Rhinitis Control and Medication Use in a Real-World Sample of Patients With Persistent Rhinitis or Rhinosinusitis: A Community Pharmacy Study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about rhinitis control in real-life, nor about the contribution of treatment-related and patient-related factors. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the level of rhinitis control and rhinitis medication utilization in patients with persistent rhinitis and to identify predictors of rhinitis control. METHODS: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted in patients with persistent rhinitis recruited in community pharmacies. Participants completed the Rhinitis Control Assessment Test, a questionnaire on patient/rhinitis characteristics, and rhinitis medication use. A visual analog scale for nasal symptoms was also completed. Pharmacy dispensing data were used to calculate adherence to intranasal glucocorticoids. Nasal spray technique was evaluated using a standardized checklist. Predictors of rhinitis control were explored using a linear regression model. RESULTS: A total of 1,514 patients, recruited in 215 pharmacies, participated in the study (mean age 48.7 y, 62% female). Almost 60% exhibited suboptimal rhinitis control (Rhinitis Control Assessment Test ≤ 21 of 30). A 50-mm cut-off on the visual analog scale yielded 78.1% sensitivity to identify suboptimal rhinitis control. Participants most frequently used intranasal glucocorticoids (55.6%) and intranasal decongestants (47.4%). Only 10.3% of current nasal spray users demonstrated perfect technique. More than half (54.8%) of glucocorticoid users were identified as underadherent. Female sex, self-reported nasal hyperreactivity, active asthma, and use of oral/intranasal decongestants or nasal saline were identified as predictors of worse rhinitis control. CONCLUSIONS: Suboptimal rhinitis control was common in this real-life sample of persistent rhinitis patients. Improving use of rhinitis medication may be key to increase disease control.

Vaccine hesitancy for the COVID-19 vaccine booster dose among nursing home staff fully vaccinated with the primary vaccination course in Belgium.

In Belgium, nursing home (NH) staff (NHS) and residents were prioritised for the initial COVID-19 vaccination and successive booster doses. The vaccination campaign for the first booster started in September 2021 in Belgian NH. Our first study about vaccine hesitancy towards the COVID-19 vaccine in Belgian NHS already showed a degree of fear for the primary vaccination course (T1). This new study aims to evaluate vaccine hesitancy to get the first booster (T2) in a population of fully vaccinated (with two doses) NHS. A random stratified sample of NHS who received the primary vaccination course (N = 954) completed an online questionnaire on COVID-19 booster hesitancy (between 25/11/2021 and 22/01/2022). NHS who hesitated or refused the booster were asked for the main reason for their hesitation/refusal. Overall, 21.0 % of our population hesitated before, were still hesitating or refused the booster, NHS that were not hesitant at T1 being 5.7 times less likely to hesitate to get the first booster dose (Adjusted OR 0.179, 95 % CI: 0.120, 0.267). Although there was a slight reduction (23.5 % to 20.1 %) in the proportion of NHS who hesitated/refused vaccination at T1 compared to T2 (p = 0.034), the fear of unknown effects was the principal reason for hesitation/refusal, already mentioned in our first study. NHS were not reassured concerning their initial fears. Given the likelihood that booster vaccinations will be necessary over the coming years, a communication strategy specific to NHS should be implemented.

The DAWN antivirals trial: process evaluation of a COVID-19 trial in general practice.

