[Summary of the practice guideline 'CVA' from the Dutch College of General Practitioners]. / Samenvatting van de standaard 'CVA' van het Nederlands Huisartsen Genootschap.

The practice guideline 'CVA' from the Dutch College of General Practitioners provides guidelines for the management of stroke patients. The guideline is in agreement with the changing insights about the benefits of stroke-units and thrombolysis. The most important recommendations are the following. In the acute phase, most patients with a cerebrovascular accident should be referred for admission to a stroke-unit. Exceptions are patients with only slight neurological disability and patients with severe comorbidity. Patients with a CVA that started less than three hours ago should be referred for emergency thrombolytic therapy in regions where this possibility exists. In situations in which the general practitioner considers a home visit to involve an unacceptable loss of time, he may decide to refer on the basis of the results of the 'face-arm-speech-time' (FAST) test, which can be administered by telephone. For patients that remain at home, the general practitioner sees to the early start of a rehabilitation programme, and takes the initiative if necessary. The general practitioner can support stroke patients with permanent neurological deficits by considering them to be chronically ill patients requiring regular check-ups.

Stroke service in The Netherlands: an exploratory study on effectiveness, patient satisfaction and utilisation of healthcare.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether shared care for stroke patients results in better patient outcome, higher patient satisfaction and different use of healthcare services. DESIGN: Prospective, comparative cohort study. SETTING: Two regions in The Netherlands with different healthcare models for stroke patients: a shared care model (stroke service) and a usual care setting. PATIENTS: Stroke patients with a survival rate of more than six months, who initially were admitted to the Stroke Service of the University Hospital Maastricht (experimental group) in the second half of 1997 and to a middle sized hospital in the western part of The Netherlands between March 1997 and March 1999 (control group). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Functional health status according to the SIP-68, EuroQol, Barthel Index and Rankin Scale, patient satisfaction and use of healthcare services. RESULTS: In total 103 patients were included in this study: 58 in the experimental group and 45 in the control group. Six months after stroke, 64% of the surviving patients in the experimental group had returned home, compared to 42% in the control group (p<0.05). This difference could not be explained by differences in health status, which was comparable at that time. Patients in the shared care model scored higher on patient satisfaction, whereas patients in the usual care group received a higher volume of home care. CONCLUSIONS: The Stroke Service Maastricht resulted in a higher number of patients who returned home after stroke, but not in a better health status. Since patients in the usual care group received a higher volume of healthcare in the period of rehabilitation, the Stroke Service Maastricht might be more efficient.

Prospective study of home morphine infusion in 62 terminally ill patients.

The project "Infusion Therapy at Home" studied the practice of parenteral infusion therapy at home. Among the treatment modalities was the administration of morphine infusions to terminally ill patients. With infusion of morphine, patients were pain-free on 73% of the treatment days. Quality of care, quality of life, and costs were acceptable.

Factors predicting differences among general practitioners in test ordering behaviour and in the response to feedback on test requests.

BACKGROUND: In a population of 85 general practitioners diagnostic test ordering behaviour has been changed by means of repeated individual feedback provided since 1985. OBJECTIVES: We studied practitioner and practice characteristics which may explain differences in test ordering behaviour and in the extent to which general practitioners tend to change their behaviour according to the feedback. METHOD: In order to trace such variables, 75 general practitioners were interviewed. In our study request data from individual general practitioners were related to data from several questionnaires. RESULTS: We found no practice characteristics which were of influence on the number of test requests by the general practitioner. Explanatory practitioner characteristics for this were found to be years of experience and working hours per week in practice. CONCLUSIONS: More years of experience as a general practitioner and a shorter duration of consultations correlated with a better response to advice given in the feedback.

Effectiveness of joint consultation sessions of general practitioners and orthopaedic surgeons for locomotor-system disorders.

Joint consultation sessions between general practitioners (GPs) and specialists to examine patients for whom decisions about referral are difficult are thought to be helpful, but their effects have not been evaluated. In a randomised, controlled trial we studied the effects of joint sessions of GPs and orthopaedic surgeons on referral and intervention rates. During 1.5 years, 12 GPs (in groups of three) held monthly joint consultation sessions with four participating orthopaedic surgeons: patients were seen by one orthopaedic surgeon in the presence of three GPs. Patients were included in the trial if the GP was uncertain about the diagnostic or therapeutic management and if referral was considered; and excluded if referral was urgently necessary or if there was some other clear indication for referral. By a randomised consent design, patients were assigned to joint consultation sessions (n = 144) or a usual-care control group (n = 128). A year later the patients were examined by an independent orthopaedic surgeon. There were significantly fewer referrals (51/144 [35%] vs 87/128 [68%], p < 0.01) and diagnostic actions in the intervention group than in the control group, without negative effects on health or functional status. More patients in the intervention group were symptom-free at 1 year (35% vs 24%, p < 0.05). Joint consultation sessions of GPs and orthopaedic surgeons within the framework of general practice resulted in more efficient care, with better targeted examination, treatment, and referrals.

Does a reduction in general practitioners' use of diagnostic tests lead to more hospital referrals?

BACKGROUND: Individual feedback on general practitioners' requests for tests can improve the quality of their test ordering behaviour. Little is known of the side effects on hospital referral behaviour when the use of tests is reduced through feedback. AIM: A study was undertaken to explore changes in general practitioners' hospital referral rates in a region where their use of diagnostic tests is reduced through feedback. METHOD: Trends in test requests and of first referrals to specialists were compared among 64 general practitioners in the Maastricht region of the Netherlands where routine feedback on test ordering behaviour is provided by the diagnostic coordinating centre. RESULTS: Reduction in diagnostic test use was not accompanied by a higher hospital referral rate, not even for specialties related to tests discussed in feedback. Good responders to feedback had decreased hospital referral rates in contrast to increased rates for poor responders (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Reducing the volume of general practitioners' diagnostic tests through feedback does not lead to more specialist referrals. Together with lower test use, fewer hospital referrals were seen.

Randomised controlled trial of routine individual feedback to improve rationality and reduce numbers of test requests.

Feedback can be described as a way to provide information on doctors' performance to enable changes in future behaviour. Feedback is used with the aim of changing test-ordering behaviour. It can lead to reductions in test usage and cost savings. It is not sufficiently clear, however, whether feedback leads to more appropriate test use. Since 1985, the Diagnostic Coordinating Center Maastricht has been giving feedback on diagnostic tests as a routine health care activity to all family doctors in its region. Both quantity and quality of requests are discussed. In a randomised, controlled trial over 2.5 years, discussion of tests not included previously was added to the existing routine feedback. One group of family doctors (n = 39) received feedback on test-group A (electrocardiography, endoscopy, cervical smears, and allergy tests), the other (n = 40) on test-group B (radiographic and ultrasonographic tests). Thus, each group of doctors acted as a control group for the other. Changes in volume and rationality of requests were analysed. The number of requests decreased during the trial (p = 0.036). Request numbers decreased particularly for test-group A (p = 0.04). The proportion of requests that were non-rational decreased more in the intervention than in the control groups (p = 0.009). Rationality improved predominantly for test-group B (p = 0.043). Thus, routine feedback can change the quantity and quality of requests.