The burden of persistent symptom diagnoses in primary care patients: a cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: The burden of symptoms is a subjective experience of distress. Little is known on the burden of feeling unwell in patients with persistent symptom diagnoses. The aim of this study was to assess the burden in primary care patients with persistent symptom diagnoses compared to other primary care patients. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed in which an online survey was sent to random samples of 889 patients with persistent symptom diagnoses (>1 year) and 443 other primary care patients after a transactional identification in a Dutch primary care data registry. Validated questionnaires were used to assess the severity of symptoms (PHQ-15), Symptom Intensity and Symptom Interference questionnaires, depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (GAD-7), quality of life (SF-12 and EQ-5D-5L)) and social functioning (SPF-ILs). RESULTS: Overall, 243 patients completed the survey: 178 (73.3%) patients in the persistent symptom diagnoses group and 65 (26.7%) patients in the control group. In the persistent group, 65 (36.5%) patients did not have persistent symptom(s) anymore according to the survey response. Patients who still had persistent symptom diagnoses (n = 113, 63.5%) reported significantly more severe somatic symptoms (mean difference = 3.6, [95% CI: 0.24, 4.41]), depression (mean difference = 3.0 [95% CI: 1.24, 3.61]) and anxiety (mean difference = 2.3 [95% CI: 0.28, 3.10]) and significantly lower physical functioning (mean difference = - 6.8 [95% CI: -8.96, -3.92]). CONCLUSION: Patients with persistent symptom diagnoses suffer from high levels of symptoms burden. The burden in patient with persistent symptoms should not be underestimated as awareness of this burden may enhance person-centered care.

Patients' Characteristics and General Practitioners' Management of Patients with Symptom Diagnoses.

INTRODUCTION: Symptom diagnoses are diagnoses used in primary care when the relevant diagnostic criteria of a disease are not fulfilled. Although symptom diagnoses often get resolved spontaneously without a clearly defined illness nor treatment, up to 38% of these symptoms persist more than 1 year. It is largely unknown how often symptom diagnoses occur, which symptoms persist, and how general practitioners (GPs) manage them. AIM: Explore morbidity rates, characteristics and management of patients with nonpersistent (≤1 year) and persistent (>1 year) symptom diagnoses. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed in a Dutch practice-based research network including 28,590 registered patients. We selected symptom diagnosis episodes with at least 1 contact in 2018. We performed descriptive statistics, Student's T and χ2 tests to summarize and compare patients' characteristics and GP management strategies in the nonpersistent and persistent groups. RESULTS: The incidence rate of symptom diagnoses was 767 episodes per 1000 patient-years. The prevalence rate was 485 patients per 1000 patient-years. Out of the patients who had a contact with their GPs, 58% had at least 1 symptom diagnosis, from which 16% were persistent (>1 year). In the persistent group, we found significantly more females (64% vs 57%), older patients (mean: 49 vs 36 years of age), patients with more comorbidities (71% vs 49%), psychological (17% vs 12%) and social (8% vs 5%) problems. Prescriptions (62% vs 23%) and referral (62.7% vs 30.6%) rates were significantly higher in persistent symptom episodes. CONCLUSION: Symptom diagnoses are highly prevalent (58%) of which a considerable part (16%) persists more than a year.

Improving Primary Health Care Data With ICPC-3: From a Medical to a Person-Centered Perspective.

The World Organization of Family Doctors (WONCA) developed the third edition of the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC-3) to support the shift from a medical perspective to a person-centered perspective in primary health care. The previous editions (ICPC-1 and ICPC-2) allowed description of 3 important elements of health care encounters: the reason for the encounter, the diagnosis and/or health problem, and the process of care. The ICPC-3 adds function-related information as a fourth element, thereby capturing most parts of the encounter in a single practical and concise classification. ICPC-3 thus has the potential to give more insight on patients' activities and functioning, supporting physicians in shifting from a strict medical/disease-based approach to care to a more person-centered approach. The ICPC-3 is also expanded with a new chapter for visits pertaining to immunizations and for coding of special screening examinations and public health promotion; in addition, it contains classes for programs related to reported conditions (eg, a cardiovascular program, a heart failure program) and can accommodate relevant national or regional classes. Classes are selected based on what is truly and frequently occurring in daily practice. Each class has its own codes. Less frequently used concepts pertaining to morbidity are captured as inclusions within the main classes. Implementation of the ICPC-3 in an electronic health record allows provision of meaningful feedback to primary care, and supports the exchange of information within teams and between primary and secondary care. It also gives policy makers and funders insight into what is happening in primary care and thus has the potential to improve provision of care.