BACKGROUND: The DAWN antivirals trial was a multicentric, randomised placebo-controlled trial evaluating antiviral medication for COVID-19 in general practice. The trial was prematurely terminated because of insufficient recruitment. AIM: To explore which factors contributed to the premature termination. DESIGN & SETTING: General practice in Belgium. METHOD: Patients were randomised to camostat or placebo (patients and physicians blinded) between June 2021 and July 2022; a third arm evaluating molnupiravir (open label) was opened in March 2022. The outcome assessor was blinded for all comparisons except for the patient reported outcomes in case of molnupiravir. The authors analysed available trial data and evaluated trial context, implementation, and mechanisms of impact based on semi-structured interviews with trial stakeholders. RESULTS: The trial recruited 44 participants; 19 were allocated to camostat (median age 55 years), 8 to molnupiravir (median age 60 years), and 17 to placebo (median age 56 years). There were no serious adverse events in either group. Most difficulties were related to the pandemic context: disruption to routine clinical services; multiple changes to the service model for COVID-19 patients; overwhelmed clinical staff; delays of trial medication; and staff shortages in the sponsor and clinical team. In addition, regulatory approval processes were lengthy and led to additional study procedures. It was felt that the trial started too late, when vaccinations had already begun. CONCLUSION: The DAWN antivirals trial was stopped prematurely. Although many barriers were related to the pandemic itself, hurdles such as a small and inexperienced sponsor and clinical teams, delays in regulatory processes, and research capacity in routine settings could be overcome by established research infrastructure and standardisation of processes.

Towards an international consensus on safety netting advice for acutely ill children presenting to ambulatory care: a modified e-Delphi procedure.

OBJECTIVE: Develop a consensus on the content and form of safety netting advice (SNA) for parents of acutely ill children. DESIGN: Four-round modified e-Delphi using online questionnaires and feedback among clinical and research experts. SETTING: Ambulatory care in high-income countries. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-one experts from 13 countries: 3 emergency physicians, 15 general practitioners, 4 nurses and 19 paediatricians. RESULTS: The experts defined the content of SNA as advice on the normal, expected disease course of the provisional diagnosis, diagnostic uncertainty, alarm signs that indicate the need for medical help and information on where and how to find such help. Regarding the form of the SNA, the experts agree that a reliable source should give SNA verbally with paper or digital written or video/image resources at every appropriate healthcare encounter in a short and simple empowering fashion, specific to the child's situation and seek confirmatory feedback from parents. CONCLUSIONS: SNA needs to contain advice on the expected disease course, alarm signs and where and how to find help. It should be given verbally with written resources by a reliable healthcare professional or digital platform. Short, simple and specific, SNA needs to empower the parent whose understanding of the advice should be checked. The effectiveness of SNA resources coproduced by parents and experts should be assessed in different settings and those providing SNA require up-to-date and reliable training.

Prognosis and prediction of antibiotic benefit in adults with clinically diagnosed acute rhinosinusitis: an individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A previous individual participant data meta-analysis (IPD-MA) of antibiotics for adults with clinically diagnosed acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) showed a marginal overall effect of antibiotics, but was unable to identify patients that are most likely to benefit from antibiotics when applying conventional (i.e. univariable or one-variable-at-a-time) subgroup analysis. We updated the systematic review and investigated whether multivariable prediction of patient-level prognosis and antibiotic treatment effect may lead to more tailored treatment assignment in adults presenting to primary care with ARS. METHODS: An IPD-MA of nine double-blind placebo-controlled trials of antibiotic treatment (n=2539) was conducted, with the probability of being cured at 8-15 days as the primary outcome. A logistic mixed effects model was developed to predict the probability of being cured based on demographic characteristics, signs and symptoms, and antibiotic treatment assignment. Predictive performance was quantified based on internal-external cross-validation in terms of calibration and discrimination performance, overall model fit, and the accuracy of individual predictions. RESULTS: Results indicate that the prognosis with respect to risk of cure could not be reliably predicted (c-statistic 0.58 and Brier score 0.24). Similarly, patient-level treatment effect predictions did not reliably distinguish between those that did and did not benefit from antibiotics (c-for-benefit 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, multivariable prediction based on patient demographics and common signs and symptoms did not reliably predict the patient-level probability of cure and antibiotic effect in this IPD-MA. Therefore, these characteristics cannot be expected to reliably distinguish those that do and do not benefit from antibiotics in adults presenting to primary care with ARS.

