Detection of atrial fibrillation in primary care with radial pulse palpation, electronic blood pressure measurement and handheld single-lead electrocardiography: a diagnostic accuracy study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of three tests-radial pulse palpation, an electronic blood pressure monitor and a handheld single-lead ECG device-for opportunistic screening for unknown atrial fibrillation (AF). DESIGN: We performed a diagnostic accuracy study in the intention-to-screen arm of a cluster randomised controlled trial aimed at opportunistic screening for AF in general practice. We performed radial pulse palpation, followed by electronic blood pressure measurement (WatchBP Home A) and handheld ECG (MyDiagnostick) in random order. If one or more index tests were positive, we performed a 12-lead ECG at shortest notice. Similarly, to limit verification bias, a random sample of patients with three negative index tests received this reference test. Additionally, we analysed the dataset using multiple imputation. We present pooled diagnostic parameters. SETTING: 47 general practices participated between September 2015 and August 2018. PARTICIPANTS: In the electronic medical record system of the participating general practices (n=47), we randomly marked 200 patients of ≥65 years without AF. When they visited the practice for any reason, we invited them to participate. Exclusion criteria were terminal illness, inability to give informed consent or visit the practice or having a pacemaker or an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. OUTCOMES: Diagnostic accuracy of individual tests and test combinations to detect unknown AF. RESULTS: We included 4339 patients; 0.8% showed new AF. Sensitivity and specificity were 62.8% (range 43.1%-69.7%) and 91.8% (91.7%-91.8%) for radial pulse palpation, 70.0% (49.0%-80.6%) and 96.5% (96.3%-96.7%) for electronic blood pressure measurement and 90.1% (60.8%-100%) and 97.9% (97.8%-97.9%) for handheld ECG, respectively. Positive predictive values were 5.8% (5.3%-6.1%), 13.8% (12.2%-14.8%) and 25.2% (24.2%-25.8%), respectively. All negative predictive values were ≥99.7%. CONCLUSION: In detecting AF, electronic blood pressure measurement (WatchBP Home A), but especially handheld ECG (MyDiagnostick) showed better diagnostic accuracy than radial pulse palpation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Netherlands Trial Register No. NL4776 (old NTR4914).

Screening for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in primary care using Holter monitoring and intermittent, ambulatory single-lead electrocardiography.

BACKGROUND: Timely detection of atrial fibrillation (AF) is important because of its increased risk of thrombo-embolic events. Single time point screening interventions fall short in detection of paroxysmal AF, which requires prolonged electrocardiographic monitoring, usually using a Holter. However, traditional 24-48 h Holter monitoring is less appropriate for screening purposes because of its low diagnostic yield. Intermittent, ambulatory screening using a single-lead electrocardiogram (1 L-ECG) device can offer a more efficient alternative. METHODS: Primary care patients of ≥65 years participated in an opportunistic screening study for AF. We invited patients with a negative 12 L-ECG to wear a Holter monitor for two weeks and to use a MyDiagnostick 1 L-ECG device thrice daily. We report the yield of paroxysmal AF found by Holter monitoring and calculate the diagnostic accuracy of the 1 L-ECG device's built-in AF detection algorithm with the Holter monitor as reference standard. RESULTS: We included 270 patients, of whom four had AF in a median of 8.0 days of Holter monitoring, a diagnostic yield of 1.5% (95%-CI: 0.4-3.8%). In 205 patients we performed simultaneous 1 L-ECG screening. For diagnosing AF based on the 1 L-ECG device's AF detection algorithm, sensitivity was 66.7% (95%-CI: 9.4-99.2%), specificity 68.8% (95%-CI: 61.9-75.1%), positive predictive value 3.1% (95%-CI: 1.4-6.8%) and negative predictive value 99.3% (95%-CI: 96.6-99.9%). CONCLUSION: We found a low diagnostic yield of paroxysmal AF using Holter monitoring in elderly primary care patients with a negative 12 L-ECG. The diagnostic accuracy of an intermittently, ambulatory used MyDiagnostick 1 L-ECG device as interpreted by its built-in AF detection algorithm is limited.

The Effect of a Comprehensive, Interdisciplinary Medication Review on Quality of Life and Medication Use in Community Dwelling Older People with Polypharmacy.