Assessment of functioning in Dutch primary care: Development study of a consultation tool for patients with chronic conditions and multimorbidity.

BACKGROUND: In primary care, a shift from a disease-oriented approach for patients with multimorbidity towards a more person-centred approach is needed. AIM: To transform a self-report questionnaire for patients with chronic conditions in primary care, the Primary Care Functioning Scale (PCFS), into an understandable, visually attractive and feasible consultation tool for patients and health care providers. The consultation tool consists of a web-based version of the PCFS, which is filled in by the patient and is processed to a feedback report that summarizes and visualizes the main findings. The feedback report can be discussed with the patient to facilitate a more person-centred conversation for patients with chronic conditions and multimorbidity in general practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: In this qualitative study, we developed the consultation tool by using design thinking in a participatory developmental process. METHODS: In the first phase, we constructed five different feedback report templates to summarize and display the results of a completed PCFS questionnaire in a series of two expert meetings with patients and general practitioners (GPs). In the second phase, we performed an exploratory qualitative interview study involving dyads of patients with chronic conditions and their practice nurses. In an iterative process, we explored their experiences with the consultation tool. RESULTS: Patients, as well as GPs, preferred a clear manner of presenting the results of the questionnaire in a feedback report. In 18 interviews with patients and practice nurses during three different interview rounds, we adjusted the feedback report and consultation tool based on the input from patients and practice nurses. After the final interview round, patients and practice nurses consented that the consultation tool was useful for having a more in-depth consultation about functioning and patients' preferences when integrated into the regularly scheduled consultations. CONCLUSION: We were able to develop an understandable and feasible consultation tool that is applicable in already existing chronic disease management programmes in general practice in the Netherlands. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: To increase the understandability and feasibility of the consultation tool, we collaborated with end-users and actively involved patients, GPs and practice nurses in a participatory development process.

Purposeful Incorporation of Patient Narratives in the Medical Record in the Netherlands.

INTRODUCTION: Structuring patient and practice data into episodes formed the foundation of the earliest evidence base of family medicine. We aim to make patients' narratives part of the evidence base for family medicine by incorporating coded and structured information on the patient's reason to visit the family physician (FP) and adding the patient's personal and contextual characteristics to routine registration data. This documentation allows studies of relations between morbidity and elements of the patient story, providing more insight into the range of problems presented to primary care and in the patient-centeredness applied by FPs. METHODS: The Dutch Practice-Based Research Network (PBRN), named FaMe-Net, is the world's oldest PBRN. Seven Dutch family practices provide regular primary care and participate in the PBRN. It contains all morbidity data of the approximately 40,000 listed patients (308,000 patient-years and 2.2 million encounters from 2005 until 2019). All information belonging to 1 health problem is ordered in 1 episode. Morbidity (diagnoses), reasons for encounter (RFE), and interventions are coded according to the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC-2). Registration occurs within the electronic health record (EHR), specially designed to facilitate the extensive registration for the PBRN. Since 2016, the network expanded routine registration with the duration of symptoms and coded personal and contextual characteristics (eg, country of birth, level of education, family history, traumatic events) obtained through the self-reported 'context survey' of listed patients. These data are added to the EHR. Registered data are extracted from the EHR and processed for scientific research.We present data on the differences in RFEs of the most prominent symptoms of COVID-19 between 2019 and 2020; the relation between the diagnosis of pneumonia and presentation of the symptom 'cough,' and how personal determinants influence the chances of final diagnoses. Lastly, we show the relation of self-reported abuse with patient's contact frequency and psychosocial problems. RESULTS: Prompt introduction of registration rules brought insight into COVID-19-related symptoms early in the pandemic. In March 2020, symptoms related to COVID-19 were presented more often than in March 2019. Chronic conditions and prevention showed a collapsing contact frequency. Telephone, email, and video consultations increased from 31% to 53%.Episodes of pneumonia most frequently started with the RFE 'cough.' A combination of 'cough' and 'fever' as RFE increases the likelihood of pneumonia, as does cough in the presence of comorbid COPD among older men. The prevalence of pneumonia is higher among patients with low socioeconomic status. DISCUSSION: The Dutch PBRN FaMe-Net has started to add elements of patients' narratives and context to decades of morbidity registration, creating options for a scientific approach to primary care's core values. Assumptions of 'pre/post chances' of the final diagnosis, already existing implicitly in FPs minds, can be elaborated and quantified by investigating the associations between multiple registered variables, including parts of patients' 'stories.' This way, we aim to make visible what is intuitively already known by FPs.

