Multispecialty group practice: the inevitable alternative.

It is generally assumed that health care systems in which specialist and hospital care is only accessible after referral by a general practitioner (GP) have lower total health care costs. In this study, the following questions were addressed: do health care systems with GPs acting as gatekeepers to specialized care have lower health care expenditure than those with directly accessible specialist care? Does health care expenditure increase more rapidly in countries without a referral system than in those with the GP acting as a gatekeeper? Multiple regression analyses on total and ambulatory health care expenditure in 18 OECD countries. Analyses showed only one statistically significant effect (P < 0.05) in countries with gatekeeping GPs: ambulatory care expenditure has increased more slowly than in non-gatekeeping systems. No significant effects of gatekeeping were found on the level of ambulatory care costs, or on the level or growth of total health care expenditure. As in earlier studies, the most important factor influencing aggregate health care costs and their growth is gross national product (GNP), followed by the share of public funding. Relationships that exist at a micro level (such as lower costs with a gatekeeping primary care doctor) did not show up in aggregate data at a macro level. Gatekeeping systems appear to be better able to contain ambulatory care expenditure. More research is necessary to understand micro level mechanisms and to distinguish the effects of gatekeeping from other structural aspects of health care systems.

Sidney Garfield—A Personal Recollection

BackgroundIrritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) is a functional somatic syndrome characterized by patterns of persistent bodily complaints for which a thorough diagnostic workup does not reveal adequate explanatory structural pathology. Detailed insight into disease-specific health-care costs is critical because it co-determines the societal impact of the disease, enables the assessment of cost-effectiveness of existing and new treatments, and facilitates choices in treatment policy. In the present study the aim was, to compare the costs and magnitude of healthcare consumption for patients diagnosed with Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) in primary and secondary care, compare these costs with the average health care expenditure for patients without IBS and describe these costs in further detail. MethodsReimbursement data for patients diagnosed with IBS by a general practitioner (GP) or specialist between 2006 and 2009 were extracted from a healthcare insurance company and compared to an age and gender matched control group of patients without IBS. Using a case-control design, direct medical costs for GP consultations, specialist care and medication prescriptions were calculated.ResultsData of 326 primary care and 9274 secondary care IBS patients were included in the analysis. For primary care patients, the mean total annual health care costs for the three years after diagnosis compared to the three years before diagnosis, increased with 486 Euro after IBS was diagnosed, whereas for secondary care patients, these costs increased with 2328 Euro. Total health care costs remained higher in the three years after the initial diagnosis when the patient is treated in secondary care, compared to primary care. This increase was significant for hospital specialist costs and medications, but not for GP contacts. For controls, there was no significant difference in mean total annual health costs in the three years before and the three years after the diagnosis and also no significant difference in cost increases between both primary- and secondary-care control patients.ConclusionTotal healthcare costs per patient substantially increase after a diagnosis of IBS and IBS related costs are significantly higher when patients are treated in secondary-care compared to primary-care. IBS patients should be treated in primary-care where possible, not only because guidelines recommend this from a quality of care viewpoint, but also to optimize use of health care resources. Referral should be restricted to those patients with alarm symptoms, with ill-matching symptoms, or other cases of diagnostic uncertainty.

Pharmacists may be well placed to take up a role in depression care, complementing the role of general practitioners. However, depression care is a relatively new role for pharmacists, and little is known of their attitudes, current practices, and barriers toward it. A random sample of 200 community pharmacists in Belgium was surveyed about the care of patients with depression in comparison with patients with other, physical conditions. The 69 pharmacists who responded to the survey generally endorsed a very positive attitude toward their potential role in depression care. This willingness was, however, not reflected in current practice, and fulfilling this role appeared to be more difficult with patients with depression in comparison with patients with other, physical conditions. A lack of training in mental health issues was the most important barrier reported. Cooperation with general practitioners in depression care was desired, but the current level of cooperation was rather low. For pharmacists to effectively take up depression care, perceived barriers need to be addressed through specific training programs and increased cooperation with general practitioners.

Rationale, considerations, and goals for atrial fibrillation centers of excellence: A Heart Rhythm Society perspective