Best practice guidance for antibiotic audit and feedback interventions in primary care: a modified Delphi study from the Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial resistance: Primary Care Antibiotic Audit and Feedback Network (JPIAMR-PAAN).

BACKGROUND: Primary care is a critical partner for antimicrobial stewardship efforts given its high human antibiotic usage. Peer comparison audit and feedback (A&F) is often used to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. The design and implementation of A&F may impact its effectiveness. There are no best practice guidelines for peer comparison A&F in antibiotic prescribing in primary care. OBJECTIVE: To develop best practice guidelines for peer comparison A&F for antibiotic prescribing in primary care in high income countries by leveraging international expertise via the Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial Resistance-Primary Care Antibiotic Audit and Feedback Network. METHODS: We used a modified Delphi process to achieve convergence of expert opinions on best practice statements for peer comparison A&F based on existing evidence and theory. Three rounds were performed, each with online surveys and virtual meetings to enable discussion and rating of each best practice statement. A five-point Likert scale was used to rate consensus with a median threshold score of 4 to indicate a consensus statement. RESULTS: The final set of guidelines include 13 best practice statements in four categories: general considerations (n = 3), selecting feedback recipients (n = 1), data and indicator selection (n = 4), and feedback delivery (n = 5). CONCLUSION: We report an expert-derived best practice recommendations for designing and evaluating peer comparison A&F for antibiotic prescribing in primary care. These 13 statements can be used by A&F designers to optimize the impact of their quality improvement interventions, and improve antibiotic prescribing in primary care.

Validation of a rapid SARS-CoV-2 antibody test in general practice.

OBJECTIVES: To validate a rapid serological test (RST) for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies used in seroprevalence studies in healthcare providers, including primary healthcare providers (PHCPs) in Belgium. DESIGN: A phase III validation study of the RST (OrientGene) within a prospective cohort study. SETTING: Primary care in Belgium. PARTICIPANTS: Any general practitioner (GP) working in primary care in Belgium and any other PHCP from the same GP practice who physically manages patients were eligible in the seroprevalence study. For the validation study, all participants who tested positive (376) on the RST at the first testing timepoint (T1) and a random sample of those who tested negative (790) and unclear (24) were included. INTERVENTION: At T2, 4 weeks later, PHCPs performed the RST with fingerprick blood (index test) immediately after providing a serum sample to be analysed for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G antibodies using a two-out-of-three assay (reference test). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The RST accuracy was estimated using inverse probability weighting to correct for missing reference test data, and considering unclear RST results as negative for the sensitivity and positive for the specificity. Using these conservative estimates, the true seroprevalence was estimated both for T2 and RST-based prevalence values found in a cohort study with PHCPs in Belgium. RESULTS: 1073 paired tests (403 positive on the reference test) were included. A sensitivity of 73% (a specificity of 92%) was found considering unclear RST results as negative (positive). For an RST-based prevalence at T1 (13.9), T2 (24.9) and T7 (70.21), the true prevalence was estimated to be 9.1%, 25.9% and 95.7%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The RST sensitivity (73%) and specificity (92%) make an RST-based seroprevalence below (above) 23% overestimate (underestimate) the true seroprevalence. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04779424.

Investigating Levothyroxine Use and Its Association with Thyroid Health in Patients with Hypothyroidism: A Community Pharmacy Study.