Improving the accuracy of ICD-10 coding of morbidity/mortality data through the introduction of an electronic diagnostic terminology tool at the general hospitals in Lagos, Nigeria.

BACKGROUND: Reliable information which can only be derived from accurate data is crucial to the success of the health system. Since encoded data on diagnoses and procedures are put to a broad range of uses, the accuracy of coding is imperative. Accuracy of coding with the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision (ICD-10) is impeded by a manual coding process that is dependent on the medical records officers' level of experience/knowledge of medical terminologies. AIM STATEMENT: To improve the accuracy of ICD-10 coding of morbidity/mortality data at the general hospitals in Lagos State from 78.7% to ≥95% between March 2018 and September 2018. METHODS: A quality improvement (QI) design using the Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle framework. The interventions comprised the introduction of an electronic diagnostic terminology software and training of 52 clinical coders from the 26 general hospitals. An end-of-training coding exercise compared the coding accuracy between the old method and the intervention. The outcome was continuously monitored and evaluated in a phased approach. RESULTS: Research conducted in the study setting yielded a baseline coding accuracy of 78.7%. The use of the difficult items (wrongly coded items) from the research for the end-of-training coding exercise accounted for a lower coding accuracy when compared with baseline. The difference in coding accuracy between manual coders (47.8%) and browser-assisted coders (54.9%) from the coding exercise was statistically significant. Overall average percentage coding accuracy at the hospitals over the 12-month monitoring and evaluation period was 91.3%. CONCLUSION: This QI initiative introduced a stop-gap for improving data coding accuracy in the absence of automated coding and electronic health record. It provides evidence that the electronic diagnostic terminology tool does improve coding accuracy and with continuous use/practice should improve reliability and coding efficiency in resource-constrained settings.

Developing measures to capture the true value of primary care.

Primary care (PC) is an essential building block for any high quality healthcare system, and has a particularly positive impact on vulnerable patients. It contributes to the overall performance of health systems, and countries that reorient their health system towards PC are better prepared to achieve universal health coverage. Monitoring the actual performance of PC in health systems is essential health policy to support PC. However, current indicators are often too narrowly defined to account for quality of care in the complex populations with which PC deals. This article reviews a number of conceptual frameworks developed to capture PC values in robust measures and indicators that can inform policy and practice performance. Each have benefits and limitations. Further work is needed to develop meaningful primary health care (PHC) and PC measures to inform strategic action by policymakers and governments for improved overall performance of health systems.

The COVID-19 Pandemic in Nijmegen, the Netherlands: Changes in Presented Health Problems and Demand for Primary Care.

We studied the changes in presented health problems and demand for primary care since the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the Netherlands. We analyzed prominent symptom features of COVID-19, and COVID-19 itself as the reason for encounter. Also, we analyzed the number and type of encounters for common important health problems. Respiratory tract symptoms related to COVID-19 were presented more often in 2020 than in 2019. We observed a dramatic increase of telephone/e-mail/Internet consultations in the months after the outbreak. Contacts for other health problems such as prevention and acute and chronic conditions plummeted substantially (P <0.001); mental health problems stabilized.

