[ECOVIR: Study of a primary care cohort in of patients with Acute Respiratory Infections in Normandy, an example of pluri-professional hospital-primary care coordination]. / ECOVIR : mise en place d'une cohorte en soins primaires, un exemple de coopération pluri-professionnelle ville-hôpital.

Acute Respiratory Infections (ARI) need be better understood and more effectively treated, especially insofar as they are of pivotal importance in public health, particularly during a crisis such as the SARS-CoV2 pandemic. The prospective, multicentric cohort study of viral codetections in respiratory samples study known as ECOVIR was conducted in Normandy, France during two winters (2018-2019, 2019-2020). The objective of the project was to create a biobank of respiratory tract samples from patients consulting their general practitioner (GP) for ARI symptoms. ECOVIR involved 36 GP investigators (GPI), from 8 health care centers throughout Normandy. Six hundred and eighty-five patients with ARI symptoms were included; naso-pharyngeal samples were taken by the GPIs and subsequently analyzed in virology laboratories for the purposes of viral codetection. The median of inclusions was 16 patients for each of the 31 actively participating GPIs over the two winters (CI25-75% [4.75; 27]). By D7, 92% of the patients contacted had responded to our call for participation, enabling us to obtain clinical, environmental and socio-demographic data. Through this study, we created an original functional network, thereby establishing a viable link between research and primary care, which is generally underrepresented in research protocols, even though it constitutes the cornerstone of the French health care system, especially during this prolonged period of sanitary crisis.

[Indicators in teledermatology: A literature review]. / Indicateurs en télédermatologie : une revue de la littérature.

AIM: Over the last two decades teledermatology has become one of the most widely used applications in telemedicine. Wide-ranging medico-economic evaluations are necessary to facilitate its deployment. "Accurate and measurable" indicators must be defined in order to enable high-quality assessments to be performed. The objective of this study is to identify all indicators allowing evaluation of teledermatology procedures and to assess the relevance and results thereof. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search until September 2017 was conducted in PubMed using the following MeSH search terms: "telemedicine", "dermatology" and "quality improvement". RESULTS: The search identified 372 articles, of which 127 were included. Fourteen indicators were identified and split into 4 categories: processes indicators, quality indicators, cost indicators and satisfaction indicators. Reliability of diagnosis was the most widely evaluated indicator (49 studies). It was good overall compared to conventional consultations. Costs were generally reduced. Due to the absence of a validated measuring tool, it was difficult to compare the results for certain indicators, particularly satisfaction, and thus to make any generalizations. CONCLUSION: Teledermatology is a promising tool. Its deployment must be adapted to the various needs in the field and achievement of this goal requires consultation with patients and with the different healthcare professionals involved. Its evaluation must also be specific to each terrain and must employ standardized measuring instruments.

Physician satisfaction with transition from CPOE to paper-based prescription.

INTRODUCTION: In January 2015, Rouen University Hospital's information system experienced serious issues. It was necessary to rapidly switch from the computerized provider order entry (CPOE) system towards a paper-based order entry (PBOE) system. This was an opportunity to evaluate prescriber opinion on the two provider order entry (POE) systems. METHODS: All residents were asked to fill an augmented version of the POE satisfaction and usage survey for both POE systems. The results were compared to identify the strengths and weaknesses of each system. RESULTS: Fifty-one respondents had used the CPOE system and the PBOE system. Overall, satisfaction was higher with PBOE than CPOE (odds ratio (OR)=3.74; p<0.001). Usability (OR=4.00; p<0.001), reliability (OR=8.54; p<0.001), time consumption (OR=0.50; p<0.05 - survey statement was formulated negatively), and communication with nurses (OR=14.27; p<0.0001) reached statistically better agreement. The more experience with CPOE the more residents were disillusioned with the reliability (OR=6.55; p<0.01), the usability (OR=5.68; p<0.01) and the patient safety (OR=0.27; p<0.05 - survey statement was formulated negatively) of CPOE. Although safety issues were reported for both systems, the causes were different; PBOE imposed frequent rewriting of the order while CPOE lack of usability might be unsafe. Another important issue with both POE systems was time consumption. CONCLUSION: Residents did not report any increase in safety issues with the rapid switch from CPOE to PBOE. They even seemed more satisfied with the rollback to paper, which remains a possible degraded mode in case of health information technology collapse.

[Benefits and usability of a pharmaceutical record in medical practice. A survey of hospital doctors and pharmacists (MATRIX study)]. / Intérêt et utilisabilité du dossier pharmaceutique en pratique médicale. Enquête auprès de médecins et pharmaciens hospitaliers (étude MATRIX).