Background: To gain maximum therapeutic effect while minimizing side effects, it is imperative for patients with hypothyroidism to use their levothyroxine (LT4) correctly, such as adhering to the prescribed regimen. Little is currently known about how patients actually use LT4 in real life. We investigated the use of LT4, as well as the thyroid health (thyrotropin [TSH] and health-related quality of life [HR-QoL]), and evaluated if proper LT4 use is associated with better thyroid health. Methods: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted in a Belgian community sample of adults using LT4 for hypothyroidism since ≥2 years. Participants completed a self-administered questionnaire on patient characteristics, self-reported adherence to LT4, timing of intake, and co-medication. They also completed the thyroid-specific patient-reported outcome (ThyPRO-39) questionnaire, measuring the HR-QoL. Pharmacy dispensing data were used to calculate the medication possession ratio (MPR). Results: We included 856 participants (mean age 61.4 ± 14.3 years, 86% [740/856] females). Approximately one in four participants (138/563) had out-of-range TSH levels. Generally, ThyPRO-39 scores were in the lower part of the range (indicating better HR-QoL), with the scales "emotional susceptibility" and "tiredness" showing the worst scores. Approximately 28% (178/632) of the participants were classified as non-adherent (MPR <80%), corresponding to at least 73 cumulative days per year without LT4 intake. Twenty-five percent (212/854) of participants self-reported non-adherence, with unintentional non-adherence (forgetfulness) most frequently reported (21.9%, 187/854). Only 39% (329/836) of participants complied with the recommendation of ingesting LT4 ≥ 30 minutes before eating. Additionally, 7% (58/856) of participants concurrently used molecules that bind to LT4, without applying the recommended dosing interval. There was no significant correlation between LT4 usage (adherence, timing of intake, and interaction with complex forming drugs) and TSH or HR-QoL. Conclusions: We found that many participants with hypothyroidism did not use their LT4 as effectively as possible, particularly with respect to timing of administration. However, the participants' HR-QoL seemed largely satisfactory, and there was no significant correlation between correctly using LT4 and thyroid health.

Scoping review of the association between bacterial vaginosis and emotional, sexual and social health.

BACKGROUND: Bacterial vaginosis (BV) is a condition that, if symptomatic, is characterized by discharge and odor, with high recurrence rates even when treated. This study aims to review what literature exists on the association between BV and the emotional, sexual, and social health of women. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science databases were searched from inception until November 2020. Studies reporting an association between women's emotional, sexual and/or social health and symptomatic BV in a qualitative and/or quantitative manner were included. Selected studies were divided in three categories, i.e. reporting on the emotional, sexual and/or social association. All studies were critically evaluated and discussed. RESULTS: Sixteen studies were included. Concerning emotional health, we found eight studies that calculated the association between stress and BV, in four this was statistically significant. Four qualitative studies on emotional health showed that the severity of the symptoms influenced the impact on women's lives. All studies on sexual health reported that many women experienced an impact on their relationship and sexual intimacy. Results for social life ranged from no association found to most of the study population showing avoidance behavior. CONCLUSION: This review shows that symptomatic BV can be associated with diminished emotional, sexual, and social health, but there is too little evidence to state the extent of this association.

Clinical prediction models for serious infections in children: external validation in ambulatory care.

BACKGROUND: Early distinction between mild and serious infections (SI) is challenging in children in ambulatory care. Clinical prediction models (CPMs), developed to aid physicians in clinical decision-making, require broad external validation before clinical use. We aimed to externally validate four CPMs, developed in emergency departments, in ambulatory care. METHODS: We applied the CPMs in a prospective cohort of acutely ill children presenting to general practices, outpatient paediatric practices or emergency departments in Flanders, Belgium. For two multinomial regression models, Feverkidstool and Craig model, discriminative ability and calibration were assessed, and a model update was performed by re-estimation of coefficients with correction for overfitting. For two risk scores, the SBI score and PAWS, the diagnostic test accuracy was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 8211 children were included, comprising 498 SI and 276 serious bacterial infections (SBI). Feverkidstool had a C-statistic of 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.77-0.84) with good calibration for pneumonia and 0.74 (0.70-0.79) with poor calibration for other SBI. The Craig model had a C-statistic of 0.80 (0.77-0.83) for pneumonia, 0.75 (0.70-0.80) for complicated urinary tract infections and 0.63 (0.39-0.88) for bacteraemia, with poor calibration. The model update resulted in improved C-statistics for all outcomes and good overall calibration for Feverkidstool and the Craig model. SBI score and PAWS performed extremely weak with sensitivities of 0.12 (0.09-0.15) and 0.32 (0.28-0.37). CONCLUSIONS: Feverkidstool and the Craig model show good discriminative ability for predicting SBI and a potential for early recognition of SBI, confirming good external validity in a low prevalence setting of SBI. The SBI score and PAWS showed poor diagnostic performance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02024282. Registered on 31 December 2013.

