Multimorbid outpatients: A high frequency of FP appointments and/or family difficulties, should alert FPs to the possibility of death or acute hospitalization occurring within six months; A primary care feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: The European General Practitioners Research Network (EGPRN) designed and validated a comprehensive definition of multimorbidity using a systematic literature review and qualitative research throughout Europe. This definition was tested as a model to assess death or acute hospitalization in multimorbid outpatients. OBJECTIVE: To assess which criteria in the EGPRN concept of multimorbidity could detect outpatients at risk of death or acute hospitalization in a primary care cohort at a 6-month follow-up and to assess whether a large scale cohort with FPs would be feasible. METHOD: Family Physicians included a random sample of multimorbid patients who attended appointments in their offices from July to December 2014. Inclusion criteria were those of the EGPRN definition of Multimorbidity. Exclusion criteria were patients under legal protection and those unable to complete the 2-year follow-up. Statistical analysis was undertaken with uni- and multivariate analysis at a 6-month follow-up using a combination of approaches including both automatic classification and expert decision making. A Multiple Correspondence Analysis (MCA) completed the process with a projection of illustrative variables. A logistic regression was finally performed in order to identify and quantify risk factors for decompensation. RESULTS: 19 FPs participated in the study. 96 patients were analyzed. 3 different clusters were identified. MCA showed the central function of psychosocial factors and peaceful versus conflictual relationships with relatives in all clusters. While taking into account the limit of a small cohort, age, frequency of family physician visits and extent of family difficulties were the factors which predicted death or acute hospitalization. CONCLUSION: A large scale cohort seems feasible in primary care. A sense of alarm should be triggered to prevent death or acute hospitalization in multimorbid older outpatients who have frequent family physician visits and who experience family difficulties.

The accuracy of the general practitioner's sense of alarm when confronted with dyspnoea and/or thoracic pain: protocol for a prospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Dyspnoea and chest pain are signs shared with multiple pathologies ranging from the benign to life-threatening diseases. Gut feelings such as the sense of alarm and the sense of reassurance are known to play a substantial role in the diagnostic reasoning of general practitioners (GPs). A Gut Feelings Questionnaire (GFQ) has been validated to measure the GP's sense of alarm. A French version of the GFQ is available following a linguistic validation procedure. The aim of the study is to calculate the diagnostic test accuracy of a GP's sense of alarm when confronted with dyspnoea and chest pain. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Prospective observational study. Patients aged between 18 and 80 years, consulting their GP for dyspnoea and/or thoracic pain will be considered for enrolment in the study. These GPs will have to complete the questionnaire immediately after the consultation for dyspnoea and/or thoracic pain. The follow-up and the final diagnosis will be collected 4 weeks later by phone contact with the GP or with the patient if their GP has no information. Life-threatening and non-life-threatening diseases have previously been defined according to the pathologies or symptoms in the (ICPC2) International Collegiate Programming Contest classification. Members of the research team, blinded to the actual outcomes shown on the index questionnaire, will judge each case in turn and will, by consensus, classify the expected outcomes as either life-threatening or non-life-threatening diseases. The sensitivity, the specificity, the positive and negative likelihood ratio of the sense of alarm will be calculated from the constructed contingency table. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the ethical committee of the University de Bretagne Occidentale. A written informed consent form will be signed and dated by GPs and patients at the beginning of the study. The results will be published in due course.