Background: We conducted a comprehensive medication review at the patients' home, using data from electronic patient records, and with input from relevant specialists, general practitioners and pharmacists formulated and implemented recommendations to optimize medication use in patients aged 60+ years with polypharmacy. We evaluated the effect of this medication review on quality of life (QoL) and medication use. Methods: Cluster randomized controlled trial (stepped wedge), randomly assigning general practices to one of three consecutive steps. Patients received usual care until the intervention was implemented. Primary outcome was QoL (SF-36 and EQ-5D); secondary outcomes were medication changes, medication adherence and (instrumental) activities of daily living (ADL, iADL) which were measured at baseline, and around 6- and 12-months post intervention. Results: Twenty-four general practices included 360 women and 410 men with an average age of 75 years (SD 7.5). A positive effect on SF-36 mental health (estimated mean was stable in the intervention, but decreased in the control condition with -6.1, p = 0.009,) was found with a reduced number of medications at follow-up compared to the control condition. No significant effects were found on other QoL subscales, ADL, iADL or medication adherence. Conclusion: The medication review prevented decrease of mental health (SF36), with no significant effects on other outcome measures, apart from a reduction in the number of prescribed medications.

Professionals guidance about palliative medicine in chronic heart failure: a mixed-method study.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare professionals (HCPs) experience difficulties in timely recognising and directing palliative care (PC) needs of their patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). The aim of this study was to develop a comprehensive tool to enable HCPs in timely recognising and directing PC needs in CHF. METHODS: A four-stage mixed-method study was performed. Stage 1: identification of needs and questions of patients and families; stage 2: prioritisation and refinement of the needs and questions; stage 3a: testing and online feedback on V.1; stage 3b: selecting and refining care recommendations; stage 4: testing and review of V.2. Iterative reviews followed each step in the development process to ensure a wide range of stakeholder input. In total, 16 patients, 12 family members and 54 HCPs participated. RESULTS: A comprehensive set of 13 PC needs was identified, redefined and tested. The resulting tool, called Identification of patients with HeARt failure with PC needs (I-HARP), contains an introduction prompt with open questions to start the conversation, 13 closed screening questions with additional in-depth questions, and recommendations on actions for identified needs. CONCLUSION: I-HARP contains an evidence-based set of questions and palliative CHF care suggestions for HCPs in the Netherlands. The resulting tool, approved by HCPs, patients and family members, is a promising guidance for HCP to timely recognise and direct PC needs in CHF.

Opportunistic screening versus usual care for detection of atrial fibrillation in primary care: cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether opportunistic screening in primary care increases the detection of atrial fibrillation compared with usual care. DESIGN: Cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 47 intention-to-screen and 49 usual care primary care practices in the Netherlands, not blinded for allocation; the study was carried out from September 2015 to August 2018. PARTICIPANTS: In each practice, a fixed sample of 200 eligible patients, aged 65 or older, with no known history of atrial fibrillation in the electronic medical record system, were randomly selected. In the intention-to-screen group, 9218 patients eligible for screening were included, 55.0% women, mean age 75.2 years. In the usual care group, 9526 patients were eligible for screening, 54.3% women, mean age 75.0 years. INTERVENTIONS: Opportunistic screening (that is, screening in patients visiting their general practice) consisted of three index tests: pulse palpation, electronic blood pressure measurement with an atrial fibrillation algorithm, and electrocardiography (ECG) with a handheld single lead electrocardiographic device. The reference standard was 12 lead ECG, performed in patients with at least one positive index test and in a sample of patients (10%) with three negative tests. If 12 lead ECG showed no atrial fibrillation, patients were invited for more screening by continuous monitoring with a Holter electrocardiograph for two weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Difference in the detection rate of newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation over one year in intention-to-screen versus usual care practices. RESULTS: Follow-up was complete for 8874 patients in the intention-to-screen practices and for 9102 patients in the usual care practices. 144 (1.62%) new diagnoses of atrial fibrillation in the intention-to-screen group versus 139 (1.53%) in the usual care group were found (adjusted odds ratio 1.06 (95% confidence interval 0.84 to 1.35)). Of 9218 eligible patients in the intention-to-screen group, 4106 (44.5%) participated in the screening protocol. In these patients, 12 lead ECG detected newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation in 26 patients (0.63%). In the 266 patients who continued with Holter monitoring, four more diagnoses of atrial fibrillation were found. CONCLUSIONS: Opportunistic screening for atrial fibrillation in primary care patients, aged 65 and over, did not increase the detection rate of atrial fibrillation, which implies that opportunistic screening for atrial fibrillation is not useful in this setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register No NL4776 (old NTR4914).