Primary care functioning scale showed validity and reliability in patients with chronic conditions: a psychometric study.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the psychometric properties of a newly developed self-report questionnaire that aims for a more person-centered approach in primary care for patients with chronic conditions, the Primary Care Functioning Scale (PCFS). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: To test the measurement properties of the PCFS, we asked patients with diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and chronic pulmonary disease to complete the PCFS questionnaire. The PCFS is entirely based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF), consisting of 52 ICF-related items covering body functions, activities and participation, environmental factors, and personal factors. We analyzed three hypotheses representing different item sets of the 34 ICF-related items that assess the level of functioning (body functions, activities, and participation). We tested for unidimensionality, differential item functioning, reliability, and criterion-related validity. RESULTS: Five hundred and eighty-two patients completed the questionnaire. The total scores of the polytomous and dichotomized items from the overall set 'body functions, activities and participation' demonstrated unidimensionality, good reliability (>0.80), and stability over time without bias from background variables. CONCLUSION: In sum, the PCFS can be used as a valid and reliable instrument to measure functioning in patients with chronic morbidity in primary care.

Sex differences in incidence of respiratory symptoms and management by general practitioners.

BACKGROUND: Differences between women and men play an important role in lung physiology and epidemiology of respiratory diseases, but also in the health care processes. OBJECTIVE: To analyse sex differences in patients encountering their general practitioner (GP) with respiratory symptoms with regard to incidence, GP's management and final diagnoses. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study, using data of the Dutch Practice Based Research Network. All patients who encountered their GP from 01-07-2013 until 30-06-2018 with a new episode of care starting with a reason for encounter in the respiratory category (R) of the ICPC-2 classification were included (n = 16 773). Multi-level logistic regression was used to analyse influence of patients' sex on management of GPs with adjustment for possible confounders. RESULTS: We found a significant higher incidence of respiratory symptoms in women than in men: 230/1000 patient years [95% confidence interval (CI) 227-232] and 186/1000 patient years (95% CI 183-189), respectively. When presenting with cough, GPs are more likely to perform physical examination [odds ratio (OR) 1.22; 95% CI 1.11-1.35] and diagnostic radiology (OR 1.25; 95% CI 1.08-1.44), but less likely to prescribe medication (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.82-0.95) in men. When visiting the GP with dyspnoea, men more often undergo diagnostic imaging (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.05-1.66) and are more often referred to a specialist (OR 1.35; 95% CI 1.13-1.62). CONCLUSIONS: Women encounter their GP more frequently with respiratory symptoms than men and GPs perform more diagnostic investigations in men. We suggest more research in general practice focussing on sex differences and possible confounders.

Multicentre descriptive cross-sectional study of Japanese home visit patients: reasons for encounter, health problems and multimorbidity.

BACKGROUND: GP in Japan are encouraged to conduct home visits for older adults. However, most previous studies on home visits were based on secondary analyses of billing data that did not include reasons for the encounter. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to describe home visit care by GP in Japan, including reasons for encounter, health problems, episodes of care, comprehensiveness and multimorbidity. METHODS: This multicentre descriptive cross-sectional study used the International Classification of Primary Care, second edition, and was conducted in Japan from 1 October 2016 to 31 March 2017. Participants were patients who received home visits from 10 enrolled GPs working in urban and rural areas across Japan. The main outcome measures were reasons for encounter, health problems and multimorbidity. RESULTS: Of 253 potential patient participants, 250 were included in this analysis; 92.4% were aged 65 years and older. We registered 1,278 regular home visits and 110 emergency home visits. The top three reasons for encounters home visits were associated with cardiovascular and gastrointestinal disorders: prescriptions for cardiovascular diseases (n = 796), medical examination/health evaluation for cardiovascular diseases (n = 758) and prescriptions for gastrointestinal problems (n = 554). About 50% of patients had multimorbidity. Cardiovascular, endocrine and neuropsychological diseases were the most frequent problems in patients with multimorbidity. CONCLUSIONS: The main reasons for encounter were prescriptions for chronic conditions. Emergency visits accounted for 8% of all visits. Around half of the patients had multimorbidity. This information may help GPs and policy makers to better assess home visit patients' needs.

