Predicting transition from acute to chronic low back pain with quantitative sensory tests-A prospective cohort study in the primary care setting.

BACKGROUND: It would be desirable to identify patients with acute low back pain (ALBP) who are at high risk for transition to chronic pain early in the course of their disease. This would enable early preventive or therapeutic interventions. Patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) display signs of central hypersensitivity. This may contribute to the transition to CLBP. We tested the hypothesis that central hypersensitivity as assessed by quantitative sensory tests predicts transition to CLBP. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study in 130 patients with ALBP recruited in a primary care setting to determine the ability of 14 tests using electrical, pressure and temperature stimulation to predict transition to CLBP after 6 months. We assessed the association of tests with transition to CLBP in multivariable analyses adjusted for socio-demographic, psychological and clinical characteristics, quantified the performance of tests using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and calculated likelihood ratios for different cut-off values for most promising tests. RESULTS: None of the evaluated tests showed a statistically significant or clinically relevant ability to predict the transition to CLBP, with 95% CI of crude and adjusted associations of all tests including one as measure of no association. Corresponding estimates of areas under the ROC curves were below 0.5, and none of the 95% CI crossed the pre-specified boundary of clinical relevance set at 0.70. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence to support a clinically relevant ability of current quantitative sensory tests to predict the transition from acute to CLBP.

Symptomatic treatment of uncomplicated lower urinary tract infections in the ambulatory setting: randomised, double blind trial.

Objective To investigate whether symptomatic treatment with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is non-inferior to antibiotics in the treatment of uncomplicated lower urinary tract infection (UTI) in women, thus offering an opportunity to reduce antibiotic use in ambulatory care.Design Randomised, double blind, non-inferiority trial.Setting 17 general practices in Switzerland.Participants 253 women with uncomplicated lower UTI were randomly assigned 1:1 to symptomatic treatment with the NSAID diclofenac (n=133) or antibiotic treatment with norfloxacin (n=120). The randomisation sequence was computer generated, stratified by practice, blocked, and concealed using sealed, sequentially numbered drug containers.Main outcome measures The primary outcome was resolution of symptoms at day 3 (72 hours after randomisation and 12 hours after intake of the last study drug). The prespecified principal secondary outcome was the use of any antibiotic (including norfloxacin and fosfomycin as trial drugs) up to day 30. Analysis was by intention to treat.Results 72/133 (54%) women assigned to diclofenac and 96/120 (80%) assigned to norfloxacin experienced symptom resolution at day 3 (risk difference 27%, 95% confidence interval 15% to 38%, P=0.98 for non-inferiority, P<0.001 for superiority). The median time until resolution of symptoms was four days in the diclofenac group and two days in the norfloxacin group. A total of 82 (62%) women in the diclofenac group and 118 (98%) in the norfloxacin group used antibiotics up to day 30 (risk difference 37%, 28% to 46%, P<0.001 for superiority). Six women in the diclofenac group (5%) but none in the norfloxacin group received a clinical diagnosis of pyelonephritis (P=0.03).Conclusion Diclofenac is inferior to norfloxacin for symptom relief of UTI and is likely to be associated with an increased risk of pyelonephritis, even though it reduces antibiotic use in women with uncomplicated lower UTI.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01039545.

Safety climate and its association with office type and team involvement in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To assess differences in safety climate perceptions between occupational groups and types of office organization in primary care. METHODS: Primary care physicians and nurses working in outpatient offices were surveyed about safety climate. Explorative factor analysis was performed to determine the factorial structure. Differences in mean climate scores between staff groups and types of office were tested. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to determine predictors for a 'favorable' safety climate. RESULTS: 630 individuals returned the survey (response rate, 50%). Differences between occupational groups were observed in the means of the 'team-based error prevention'-scale (physician 4.0 vs. nurse 3.8, P < 0.001). Medical centers scored higher compared with single-handed offices and joint practices on the 'team-based error prevention'-scale (4.3 vs. 3.8 vs. 3.9, P < 0.001) but less favorable on the 'rules and risks'-scale (3.5 vs. 3.9 vs. 3.7, P < 0.001). Characteristics on the individual and office level predicted favorable 'team-based error prevention'-scores. Physicians (OR = 0.4, P = 0.01) and less experienced staff (OR 0.52, P = 0.04) were less likely to provide favorable scores. Individuals working at medical centers were more likely to provide positive scores compared with single-handed offices (OR 3.33, P = 0.001). The largest positive effect was associated with at least monthly team meetings (OR 6.2, P < 0.001) and participation in quality circles (OR 4.49, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that frequent quality circle participation and team meetings involving all team members are effective ways to strengthen safety climate in terms of team-based strategies and activities in error prevention.

