Impact of a phone call with a medical student/general practitioner team on morbidity of chronic patients during the first French COVID-19 lockdown (COVIQuest): a cluster randomised trial.

OBJECTIVES: The first COVID-19 lockdown led to a significantly reduced access to healthcare, which may have increased decompensations in frail patients with chronic diseases, especially older patients living with a chronic cardiovascular disease (CVD) or a mental health disorder (MHD). The objective of COVIQuest was to evaluate whether a general practitioner (GP)-initiated phone call to patients with CVD and MHD during the COVID-19 lockdown could reduce the number of hospitalisation(s) over a 1-month period. DESIGN: This is a cluster randomised controlled trial. Clusters were GPs from eight French regions. PARTICIPANTS: Patients ≥70 years old with chronic CVD (COVIQuest_CV subtrial) or ≥18 years old with MHD (COVIQuest_MH subtrial). INTERVENTIONS: A standardised GP-initiated phone call aiming to evaluate patients' need for urgent healthcare, with a control group benefiting from usual care (ie, the contact with the GP was by the patient's initiative). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hospital admission within 1 month after the phone call. RESULTS: In the COVIQuest_CV subtrial, 131 GPs and 1834 patients were included in the intervention group and 136 GPs and 1510 patients were allocated to the control group. Overall, 65 (3.54%) patients were hospitalised in the intervention group vs 69 (4.57%) in the control group (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.20; risk difference -0.77, 95% CI -2.28 to 0.74). In the COVIQuest_MH subtrial, 136 GPs and 832 patients were included in the intervention group and 131 GPs and 548 patients were allocated to the control group. Overall, 27 (3.25%) patients were hospitalised in the intervention group vs 12 (2.19%) in the control group (OR 1.52, 95% CI 0.82 to 2.81; risk difference 1.38, 95% CI 0.06 to 2.70). CONCLUSION: A GP-initiated phone call may have been associated with more hospitalisations within 1 month for patients with MHD, but results lack robustness and significance depending on the statistical approach used. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04359875.

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.

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.