Measuring persistent somatic symptom related stigmatisation: Development of the Persistent Somatic Symptom Stigma scale for Healthcare Professionals (PSSS-HCP).

OBJECTIVE: Persistent somatic symptoms (PSS) describe recurrent or continuously occurring symptoms such as fatigue, dizziness, or pain that have persisted for at least several months. These include single symptoms such as chronic pain, combinations of symptoms, or functional disorders such as fibromyalgia or irritable bowel syndrome. While stigmatisation by healthcare professionals is regularly reported, there are limited measurement instruments demonstrating content validity. This study develops a new instrument to measure stigmatisation by healthcare professionals, the Persistent Somatic Symptom Stigma scale for Healthcare Professionals (PSSS-HCP). METHODS: Development was an iterative process consisting of research team review, item generation and cognitive interviewing. We generated a longlist of 60 items from previous reviews and qualitative research. We conducted 18 cognitive interviews with healthcare professionals in the United Kingdom (UK). We analysed the relevance, comprehensibility and comprehensiveness of items, including the potential for social desirability bias. RESULTS: After research team consensus and initial feedback, we retained 40 items for cognitive interviewing. After our first round of interviews (n = 11), we removed 20 items, added three items and amended five items. After our second round of interviews (n = 7), we removed four items and amended three items. No major problems with relevance, comprehensibility, comprehensiveness or social desirability were found in remaining items. CONCLUSIONS: The provisional version of the PSSS-HCP contains 19 items across three domains (stereotypes, prejudice, discrimination), demonstrating sufficient content validity. Our next step will be to perform a validation study to finalise item selection and explore the structure of the PSSS-HCP.

Strategies to improve implementation of collaborative care for functional disorders and persistent somatic symptoms: A qualitative study using a Research World Café design.

INTRODUCTION: Persistent somatic symptoms and functional disorders (PSS/FD) are often complex conditions requiring care from multiple disciplines. One way of bringing the different disciplines together is through collaborative care. Little is known about the implementation barriers faced and relevant strategies to tackle the barriers in this field. Therefore, using expert knowledge, we aim to develop realistic strategies for dealing with implementation barriers of collaborative care in PSS/FD. METHODS: The Research World Café method is a single-session, expert-based method with multiple focus-groups forming and reforming to answer a set of inter-related questions, under the guidance of moderators. Using this method, participants involved in PSS/FD care across different areas of healthcare in the Netherlands developed several realistic strategies for dealing with ten implementation barriers for collaborative care in PSS/FD that were previously identified in a Delphi study. Strategies were grouped into strategy clusters using a card-sorting task. RESULTS: Thirty-three participants took part, representing ten different disciplines, most commonly physiotherapists, psychologists, and physicians. In total, 54 strategies, identified in response to the ten barriers, were grouped into eight strategy clusters. The strategy clusters were professional education, communication, care coordination, care pathways, joint consults, funding, patient involvement, and prevention. CONCLUSION: We identified a number of useful strategies for dealing with implementation barriers for collaborative care in PSS/FD. Many strategies provided ways to deal with multiple barriers at once. The effects of applying these strategies in collaborative care in PSS/FD will need testing through implementation studies, as well as in other areas needing multidisciplinary care.

How stigma unfolds for patients with Functional Neurological Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore experiences of stigma in Functional Neurological Disorder (FND) from the perspective of the patient as it manifests from the onset of symptoms, up to diagnosis and subsequently. BACKGROUND: The existing literature clearly shows that stigma exists for many patients with FND, and is associated with poorer quality of life. However, it is less clear how stigma unfolds, and how it can be alleviated. METHODS: We performed a qualitative interview study with patients who were diagnosed with FND, using data based on semi-structured interviews. Participants were recruited purposively via outpatient clinics. We analysed the data using a reflexive thematic analytic approach, through the lens of recognised stigma frameworks. RESULTS: 15 participants were included in the study, aged between 19 and 68 years, with varying presentations of FND. We identified six themes and 16 subthemes relevant to their stigma trajectory. We found that stigma unfolds through four main domains: 1) through their symptom experience; 2) through "othering" by the healthcare system; 3) through everyday interactions; and 4) from within the self. Across these four domains was a central theme of 5) stages of knowledge, which both fuelled and countered stigma. Lastly, 6) validation of the patient experience emerged as a theme that alleviated stigma. CONCLUSIONS: Stigma did not unfold as a linear process, rather it came from multiple interacting sources. Interventions to target stigma could take the form of improved clinician training, communication, especially around point of diagnosis, and public interventions, co-produced with patients with FND.