Exploring readiness for implementing goal-oriented care in primary care using normalization process theory.

AIM: To use normalization process theory (NPT) to build a strategy for the implementation of goal-oriented care (GOC) in primary care in Flanders, Belgium. BACKGROUND: GOC is a possible approach to more coordinated and integrated care and tailors care to patients' personal life goals. The concept has gained interest among policy makers and researchers, but the main drivers for successful implementation are the primary healthcare professionals (PHCPs) who need to see added value of GOC in order to embed it into their daily practice. NPT, developed to understand the processes of implementing new ways of organizing care, offers a useful lens to understand adoption of GOC in primary care practice. METHOD: PHCPs (n = 131) who participated in a 2-hour community meeting on GOC were asked to complete the Normalization MeAsure Development survey. This 23-item survey is based on NPT and describes participants' views about how an intervention would impact their work, their expectations about it, and whether it could become a routine part of their work. FINDINGS: The NPT constructs coherence (sense-making work) and cognitive participation (relational work) showed positive tendency toward implementation of GOC. The participants had an initial understanding on GOC and there was much interest in supporting and start working with this approach. The other constructs collective action (operational work) and reflexive monitoring (appraisal work) will need further efforts to trigger implementation. A common ground is needed to integrate GOC as a common practice which can be achieved by intensive interprofessional collaboration.

Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among Belgian nursing home residents and staff during the primary COVID-19 vaccination campaign.

BACKGROUND: Nursing home residents (NHR) and staff have been disproportionally affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and were therefore prioritised in the COVID-19 vaccination strategy. However, frail older adults, like NHR, are known to have decreased antibody responses upon vaccination targeting other viral antigens. OBJECTIVES: As real-world data on vaccine responsiveness, we assessed the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among Belgian NHR and staff during the primary COVID-19 vaccination campaign. METHODS: In total, we tested 1629 NHR and 1356 staff across 69 Belgian NHs for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG antibodies using rapid tests. We collected socio-demographic and COVID-19-related medical data through questionnaires. Sampling occurred between 1 February and 24 March 2021, in a randomly sampled population that received none, one or two BNT162b2 vaccine doses. RESULTS: We found that during the primary vaccination campaign with 59% of the study population fully vaccinated, 74% had SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Among fully vaccinated individuals only, fewer residents tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (77%) than staff (98%), suggesting an impaired vaccine-induced antibody response in the elderly, with lowest seroprevalences observed among infection naïve residents. COVID-19 vaccination status and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection were predictors for SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. Alternatively, age ≥ 80 years old, the presence of comorbidities and high care dependency predicted SARS-CoV-2 seronegativity in NHR. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the need for further monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 immunity upon vaccination in the elderly population, as their impaired humoral responses could imply insufficient protection against COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was retrospectively registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04738695).

Blended care to discontinue benzodiazepine receptor agonists use in patients with chronic insomnia disorder: a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial in primary care.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: International guidelines recommend using benzodiazepine receptor agonists (BZRA) for maximally four weeks. Nevertheless, long-term use for chronic insomnia disorder remains a common practice. This study aimed to test the effectiveness of blended care for discontinuing long-term BZRA use in general practice. METHODS: A pragmatic cluster randomized controlled superiority trial compared blended care to usual care through urine toxicology screening. In the intervention, care by the general practitioner (GP) was complemented by an interactive e-learning program, based on cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia. Adults using BZRA daily for minimally 6 months were eligible. Participants were clustered at the level of the GP surgery for allocation (1:1). Effectiveness was measured as the proportion of patients who had discontinued at one-year follow-up. Data analysis followed intention-to-treat principles. RESULTS: In total, 916 patients in 86 clusters, represented by 99 GPs, were randomized. Primary outcome data was obtained from 727 patients (79%). At one-year follow-up, 82 patients (18%) in blended care, compared to 91 patients (20%) in usual care, had discontinued. There was no statistically significant effect for the intervention (OR: 0.924; 95% CI: 0.60; 1.43). No adverse events were reported to the research team. CONCLUSIONS: The findings did not support the superiority of blended care over usual care. Both strategies showed clinical effectiveness, with an average of 19% of patients having discontinued at one-year follow-up. Further research is important to study the effect of structurally implementing digital interventions in general practice. CLINICAL TRIAL: Big Bird trial; KCE-17016. This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03937180).

