COVID-19 profiles in general practice: a latent class analysis.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) were on the front line of the COVID-19 outbreak. Identifying clinical profiles in COVID-19 might improve patient care and enable closer monitoring of at-risk profiles. OBJECTIVES: To identify COVID-19 profiles in a population of adult primary care patients, and to determine whether the profiles were associated with negative outcomes and persistent symptoms. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: In a prospective multicentre study, 44 GPs from multiprofessional primary care practices in the Paris area of France recruited 340 consecutive adult patients (median age: 47 years) with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 during the first two waves of the epidemic. METHOD AND OUTCOME: A latent class (LC) analysis with 11 indicators (clinical signs and symptoms) was performed. The resulting profiles were characterised by a 3-month composite outcome (COVID-19-related hospital admission and/or death) and persistent symptoms three and 6 months after inclusion. RESULTS: We identified six profiles: 'paucisymptomatic' (LC1, 9%), 'anosmia and/or ageusia' (LC2, 12.9%), 'influenza-like syndrome with anosmia and ageusia' (LC3, 15.5%), 'influenza-like syndrome without anosmia or ageusia' (LC4, 24.5%), 'influenza-like syndrome with respiratory impairment' (LC5) and a 'complete form' (LC6, 17.7%). At 3 months, 7.4% of the patients were hospitalised (with higher rates in LC5), and 18% had persistent symptoms (with higher rates in LC5 and LC6). At 6 months, 6.4% of the patients had persistent symptoms, with no differences between LCs. CONCLUSION: Our findings might help GPs to identify patients at risk of persistent COVID-19 symptoms and hospital admission and then set up procedures for closer monitoring.

Initial characteristics and course of disease in patients with suspected COVID-19 managed in general practice: a prospective, multicentre cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe and compare the initial clinical characteristics of a cohort of patients with suspected COVID-19 managed by general practitioners (GPs); to assess whether 3-month persistent symptoms were more frequent among confirmed cases than among no-COVID cases; and to identify factors predictive of persistent symptoms and adverse outcomes among confirmed cases. DESIGN AND SETTING: A comparative, prospective, multicentre cohort study in primary care in the Paris region of France. PARTICIPANTS: 521 patients aged ≥18 with suspected COVID-19 were enrolled between March and May 2020. OUTCOME MEASURES: Initial symptoms, COVID-19 status, persistent symptoms 3 months after inclusion and a composite criterion for potentially COVID-19-related events (hospitalisation, death, emergency department visits). The final COVID-19 status ('confirmed', 'no-COVID' and 'uncertain' cases) was determined by the GP after the receipt of the laboratory test results. RESULTS: 516 patients were analysed; 166 (32.2%) were classified into the 'confirmed COVID' group, 180 (34.9%) into the 'no-COVID' group and 170 (32.9%) in the 'uncertain COVID' group. Confirmed cases were more likely to have persistent symptoms than no-COVID cases (p=0.09); initial fever/feeling feverish and anosmia were independently associated with persistent symptoms. At 3 months, we observed 16 (9.8%) COVID-19-related hospital admissions, 3 (1.8%) intensive care unit admissions, 13 (37.1%) referrals to an emergency department and no death. Age >70 and/or at least one comorbidity (OR 6.53; 95% CI 1.13-37.84; p=0.036), abnormalities in a lung examination (15.39; 95% CI 1.61-146.77; p=0.057) and two or more systemic symptoms (38.61; 95% CI 2.30-647.40; p=0.011) were associated with the composite criterion. CONCLUSIONS: Although most patients with COVID-19 in primary care had mild disease with a benign course, almost one in six had persistent symptoms at 3 months. These symptoms were more frequent in the 'confirmed COVID' group. Our findings need to be confirmed in a prospective study with longer follow-up.

Changes over time in attitudes towards the management of older patients with heart failure by general practitioners: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Underdiagnosis and undertreatment of chronic heart failure (CHF) are common in older patients, who are usually treated by general practitioners (GPs). In 2007, the French ICAGE study explored GPs' attitudes to the management of this condition in older patients. OBJECTIVES: To explore changes over time in GPs' attitudes towards the management of CHF in patients aged ≥75 and to identify barriers to optimal management. METHODS: In 2015, we performed a qualitative study of 20 French GPs via semi-structured interviews and a thematic content analysis. The results were compared with the findings of a 2007 study. RESULTS: In 2015, the perceived barriers to diagnosis were the same as in 2007. Echocardiography was still the preferred diagnostic method but the GPs relied on the cardiologist to confirm the diagnosis. Many GPs were still unaware of the different types of CHF. In contrast, they reported greater knowledge of decompensation factors and the ultrasound criteria for CHF. They also prescribed a brain natriuretic peptide assay more frequently. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and beta blockers were more strongly perceived to be core treatments. Few GPs initiated drug treatments and optimized dosages. Although patient education was never mentioned, the importance of multidisciplinary care was emphasized. CONCLUSION: Our results evidenced a small recent improvement in the management of older patients with CHF. Appropriate guidelines and training for GPs, patient education and multidisciplinary collaboration might further improve the care given to this population.