Frequency of and harm associated with primary care safety incidents.

OBJECTIVE: To assess frequency and severity of patient safety incidents in primary care. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey of health-care professionals in Swiss primary care offices. METHODS: Physicians and nurses in primary care offices were surveyed about the frequency and severity of 23 safety incidents. Differences between professional groups and types of offices were analyzed. Reported incidents were classified in a matrix. RESULTS: A total of 630 individuals (50.2% physicians, 49.8% nurses) participated. Among them, 30% of physicians (95% confidence interval [CI] 25%-35%) and 16.6% of nurses (95% CI 12%-21%) reported that at least 1 of the incidents occurred daily or weekly in their offices (c2 16.1, P <.001). On average, each responder reported a total of 92 incidents during the preceding 12 months (mean of 117 events for physicians, mean of 66 events for nurses; P <.001). Documentation failure was reported most frequently.The highest fraction of last occurrences with severe injury or death was for diagnostic errors (4.1%). Unadjusted for caseload, staff working in medical centers reported higher frequencies of several incidents. The frequency-harm matrix suggests that triage by nurse at initial contact, diagnostic errors, medication errors, failure to monitor patients after medical procedures, and test or intervention errors should be prioritized for action. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents a supplemental approach to identification of safety threats in primary care. Many incidents occur regularly and are highly relevant for healthcare professionals' daily work.The results offer guidance on setting priorities for patient safety in primary care.

Threats to patient safety in the primary care office: concerns of physicians and nurses.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about primary care professionals' concerns about risks to patient safety. AIM: To identify threats to patient safety in the primary care office from the perspective of physicians and nurses. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey; participants were asked to name and rank threats to safety they personally were most concerned about. SETTING: Physicians and nurses working in primary care offices in Switzerland. METHODS: Verbatim reports were analysed under an inductive content-analysis framework. Coded threats were quantitatively analysed in terms of frequency and prioritisation. Differences between physicians and nurses were analysed. RESULTS: Of 1260 invited individuals, 630 responded to the survey and 391 (31%) described 936 threats to patient safety. The coding system included 29 categories organised in 5 themes. Agreement of coders was good (kappa = 0.87, CI = 0.86-0.87). Safety of medication (8.8%), triage by nurses (7.2%) and drug interactions (6.8%) were the threats cited most frequently. Errors in diagnosis (OR = 0.21, CI 0.09-0.47, p <0.001), drug interactions (OR = 0.10, CI 0.04-0.25, p <0.001) and compliance of patients (OR = 0.28, CI 0.08-0.96, p = 0.044) were more likely to be cited by physicians. X-rays (OR = 3.34, CI 1.04-10.71, p = 0.043), confusion of patients or records (OR = 3.28, CI 1.55-6.94, p = 0.002), hygiene (OR = 3.21, CI1.12-9.19, p = 0.030), safety of office rooms (OR = 6.70, CI 1.46-30.73, p = 0.014), and confidentiality (OR = 7.38, CI 1.63-33.50, p = 0.010) were more likely to be described by nurses. CONCLUSION: Physicians and nurses are concerned about diverse threats to patient safety in primary care. Involving both groups in detection and analysis of risks in medical offices seems a valuable strategy to improve collaboration and safety.