Building an understanding of goal-oriented care through the experiences of people living with chronic conditions.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the concept of goal-oriented care (GOC) through the experiences of people with chronic conditions. METHOD: Interviews with people living with chronic conditions (n = 50) were analyzed in two ways. A deductive approach based on GOC attributes generated in a concept analysis on GOC: goal-elicitation, goal-setting, goal-evaluation, patients' context, and patients' needs and preferences. An inductive approach based on a thematic analysis using descriptive phenomenology. RESULTS: The phase of goal-elicitation was recognized by the participants, whereas goal-setting and goal-evaluation were experienced to a lesser extent. Regarding the underpinning attributes, mixed feelings were reported concerning the integration of the patient's context and the presence of their needs and preferences throughout the care process. The inductive analysis revealed specific attention to informing patients about their condition and treatment options and discussing goals in interprofessional collaboration. CONCLUSION: Goal-elicitation was already present and seems to be a good foundation for GOC. More attention should be given to goal-setting and goal-evaluation. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Developing guidance by means of a workflow, tools, or questions might support people with chronic conditions and providers to underpin the entire care process with patients' personal goals.

Cost-effectiveness of adding oseltamivir to primary care for influenza-like-illness: economic evaluation alongside the randomised controlled ALIC4E trial in 15 European countries.

BACKGROUND: Oseltamivir is usually not often prescribed (or reimbursed) for non-high-risk patients consulting for influenza-like-illness (ILI) in primary care in Europe. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adding oseltamivir to usual primary care in adults/adolescents (13 years +) and children with ILI during seasonal influenza epidemics, using data collected in an open-label, multi-season, randomised controlled trial of oseltamivir in 15 European countries. METHODS: Direct and indirect cost estimates were based on patient reported resource use and official country-specific unit costs. Health-Related Quality of Life was assessed by EQ-5D questionnaires. Costs and quality adjusted life-years (QALY) were bootstrapped (N = 10,000) to estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), from both the healthcare payers' and the societal perspectives, with uncertainty expressed through probabilistic sensitivity analysis and expected value for perfect information (EVPI) analysis. Additionally, scenario (self-reported spending), comorbidities subgroup and country-specific analyses were performed. RESULTS: The healthcare payers' expected ICERs of oseltamivir were €22,459 per QALY gained in adults/adolescents and €13,001 in children. From the societal perspective, oseltamivir was cost-saving in adults/adolescents, but the ICER is €8,344 in children. Large uncertainties were observed in subgroups with comorbidities, especially for children. The expected ICERs and extent of decision uncertainty varied between countries (EVPI ranged €1-€35 per patient). CONCLUSION: Adding oseltamivir to primary usual care in Europe is likely to be cost-effective for treating adults/adolescents and children with ILI from the healthcare payers' perspective (if willingness-to-pay per QALY gained > €22,459) and cost-saving in adults/adolescents from a societal perspective.

Challenges and opportunities for general practice specific CME in Europe - a narrative review of seven countries.