"I can't find anything wrong: it must be a pulmonary embolism": Diagnosing suspected pulmonary embolism in primary care, a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Before using any prediction rule oriented towards pulmonary embolism (PE), family physicians (FPs) should have some suspicion of this diagnosis. The diagnostic reasoning process leading to the suspicion of PE is not well described in primary care. OBJECTIVE: to explore the diagnostic reasoning of FPs when pulmonary embolism is suspected. METHOD: Semi-structured qualitative interviews with 28 FPs. The regional hospital supplied data of all their cases of pulmonary embolism from June to November 2011. The patient's FP was identified where he/she had been the physician who had sent the patient to the emergency unit. The first consecutive 14 FPs who agreed to participate made up the first group. A second group was chosen using a purposeful sampling method. The topic guide focused on the circumstances leading to the suspicion of PE. A thematic analysis was performed, by three researchers, using a grounded theory coding paradigm. RESULTS: In the FPs' experience, the suspicion of pulmonary embolism arose out of four considerations: the absence of indicative clinical signs for diagnoses other than PE, a sudden change in the condition of the patient, a gut feeling that something was seriously wrong and an earlier failure to diagnose PE. The FPs interviewed did not use rules in their diagnostic process. CONCLUSION: This study illustrated the diagnostic role of gut feelings in the specific context of suspected pulmonary embolism in primary care. The FPs used the sense of alarm as a tool to prevent the diagnostic error of missing a PE. The diagnostic accuracy of gut feelings has yet to be evaluated.

There are considerable drawbacks to oral anticoagulant for monitoring patients at home which should lead family physicians to discuss alternative or enhanced solutions: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: INR (International Normalized Ratio) is the biological reference test for the monitoring of vitamin K antagonist (VKA) therapy. Overdosage of VKAs causes about 17,000 hospitalizations and 5,000 deaths each year in France. To avoid these complications, monitoring and blood sampling conditions must be rigorous. In France, more than half of INRs are carried out at home. The aim was to determine blood-sampling conditions at home, transit time and the quality of the laboratory reagents used. METHOD: Questionnaire-based, descriptive epidemiological cross-sectional prevalence study involving home care nurses, family physicians (FPs) and clinical laboratories. SETTING: Brittany, France, 2008. Study of the pre-analytical phase of INRs sampled at home and its influence on INR results. RESULTS: The study included 291 FPs, 249 home care nurses, and 49 laboratories. 32.5% of reported INRs were outside the therapeutic range. Samples were drawn into unsuitable tubes in 5.5% of cases and delivered in a chilled condition in 9% of cases. In urban areas 50% of the tubes took more than 2 hours to reach the laboratory compared with 71% from rural areas. The average International Sensitivity Index (ISI) of the thromboplastin was 1.62. The INRs provided by the laboratories were not analyzable in 64.7% of cases where blood samples had been taken at home. CONCLUSION: Blood sample quality, transit time and the reagents used are currently inadequate. The majority of INRs taken at home are not reliable. FPs should consider these drawbacks in comparison with alternative solutions to increase patient safety.

The transculturality of 'gut feelings'. Results from a French Delphi consensus survey.

BACKGROUND: General Practitioners (GPs) sometimes base their clinical decisions on 'gut feelings.' Research into the significance of this phenomenon with focus groups and a Delphi consensus procedure in the Netherlands provided a concept of 'gut feelings:' a sense of alarm, a sense of reassurance and several determinants. The transculturality of 'gut feelings' has been examined briefly until now as the issue is complex. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a consensus on 'gut feelings' in general practice in France could be obtained. Using a similar Delphi consensus procedure and the same six initial statements as in the Netherlands, and compare the French results with the seven final Dutch consensual statements. METHOD: Qualitative research, including a Delphi consensus procedure after a forward-backward translation (FBT) of the initial Dutch statements of 'gut feelings.' A heterogeneous sample of 34 French expert GPs participated. FBT of the final French statements was undertaken for a content comparison with the Dutch. RESULTS: After three Delphi rounds, French GPs reached agreement on nine statements. Many similarities have been found between the Dutch and the French defining statements, with reservations concerning the 'sense of reassurance,' which French GPs seemed to feel more cautious about. CONCLUSION: 'Gut feelings' are a well-defined concept in France too. The Dutch and the French consensual statements seem very close. The transculturality of the concept is confirmed, which is a new indicator that 'gut feelings' are a self-contained concept.