Shared decision-making in undergraduate nursing and medical education: An explorative dual-method study.

OBJECTIVE: This study explores how shared decision-making (SDM) is integrated in undergraduate nursing and medical education. METHODS: A dual-method design was applied. The integration of SDM in medicine and nursing education programs (i.e. SDM on paper) was explored through document analyses; the integration of SDM in curricula (i.e. SDM in class) through interviews with teachers and curriculum coordinators (N = 19). RESULTS: A majority of the education programs featured SDM, mostly non-explicit. In curricula SDM was generally implicitly featured in compulsory courses across all study years. SDM was often integrated into preexisting theories and models and taught through various methods and materials. Generally, teachers and supervisors were not trained in SDM themselves. They assessed students' competence in SDM in a summative manner. CONCLUSION: Overall, SDM was featured in undergraduate nursing and medical education, however, very implicitly.

Quality indicators for collaborative care networks in persistent somatic symptoms and functional disorders: a modified delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Care for persistent somatic symptoms and functional disorders (PSS/FD) is often fragmented. Collaborative care networks (CCNs) may improve care quality for PSS/FD. Effectiveness likely depends on their functioning, but we lack a straightforward quality evaluation system. We therefore aimed to develop quality indicators to evaluate CCNs for PSS/FD. METHOD: Using an online three-round modified Delphi process, an expert panel provided, selected and ranked quality indicators for CCNs in PSS/FD. Recruited experts were diverse healthcare professionals with relevant experience in PSS/FD care in the Netherlands. RESULTS: The expert panel consisted of 86 professionals representing 15 disciplines, most commonly physiotherapists, psychologists and medical specialists. 58% had more than 10 years experience in PSS/FD care. Round one resulted in 994 quotations, which resulted in 46 unique quality indicators. These were prioritised in round two and ranked in round three by the panel, resulting in a final top ten. The top three indicators were: "shared vision of care for PSS/FD", "pathways tailored to the individual patient", and "sufficiently-experienced caregivers for PSS/FD". CONCLUSIONS: The identified quality indicators to evaluate CCNs in the field of PSS/FD can be implemented in clinical practice and may be useful in improving services and when assessing effectiveness.

Trends in low-value GP care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Several studies showed that during the pandemic patients have refrained from visiting their general practitioner (GP). This resulted in medical care being delayed, postponed or completely forgone. The provision of low-value care, i.e. care which offers no net benefit for the patient, also could have been affected. We therefore assessed the impact of the COVID-19 restrictions on three types of low-value GP care: 1) imaging for back or knee problems, 2) antibiotics for otitis media acuta (OMA), and 3) repeated opioid prescriptions, without a prior GP visit. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using registration data from GPs part of an academic GP network over the period 2017-2022. The COVID-19 period was defined as the period between April 2020 to December 2021. The periods before (January 2017 to April 2020) and after the COVID-19 period (January 2022 to December 2022) are the pre- and post-restrictions periods. The three clinical practices examined were selected by two practicing GPs from a top 30 of recommendations originating from the Dutch GP guidelines, based on their perceived prevalence and relevance in practice (van Dulmen et al., BMC Primary Care 23:141, 2022). Multilevel Poisson regression models were built to examine changes in the incidence rates (IR) of both registered episodes and episodes receiving low-value treatment. RESULTS: During the COVID-19 restrictions period, the IRs of episodes of all three types of GP care decreased significantly. The IR of episodes of back or knee pain decreased by 12%, OMA episodes by 54% and opioid prescription rate by 13%. Only the IR of OMA episodes remained significantly lower (22%) during the post-restrictions period. The provision of low-value care also changed. The IR of imaging for back or knee pain and low-value prescription of antibiotics for OMA both decreased significantly during the COVID-restrictions period (by 21% and 78%), but only the low-value prescription rate of antibiotics for OMA remained significantly lower (by 63%) during the post-restrictions period. The IR of inappropriately repeated opioid prescriptions remained unchanged over all three periods. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that both the rate of episodes as well as the rate at which low-value care was provided have generally been affected by the COVID-19 restrictions. Furthermore, it shows that the magnitude of the impact of the restrictions varies depending on the type of low-value care. This indicates that deimplementation of low-value care requires tailored (multiple) interventions and may not be achieved through a single disruption or intervention alone.

