RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Using the 'surprise' question 'Would you be surprised if this patient died in the next year?' may improve physicians' prognostic accuracy and identify people appropriate for palliative care. AIM: Determine the prognostic accuracy of general practitioners asking the 'surprise' question about their patients with advanced (stage IV) cancer. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Between December 2011 and February 2012, 42 of 50 randomly selected general practitioners (Bologna area, Italy) prospectively classified 231 patients diagnosed with advanced cancer according to the 'surprise' question and supplied the status of each patient 1 year later. RESULTS: Of the 231 patients, general practitioners responded 'No' to the 'surprise' question for 126 (54.5%) and 'Yes' for 105 (45.5%). After 12 months, 104 (45.0%) patients had died; 87 (83.7%) were in the 'No' group. The sensitivity of the 'surprise' question was 69.3%; the specificity was 83.6%. Positive predictive value was 83.8%; negative predictive value was 69.0%. The answer to the 'surprise' question was significantly correlated with survival at 1 year. Patients in the 'No' group had an odds ratio of 11.55 (95% confidence interval: 5.83-23.28) and a hazard ratio of 6.99 (95% confidence interval: 3.75-13.03) of being dead in the next year compared to patients in the 'Yes' group (p = 0.000 for both odds ratio and hazard ratio). CONCLUSION: When general practitioners used the 'surprise' question for their patients with advanced cancer, the accuracy of survival prognosis was very high. This has clinical potential as a method to identify patients who might benefit from palliative care.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: A comprehensive lifestyle approach is suggested as first-line treatment for the individual features of the metabolic syndrome, but the results in community medicine are usually discouraging. No study has tested the feasibility of an integrated approach between general practitioners (GPs) and specialist centers. METHODS: We report the process analysis on baseline data of a randomized study based on the integration between GPs, selecting patients on the basis of a pre-defined grid and specific targets, and a specialist center, providing informative material and arranging courses of counseling and cognitive-behavioral therapy, using a shared database. After initial visits by GPs for clinical assessment and motivation to treatment, patients were randomly assigned to: (a) prescriptive diet, managed by GPs; (b) counseling (four group lessons); (c) cognitive-behavioral treatment (12 group lessons), both managed by specialist center. Data of the first 503 subjects were compared with those of 139 cases self-referring to the specialist center for the treatment of obesity. RESULTS: Subjects enrolled by GPs were more frequently males, had lower obesity grades, and a higher number of features of metabolic syndrome, compared with the control group. Only 10% of subjects randomized to counseling and 27% randomized to behavior declined participation in the intensive treatments; attendance at sessions averaged 90%. GPs were satisfied with their participation and reported that treatments met patients' needs. CONCLUSIONS: An integrated approach to lifestyle changes between GPs and a specialist center is feasible in the metabolic syndrome and may be cost-effective, considering the high burden of disease.