With the development of antiretroviral therapy, Human Immunodeficiency Virus [HIV) infection has become a chronic disease. In order to develop an efficient response to this new challenge, there is a need for closer collaboration between specialized units and general practitioners. This article identifies the opportunities for and the barriers to this collaboration. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients living with HIV, general practitioners working in multidisciplinary group practice using the capitation system and infectiologists from one Belgian urban area. Interviews focused one xperiences and expectations in relation to diagnosis, follow-up and collaboration between general practitioners and infectiologists. Overall, infectiologists and general practitioners aspire to improved communication and collaboration. There are overlaps between general practitioner's and infectiologist's field of action. The general practitioner's intervention is sometimes restricted to common uncomplicated or psychosocial problems, in the context of unplanned and short contacts.Infectiologists prefer to focus on HIV problems, leaving general practitioners to take care of these patients' other health problems. The patient may be an obstacle to greater involvement of general practitioners due to fear of stigmatization from his family and social circle or lack of confidence in the general practitioner's skills. This research underlines the difficulties and gaps in the care of HIV patients and provides preliminary explanations for the lack of active cooperation between general practitioners and infectiologists. Overlaps between the areas of professional skills can result in uncovered aspects of care, which can have a negative impact on patients, but also on general practitioners and infectiologists. Collaboration between general practitioners and infectiologists should be based on a concerted decision, with clear allocation of tasks, taking into account the patient's expectations.

Ian Anderson: transforming Indigenous medicine and education

Objective To examine associations between the contract and ownership type of general practices and patient experience in England. Design Multilevel linear regression analysis of a national cross-sectional patient survey (General Practice Patient Survey). Setting All general practices in England in 2013-2014 ( n = 8017). Participants 903,357 survey respondents aged 18 years or over and registered with a general practice for six months or more (34.3% of 2,631,209 questionnaires sent). Main outcome measures Patient reports of experience across five measures: frequency of consulting a preferred doctor; ability to get a convenient appointment; rating of doctor communication skills; ease of contacting the practice by telephone; and overall experience (measured on four- or five-level interval scales from 0 to 100). Models adjusted for demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of respondents and general practice populations and a random intercept for each general practice. Results Most practices had a centrally negotiated contract with the UK government ('General Medical Services' 54.6%; 4337/7949). Few practices were limited companies with locally negotiated 'Alternative Provider Medical Services' contracts (1.2%; 98/7949); these practices provided worse overall experiences than General Medical Services practices (adjusted mean difference -3.04, 95% CI -4.15 to -1.94). Associations were consistent in direction across outcomes and largest in magnitude for frequency of consulting a preferred doctor (-12.78, 95% CI -15.17 to -10.39). Results were similar for practices owned by large organisations (defined as having ≥20 practices) which were uncommon (2.2%; 176/7949). Conclusions Patients registered to general practices owned by limited companies, including large organisations, reported worse experiences of their care than other patients in 2013-2014.

Purpose Ultrasound (US) is a key tool in the evaluation of palpable breast masses and helps to refine the likelihood of malignancy and need for additional diagnostic studies. US is available in many low-resource settings, but there is little expertise. We launched a breast US training program for general practitioners (GPs) and nurses at a rural Rwandan district hospital that is a cancer referral facility. We assessed the skills of the GPs and nurses in diagnostic breast US after intensive training. Methods Four breast radiologists from Boston trained five nurses and four GPs in Rwanda over 9 weeks of in-person training and 21 months of weekly remote mentoring using electronic image review and feedback. During the in-person training, trainees and radiologists evaluated patients separately. Remote assessments were based on emailed image sharing. We compared lesions with radiologist and trainee assessments to calculate trainee sensitivity using the radiologist assessments as the gold standard. Results Of 323 breast and axillary lesions assessed by trainees and radiologists, 279 were breast lesions. Of these, 114 (41%) were evaluated by radiologists in person and 165 (59%) through e-mail. Two hundred thirty-seven lesions (85%) were determined to be breast masses by radiologists, 164 of these as solid masses, 25 complex solid/cystic, 15 definite or probable cysts, 31 normal lymph nodes, and two other masses. The sensitivity of trainees’ assessments in identifying solid masses was 90.2% (95% CI, 85.9% to 94.9%) overall. Among trainees who scanned ≥ 10 lesions, mean sensitivity was 90.6% in the first 14 months and 94.0% in the second 9 months, after in-person training ( P = .3, paired t tests). In cases in which radiologists and trainees perceived solid masses (n = 148), trainees’ sensitivity was 81.4% (95% CI, 72.3% to 90.5%) for detecting suspicious masses or probably benign but in need of additional evaluation ( v benign with no additional evaluation needed). Among trainees who scanned ≥ 10 lesions, sensitivity was 79.1% in the first 14 months and 96.2% in the second 9 months ( P = .03, paired t tests). Conclusion Nurses and GPs in a rural sub-Saharan African facility built strong skills in diagnostic US with in-person training and remote electronic mentoring. The sensitivity of assessments for identifying suspicious masses demonstrated significant improvement after sustained mentorship. Assessment of the impact of the training on patient care and outcomes is ongoing. AUTHORS' DISCLOSURES OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The following represents disclosure information provided by authors of this manuscript. All relationships are considered compensated. Relationships are self-held unless noted. I = Immediate Family Member, Inst = My Institution. Relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. For more information about ASCO's conflict of interest policy, please refer to www.asco.org/rwc or ascopubs.org/jco/site/ifc . Sughra Raza Honoraria: Fujifilm Medical Services Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Fujifilm Medical Services