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.

Patterns of psychotropic drug prescriptions and general practice consultations among community-dwelling older people with dementia during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent lockdown measures had serious implications for community-dwelling older people with dementia. While the short-term impacts of the pandemic on this population have been well studied, there is limited research on its long-term impacts. Quantifying the long-term impacts may provide insights into whether healthcare adaptations are needed after the acute phase of the pandemic to balance infection prevention measures with healthcare provision. This study aims to examine patterns of psychotropic drug prescriptions and general practice consultations in community-dwelling older people with dementia during the first two years of the pandemic. METHODS: We utilised routine electronic health records from three Dutch academic general practice research networks located in the North, East, and South, between 2019 and 2021. We (1) compared the weekly prescription rates of five groups of psychotropic drugs and two groups of tracer drugs, and weekly general practice consultation rates per 1000 participants, between the first two years of the pandemic and the pre-pandemic phase, (2) calculated changes in these rates during three lockdowns and two relaxation phases relative to the corresponding weeks in 2019, and (3) employed interrupted time series analyses for the prescription rates. Analyses were performed for each region separately. RESULTS: The study population sizes in the North, East, and South between 2019 and 2021 were 1726 to 1916, 93 to 117, and 904 to 960, respectively. Data from the East was excluded from the statistical analyses due to the limited sample size. During the first two years of the pandemic, the prescription rates of psychotropic drugs were either lower or similar to those in the pre-pandemic phase, with differences varying from -2.6‰ to -10.2‰. In contrast, consultation rates during the pandemic were higher than in the pre-pandemic phase, increasing by around 38‰. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a decrease in psychotropic drug prescriptions, but an increase in general practice consultations among community-dwelling older people with dementia during the first two years of the pandemic. However, reasons for the decrease in psychotropic drug prescriptions are unclear due to limited information on the presence of neuropsychiatric symptoms and the appropriateness of prescribing.

Dutch GP healthcare consumption in COVID-19 heterogeneous regions: an interregional time-series approach in 2020-2021.

BACKGROUND: Many countries observed a sharp decline in the use of general practice services after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, research has not yet considered how changes in healthcare consumption varied among regions with the same restrictive measures but different COVID-19 prevalence. AIM: To investigate how the COVID-19 pandemic affected healthcare consumption in Dutch general practice during 2020 and 2021, among regions with known heterogeneity in COVID-19 prevalence, from a pre-pandemic baseline in 2019. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study using electronic health records. SETTING: Dutch general practices involved in regional research networks. METHODS: Interrupted time-series analysis of changes in healthcare consumption from before to during the pandemic. Descriptive statistics on the number of potential COVID-19 related contacts, reason for contact and type of contact. RESULTS: The study covered 3 627 597 contacts (425 639 patients), 3 532 693 contacts (433 340 patients), and 4 134 636 contacts (434 872 patients) in 2019, 2020, and 2021, respectively. Time-series analysis revealed a significant decrease in healthcare consumption after the outbreak of the pandemic. Despite interregional heterogeneity in COVID-19 prevalence, healthcare consumption decreased comparably over time in the three regions, before rebounding to a level significantly higher than baseline in 2021. Physical consultations transitioned to phone or digital over time. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare consumption decreased irrespective of the regional prevalence of COVID-19 from the start of the pandemic, with the Delta variant triggering a further decrease. Overall, changes in care consumption appeared to reflect contextual factors and societal restrictions rather than infection rates.