General practitioner use of D-dimer in suspected venous thromboembolism: historical cohort study in one geographical region in the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate how many general practitioner (GP)-referred venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) are diagnosed during 1 year in one geographical region and to investigate the (urgent) referral pathway of VTE diagnoses, including the role of laboratory D-dimer testing. DESIGN: Historical cohort study. SETTING: GP patients of 47 general practices in a demarcated geographical region of 161 503 inhabitants in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: We analysed all 895 primary care patients in whom either the GP determined a D-dimer value or who had a diagnostic work-up for suspected VTE in a non-academic hospital during 2015. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes of this study were the total number of VTEs per year and the diagnostic pathways-including the role of GP determined D-dimer testing-of patients urgently referred to secondary care for suspected VTE. Additionally, we explored the use of an age-adjusted D-dimer cut-off. RESULTS: The annual VTE incidence was 0.9 per 1000 inhabitants. GPs annually ordered 5.1 D-dimer tests per 1000 inhabitants. Of 470 urgently GP-referred patients, 31.3% had a VTE. Of those urgently referred based on clinical assessment only (without D-dimer testing), 73.8% (96/130) had a VTE; based on clinical assessment and laboratory D-dimer testing yielded 15.0% (51/340) VTE. Applying age-adjusted D-dimer cut-offs to all patients aged 50 years or older resulted in a reduction of positive D-dimer results from 97.9% to 79.4%, without missing any VTE. CONCLUSIONS: Although D-dimer testing contributes to the diagnostic work-up of VTE, GPs have a high detection rate for VTE in patients who they urgently refer to secondary care based on clinical assessment only.

Ruling Out Pulmonary Embolism in Primary Care: Comparison of the Diagnostic Performance of "Gestalt" and the Wells Rule.

PURPOSE: Diagnostic prediction models such as the Wells rule can be used for safely ruling out pulmonary embolism (PE) when it is suspected. A physician's own probability estimate ("gestalt"), however, is commonly used instead. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of both approaches in primary care. METHODS: Family physicians estimated the probability of PE on a scale of 0% to 100% (gestalt) and calculated the Wells rule score in 598 patients with suspected PE who were thereafter referred to secondary care for definitive testing. We compared the discriminative ability (c statistic) of both approaches. Next, we stratified patients into PE risk categories. For gestalt, a probability of less than 20% plus a negative point-of-care d-dimer test indicated low risk; for the Wells rule, we used a score of 4 or lower plus a negative d-dimer test. We compared sensitivity, specificity, efficiency (percentage of low-risk patients in total cohort), and failure rate (percentage of patients having PE within the low-risk category). RESULTS: With 3 months of follow-up, 73 patients (12%) were confirmed to have venous thromboembolism (a surrogate for PE at baseline). The c statistic was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.70-0.83) for gestalt and 0.80 (95% CI, 0.75-0.86) for the Wells rule. Gestalt missed 2 out of 152 low-risk patients (failure rate = 1.3%; 95% CI, 0.2%-4.7%) with an efficiency of 25% (95% CI, 22%-29%); the Wells rule missed 4 out of 272 low-risk patients (failure rate = 1.5%; 95% CI, 0.4%-3.7%) with an efficiency of 45% (95% CI, 41%-50%). CONCLUSIONS: Combined with d-dimer testing, both gestalt using a cutoff of less than 20% and the Wells rule using a score of 4 or lower are safe for ruling out PE in primary care. The Wells rule is more efficient, however, and PE can be ruled out in a larger proportion of suspected cases.

Factors associated with appropriate knowledge of the indications for prescribed drugs among community-dwelling older patients with polypharmacy.

