Background

Osteoarthritis is a common presentation in primary care, and non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (sometimes also referred to as traditional NSAIDs or tNSAIDs) and selective cyclo-oxygenase 2 inhibitors (COX-2 inhibitors) are commonly used to treat it. The UK's National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) recommends taking patient risk factors into account when selecting a tNSAID or a COX-2 inhibitor, but GPs have lacked practical guidance on assessing patient risk.

Methods

A multi-disciplinary group that included primary care professionals (PCPs) developed an evidence-based consensus statement with an accompanying flowchart that aimed at providing concise and specific guidance on NSAID use in osteoarthritis treatment. An open invitation to meet and discuss the issue was made to relevant healthcare professionals in South Yorkshire. A round table meeting was held that used a modified nominal group technique, aimed at generating opinions and ideas from all stakeholders in the consensus process. A draft developed from this meeting went through successive revisions until a consensus was achieved.

Results

Four statements on the use of tNSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors (and an attached category of evidence) were agreed: 1) tNSAIDs are effective drugs in relieving pain and immobility associated with osteoarthritis. COX-2 inhibitors are equally effective; 2) tNSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors vary in their potential gastrointestinal, liver, and cardio-renal toxicity. This risk varies between individual treatments within both groups and is increased with dose and duration of treatment; 3) COX-2 inhibitors are associated with a significantly lower gastrointestinal toxicity compared to tNSAIDs. Co-prescribing of aspirin reduces this advantage; 4) PPIs should always be considered with a tNSAID and with a COX-2 inhibitor in higher GI risk patients. An accompanying flowchart to guide management was also agreed.

Conclusions

Individual patient risk is an important factor in choice of treatment for patients with osteoarthritis and the consensus statement developed offers practical guidance for GPs and others in primary care. Where there are clinical uncertainties, guidance developed and agreed by local clinicians has a role to play in improving patient management.

Background

Implementing a primary care clinical research study in several countries can make it possible to recruit sufficient patients in a short period of time that allows important clinical questions to be answered. Large multi-country studies in primary care are unusual and are typically associated with challenges requiring innovative solutions. We conducted a multi-country study and through this paper, we share reflections on the challenges we faced and some of the solutions we developed with a special focus on the study set up, structure and development of Primary Care Networks (PCNs).

Method

GRACE-01 was a multi-European country, investigator-driven prospective observational study implemented by 14 Primary Care Networks (PCNs) within 13 European Countries. General Practitioners (GPs) recruited consecutive patients with an acute cough. GPs completed a case report form (CRF) and the patient completed a daily symptom diary. After study completion, the coordinating team discussed the phases of the study and identified challenges and solutions that they considered might be interesting and helpful to researchers setting up a comparable study.

Results

The main challenges fell within three domains as follows:

i) selecting, setting up and maintaining PCNs;

ii) designing local context-appropriate data collection tools and efficient data management systems; and

iii) gaining commitment and trust from all involved and maintaining enthusiasm.

The main solutions for each domain were:

i) appointing key individuals (National Network Facilitator and Coordinator) with clearly defined tasks, involving PCNs early in the development of study materials and procedures.

ii) rigorous back translations of all study materials and the use of information systems to closely monitor each PCNs progress;

iii) providing strong central leadership with high level commitment to the value of the study, frequent multi-method communication, establishing a coherent ethos, celebrating achievements, incorporating social events and prizes within meetings, and providing a framework for exploitation of local data.

Conclusions

Many challenges associated with multi-country primary care research can be overcome by engendering strong, effective communication, commitment and involvement of all local researchers. The practical solutions identified and the lessons learned in implementing the GRACE-01 study may assist in establishing other international primary care clinical research platforms.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00353951

Background

From both clinical experience and research we learned that in complex progressive disorders such as dementia, diagnosis includes multiple steps, each with their own clinical and research characteristics.

Discussion

Diagnosing starts with a trigger phase in which the GP gradually realizes that dementia may be emerging. This is followed by a disease-oriented diagnosis and subsequently a care -oriented diagnosis. In parallel the GP should consider the consequences of this process for the caregiver and the interaction between both. As soon as a comprehensive diagnosis and care plan are available, monitoring follows.

Summary

We propose to split the diagnostic process into four diagnostic steps, followed by a monitoring phase. We recommend to include these steps when designing studies on screening, diagnosis and monitoring of patients with dementia and their families.

Background

Health literacy is an increasingly important topic in both the policy and research agendas of many countries. During the recent 36th Annual Meeting of the North American Primary Care Research Group, the authors led an audio-taped 3-hour forum, "Studying Health Literacy: Developing an International Collaboration," where the current state of health literacy (HL) in the United States (US) and United Kingdom (UK) was presented and attendees were encouraged to debate a future research agenda.

Discussion of Forum Themes

The debate centred around three distinct themes, including: (1) refining HL definitions and conceptual models, (2) HL measurement and assessment tools, and (3) developing a collaborative international research agenda. The attendees agreed that future research should be theoretically grounded and conceptual models employed in studies should be explicit to allow for international comparisons to be drawn.

Summary and Authors Reflections

The importance of HL research and its possible contribution to health disparities is becoming increasingly recognised internationally. International collaborations and comparative studies could illuminate some of the possible determinants of disparities, and also possibly provide a vehicle to examine other research questions of interest.

Background

The chance of an influenza pandemic is real and clinicians should keep themselves informed about the rationale and science behind preventive and therapeutic principles relating to an (impending) influenza pandemic.

Discussion

Vaccination is considered the best prevention in case of a pandemic threat and first choice to contain the impact of a pandemic. Pending the availability of an effective pandemic vaccine, antivirals are likely the only effective agents for prevention and treatment. When an influenza pandemic is impending, all interventions aim to prevent people becoming infected and to suppress replication and transmission of the virus as much as possible. Antivirals will be prescribed to patients with laboratory confirmed pre-pandemic influenza as well as to their contacts (post-exposure prophylaxis) which may delay development of or even prevent a pandemic. During a manifest influenza pandemic, however, there is large-scale spreading of the influenza virus. Therefore, preventive use of antivirals is less efficient to prevent transmission. Delaying the pandemic is then important in order to prevent exhausting public health resources and disruption of society. Thus, during a manifest pandemic everyone with influenza symptoms should receive antivirals as quickly as possible, regardless of virological confirmation. To ensure optimal effectiveness of antivirals and to minimize development of drug resistant viral strains, the use of antivirals for annual influenza should be restrictive. The crucial position of family physicians during an (impending) influenza pandemic necessitates the development of primary health care guidelines on this topic for all countries.

Summary

Family physicians will play a key role in assessing and treating victims of a new influenza virus, and in reassuring the worried well. We outline various possible interventions in the event of an impending and a manifest influenza pandemic, such as non-medial measures, prescription of antivirals, and vaccination, and emphasize the need for pandemic influenza preparedness.

Background

A strong and self confident primary care workforce can deliver the highest quality care and outcomes equitably and cost effectively. To meet the increasing demands being made of it, primary care needs its own thriving research culture and knowledge base.

Methods

Review of recent developments supporting primary care clinical research.

Results

Primary care research has benefited from a small group of passionate leaders and significant investment in recent decades in some countries. Emerging from this has been innovation in research design and focus, although less is known of the effect on research output.

Conclusion

Primary care research is now well placed to lead a broad re-vitalisation of academic medicine, answering questions of relevance to practitioners, patients, communities and Government. Key areas for future primary care research leaders to focus on include exposing undergraduates early to primary care research, integrating this early exposure with doctoral and postdoctoral research career support, further expanding cross disciplinary approaches, and developing useful measures of output for future primary care research investment.