Improving the Reporting of Primary Care Research: Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care-the CRISP Statement.

Primary care (PC) is a unique clinical specialty and research discipline with its own perspectives and methods. Research in this field uses varied research methods and study designs to investigate myriad topics. The diversity of PC presents challenges for reporting, and despite the proliferation of reporting guidelines, none focuses specifically on the needs of PC. The Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care (CRISP) Checklist guides reporting of PC research to include the information needed by the diverse PC community, including practitioners, patients, and communities. CRISP complements current guidelines to enhance the reporting, dissemination, and application of PC research findings and results. Prior CRISP studies documented opportunities to improve research reporting in this field. Our surveys of the international, interdisciplinary, and interprofessional PC community identified essential items to include in PC research reports. A 2-round Delphi study identified a consensus list of items considered necessary. The CRISP Checklist contains 24 items that describe the research team, patients, study participants, health conditions, clinical encounters, care teams, interventions, study measures, settings of care, and implementation of findings/results in PC. Not every item applies to every study design or topic. The CRISP guidelines inform the design and reporting of (1) studies done by PC researchers, (2) studies done by other investigators in PC populations and settings, and (3) studies intended for application in PC practice. Improved reporting of the context of the clinical services and the process of research is critical to interpreting study findings/results and applying them to diverse populations and varied settings in PC.Annals "Online First" article.

A Natural Language Processing Model for COVID-19 Detection Based on Dutch General Practice Electronic Health Records by Using Bidirectional Encoder Representations From Transformers: Development and Validation Study.

BACKGROUND: Natural language processing (NLP) models such as bidirectional encoder representations from transformers (BERT) hold promise in revolutionizing disease identification from electronic health records (EHRs) by potentially enhancing efficiency and accuracy. However, their practical application in practice settings demands a comprehensive and multidisciplinary approach to development and validation. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted challenges in disease identification due to limited testing availability and challenges in handling unstructured data. In the Netherlands, where general practitioners (GPs) serve as the first point of contact for health care, EHRs generated by these primary care providers contain a wealth of potentially valuable information. Nonetheless, the unstructured nature of free-text entries in EHRs poses challenges in identifying trends, detecting disease outbreaks, or accurately pinpointing COVID-19 cases. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop and validate a BERT model for detecting COVID-19 consultations in general practice EHRs in the Netherlands. METHODS: The BERT model was initially pretrained on Dutch language data and fine-tuned using a comprehensive EHR data set comprising confirmed COVID-19 GP consultations and non-COVID-19-related consultations. The data set was partitioned into a training and development set, and the model's performance was evaluated on an independent test set that served as the primary measure of its effectiveness in COVID-19 detection. To validate the final model, its performance was assessed through 3 approaches. First, external validation was applied on an EHR data set from a different geographic region in the Netherlands. Second, validation was conducted using results of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test data obtained from municipal health services. Lastly, correlation between predicted outcomes and COVID-19-related hospitalizations in the Netherlands was assessed, encompassing the period around the outbreak of the pandemic in the Netherlands, that is, the period before widespread testing. RESULTS: The model development used 300,359 GP consultations. We developed a highly accurate model for COVID-19 consultations (accuracy 0.97, F1-score 0.90, precision 0.85, recall 0.85, specificity 0.99). External validations showed comparable high performance. Validation on PCR test data showed high recall but low precision and specificity. Validation using hospital data showed significant correlation between COVID-19 predictions of the model and COVID-19-related hospitalizations (F1-score 96.8; P<.001; R2=0.69). Most importantly, the model was able to predict COVID-19 cases weeks before the first confirmed case in the Netherlands. CONCLUSIONS: The developed BERT model was able to accurately identify COVID-19 cases among GP consultations even preceding confirmed cases. The validated efficacy of our BERT model highlights the potential of NLP models to identify disease outbreaks early, exemplifying the power of multidisciplinary efforts in harnessing technology for disease identification. Moreover, the implications of this study extend beyond COVID-19 and offer a blueprint for the early recognition of various illnesses, revealing that such models could revolutionize disease surveillance.

