[Burning ankle sensation after partial nail extraction]. / Brandende enkel na partiële nagelextractie.

A59-year-old patient reports back to general practice with a burning sensation at the ankle a few hours after a partial nail extraction with phenolization of the nail bed. There is a chemical burn caused by a drop of phenol spilt during the procedure.

Reducing disability in community-dwelling frail older people: cost-effectiveness study alongside a cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: although proactive primary care, including early detection and treatment of community-dwelling frail older people, is a part of the national healthcare policy in several countries, little is known about its cost-effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a proactive primary care approach in community-dwelling frail older people. DESIGN AND SETTING: embedded in a cluster randomised trial among 12 Dutch general practitioner practices, an economic evaluation was performed from a societal perspective with a time horizon of 24 months. METHOD: frail older people in the intervention group received an in-home assessment and interdisciplinary care based on a tailor-made treatment plan and regular evaluation and follow-up. Practices in the control group delivered usual care. The primary outcome for the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis was disability and health-related quality of life, respectively. RESULTS: multilevel analyses among 346 frail older people showed no significant differences between the groups regarding disability and health-related quality of life at 24 months. People in the intervention group used, as expected, more primary care services, but there was no decline in more expensive hospital and long-term care. Total costs over 24 months tended to be higher in the intervention group than in the control group (€26,503 versus €20,550, P = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: the intervention under study led to an increase in healthcare utilisation and related costs without providing any beneficial effects. This study adds to the scarce amount of evidence of the cost-effectiveness of proactive primary care in community-dwelling frail older people. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials, ISRCTN 31954692.

Effectiveness of interdisciplinary primary care approach to reduce disability in community dwelling frail older people: cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether an interdisciplinary primary care approach for community dwelling frail older people is more effective than usual care in reducing disability and preventing (further) functional decline. DESIGN: Cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 12 general practices in the south of the Netherlands PARTICIPANTS: 346 frail older people (score ≥ 5 on Groningen Frailty Indicator) were included; 270 (78%) completed the study. INTERVENTIONS: General practices were randomised to the intervention or control group. Practices in the control group delivered care as usual. Practices in the intervention group implemented the "Prevention of Care" (PoC) approach, in which frail older people received a multidimensional assessment and interdisciplinary care based on a tailor made treatment plan and regular evaluation and follow-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was disability, assessed at 24 months by means of the Groningen Activity Restriction Scale. Secondary outcomes were depressive symptomatology, social support interactions, fear of falling, and social participation. Outcomes were measured at baseline and at 6, 12, and 24 months' follow-up. RESULTS: 193 older people in the intervention group (six practices) received the PoC approach; 153 older people in the control group (six practices) received care as usual. Follow-up rates for patients were 91% (n=316) at six months, 86% (n=298) at 12 months, and 78% (n=270) at 24 months. Mixed model multilevel analyses showed no significant differences between the two groups with regard to disability (primary outcome) and secondary outcomes. Pre-planned subgroup analyses confirmed these results. CONCLUSIONS: This study found no evidence for the effectiveness of the PoC approach. The study contributes to the emerging body of evidence that community based care in frail older people is a challenging task. More research in this field is needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN31954692.

Follow-up care by patient's own general practitioner after contact with out-of-hours care. A descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the care process after patients have contacted a GP cooperative for out-of-hours care. The objective of this study was to determine the proportion of patients who seek follow-up care after contact with a GP cooperative for out-of-hours care, and to gain insight into factors that are related to this follow-up care. METHODS: A total of 2805 patients who contacted a GP cooperative for out-of-hours care were sent a questionnaire. They were asked whether they had attended their own GP within a week after their contact with the cooperative, and for what reason. To investigate whether other variables are related to follow-up care, a logistic regression analysis was applied. Variables that entered in this analysis were patient characteristics (age, gender, etc.) and patient opinion on correctness of diagnosis, urgency and severity of the medical complaint. RESULTS: The response rate was 42%. In total, 48% of the patients received follow-up care from their own GP. Only 20% were referred or advised to attend their own GP. Others attended because their medical condition worsened or because they were concerned about their complaint. Variables that predicted follow-up care were the patient's opinion on the correctness of the diagnosis, patient's health insurance, and severity of the medical problem. CONCLUSION: Almost half of all patients in this study who contacted the GP cooperative for out-of-hours care attended their own GP during office hours within a week, for the same medical complaint. The most important factor that predicted follow-up care from the patient's own GP after an out-of-hours contact was the patient's degree of confidence in the diagnosis established at the GP cooperative. Despite the limited generalisability, this study is a first step in providing insight into the dimension of follow-up care after a patient has contacted the GP cooperative for out-of-hours primary care.