BACKGROUND: Several changes have led to general practitioners (GPs) working in a more differentiated setting today and being supported by other health professions. As practice changes, primary care specific continuing medical education (CME) may also need to adapt. By comparing different primary care specific CME approaches for GPs across Europe, we aim at identifying challenges and opportunities for future development. METHODS: Narrative review assessing, analysing and comparing CME programs for general practitioners across different north-western European countries (UK, Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium (Flanders), Germany, Switzerland, and France). Templates containing detailed items across seven dimensions of country-specific CME were developed and used. These dimensions are role of primary care within the health system, legal regulations regarding CME, published aims of CME, actual content of CME, operationalisation, funding and sponsorship, and evaluation. RESULTS: General practice specific CME in the countries under consideration are presented and comparatively analysed based on the dimensions defined in advance. This shows that each of the countries examined has different strengths and weaknesses. A clear pioneer cannot be identified. Nevertheless, numerous impulses for optimising future GP training systems can be derived from the examples presented. CONCLUSIONS: Independent of country specific CME programs several fields of potential action were identified: the development of curriculum objectives for GPs, the promotion of innovative teaching and learning formats, the use of synergies in specialist GP training and CME, the creation of accessible yet comprehensive learning platforms, the establishment of clear rules for sponsorship, the development of new financing models, the promotion of fair competition between CME providers, and scientifically based evaluation.

Point-of-care C-reactive protein test results in acute infections in children in primary care: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Acute infections are a common reason for children to consult primary care. Serious infections are rare but differentiating them from self-limiting illnesses remains challenging. This can lead to inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. Point-of-care C-reactive protein testing is used to guide antibiotic prescribing in adults. However, in children its use remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to assess point-of-care CRP test levels with respect to patients' characteristics, care setting, preliminary diagnosis, and management. METHODS: A prospective observational study was performed in children with an acute infection presenting to ambulatory care in Belgium. RESULTS: In this study 8280 cases were analysed, of which 6552 had a point-of-care CRP value available. A total of 276 physicians participated. The median patient age was 1.98 years (IQR 0.97 to 4.17), 37% of children presented to a general practitioner, 33% to a paediatric out-patient clinic, and 30% to the emergency department. A total of 131 different preliminary diagnoses were found, with acute upper airway infection as the most frequent. In 6% (n = 513) patients were diagnosed with a serious infection. The most common serious infection was pneumonia. Antibiotics were prescribed in 28% (n = 2030) of all episodes. The median CRP over all infectious episodes was 10 mg/L (IQR < 5-29). Children below 5 years of age and those presenting to a paediatrician had a higher median CRP. Median CRP in patients with serious infections was 21 mg/L (IQR 6 to 63.5). Pneumonia had a median CRP of 48 mg/L (IQR 13-113). In the episodes with antibiotics prescription, median CRP level was 29 mg/L (IQR 10-58) compared to 7 mg/L (IQR < 5-19) when they were not prescribed. CONCLUSION: A low POC CRP as a standalone tool did not seem to be sufficient to rule out serious infections, but its potential in assessing serious infections could increase when integrated in a clinical decision rule. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02024282 (registered on 31/12/2013).

Do doctors and other healthcare professionals know overdiagnosis in screening and how are they dealing with it? A protocol for a mixed methods systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Overdiagnosis is the diagnosis of a disease that would never have caused any symptom or problem. It is a harmful side effect of screening and may lead to unnecessary treatment, costs and emotional drawbacks. Doctors and other healthcare professionals (HCPs) have the opportunity to mitigate these consequences, not only by informing their patients or the public but also by adjusting screening methods or even by refraining from screening. However, it is unclear to what extent HCPs are fully aware of overdiagnosis and whether it affects their screening decisions. With this systematic review, we aim to synthesise all available research about what HCPs know and think about overdiagnosis, how it affects their position on screening policy and whether they think patients and the public should be informed about it. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will systematically search several databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL and PsycArticles) for studies that directly examine HCPs' knowledge and subjective perceptions of overdiagnosis due to health screening, both qualitatively and quantitatively. We will optimise our search by scanning reference and citation lists, contacting experts in the field and hand searching abstracts from the annual conference on 'Preventing Overdiagnosis'. After selection and quality appraisal, we will analyse qualitative and quantitative findings separately in a segregated design for mixed-method reviews. The data will be examined and presented descriptively. If the retrieved studies allow it, we will review them from a constructivist perspective through a critical interpretive synthesis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: For this type of research, no ethical approval is required. Findings from this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at the annual congress of 'Preventing Overdiagnosis'. In addition, the results will serve as guidance for further research on this topic. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021244513.

