Precipitating factors of heart failure decompensation, short-term morbidity and mortality in patients attended in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the precipitating factors for heart failure decompensation in primary care and associations with short-term prognosis. Design Prospective cohort study with a 30-d follow-up from an index consultation. Regression models to determine independent factors associated with hospitalisation or death. SETTING: Primary care in ten European countries. Patients Patients with diagnosis of heart failure attended in primary care for a heart failure decompensation (increase of dyspnoea, unexplained weight gain or peripheral oedema). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Potential precipitating factors for decompensation of heart failure and their association with the event of hospitalisation or mortality 30 d after a decompensation. RESULTS: Of 692 patients 54% were women, mean age 81 (standard deviation [SD] 8.9) years; mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 55% (SD 12%). Most frequently identified heart failure precipitation factors were respiratory infections in 194 patients (28%), non-compliance of dietary recommendations in 184 (27%) and non-compliance with pharmacological treatment in 157 (23%). The two strongest precipitating factors to predict 30 d hospitalisation or death were respiratory infections (odds ratio [OR] 2.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] (2.4-3.4)) and atrial fibrillation (AF) > 110 beats/min (OR 2.2, CI 1.5-3.2). Multivariate analysis confirmed the association between the following variables and hospitalisation/death: In relation to precipitating factors: respiratory infection (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.14-1.25) and AF with heart rate > 110 beats/min (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.10-1.35); and regarding patient characteristics: New York Heart Association (NYHA) III or IV (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.15-1.29); previous hospitalisation (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.11-1.19); and LVEF < 40% (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.09-1.19). CONCLUSIONS: In primary care, respiratory infections and rapid AF are the most important precipitating factors for hospitalisation and death within 30 d following an episode of heart failure decompensation. Key points Hospitalisation due to heart failure decompensation represents the highest share of healthcare costs for this disease. So far, no primary care studies have analysed the relationship between precipitating factors and short term prognosis of heart failure decompensation episodes. We found that in 692 patients with heart failure decompensation in primary care, the respiratory infection and rapid atrial fibrillation (AF) increased the risk of short-term hospital admission or death. Patients with a hospital admission the previous year and a decompensation episode caused by respiratory infection were even more likely to be hospitalized or die within 30 d.

Cross-Cultural Validation of the Definition of Multimorbidity in the Bulgarian Language.

INTRODUCTION: Multimorbidity is a health issue with growing importance. During the last few decades the populations of most countries in the world have been ageing rapidly. Bulgaria is affected by the issue because of the high prevalence of ageing population in the country with multiple chronic conditions. The AIM of the present study was to validate the translated definition of multimorbidity from English into the Bulgarian language. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present study is part of an international project involving 8 national groups. We performed a forward and backward translation of the original English definition of multimorbidity using a Delphi consensus procedure. RESULTS: The physicians involved accepted the definition with a high percentage of agreement in the first round. The backward translation was accepted by the scientific committee using the Nominal group technique. DISCUSSION: Some of the GPs provided comments on the linguistic expressions which arose in order to improve understanding in Bulgarian. The remarks were not relevant to the content. The conclusion of the discussion, using a meta-ethnographic approach, was that the differences were acceptable and no further changes were required. CONCLUSIONS: A native version of the published English multimorbidity definition has been finalized. This definition is a prerequisite for better management of multimorbidity by clinicians, researchers and policy makers.

Risk stratification in heart failure decompensation in the community: HEFESTOS score.