Genetics in primary care: validating a tool to pre-symptomatically assess common disease risk using an Australian questionnaire on family history.

BACKGROUND: A positive family history for diabetes, cardiovascular diseases or various types of cancer increases the relative risk for these diseases by 2 to 5 times compared to people without a positive family history. Taking a family history in daily general practice is useful for early, pre-symptomatic risk assessment, but at the moment no standardized family history questionnaire is available in the Dutch language. In this study we used a 9-item questionnaire, previously developed and applied in an Australian study, to probe family history for 7 specific conditions. The aim of the present qualitative study was to test face and content validity of the Australian family history questionnaire in Dutch general practice and to advance the standardization of intake information at an international level. We conducted 10 cognitive interviews with patients over 4 rounds, using the verbal probing technique. This approach allows the collection of data through a series of probe questions, with the aim of obtaining detailed information. After each interview round we modified the questionnaire based on the answers of the interviewees. We also performed 10 semi-structured interviews with general practitioners (GPs) to get their opinion on the content and usability of the questionnaire in practice. RESULTS: Patients varied in age and gender, and 4 patients were known to have a genetic disorder. The GPs varied in age, gender, clinical experience, type of practice and location. In the first round, seven problems were identified in the questionnaire in the categories Comprehension (1), Recall (2), Judgement (0), Response process (2) and Completeness, (2); by the fourth and final round no problems remained. The content and usability of the questionnaire were assessed positively. CONCLUSIONS: When translated for everyday use in Dutch general practice, the Australian family history questionnaire showed a strong face and content validity, and GPs were positive regarding feasibility. Validation of this family history questionnaire could aid in the standardized integration of genetically relevant information in the electronic health record and clinical research. Conspicuous questionnaire information might alert the GP regarding specific conditions and enable detection of disease at an earlier stage. Additional questionnaire requirements needed however are accurate patient information and consistent, accessible locations in the electronic health record with a possibility to be automatically registered. By deriving a Dutch family history questionnaire convenient for GPs, we adapted a template that might also prove useful for other countries and other medical professionals. This development could make the rapid operationalization of readily available genetic knowledge feasible in daily practice and clinical research, leading to improved medical care.

Use and Effects of Patient Access to Medical Records in General Practice Through a Personal Health Record in the Netherlands: Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: In the Dutch health care system, general practitioners hold a central position. They store information from all health care providers who are involved with their patients in their electronic health records. Web-based access to the summary record in general practice through a personal health record (PHR) may increase patients' insight into their medical conditions and help them to be involved in their care. OBJECTIVE: We describe the protocol that we will use to investigate the utilization of patients' digital access to the summary of their medical records in general practice through a PHR and its effects on the involvement of patients in their care. METHODS: We will conduct a multilevel mixed-methods study in which the PHR and Web-based access to the summary record will be offered for 6 months to a random sample of 500 polypharmacy patients, 500 parents of children aged <4 years, and 500 adults who do not belong to the former two groups. At the patient level, a controlled before-after study will be conducted using surveys, and concurrently, qualitative data will be collected from focus group discussions, think-aloud observations, and semistructured interviews. At the general practice staff (GP staff) level, focus group discussions will be conducted at baseline and Q-methodology inquiries at the end of the study period. The primary outcomes at the patient level are barriers and facilitators for using the PHR and summary records and changes in taking an active role in decision making and care management and medication adherence. Outcomes at the GP staff level are attitudes before and opinions after the implementation of the intervention. Patient characteristics and changes in outcomes related to patient involvement during the study period will be compared between the users and nonusers of the intervention using chi-square tests and t tests. A thematic content analysis of the qualitative data will be performed, and the results will be used to interpret quantitative findings. RESULTS: Enrollment was completed in May 2017 and the possibility to view GP records through the PHR was implemented in December 2017. Data analysis is currently underway and the first results are expected to be submitted for publication in autumn 2019. CONCLUSIONS: We expect that the findings of this study will be useful to health care providers and health care organizations that consider introducing the use of PHR and Web-based access to records and to those who have recently started using these. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Registry NTR6395; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=6395 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/71nc8jzwM). REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER: RR1-10.2196/10193.