Primary Care Research: Looking Back and Moving Forward With Reflections on NAPCRG's First 50 Years.

NAPCRG celebrated 50 years of leadership and service at its 2022 meeting. A varied team of primary care investigators, clinicians, learners, patients, and community members reflected on the organization's past, present, and future. Started in 1972 by a small group of general practice researchers in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom, NAPCRG has evolved into an international, interprofessional, interdisciplinary, and intergenerational group devoted to improving health and health care through primary care research. NAPCRG provides a nurturing home to researchers and teams working in partnership with individuals, families, and communities. The organization builds upon enduring values to create partnerships, advance research methods, and nurture a community of contributors. NAPCRG has made foundational contributions, including identifying the need for primary care research to inform primary care practice, practice-based research networks, qualitative and mixed-methods research, community-based participatory research, patient safety, practice transformation, and partnerships with patients and communities. Landmark documents have helped define classification systems for primary care, responsible research with communities, the central role of primary care in health care systems, opportunities to revitalize generalist practice, and shared strategies to build the future of family medicine. The future of health and health care depends upon strengthening primary care and primary care research with stronger support, infrastructure, training, and workforce. New technologies offer opportunities to advance research, enhance care, and improve outcomes. Stronger partnerships can empower primary care research with patients and communities and increase commitments to diversity and quality care for all. NAPCRG offers a home for all partners in this work.

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.

What can we learn from experiences in general practice during the COVID-19 pandemic? A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Experiences with organizational changes in daytime general practices and out-of-hours (OOH) services during the COVID-19 pandemic may help to address the challenges in general practice care that were already a concern before the crisis. This study aimed to describe these experiences and the potential usefulness of the organizational changes for future general practice care and any future pandemics. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were performed among 11 directors of OOH services, and 19 (locum) general practitioners (GPs) or practice managers, who were purposively sampled. Video or telephone interviews were performed in two rounds: between November 2020 and January 2021 and between May 2021 and August 2021. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis methods. RESULTS: Three themes emerged from the data: (1) Changes in the triage procedures; in GP practices and OOH services, stricter triage criteria were implemented, and GPs were more actively involved in the triage process. These measures helped to reduce the number of 'low urgency' face-to-face consultations. (2) Changes in GP care; there was a shift towards video and telephone consultations, allowing GPs to spend more time with patients during the remaining face-to-face consultations. For chronic patients, the shift towards telemonitoring appeared to encourage self-care, and postponing face-to-face consultations for regular checkups appeared to be unproblematic for stable patients. (3) Coordination of GP care and information communication flow during the COVID-19 pandemic; OOH directors perceived a lack of consistency in the information from various governmental and non-governmental parties on containment measures and guidelines related to COVID-19, making it difficult to act on them. The COVID-19 pandemic intensified collaboration between GPs, OOH services, and other healthcare professionals. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that some of the organizational changes, such as stricter triage, remote consultations, and changes in managed care of chronic patients, may help in tackling the pre-existing challenges in GP care from before the COVID-19 pandemic. However, more extensive research and continuous monitoring are necessary to establish the effects on patients and their health outcomes. To navigate future pandemics, the intensified collaboration between health professionals should be maintained, while there is considerable room for improvement in the provision of unambiguous information.

Care by general practitioners for patients with asthma or COPD during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on general practitioners' (GP) care for patients with asthma and/or COPD is largely unknown. To describe the impact of the pandemic on asthma or COPD-related GP care, we analysed routinely recorded electronic health records data from Dutch general practices and out-of-hours (OOH) services. During the COVID-19 pandemic (2020), the contact rates for asthma and/or COPD were significantly lower in GP practices and OOH services compared with the pre-pandemic period (2019) (respectively, 15% lower and 28% lower). The proportion of telephone contacts increased significantly with 13%-point in GP practices and 12%-point at OOH services, while the proportion of face-to-face contacts decreased. Furthermore, the proportion of high urgent contacts with OOH services decreased by 8.5%-point. To conclude, the overall contact rates in GP practices and OOH services decreased, while more contacts were remote. Lower contact rates have, after a short follow-up, not resulted in more patients with exacerbations in OOH care. However, this might still be expected after a longer follow-up.