BACKGROUND: polypharmacy contributes to patients' non-adherence with physicians' prescriptions. Patients' knowledge about the indications for their medicines is one of the factors influencing adherence. OBJECTIVE: to identify factors associated with appropriate knowledge about the indications for drugs prescribed to older patients with polypharmacy. METHODS: in a primary care setting, using home interviews and postal questionnaires, patients aged 60 and over who were taking five or more prescribed drugs simultaneously were asked about their medication. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the association (odds ratio, OR) between medication knowledge and explanatory variables like medication use, sex, age, living situation and educational level. RESULTS: seven hundred and fifty-four participants (mean age 73.2 years) reported an average daily intake of nine (SD 3.0) prescribed drugs. Only 15% of the patients were able to recall the indication for each of their prescribed drugs. Variables that were negatively associated with correct reporting of all indications were taking many prescribed drugs (e.g. ≥10 versus ≤5: OR 0.05), age 80 years or over (versus 60-69 years: OR 0.47) and male sex (OR 0.53). Patients living with a partner were more knowledgeable than patients living alone (OR 2.11). We did not find an association with educational level. CONCLUSION: among older patients using five or more prescribed drugs, there was little understanding of the indications for their drugs, especially among patients taking the highest number of drugs, patients aged 80 or over, and men. Patients living independently with a partner were more knowledgeable than others.

Detecting and Diagnosing Atrial Fibrillation (D2AF): study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation is a common cause of stroke and other morbidity. Adequate treatment with anticoagulants reduces the risk of stroke by 60 %. Early detection and treatment of atrial fibrillation could prevent strokes. Atrial fibrillation is often asymptomatic and/or paroxysmal. Case-finding with pulse palpation is an effective screening method, but new methods for detecting atrial fibrillation have been developed. To detect paroxysmal atrial fibrillation ambulatory rhythm recording is needed. This study aims to determine the yield of case-finding for atrial fibrillation in primary care patients. In addition, it will determine the diagnostic accuracy of three different case-finding methods. METHODS/DESIGN: In a multicenter cluster randomised controlled trial, we compare an enhanced protocol for case-finding of atrial fibrillation with usual care. We recruit 96 practices. We include primary care patients aged 65 years or older not diagnosed with atrial fibrillation. Within each practice, a cluster of 200 patients is randomly selected and marked. Practices are evenly randomised to intervention or control group. The allocation is not blinded. When a marked patient visits an intervention practice, the case-finding protocol starts, consisting of: pulse palpation, sphygmomanometer with automated atrial fibrillation detection and handheld single-lead electrocardiogram (ECG). All patients with at least 1 positive test and a random sample of patients with negative tests receive a 12-lead ECG. Patients without atrial fibrillation on the 12-lead ECG, undergo additional continuous Holter and use the handheld single-lead ECG at home for 2 weeks. Control practices provide care as usual. The study runs for 1 year in each cluster. The primary outcomes are the difference in detection rate of new AF between intervention and control practices and the accuracy of three index tests to diagnose AF. We are currently recruiting practices. The 'Detecting and Diagnosing Atrial Fibrillation' (D2AF) study will determine the yield of an intensive case-finding strategy and the diagnostic accuracy of three index tests to diagnose atrial fibrillation in a primary care setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register: NTR4914 , registered on the 25 of November 2014.