Reliability measurement and ICD-10 validation of ICPC-2 for coding/classification of diagnoses/health problems in an African primary care setting.

Background: The routine application of a primary care classification system to patients' medical records in general practice/primary care is rare in the African region. Reliable data are crucial to understanding the domain of primary care in Nigeria, and this may be actualized through the use of a locally validated primary care classification system such as the International Classification of Primary Care, 2nd edition (ICPC-2). Although a few studies from Europe and Australia have reported that ICPC is a reliable and feasible tool for classifying data in primary care, the reliability and validity of the revised version (ICPC-2) is yet to be objectively determined particularly in Africa. Objectives: (i) To determine the convergent validity of ICPC-2 diagnoses codes when correlated with International Statistical Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes, (ii) to determine the inter-coder reliability among local and foreign ICPC-2 experts and (iii) to ascertain the level of accuracy when ICPC-2 is engaged by coders without previous training. Methods: Psychometric analysis was carried out on ICPC-2 and ICD-10 coded data that were generated from physicians' diagnoses, which were randomly selected from general outpatients' clinic attendance registers, using a systematic sampling technique. Participants comprised two groups of coders (ICPC-2 coders and ICD-10 coders) who coded independently a total of 220 diagnoses/health problems with ICPC-2 and/or ICD-10, respectively. Results: Two hundred and twenty diagnoses/health problems were considered and were found to cut across all 17 chapters of the ICPC-2. The dataset revealed a strong positive correlation between selected ICPC-2 codes and ICD-10 codes (r ≈ 0.7) at a sensitivity of 86.8%. Mean percentage agreement among the ICPC-2 coders was 97.9% at the chapter level and 95.6% at the rubric level. Similarly, Cohen's kappa coefficients were very good (κ > 0.81) and were higher at chapter level (0.94-0.97) than rubric level (0.90-0.93) between sets of pairs of ICPC-2 coders. An accuracy of 74.5% was achieved by ICD-10 coders who had no previous experience or prior training on ICPC-2 usage. Conclusion: Findings support the utility of ICPC-2 as a valid and reliable coding tool that may be adopted for routine data collection in the African primary care context. The level of accuracy achieved without training lends credence to the proposition that it is a simple-to-use classification and may be a useful starting point in a setting devoid of any primary care classification system for morbidity and mortality registration at such a critical level of public health importance.

Datasets collected in general practice: an international comparison using the example of obesity.

International datasets from general practice enable the comparison of how conditions are managed within consultations in different primary healthcare settings. The Australian Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health (BEACH) and TransHIS from the Netherlands collect in-consultation general practice data that have been used extensively to inform local policy and practice. Obesity is a global health issue with different countries applying varying approaches to management. The objective of the present paper is to compare the primary care management of obesity in Australia and the Netherlands using data collected from consultations. Despite the different prevalence in obesity in the two countries, the number of patients per 1000 patient-years seen with obesity is similar. Patients in Australia with obesity are referred to allied health practitioners more often than Dutch patients. Without quality general practice data, primary care researchers will not have data about the management of conditions within consultations. We use obesity to highlight the strengths of these general practice data sources and to compare their differences.

[Coding in general practice-Will the ICD-11 be a step forward?] / Codieren in der Hausarztpraxis ­ Wird die ICD-11 ein Fortschritt sein?

