the episodes of exacerbations of COPD. Tailoring their antibiotic treatment according to the presence or absence of high-risk co-morbid conditions could help GPs in improving antibiotic use in patients with respiratory tract infections in primary care.