Diagnostic prediction models for suspected pulmonary embolism: systematic review and independent external validation in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To validate all diagnostic prediction models for ruling out pulmonary embolism that are easily applicable in primary care. DESIGN: Systematic review followed by independent external validation study to assess transportability of retrieved models to primary care medicine. SETTING: 300 general practices in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Individual patient dataset of 598 patients with suspected acute pulmonary embolism in primary care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Discriminative ability of all models retrieved by systematic literature search, assessed by calculation and comparison of C statistics. After stratification into groups with high and low probability of pulmonary embolism according to pre-specified model cut-offs combined with qualitative D-dimer test, sensitivity, specificity, efficiency (overall proportion of patients with low probability of pulmonary embolism), and failure rate (proportion of pulmonary embolism cases in group of patients with low probability) were calculated for all models. RESULTS: Ten published prediction models for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism were found. Five of these models could be validated in the primary care dataset: the original Wells, modified Wells, simplified Wells, revised Geneva, and simplified revised Geneva models. Discriminative ability was comparable for all models (range of C statistic 0.75-0.80). Sensitivity ranged from 88% (simplified revised Geneva) to 96% (simplified Wells) and specificity from 48% (revised Geneva) to 53% (simplified revised Geneva). Efficiency of all models was between 43% and 48%. Differences were observed between failure rates, especially between the simplified Wells and the simplified revised Geneva models (failure rates 1.2% (95% confidence interval 0.2% to 3.3%) and 3.1% (1.4% to 5.9%), respectively; absolute difference -1.98% (-3.33% to -0.74%)). Irrespective of the diagnostic prediction model used, three patients were incorrectly classified as having low probability of pulmonary embolism; pulmonary embolism was diagnosed only after referral to secondary care. CONCLUSIONS: Five diagnostic pulmonary embolism prediction models that are easily applicable in primary care were validated in this setting. Whereas efficiency was comparable for all rules, the Wells rules gave the best performance in terms of lower failure rates.

Alternative diagnoses in patients in whom the GP considered the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism.

INTRODUCTION: Pulmonary embolism (PE) often presents with nonspecific symptoms and may be an easily missed diagnosis. When the differential diagnosis includes PE, an empirical list of frequently occurring alternative diagnoses could support the GP in diagnostic decision making. OBJECTIVES: To identify common alternative diagnoses in patients in whom the GP suspected PE but in whom PE could be ruled out. To investigate how the Wells clinical decision rule for PE combined with a point-of-care d-dimer test is associated with these alternative diagnoses. METHODS: Secondary analysis of the Amsterdam Maastricht Utrecht Study on thrombo-Embolism (Amuse-2) study, which validated the Wells PE rule combined with point-of-care d-dimer testing in primary care. All 598 patients had been referred to and diagnosed in secondary care. All diagnostic information was retrieved from the GPs' medical records. RESULTS: In 516 patients without PE, the most frequent alternative diagnoses were nonspecific thoracic pain/dyspnoea (42.6%), pneumonia (13.0%), myalgia (11.8%), asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (4.8%), panic disorder/hyperventilation (4.1%) and respiratory tract infection (2.3%). Pneumonia occurred almost as frequent as PE. Patients without PE with either a positive Wells rule (>4) or a positive d-dimer test, were more often (odds ratio = 2.1) diagnosed with a clinically relevant disease than patients with a negative Wells rule and negative d-dimer test. CONCLUSION: In primary care patients suspected of PE, the most common clinically relevant diagnosis other than PE was pneumonia. A positive Wells rule or a positive d-dimer test are not only positively associated with PE, but also with a high probability of other clinically relevant disease.

Family history tools for primary care are not ready yet to be implemented. A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Taking the family history helps the doctor in estimating the probability of disease in individual patients. However, significant barriers to obtaining adequate family history information remain. Tools overcoming these barriers might support family physicians in this task. OBJECTIVE: To review systematically the characteristics of existing family history tools and discuss their potential use in primary care. METHODS: Studies were identified through searches of PubMed, Embase and Cinahl from 1 January 2002 until May 2012. All authors independently screened studies and included original research papers on family history tools of which assessment had been performed or was planned. We reviewed diseases for which family history information was collected, study setting, tool design, type of family history collection, presence of risk-assessment and recommendations for management, and assessment (categorized as either validity or benefit). RESULTS: Eighteen family history tools were identified: six generic, two on cardiovascular disease and ten on cancer. The six generic tools were partly tested in primary care (3x), are mainly computerized (4x), rarely include management recommendations for the physician (1x) and were partly validated against a reference standard (genetic counsellor) (3x, plus one planned). Of the five specific tools studied in primary care, none was validated. No family history tool allows electronic transfer of family history information to electronic medical record systems. Use of a family history tool improved identification of patients at risk for disease. CONCLUSION: Several promising family history tools for primary care have been developed but large-scale implementation cannot be advised yet, based on available validation studies.