Prevalence, incidence and longevity of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 among primary healthcare providers in Belgium: a prospective cohort study with 12 months of follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence, incidence and longevity of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 among primary healthcare providers (PHCPs). DESIGN: Prospective cohort study with 12 months of follow-up. SETTING: Primary care in Belgium. PARTICIPANTS: Any general practitioner (GP) working in primary care in Belgium and any other PHCP from the same GP practice who physically manages (examines, tests, treats) patients were eligible. A convenience sample of 3648 eligible PHCPs from 2001 GP practices registered for this study (3044 and 604 to start in December 2020 and January 2021, respectively). 3390 PHCPs (92,9%) participated in their first testing time point (2820 and 565, respectively) and 2557 PHCPs (70,1%) in the last testing time point (December 2021). INTERVENTIONS: Participants were asked to perform a rapid serological test targeting IgM and IgG against the receptor binding domain of SARS-CoV-2 and to complete an online questionnaire at each of maximum eight testing time points. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The prevalence, incidence and longevity of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 both after natural infection and after vaccination. RESULTS: Among all participants, 67% were women and 77% GPs. Median age was 43 years. The seroprevalence in December 2020 (before vaccination availability) was 15.1% (95% CI 13.5% to 16.6%), increased to 84.2% (95% CI 82.9% to 85.5%) in March 2021 (after vaccination availability) and reached 93.9% (95% CI 92.9% to 94.9%) in December 2021 (during booster vaccination availability and fourth (delta variant dominant) COVID-19 wave). Among not (yet) vaccinated participants the first monthly incidence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 was estimated to be 2.91% (95% CI 1.80% to 4.01%). The longevity of antibodies is higher in PHCPs with self-reported COVID-19 infection. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that occupational health measures provided sufficient protection when managing patients. High uptake of vaccination resulted in high seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in PHCPs in Belgium. Longevity of antibodies was supported by booster vaccination and virus circulation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04779424.

Diagnostic performance of the SARS-CoV-2 S1RBD IgG ELISA (ImmunoDiagnostics) for the quantitative detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies on dried blood spots.

Dried Blood Spots (DBS) are broadly used in SARS-CoV-2 surveillance studies, reporting either the presence or absence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. However, quantitative follow-up has become increasingly important to monitor humoral vaccine responses. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the performance of DBS for the detection of anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 antibody concentrations using a commercially available assay, reporting in a standardised unitage (International Units/mL; IU/mL). To assess the sensitivity and specificity of the ImmunoDiagnostics ELISA on serum and DBS for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection, we analysed 72 paired DBS and serum samples. The SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG ELISA kit (EUROIMMUN) on serum was used as the reference method. We performed a statistical assessment to optimise the cut-off value for DBS and serum and assessed the correlation between DBS and serum antibody concentrations. We found that anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 antibody concentrations detected in DBS are highly correlated to those detected in paired serum (Pearson correlation 0.98; p-value < 0.0001), allowing to assess serum antibody concentration using DBS. The optimal cut-off for antibody detection on DBS was found to be 26 IU/mL, with 98.1% sensitivity and 100% specificity. For serum, the optimal cut-off was 14 IU/mL, with 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Therefore, we conclude that the ImmunoDiagnostics ELISA kit has optimal performance in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies on both DBS and serum. This makes DBS ideal for large-scale follow-up of humoral SARS-CoV-2 immune responses, as it is an easy but valuable sampling method for quantification of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, compared to serum.