The clinical trial ARISTOTLE showed that apixaban was superior to warfarin in reducing the risks of stroke and bleeding among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Further study of the effect of apixaban versus warfarin use on health care resource utilization (HCRU) and associated costs in the real-world setting is warranted, especially among elderly patients who are at higher risk of stroke and bleeding. To compare HCRU and costs among elderly NVAF patients treated with apixaban versus warfarin in the United States. Elderly patients (aged ≥ 65 years) with Medicare coverage who initiated apixaban or warfarin were identified from the Humana research database during January 1, 2013-September 30, 2015. Patients were required to have 12 months of continuous insurance coverage before drug initiation (baseline period) and an atrial fibrillation diagnosis during the baseline period or on the date of drug initiation. NVAF patients were grouped into cohorts depending on the drug initiated. Propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to control for differences in demographics and clinical characteristics of study cohorts. Patients were followed after the index date for a variable length of follow-up. All-cause and disease-specific HCRU and costs during the follow-up were evaluated before and after PSM and reported as per patient per year. Of the overall (unmatched) population, 8,250 patients (mean age: 78.0 years) initiated apixaban and 14,051 patients (mean age: 78.2 years) initiated warfarin. Among NVAF patients who initiated apixaban versus those who initiated warfarin, mean Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores (3.0 vs. 3.4, P < 0.001); stroke risk scores, including CHADS2 (2.7 vs. 2.9, P < 0.001) and CHA2DS2-VASc (4.6 vs. 4.7, P < 0.001); and bleeding risk scores, including HAS-BLED (3.1 vs. 3.2, P < 0.001), were lower. Additionally, total annual all-cause health care costs were lower during the baseline period for patients treated with apixaban versus warfarin ($17,077 vs. $20,236, P < 0.001). After PSM, 14,214 patients were matched, with 7,107 in each cohort. Mean age, CCI score, and stroke and bleeding risks were similar between matched cohorts, as were total all-cause health care costs during the baseline period. During the follow-up among matched cohorts, apixaban versus warfarin treatment was associated with higher annual pharmacy costs ($5,159 vs. $2,867, P < 0.001) but lower annual inpatient ($8,327 vs. $14,296, P < 0.001), outpatient ($9,655 vs. $11,469, P < 0.001), and total all-cause health care costs ($23,141 vs. $28,633, P < 0.001), which were reflective of lower inpatient, outpatient, and all-cause HCRU among apixaban-treated patients. Furthermore, bleeding-related ($2,101 vs. $3,963, P < 0.001) and stroke-related ($652 vs. $1,178, P = 0.001) annual medical costs were lower for patients treated with apixaban versus warfarin. After controlling for differences in patient characteristics, in the real-world setting apixaban versus warfarin use was associated with less HCRU and lower total all-cause health care costs and costs for bleeding- and stroke-related medical services, but greater pharmacy costs, among elderly NVAF patients. This study was sponsored by Pfizer and Bristol-Myers Squibb. Deitelzweig is a consultant for Pfizer and Bristol-Myers Squibb and has served on their advisory boards and received speaker fees. Deitelzweig also serves as consultant and advisory board member to Portola and Janssen. Luo, Trocio, and Mardekian are employees of Pfizer and own stock in the company. Gupta and Curtice are employees of Bristol-Myers Squibb and own stock in the company. Lingohr-Smith, Menges, and Lin are employees of Novosys Health, which received research funds from Pfizer and Bristol-Myers Squibb to conduct this study and develop the manuscript. Study concept and design were primarily contributed by Deitelzweig, Luo, and Gupta, along with Trocio, Mardekian, Curtice, and Lin. Lin, Menges, and Lingohr-Smith took the lead in data collection, with assistance from the other authors. Data interpretation was performed by Deitelzweig, Menges, and Lin, with assistance from the other authors. The manuscript was written by Lingohr-Smith and Menges, along with the other authors, and revised by all the authors. Some aspects of this study were presented at the American Heart Association Scientific Sessions in New Orleans, Louisiana, November 12-16, 2016.

The practice of general practice emphasizes that the general practitioner is the backbone, and the primary health institution is the main body, which solves the main health problems of the community and meets the basic health service needs of the residents. Rehabilitation medicine occupies a prominent position in the community health service, and its related knowledge and skills are the important part of the whole medical education. However, rehabilitation medicine has more teaching contents, less training time and out-of-date teaching model, which have made the effect of rehabilitation medicine teaching not good. In the rehabilitation medicine teaching for training general practitioners, by strengthening the concept of rehabilitation, elaborating teaching content, optimizing teaching ward-round, and outstanding ability as well as reforming evaluation way, we try to exercise the students' clinical thinking and improve clinical skills, to cultivate outstanding qualified general medical practitioners for community rehabilitation ultimately. Key words: General practice; Rehabilitation medicine; General medical practitioner; Community rehabilitation

Objectives: To field test the reliability, validity, and acceptability of review criteria for angina, asthma, and type 2 diabetes which had been developed by expert panels using a systematic process...