Prognostic factors for persistent fatigue after COVID-19: a prospective matched cohort study in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Persistent fatigue after COVID-19 is common; however, the exact incidence and prognostic factors differ between studies. Evidence suggests that age, female sex, high body mass index, and comorbidities are risk factors for long COVID. AIM: To investigate the prevalence of persistent fatigue after COVID-19 in patients with a mild infection (managed in primary care) during the first wave of the pandemic and to determine prognostic factors for persistent fatigue. DESIGN AND SETTING: This was a prospective cohort study in Dutch general practice, combining online questionnaires with data from electronic health records. METHOD: Patients who contacted their GP between March and May 2020 and were diagnosed with COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic were included. Patients were matched to controls without COVID-19 based on age, sex, and GP practice. Fatigue was measured at 3, 6, and 15 months, using the Checklist of Individual Strength. RESULTS: All the participants were GP attendees and included 179 with suspected COVID-19, but who had mild COVID and who had not been admitted to hospital with COVID, and 122 without suspected COVID-19. Persistent fatigue was present in 35% (49/142) of the suspected COVID-19 group and 13% (14/109) of the non-COVID-19 group (odds ratio 3.65; 95% confidence interval = 1.82 to 7.32). Prognostic factors for persistent fatigue included low education level, absence of a partner, high neuroticism (using the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Revised-Short Form), low resilience, high frequency of GP contact, medication use, and threatening experiences in the past. The latter three factors appeared to be prognostic factors for persistent fatigue specifically after COVID-19 infection. CONCLUSION: GP patients with COVID-19 (who were not admitted to hospital with COVID) have a fourfold higher chance of developing persistent fatigue than GP patients who had not had COVID-19. This risk is even higher in psychosocially vulnerable patients who had COVID-19.

Sex and gender differences in primary care help-seeking for common somatic symptoms: a longitudinal study.

OBJECTIVE: Women are reported to consult general practitioners (GPs) more frequently than men. However, previous studies on sex differences in help-seeking behavior for somatic symptoms do not distinguish between sex and gender, do not account for sex differences in presented symptoms, and are frequently conducted in clinical settings, automatically excluding non-help seekers. Therefore, we aim to assess the independent associations of sex and gender with primary care help-seeking for somatic symptoms in the general population. DESIGN AND SETTING: Records from the longitudinal population-based Lifelines Cohort Study were linked to routine electronic health records from GPs. SUBJECTS: Participants reporting new-onset common somatic symptoms. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Associations between sex and gender, operationalized via a novel gender-index, with primary care help-seeking for somatic symptoms and differences in the strength of the association between gender and help-seeking for somatic symptoms between women and men. RESULTS: Of 20,187 individuals with linked data, 8325 participants (67.5% female; mean age = 44.5 years [SD = 12.9]) reported at least one new-onset somatic symptom. Hereof, 255 (3.1%) consulted the GP within 6 weeks of symptom onset. Female sex was positively associated with consulting the GP (OR = 1.78; 95%CI = 1.13-2.80), whereas feminine gender was not (OR = 0.67; 95%CI = 0.39-1.16). The latter association did not differ in strength between men and women. More paid working days are negatively associated with help-seeking (OR = 0.95; 95%CI = 0.91-0.98). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that female sex rather than feminine gender is associated with primary care help-seeking behavior for somatic symptoms. Nevertheless, clinicians should be aware that gender-related variables, such as mean paid working days, may be associated with help-seeking behavior.