Safe exclusion of pulmonary embolism using the Wells rule and qualitative D-dimer testing in primary care: prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To validate the use of the Wells clinical decision rule combined with a point of care D-dimer test to safely exclude pulmonary embolism in primary care. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Primary care across three different regions of the Netherlands (Amsterdam, Maastricht, and Utrecht). PARTICIPANTS: 598 adults with suspected pulmonary embolism in primary care. INTERVENTIONS: Doctors scored patients according to the seven variables of the Wells rule and carried out a qualitative point of care D-dimer test. All patients were referred to secondary care and diagnosed according to local protocols. Pulmonary embolism was confirmed or refuted on the basis of a composite reference standard, including spiral computed tomography and three months' follow-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity), proportion of patients at low risk (efficiency), number of missed patients with pulmonary embolism in low risk category (false negative rate), and the presence of symptomatic venous thromboembolism, based on the composite reference standard, including events during the follow-up period of three months. RESULTS: Pulmonary embolism was present in 73 patients (prevalence 12.2%). On the basis of a threshold Wells score of ≤ 4 and a negative qualitative D-dimer test result, 272 of 598 patients were classified as low risk (efficiency 45.5%). Four cases of pulmonary embolism were observed in these 272 patients (false negative rate 1.5%, 95% confidence interval 0.4% to 3.7%). The sensitivity and specificity of this combined diagnostic approach was 94.5% (86.6% to 98.5%) and 51.0% (46.7% to 55.4%), respectively. CONCLUSION: A Wells score of ≤ 4 combined with a negative qualitative D-dimer test result can safely and efficiently exclude pulmonary embolism in primary care.

Rimonabant improves obesity but not the overall cardiovascular risk and quality of life; results from CARDIO-REDUSE (CArdiometabolic Risk reDuctIOn by Rimonabant: the Effectiveness in Daily practice and its USE).

BACKGROUND: Rimonabant treatment, examined in Phase 3 trials, showed improvement of cardiovascular risk factors in obese patients. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this Phase 4 trial is to assess the effectiveness of rimonabant plus lifestyle counselling when used in daily practice, namely in the general practice. The hypothesis was that the effectiveness in Phase 4 would be smaller than the efficacy in Phase 3 due to different patient selection and treatment conditions. At the end of this trial, rimonabant was suspended of all markets due to psychiatric side effects. METHODS: This trial randomly assigned 222 patients with enlarged waist circumferences and hyperglycaemia or diabetes mellitus type 2, recruited from Dutch general practices, to double-blinded therapy with either placebo or rimonabant (20 mg/day) for 1 year in addition to lifestyle counselling. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, the rimonabant group showed significant improvements in body weight, body mass index, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and the main outcome waist circumference after 1 year. The United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study risk calculation showed no significant difference. The rimonabant group showed statistically deterioration, compared with the placebo group, in the quality of life in the EuroQol and two domains of the SF-36: role limitations due to physical health problems and bodily pain. CONCLUSIONS: The unique real life data of this Phase 4 trial showed that the effectiveness of rimonabant in daily practice is indeed lower than in controlled circumstances (Phase 3). Rimonabant treatment showed improvement of obesity and the HDL cholesterol, but had no positive effect on the other cardiovascular risk factors and the quality of life.

Series: The research agenda for general practice/family medicine and primary health care in Europe. Part 6: reaction on commentaries - how to continue with the Research Agenda?

The Research Agenda should be used as a key reference point to which new research should relate its usefulness and added value. Primary care evolves towards more interdisciplinary care, and research should focus more on the core competency of person-centred team care. There is an urgent need to develop clear definitions and appropriate research instruments for this domain. It will be a particular challenge to study comprehensive approaches in primary-care patients with multi-morbidity. The Research Agenda and the commentaries on it show future directions for primary care research. There are challenges related to a changing society, the shared responsibility and guidance of research by professionals and citizens (patients), and the need to fully integrate research as part of primary healthcare provision. There will be a need for a prioritization of spearheads to guide primary care research for the next decade: translational research, research on equity and health differences, on chronic disease and health systems research. This can not be realized without the development and maintenance of a solid research infrastructure: easily maintained and accessed observational databases, helpful information technology, strategies and techniques for patient involvement, advanced research training possibilities, and the development and validation of appropriate research instruments and outcome measures to capture the different challenges. Worldwide, primary care not only is a priority for health care policy, but it needs to become a research priority as well.