Accuracy of electrocardiography in diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy in arterial hypertension: systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To review the accuracy of electrocardiography in screening for left ventricular hypertrophy in patients with hypertension. DESIGN: Systematic review of studies of test accuracy of six electrocardiographic indexes: the Sokolow-Lyon index, Cornell voltage index, Cornell product index, Gubner index, and Romhilt-Estes scores with thresholds for a positive test of > or =4 points or > or =5 points. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases ((Pre-)Medline, Embase), reference lists of relevant studies and previous reviews, and experts. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers scrutinised abstracts and examined potentially eligible studies. Studies comparing the electrocardiographic index with echocardiography in hypertensive patients and reporting sufficient data were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Data on study populations, echocardiographic criteria, and methodological quality of studies were extracted. DATA SYNTHESIS: Negative likelihood ratios, which indicate to what extent the posterior odds of left ventricular hypertrophy is reduced by a negative test, were calculated. RESULTS: 21 studies and data on 5608 patients were analysed. The median prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy was 33% (interquartile range 23-41%) in primary care settings (10 studies) and 65% (37-81%) in secondary care settings (11 studies). The median negative likelihood ratio was similar across electrocardiographic indexes, ranging from 0.85 (range 0.34-1.03) for the Romhilt-Estes score (with threshold > or =4 points) to 0.91 (0.70-1.01) for the Gubner index. Using the Romhilt-Estes score in primary care, a negative electrocardiogram result would reduce the typical pre-test probability from 33% to 31%. In secondary care the typical pre-test probability of 65% would be reduced to 63%. CONCLUSION: Electrocardiographic criteria should not be used to rule out left ventricular hypertrophy in patients with hypertension.

Accuracy of B-type natriuretic peptide tests to exclude congestive heart failure: systematic review of test accuracy studies.

BACKGROUND: Congestive heart failure (CHF) is a major public health problem. The use of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) tests shows promising diagnostic accuracy. Herein, we summarize the evidence on the accuracy of BNP tests in the diagnosis of CHF and compare the performance of rapid enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and standard radioimmunosorbent assay (RIA) tests. METHODS: We searched electronic databases and the reference lists of included studies, and we contacted experts. Data were extracted on the study population, the type of test used, and methods. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) plots and summary ROC curves were produced and negative likelihood ratios pooled. Random-effect meta-analysis and metaregression were used to combine data and explore sources of between-study heterogeneity. RESULTS: Nineteen studies describing 22 patient populations (9 ELISA and 13 RIA) and 9093 patients were included. The diagnosis of CHF was verified by echocardiography, radionuclide scan, or echocardiography combined with clinical criteria. The pooled negative likelihood ratio overall from random-effect meta-analysis was 0.18 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13-0.23). It was lower for the ELISA test (0.12; 95% CI, 0.09-0.16) than for the RIA test (0.23; 95% CI, 0.16-0.32). For a pretest probability of 20%, which is typical for patients with suspected CHF in primary care, a negative result of the ELISA test would produce a posttest probability of 2.9%; a negative RIA test, a posttest probability of 5.4%. CONCLUSIONS: The use of BNP tests to rule out CHF in primary care settings could reduce demand for echocardiography. The advantages of rapid ELISA tests need to be balanced against their higher cost.

Effect of short-wave (6-22 MHz) magnetic fields on sleep quality and melatonin cycle in humans: the Schwarzenburg shut-down study.

This paper describes the results of a unique "natural experiment" of the operation and cessation of a broadcast transmitter with its short-wave electromagnetic fields (6-22 MHz) on sleep quality and melatonin cycle in a general human population sample. In 1998, 54 volunteers (21 men, 33 women) were followed for 1 week each before and after shut-down of the short-wave radio transmitter at Schwarzenburg (Switzerland). Salivary melatonin was sampled five times a day and total daily excretion and acrophase were estimated using complex cosinor analysis. Sleep quality was recorded daily using a visual analogue scale. Before shut down, self-rated sleep quality was reduced by 3.9 units (95% CI: 1.7-6.0) per mA/m increase in magnetic field exposure. The corresponding decrease in melatonin excretion was 10% (95% CI: -32 to 20%). After shutdown, sleep quality improved by 1.7 units (95% CI: 0.1-3.4) per mA/m decrease in magnetic field exposure. Melatonin excretion increased by 15% (95% CI: -3 to 36%) compared to baseline values suggesting a rebound effect. Stratified analyses showed an exposure effect on melatonin excretion in poor sleepers (26% increase; 95% CI: 8-47%) but not in good sleepers. Change in sleep quality and melatonin excretion was related to the extent of magnetic field reduction after the transmitter's shut down in poor but not good sleepers. However, blinding of exposure was not possible in this observational study and this may have affected the outcome measurements in a direct or indirect (psychological) way.