Persistent somatic symptom related stigmatisation by healthcare professionals: A systematic review of questionnaire measurement instruments.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with persistent somatic symptoms (PSS) experience stigmatising attitudes and behaviours by healthcare professionals. While previous research has focussed on individual manifestations of PSS related stigma, less is known about sound ways to measure stigmatisation by healthcare professionals towards patients with PSS. This review aims to assess the quality of questionnaire measurement instruments and make recommendations about their use. METHODS: A systematic review using six databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Open Grey and EThOS). The search strategy combined three search strings related to healthcare professionals, PSS and stigma. Additional publications were identified by searching bibliographies. Three authors independently extracted the data. Data analysis and synthesis followed COSMIN methodology for reviews of outcome measurement instruments. RESULTS: We identified 90 publications that met the inclusion criteria using 62 questionnaire measurement instruments. Stereotypes were explored in 92% of instruments, prejudices in 52% of instruments, and discrimination in 19% of instruments. The development process of the instruments was not rated higher than doubtful. Construct validity, structural validity, internal consistency and reliability were the most commonly investigated measurement properties. Evidence around content validity was inconsistent or indeterminate. CONCLUSION: No instrument provided acceptable evidence on all measurement properties. Many instruments were developed for use within a single publication, with little evidence of their development or establishment of content validity. This is problematic because stigma instruments should reflect the challenges that healthcare professionals face when working with patients with PSS. They should also reflect the experiences that patients with PSS have widely reported during clinical encounters.

Effectiveness of psychosomatic therapy for patients with persistent somatic symptoms: Results from the CORPUS randomised controlled trial in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of psychosomatic therapy versus care as usual in primary care for patients with persistent somatic symptoms (PSS). METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, two-armed, randomised controlled trial among primary care patients with PSS in the Netherlands that included 39 general practices and 34 psychosomatic therapists. The intervention, psychosomatic therapy, consisted of 6-12 sessions delivered by specialised exercise- and physiotherapists. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: patient's level of functioning. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: severity of physical and psychosocial symptoms, health-related quality of life, health-related anxiety, illness behaviour and number of GP contacts. RESULTS: Compared to usual care (n = 85), the intervention group (n = 84) showed no improvement in patient's level of functioning (mean difference - 0.50 [95% CI -1.10 to 0.10]; p = .10), and improvement in health-related anxiety (mean difference - 1.93 [95% CI -3.81 to -0.04]; p = .045), over 12 months. At 5-month follow-up, we found improvement in physical functioning, somatisation, and health-related anxiety. The 12-month follow-up revealed no therapy effects. Subgroup analyses showed an overall effect in patient's level of functioning for the group with moderate PSS (mean difference - 0.91 [95% CI -1.78 to -0.03]; p = .042). In the year after the end of therapy, the number of GP contacts did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSION: We only found effects on some secondary outcome measures, and on our primary outcome measure especially in patients with moderate PSS, the psychosomatic therapy appears promising for further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: the trial is registered in the Netherlands Trial Registry, https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=NTR7356 under ID NTR7356.

Key items for reports of primary care research: an international Delphi study.

OBJECTIVE: Reporting guidelines can improve dissemination and application of findings and help avoid research waste. Recent studies reveal opportunities to improve primary care (PC) reporting. Despite increasing numbers of guidelines, none exists for PC research. This study aims to prioritise candidate reporting items to inform a reporting guideline for PC research. DESIGN: Delphi study conducted by the Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care (CRISP) Working Group. SETTING: International online survey. PARTICIPANTS: Interdisciplinary PC researchers and research users. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We drew potential reporting items from literature review and a series of international, interdisciplinary surveys. Using an anonymous, online survey, we asked participants to vote on and whether each candidate item should be included, required or recommended in a PC research reporting guideline. Items advanced to the next Delphi round if they received>50% votes to include. Analysis used descriptive statistics plus synthesis of free-text responses. RESULTS: 98/116 respondents completed round 1 (84% response rate) and 89/98 completed round 2 (91%). Respondents included a variety of healthcare professions, research roles, levels of experience and all five world regions. Round 1 presented 29 potential items, and 25 moved into round 2 after rewording and combining items and adding 2 new items. A majority of round 2 respondents voted to include 23 items (90%-100% for 11 items, 80%-89% for 3 items, 70%-79% for 3 items, 60%-69% for 3 items and 50%-59% for 3 items). CONCLUSION: Our Delphi study identified items to guide the reporting of PC research that has broad endorsement from the community of producers and users of PC research. We will now use these results to inform the final development of the CRISP guidance for reporting PC research.