Comparing the diagnostic performance of 2 clinical decision rules to rule out deep vein thrombosis in primary care patients.

PURPOSE: The Wells rule is widely used for clinical assessment of patients with suspected deep vein thrombosis (DVT), especially in the secondary care setting. Recently a new clinical decision rule for primary care patients (the primary care rule) has been proposed, because the Wells rule is not sufficient to rule out DVT in this setting. The objective was to compare the ability of both rules to safely rule out DVT and to efficiently reduce the number of referrals for leg ultrasound investigation that would result in a negative finding. METHODS: Family physicians collected data on 1,086 patients to calculate the scores for both decision rules before leg ultrasonography was performed. In all patients D-dimer (dimerized plasmin fragment D) testing was performed using a rapid point-of-care assay. Patients were stratified into risk categories defined by each rule and the D-dimer result. Outcomes were DVT (diagnosed by ultrasonography) and venous thromboembolic complications or death caused by a possible thromboembolic event during a 90-day follow-up period. We calculated the differences between the 2 rules in the number of missed diagnoses and the proportions of patients that needed ultrasound testing. RESULTS: Data from 1,002 eligible patients were used for this analysis. A venous thromboembolic event occurred during follow-up in 7 patients with a low score and negative D-dimer finding, both with the Wells rule (7 of 447; 1.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7%-3.3% ) and the primary care rule (7 of 495; 1.4%; 95% CI, 0.6%-3.0%). Using the Wells rule, 447 patients (45%) would not need referral for further testing compared with 495 patients (49%) when using the primary care rule (McNemar P <.001). CONCLUSIONS: In primary care, suspected DVT can safely be ruled out using either of the 2 rules in combination with a point-of-care D-dimer test. Both rules can reduce unnecessary referrals for compression ultrasonography by about 50%, though the primary care rule reduces it slightly more.

Series: The research agenda for general practice/family medicine and primary health care in Europe. Part 5: Needs and implications for future research and policy.

The recently published 'Research Agenda for General Practice/Family Medicine and Primary Health Care in Europe' summarizes the evidence relating to the core competencies and characteristics of the Wonca Europe definition of GP/FM, and highlights related needs and implications for future research and policy. The European Journal of General Practice publishes a series of articles based on this document. In a first article, background, objectives, and methodology were discussed. In three subsequent, articles the results for the six core competencies of the European Definition of GP/FM were presented. This article formulates the common aims for further research and appropriate research methodologies, based on the missing evidence and research gaps identified form the comprehensive literature review. In addition, implications of this research agenda for general practitioners/family doctors, researchers, research organizations, patients and policy makers are presented. The concept of six core competencies should be abandoned in favour of a model with four dimensions, including clinical, person related, community oriented and management aspects. Future research and policy should consider more the involvement and rights of patients; more attention should be given to how new treatments or technologies are effectively translated into routine patient care, in particular primary care. There is a need for a European ethics board. The promotion of GP/FM research demands a good infrastructure in each country, including access to literature and databases, appropriate funding and training possibilities.

The research agenda for general practice/family medicine and primary health care in Europe. Part 3. Results: person centred care, comprehensive and holistic approach.

The recently published 'Research Agenda for General Practice/Family Medicine and Primary Health Care in Europe' summarizes the evidence relating to the core competencies and characteristics of the Wonca Europe definition of GP/FM, and its implications for general practitioners/family doctors, researchers and policy makers. The European Journal of General Practice publishes a series of articles based on this document. In a first article, background, objectives, and methodology were discussed. In a second article, the results for the two core competencies 'primary care management' and 'community orientation' were presented. This article reflects on the three core competencies, which deal with person related aspects of GP/FM, i.e. 'person centred care', 'comprehensive approach' and 'holistic approach'. Though there is an important body of opinion papers and (non-systematic) reviews, all person related aspects remain poorly defined and researched. Validated instruments to measure these competencies are lacking. Concerning patient-centredness, most research examined patient and doctor preferences and experiences. Studies on comprehensiveness mostly focus on prevention/care of specific diseases. For all domains, there has been limited research conducted on its implications or outcomes.