Costs and Health Outcomes Associated With Primary vs Secondary Care After an Asthma-Related Hospitalization

Do Canada and the United States Differ in Prevalence of Depression and Utilization of Services?

Ectopic pregnancy is a terminology which is utilized for the scenario in which a fertilized eggs has implanted outside the uterus [5] which usually has tended to be within one of the fallopian tubes. The classical manifestations of ectopic pregnancy do include abdominal pain and bleeding per vaginam; nevertheless, it has been stated that less than 50% of women who are afflicted by ectopic pregnancy are stated to have both symptoms of abdominal pain and vaginal bleeding. The lady who has ectopic pregnancy could describe the abdominal pain as sharp pain dull pain, or crampy pain. The abdominal pain could also extend to affect the ipsilateral shoulder due to irritation of the diaphragm in the scenario of of bleeding from the ectopic pregnancy into the abdomen. Severe bleeding into the abdomen from ectopic pregnancy site into the abdomen or through the vagina could emanate in the patient developing a fast heart rate (tachycardia, fainting, or shock and on rare occasions the foetus may not have the chance to survive [6] When the patient who has ectopic pregnancy manifests with abdominal pain and bleeding from the vagina, the patient tends to be seen by a gynaecologist but when the patient presents with abdominal pain, loin pain or shoulder tip pain, the patient could in the first instance be seen by a General Practitioner, a general surgeon, a physician or a Urologist on rare occasions and hence even though ectopic pregnancy is a gynaecological practitioner, every clinician including General Duty Practitioners and Emergency clinicians need to have a high index of suspicion for ectopic pregnancy in order to establish a quick and accurate diagnosis to enable prompt and appropriate treatment of the patient. Some of the risk factors for the development of ectopic pregnancy do include: pelvic inflammatory disease, smoking of tobacco, previous tubal surgery, a history of infertility, utilization of assisted reproductive technology. In most hospitals globally, diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy tends to be established via utilization of blood tests for human chorionic gonadotrophin and the undertaking of ultrasound scan of abdomen and pelvis to demonstrate presence of the ectopic pregnancy. Nevertheless, in some small hospitals where facilities for ultrasound scan are not immediately available as well as in scenarios where serum beta human chorionic gonadotrophin are not immediately available on such rare occasions based upon a high index of suspicion for ectopic pregnancy the emergency general duty practitioner tends to subject the patient to surgical operation and during the procedure the ectopic pregnancy would be diagnosed and dealt with accordingly. Some of the differential diagnoses of ectopic pregnancy include: miscarriage, torsion of the ovary, appendicitis if the ectopic pregnancy is on the right side, rupture of corpus luteum cyst. Some of the treatment options that have been utilized for ectopic pregnancy include: surgery with various forms of surgical operation including salpingectomy, as well as achieving abortion via treatment with methotrexate. With regard to mortality associated with ectopic pregnancy the mortality has tended to 0.2%, but the mortality associated with ectopic pregnancy within the developing world has been 2%. Ectopic pregnancy is stated to account for 1.5% of pregnancies within the developed world. Conclusion Ectopic pregnancy is a condition that tends to manifest with bleeding from the vagina plus abdominal pain but it could also manifest as abdominal pain alone and hence a patient with ectopic pregnancy may initially present to an emergency clinician, an obstetrician, / gynaecologists, a General Practitioner, a General Surgeon and on very rare occasions to a Urologist. A high index of suspicion is required to diagnose ectopic pregnancy based upon determination of serum Beta Human Chorionic Gonadotrophin levels as well as undertaking of ultrasound scan of abdomen and pelvis in order to provide appropriate and effective treatment based upon the clinical state of the patients as well as whether or not the patient has a desire to be pregnant again in the future. It is important to appreciate that a patient who has ectopic pregnancy could be seen for the first time by various clinicians including gynaecologists, emergency clinicians, general surgeons and even urologists. A lady who has pain in the right lower quadrant of the abdomen could be considered to have differential diagnoses, some of which include appendicitis, and ureteric colic and hence it is important to consider ectopic pregnancy as a possible diagnosis in cases of right sided lower abdominal and suprapubic pain Considering that occasionally a patient who has ectopic pregnancy may first be seen by non-gynaecologists, it is important for all clinicians to have a high index of suspicion to exclude ectopic pregnancy when they see ladies in their reproductive ages who manifest with vaginal bleeding and abdominal pain or abdominal pain alone.