AIMS: Because evidence regarding risk stratification predicting prognosis of patients with heart failure (HF) decompensation attended in primary care is lacking, we developed and externally validated a model to forecast death/hospitalization during the first 30 days after an episode of decompensation. The predictive model is based on variables easily obtained in primary care settings. METHODS AND RESULTS: HEFESTOS is a multinational study consisting of a derivation cohort of HF patients recruited in 14 primary healthcare centres in Barcelona and a validation cohort from primary healthcare in 9 other European countries. The derivation and validation cohorts included 561 and 250 patients, respectively. Percentages of women in the derivation and validation cohorts were 56.3% and 47.6% (P = 0.026), respectively. Mean age was 82.2 years (SD 8.03) in the derivation cohort, and 79.3 years (SD 10.3) in the validation one (P = 0.001). HF with preserved ejection fraction represented 72.1% in the derivation cohort and 58.8% in the validation one (P = 0.004). Mortality/hospitalization during the first 30 days after a decompensation episode was 30.5% and 26% (P = 0.225) for the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression models were performed to develop a score of risk. The identified predictors were worsening of dyspnoea [odds ratio (OR): 2.5; P = 0.001], orthopnoea (OR: 2.16; P = 0.01), paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnoea (OR: 2.25; P = 0.01), crackles (OR: 2.35; P = 0.01), New York Heart Association functional class III/IV (OR: 2.11; P = 0.001), oxygen saturation ≤ 90% (OR: 4.98; P < 0.001), heart rate > 100 b.p.m. (OR: 2.72; P = 0.002), and previous hospitalization due to HF (OR: 2.45; P < 0.001). The model showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.807, 95% confidence interval (CI): [0.770; 0.845] in the derivation cohort and AUC 0.73, 95% CI: [0.660; 0.808] in the validation one. No significant differences between both cohorts were observed (P = 0.08). Regarding probability of hospitalization/death, three risk groups were defined: low <5%, medium 5-20%, and high >20%. Outcome incidence was 2.7% for the low-risk group, 12.8% for medium risk, and 46.2% for high risk in the derivation cohort, and 9.1%, 12.9%, and 39.6% in the validation one. CONCLUSIONS: The HEFESTOS score, based on variables easily accessible in a community setting and validated in an external European cohort, properly predicted the risk of death/hospitalization during the first 30 days after an HF decompensation episode.

Nine Forward-Backward Translations of the Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25 With Cultural Checks.

Introduction: The Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25 (HSCL-25) is an effective, reliable, and ergonomic tool that can be used for depression diagnosis and monitoring in daily practice. To allow its broad use by family practice physicians (FPs), it was translated from English into nine European languages (Greek, Polish, Bulgarian, Croatian, Catalan, Galician, Spanish, Italian, and French) and the translation homogeneity was confirmed. This study describes this process. Methods: First, two translators (an academic translator and an FP researcher) were recruited for the forward translation (FT). A panel of English-speaking FPs that included at least 15 experts (researchers, teachers, and practitioners) was organized in each country to finalize the FT using a Delphi procedure. Results: One or two Delphi procedure rounds were sufficient for each translation. Then, a different translator, who did not know the original version of the HSCL-25, performed a backward translation in English. An expert panel of linguists compared the two English versions. Differences were listed and a multicultural consensus group determined whether they were due to linguistic problems or to cultural differences. All versions underwent cultural check. Conclusion: All nine translations were finalized without altering the original meaning.

Information systems and the electronic health record in primary health care.

The implementation of information systems into primary health care opened the possibilities of providing integrated and co-ordinated health care, improved in quality and focused on the healthcare user. The healthcare system, researchers, physicians, and patients have recognised the benefits offered by informatics, but also raised questions that have yet to be answered.

How do general practitioners recognize the definition of multimorbidity? A European qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity is a challenging concept for general practice. An EGPRN working group has published a comprehensive definition of the concept of multimorbidity. As multimorbidity could be a way to explore complexity in general practice, it was of importance to explore whether European general practitioners (GPs) recognize this concept and whether they would change it. OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether European GPs recognize the EGPRN concept of multimorbidity and whether they would change it. METHODS: Focus group meetings and semi-structured interviews as data collection techniques with a purposive sample of practicing GPs from every country. Data collection continued until saturation was reached in every country. The analysis was undertaken using a grounded theory based method. In each national team, four independent researchers, working blind and pooling data, carried out the analysis. To ensure the internationalization of the data, an international team of 10 researchers pooled the axial and selective coding of all national teams to check the concept and highlight emerging themes. RESULTS: The maximal variation and saturation of the sample were reached in all countries with 211 selected GPs. The EGPRN definition was recognized in all countries. Two additional ideas emerged, the use of Wonca's core competencies of general practice, and the dynamics of the doctor-patient relationship for detecting and managing multimorbidity and patient's complexity. CONCLUSION: European GPs recognized and enhanced the EGPRN concept of multimorbidity. These results open new perspectives regarding the management of complexity using the concept of multimorbidity in general practice. [Box: see text].

