[The general practitioner and insomnia]. / Le médecin généraliste face a une plainte d'insomnie.

A complaint of insomnia has to be analysed, and differentiated from hypochondria and, overall, from hypersomnia. Once confirmed and assessed as acute or chronic, it is often considered a disorder of hyperarousal, that is an imbalance between a central nervous system activating and a central nervous system inhibiting system with subcontinuous overflow from the former. An acute insomnia is less than one month of duration. As a disease, insomnia has to be categorized as a secondary or a primary disorder. Thereafter, it remains to assess the extent of social, psychological and economical interactions. These factors intervene as consequences or perpetuating factors. The capacity to assess the whole situation is really the great strength of the general practitioner who, more than anybody else, is on home ground. Laboratory findings and specialist examination come only as supporting evidence for causal links. A polysomnography realized in a sleep disorder center provides data reinforcing or correcting the diagnosis. From a sound assessment of the disease, the treatment has to be deduced by following a rigorous reasoning, devoid of guilty feelings as they are suggested to patients by mass-media talking, as well as freed from fashionable non medical practices. Today, we know that chronic insomnia is a disease with potential severe consequences and that it does not heal spontaneously.

[Optimizing the management of type 2 diabetics: results of the "DREAM" study in general practice]. / Optimalisation de la prise en charge du patient diabétique de type 2: résultats de l'étude "DREAM" en médecine générale.

This paper reports the results of the "DREAM" ("Diabetes REinforcement of Adequate Management") study performed among 42 general practitioners. A treatment algorithm was proposed to intensify the management of type 2 diabetic patients in case of poor control (HbA1C > 7.5% and fasting blood glucose > 140 mg/dl) before asking for an advice from a diabetologist. A total of 163 patients participated in the study: 84 men and 79 women, 59 +/- 10 years old; 5.2 +/- 6.1 years of known duration of diabetes; BMI: 30.7 +/- 5.8 kg/m2. Almost two thirds of patients received an antihypertensive agent, one third a lipid-lowering drug, and three quarters at least one antidiabetic agent: 22% a sulfonylurea, 18% metformin, 25% a combined oral therapy, 10% insulin (alone or in combination). At baseline, mean HbA1C averaged 7.1 +/- 2.2% (N: 4-6%), and 34% of patients had HbA1C > 7.5%. From these 163 patients, 100 were evaluated after 12 months, 57% being well controlled vs 36% at baseline. Among the 32 patients whose hypoglycaemic treatment was intensified, HbA1C level significantly decreased by almost 0.8% (p < 0.05). Despite precise guidelines, 55% of patients with HbA1C > 7.5% had no treatment adjustment, essentially in the group already on oral bitherapy or on insulin. Among the 65 patients evaluated after 24 months, the percentage of well controlled patients decreased to 44% (vs 51% after 12 months). The decision of switching to insulin was often delayed (no patient after 1 year and 2 patients only after 2 years). In conclusion, the "DREAM" study demonstrates the feasibility, but also the difficulty, of optimising the management of type 2 diabetic patients in general practice.