RESUMO
BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) should regularly review patients' medications and, if necessary, deprescribe, as inappropriate polypharmacy may harm patients' health. However, deprescribing can be challenging for physicians. This study investigates GPs' deprescribing decisions in 31 countries. METHODS: In this case vignette study, GPs were invited to participate in an online survey containing three clinical cases of oldest-old multimorbid patients with potentially inappropriate polypharmacy. Patients differed in terms of dependency in activities of daily living (ADL) and were presented with and without history of cardiovascular disease (CVD). For each case, we asked GPs if they would deprescribe in their usual practice. We calculated proportions of GPs who reported they would deprescribe and performed a multilevel logistic regression to examine the association between history of CVD and level of dependency on GPs' deprescribing decisions. RESULTS: Of 3,175 invited GPs, 54% responded (N = 1,706). The mean age was 50 years and 60% of respondents were female. Despite differences across GP characteristics, such as age (with older GPs being more likely to take deprescribing decisions), and across countries, overall more than 80% of GPs reported they would deprescribe the dosage of at least one medication in oldest-old patients (> 80 years) with polypharmacy irrespective of history of CVD. The odds of deprescribing was higher in patients with a higher level of dependency in ADL (OR =1.5, 95%CI 1.25 to 1.80) and absence of CVD (OR =3.04, 95%CI 2.58 to 3.57). INTERPRETATION: The majority of GPs in this study were willing to deprescribe one or more medications in oldest-old multimorbid patients with polypharmacy. Willingness was higher in patients with increased dependency in ADL and lower in patients with CVD.
Assuntos
Desprescrições , Clínicos Gerais , Atividades Cotidianas , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Multimorbidade , PolimedicaçãoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: While primary care physicians (PCPs) play a key role in cancer detection, they can find cancer diagnosis challenging, and some patients have considerable delays between presentation and onward referral. AIM: To explore European PCPs' experiences and views on cases where they considered that they had been slow to think of, or act on, a possible cancer diagnosis. DESIGN & SETTING: A multicentre European qualitative study, based on an online survey with open-ended questions, asking PCPs for their narratives about cases when they had missed a diagnosis of cancer. METHOD: Using maximum variation sampling, PCPs in 23 European countries were asked to describe what happened in a case where they were slow to think of a cancer diagnosis, and for their views on why it happened. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: A total of 158 PCPs completed the questionnaire. The main themes were as follows: patients' descriptions did not suggest cancer; distracting factors reduced PCPs' cancer suspicions; patients' hesitancy delayed the diagnosis; system factors not facilitating timely diagnosis; PCPs felt that they had acted wrongly; and problems with communicating adequately. CONCLUSION: The study identified six overarching themes that need to be addressed. Doing so should reduce morbidity and mortality in the small proportion of patients who have a significant, avoidable delay in their cancer diagnosis. The 'Swiss cheese' model of accident causation showed how the themes related to each other.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The quantification of diabetes-related quality of life (DR-QoL) is an essential step in making Type 2 Diabetes (T2DM) self-management arrangements. The European General Practitioners Research Network (EGPRN) initiated the EUROBSTACLE study to develop a broadly conceptualised DR-QoL instrument for diverse cultural and ethnic groups; high and low-income countries. In 2016 the Diabetes Obstacles Questionnaire-30 (DOQ-30) was introduced. OBJECTIVES: The research aimed to study obstacles a patient with diabetes (PWD) may face in everyday life. First, we assessed how descriptive and clinical characteristics and the residential country were associated with the obstacles. Secondly, we calculated the proportion of respondents who expressed obstacles. METHODS: Data were collected in 2009 in a cross-sectional survey in Belgium, France, Estonia, Serbia, Slovenia, and Turkey. Multiple linear regressions were computed to detect associations between descriptive and clinical characteristics, residential country, and obstacles. Percentages of respondents who perceived obstacles were calculated. RESULTS: We found that although descriptive and clinical characteristics varied to quite a great extent, they were weakly associated with the perception of obstacles. The residential country was most often associated with the existence of some obstacle. The highest percent (48%) of all respondents perceived 'Uncertainty about Insulin Use' as an obstacle. CONCLUSION: Descriptive and clinical characteristics were weakly associated with perceived obstacles. However, the residential country plays an essential role in the decline of the QoL of PWDs. Education of both PWDs and healthcare professionals (HCPs) plays an essential role in countering the fear of insulin.
Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Qualidade de Vida , Estudos Transversais , Humanos , Sérvia , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Patients with type 2 diabetes reveal different obstacles in living with the disease. The EGPRN initiated a qualitative research EUROBSTACLE to create a broadly conceptualized diabetes-related quality of life (DR-QoL) instrument. It led to the development of the diabetes obstacle questionnaire (DOQ), a five-point Likert-scaled measure, consisting of 78 items in eight scales. OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a short, easy-to-use version of the DOQ. METHODS: A cross-sectional study with the DOQ was carried out. Participants answered the DOQ and GPs added some clinical data from their medical records. Data of 853 patients from Belgium, France, Estonia, Serbia, Slovenia, and Turkey were included in the analysis. The selection of items for the short version of the DOQ was achieved with exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Construct validity was proved with EFA and Pearson correlations between the DOQ and the new DOQ-30. Internal reliability was established with Cronbach's alpha. RESULTS: DOQ-30 resulted in 30 items in nine subscales. It explained 49.8% of items' variance. It shows a considerable good internal reliability and construct validity. CONCLUSION: The DOQ-30 is a five-point Likert-scaled broadly conceptualized measure of DR-QoL. It addresses a variety of obstacles, such as social, psychological, cognitive and behavioural. The DOQ-30 is ready for implementation in general practice and research in Europe as a valuable instrument to assess DR-QoL.