The European general practice research network presents the translations of its comprehensive definition of multimorbidity in family medicine in ten European languages.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity, according to the World Health Organization, exists when there are two or more chronic conditions in one patient. This definition seems inaccurate for the holistic approach to Family Medicine (FM) and long-term care. To avoid this pitfall the European General Practitioners Research Network (EGPRN) designed a comprehensive definition of multimorbidity using a systematic literature review. OBJECTIVE: To translate that English definition into European languages and to validate the semantic, conceptual and cultural homogeneity of the translations for further research. METHOD: Forward translation of the EGPRN's definition of multimorbidity followed by a Delphi consensus procedure assessment, a backward translation and a cultural check with all teams to ensure the homogeneity of the translations in their national context. Consensus was defined as 70% of the scores being higher than 6. Delphi rounds were repeated in each country until a consensus was reached. RESULTS: 229 European medical expert FPs participated in the study. Ten consensual translations of the EGPRN comprehensive definition of multimorbidity were achieved. CONCLUSION: A comprehensive definition of multimorbidity is now available in English and ten European languages for further collaborative research in FM and long-term care.

How to deal with a crying patient? A study from a primary care setting in Croatia, using the 'critical incident technique'.

BACKGROUND: Expression of strong emotions by patients is not a rare event in medical practice, however, there are few studies describing general practitioner (GP) communication with a crying patient. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe GP behaviour with a patient who cries in a family practice setting. METHODS: A semi-qualitative study was conducted on 127 Croatian GP trainees, 83.5% female, and 16.5% male. The study method used was the 'critical incident technique.' GP trainees described their recent experience with patients who cried in front of them. Textual data were explored inductively using content analysis to generate categories and explanations. RESULTS: All 127 (100.0%) GP trainees initially let patients cry, giving them verbal (81.9%) and/or nonverbal support (25.9%). GP trainees (69.3%) encouraged their patients to verbalize and to describe the problem. Most GP trainees (87.4%) tried to establish mutual problem understanding. Approximately half of the GP trainees (55.1%) made a joint management plan. A minor group (14.2%) tried to maintain contact with the patient by arranging follow-up appointments. The vast majority of GP trainees shared their patient's emotion of sadness (92.9%). Some GP trainees were caught unaware or unprepared for patient's crying and reacted awkwardly (4.7%), some were indifferent (3.9%) or even felt guilty (3.1%). CONCLUSION: GP trainees' patterns of communication with crying patients can be described in five steps: (a) let the patient cry; (b) verbalization of emotions and facilitation to express the problem; (c) mutual understanding and solution finding; (d) evaluation--maintaining contact; and (e) personal experience of great emotional effort.

Health and treatment priorities in patients with multimorbidity: report on a workshop from the European General Practice Network meeting 'Research on multimorbidity in general practice'.

Setting health and treatment priorities is necessary when caring for multiple and complex patient issues. This is already done in the doctor-patient consultation-yet implicitly rather than explicitly. The aim of this European General Practice Network workshop was to advance a consultation approach that deals with shared priority setting. The workshop was divided into three parts: (1) how to gain a comprehensive health overview for patients with multiple problems as a basis for priority setting; (2) how to establish priorities considering patient and doctor perspectives; and (3) how to practice a communication style that achieves shared priority setting. The workshop participants preferred to gain information on patients' health status using documentations from patient records rather than conducting systematic assessments. The group emphasized that medical as well as everyday life problems need to be considered when determining priorities, a procedure that requires time and resources not readily available in daily practice. Existing skills for person-centred communication with patients should be applied in order to agree on priorities. Overall it became apparent how challenging it is to arrange and prioritize an array of health problems in a consultation with patients. Existing concepts augmented by innovative systematic methods may be the way forward.