Primary care physicians in Germany don't benefit from coding diagnoses-they are coding for the needs of others. For coding, they mostly are using either the thesaurus of the German Institute of Medical Documentation and Information (DIMDI) or self-made cheat-sheets. Coding quality is low but seems to be sufficient for the main use case of the resulting data, which is the morbidity adjusted risk compensation scheme that distributes financial resources between the many German health insurance companies.Neither the International Classification of Diseases and Health Related Problems (ICD-10) nor the German thesaurus as an interface terminology are adequate for coding in primary care. The ICD-11 itself will not recognizably be a step forward from the perspective of primary care. At least the browser database format will be advantageous. An implementation into the 182 different electronic health records (EHR) on the German market would probably standardize the coding process and make code finding easier. This method of coding would still be more cumbersome than the current coding with self-made cheat-sheets.The first steps towards a useful official cheat-sheet for primary care have been taken, awaiting implementation and evaluation. The International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC-2) already provides an adequate classification standard for primary care that can also be used in combination with ICD-10. A new version of ICPC (ICPC-3) is under development. As the ICPC-2 has already been integrated into the foundation layer of ICD-11 it might easily become the future standard for coding in primary care. Improving communication between the different EHR would make taking over codes from other healthcare providers possible. Another opportunity to improve the coding quality might be creating use cases for the resulting data for the primary care physicians themselves.

Change in frequency of patient requests for diagnostic screening and interventions during primary care encounters from 1985 to 2014.

Background: The reason why patients contact a care provider, the reason for encounter (RFE), reflects patients' personal needs and expectations regarding medical care. RFEs can be symptoms or complaints, but can also be requests for diagnostic or therapeutic interventions. Objectives: Over the past 30 years, we aim to analyse the frequency with which patients consult a GP to request an intervention, and to analyse the impact of these requests on the subsequent diagnostic process. Methods: We included all patients with a request for diagnostics, medication prescription or referral from 1985 to 2014. We analysed the number of requests, granted requests and interventions originating from a request. We compared the final diagnosis (symptom or disease diagnosis) between patients with and without a request. Design and Setting: This is a retrospective cohort study with data from Family Medicine Network, a Dutch primary healthcare registration network. Results: Over time, patients more often present to their GP with a request for intervention. GPs are increasingly compliant with these requests. Patients presenting with a request for intervention are more likely to be diagnosed with a symptom rather than a disease. Conclusion: This study provides insight into the changes in patients' and GPs' behaviour and patients' influence on the medical process, and confirms the clinical relevance of the RFE. This study could support GPs in daily practice when deciding whether or not to grant a request.

The Diagnostic Value of the Patient's Reason for Encounter for Diagnosing Cancer in Primary Care.

PURPOSE: Family physicians (FPs) have to recognize alarm symptoms and estimate the probability of cancer to manage these symptoms correctly. Mostly, patients start the consultation with a spontaneous statement on why they visit the doctor. This is also called the reason for encounter (RFE). It precedes the interaction and interpretation by FPs and patients. The aim of this study is to investigate the predictive value of alarm symptoms as the RFE for diagnosing cancer in primary care. DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective cohort study in a Dutch practice-based research network (Family Medicine Network). METHOD: We analyzed all patients >45 years of age listed in the practice-based research network, FaMe-net, in the period 1995 to 2014 (118.219 patient years). We focused on a selection of alarm symptoms as defined by the Dutch Cancer Society and Cancer Research UK. We calculated the positive predictive value (PPV) of alarm symptoms, spontaneously mentioned in the beginning of the consultation by the patient (RFE), for diagnosing cancer. RESULTS: The highest PPVs were found for patients spontaneously mentioning a breast lump (PPV 14.8%), postmenopausal bleeding (PPV 3.9%), hemoptysis (PPV 2.7%), rectal bleeding (PPV 2.6%), hematuria (PPV 2.2%) and change in bowel movements (PPV 1.8%). CONCLUSION: Patients think about going to their physician and think about their first uttered statements during the consultation. In the case of cancer, the diagnostic workup during the consultation on alarm symptoms will add to the predictive value of these reasons for encounter. However, it is important to realize that the statement made by the patient entering the consultation room has a significant predictive value in itself.