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the impact of the pharmaceutical patient record use in emergency, geriatric and anaesthesia and intensive care departments, an experimentation was launched in 2013 in 55 hospitals. The purpose of the study was to assess the opinions of physicians and pharmacists about the benefits and usability of the patient pharmaceutical record. METHODS: An e-mailed self-administered questionnaire was sent to all the pharmacists, anaesthesiologists, geriatricians and emergency physicians of the 55 hospitals involved in the patient pharmaceutical record experimentation. The questionnaire assessed the usability of the patient pharmaceutical record using the "System Usability Scale", as well as its use, its benefits and limitations perceived in clinical practice, and overall user satisfaction. Questionnaires were collected from November 2014 to January 2015. RESULTS: Ninety-six questionnaires were collected, from 47 hospitals, representing 86% of the hospitals involved in the experimentation. The patient pharmaceutical record was effectively operational in 36 hospitals. Data from 73 questionnaires filled by physicians and pharmacists with potential experience with the patient pharmaceutical record were used for evaluation. Forty-two respondents were pharmacists (57%) and 31 were physicians (43%), including 13 geriatricians, 11 emergency physicians and 7 anaesthesiologists. Patient pharmaceutical record overall usability score was 62.5 out of 100. It did not vary with the profession or seniority of the respondent. It was positively correlated with the frequency of use. More than half of respondents reported that they never or uncommonly used the patient pharmaceutical record. The length of access to data period was considered as insufficient. Main obstacles to more utilization of the patient pharmaceutical record were the lack of information about the dosage of dispensed drugs, the low number of patients in possession of their health card and the low number of patients with an activated patient pharmaceutical record. CONCLUSION: Two years after the beginning of the experiment aiming to broaden the access to the patient pharmaceutical record to physicians, these first evaluation results are encouraging. The evaluation of the consequences of the access to the patient pharmaceutical record for physicians remains necessary.

Searching for rare diseases in PubMed: a blind comparison of Orphanet expert query and query based on terminological knowledge.

BACKGROUND: Despite international initiatives like Orphanet, it remains difficult to find up-to-date information about rare diseases. The aim of this study is to propose an exhaustive set of queries for PubMed based on terminological knowledge and to evaluate it versus the queries based on expertise provided by the most frequently used resource in Europe: Orphanet. METHODS: Four rare disease terminologies (MeSH, OMIM, HPO and HRDO) were manually mapped to each other permitting the automatic creation of expended terminological queries for rare diseases. For 30 rare diseases, 30 citations retrieved by Orphanet expert query and/or query based on terminological knowledge were assessed for relevance by two independent reviewers unaware of the query's origin. An adjudication procedure was used to resolve any discrepancy. Precision, relative recall and F-measure were all computed. RESULTS: For each Orphanet rare disease (n = 8982), there was a corresponding terminological query, in contrast with only 2284 queries provided by Orphanet. Only 553 citations were evaluated due to queries with 0 or only a few hits. There were no significant differences between the Orpha query and terminological query in terms of precision, respectively 0.61 vs 0.52 (p = 0.13). Nevertheless, terminological queries retrieved more citations more often than Orpha queries (0.57 vs. 0.33; p = 0.01). Interestingly, Orpha queries seemed to retrieve older citations than terminological queries (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The terminological queries proposed in this study are now currently available for all rare diseases. They may be a useful tool for both precision or recall oriented literature search.

[Prevalence of asthma consultations in general practice]. / Prévalence des consultations pour asthme en médecine générale.

INTRODUCTION: Few data from primary care settings are available about asthma prevalence. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of asthma consultations in general practice, and to describe their characteristics. METHODS: This was a multicenter, cross-sectional national study, conducted in general practice. Investigators were 54 interns from 27 medical schools. Between December 2011 and April 2012, they collected and entered variables specific to each consultation over a period of 20 days from a structured electronic health record using the International classification of primary care (ICPC-2) together with data about their trainer(s). RESULTS: Data were recorded for 20,613 consultations with 45,582 consultation outcomes described. Asthma represented 348 (1.69%) of consultations. The presence of an asthma code was associated with fewer reasons for the consultation, but with more processes of care. Forty-two percent of other consultation results associated with asthma in the same consultation concerned chronic diseases. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that asthma remains underdiagnosed in general practice in France. In order to address this problem, the development of validated diagnostic tools that can be used in general practice settings, and a better access to spirometry, may be directions to explore in future research.