Use and impact of point-of-care ultrasonography in general practice: a prospective observational study

OBJECTIVES

To describe how general practitioners (GPs) use point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) and how it influences the diagnostic process and treatment of patients.

DESIGN

Prospective observational study using an online questionnaire before and after POCUS.

SETTING

Office-based general practice.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty GPs consecutively recruited all patients examined with POCUS in 1 month.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

We estimated the use of POCUS through the indication for use, the frequency of use, the time consumption, the extent of modification of the examination and the findings.The influence on the diagnostic process was estimated through change in the tentative diagnoses, change in confidence, the ability to produce ultrasound images and the relationship between confidence and organs scanned or tentative diagnoses.The influence of POCUS on patient treatment was estimated through change in plan for the patient, change in patient's treatment and the relationship between such changes and certain findings.

RESULTS

The GPs included 574 patients in the study. POCUS was used in patient consultations with a median frequency of 8.6% (IQR: 4.9-12.6). Many different organs were scanned covering more than 100 different tentative diagnoses. The median time taken to perform POCUS was 5 min (IQR: 3-8). Across applications and GPs, POCUS entailed a change in diagnoses in 49.4% of patients; increased confidence in a diagnosis in 89.2% of patients; a change in the management plan for 50.9% of patients including an absolute reduction in intended referrals to secondary care from 49.2% to 25.6%; and a change in treatment for 26.5% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical utilisation of POCUS was highly variable among the GPs included in this study in terms of the indication for performing POCUS, examined scanning modalities and frequency of use. Overall, using POCUS altered the GPs' diagnostic process and clinical decision-making in nearly three out of four consultations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03375333.

Does accreditation of general practice promote patient-reported quality of care? A natural cluster randomised experiment

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether accreditation of general practice in Denmark promotes patient-reported quality of care and patient satisfaction.

DESIGN

A national cluster randomised case control study based on an online version of the Danish Patients Evaluate Practice questionnaire. Mixed effects ordered logit regression models taking account of clustering of patients in different municipalities were used in the analyses.

SETTING

General practice in Denmark.

PARTICIPANTS

A representative sample of the Danish population.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was patient-reported quality of care, and patient satisfaction with general practice and patient satisfaction with the general practitioner served as secondary outcome measures.

RESULTS

In total, 3609 respondents answered the survey. We found no statistically significant relationships between patient-reported quality of care and practice accreditation (2016: OR=0.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.07 and 2017: OR=0.85, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.02) and between patient satisfaction with the general practitioner and accreditation (2016: OR=0.93, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.13 and 2017: OR=0.86, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.04). However, there was a statistically significant negative relationship between patient satisfaction with the general practice and recent practice accreditation compared with satisfaction with practices not yet accredited (OR=0.81, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.97) but no significant relationship between patient satisfaction with the general practice and previous accreditation (OR=0.91, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.09).

CONCLUSION

Accreditation does not promote patient-reported quality of care or patient satisfaction. On the contrary, patient satisfaction with the general practice decreases when general practice is recently accredited.

Visual impairment and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether visual acuity impairment was an independent predictor of mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This is a 19-year follow-up of a cohort of 1241 patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and aged 40 years or over. Visual acuity was assessed by practicing ophthalmologists both at diabetes diagnosis and after 6 years. The logarithmic value of the visual acuity (logMAR) was the exposure. Multivariable Cox regression models were adjusted for multiple potential confounders including cardiovascular disease, and censored for potential mediators, that is, fractures/trauma. Primary outcomes were from national registers: all-cause mortality and diabetes-related mortality.

RESULTS

Visual impairment at diabetes diagnosis was robustly associated with subsequent 6-year all-cause mortality. Per 1 unit reduced logMAR acuity the incidence rate of all-cause mortality increased with 51% (adjusted HR: 1.51; 95% CI 1.12 to 2.03) and of fractures/trauma with 59% (HR: 1.59; 95% CI 1.18 to 2.15), but visual acuity was not associated with diabetes-related mortality. After censoring for fractures/trauma, visual acuity was still an independent risk factor for all-cause mortality (HR: 1.68; 95% CI 1.23 to 2.30). In contrast, visual acuity 6 years after diabetes diagnosis was not associated with the subsequent 13 years' incidence of any of the outcomes, as an apparent association with all-cause mortality and diabetes-related mortality was explained by confounding from comorbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

Visual acuity measured by ophthalmologists in patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes was an independent predictor of mortality in the short term.

Retirement, job satisfaction and attitudes towards mandatory accreditation: a Danish survey study in general practice

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to analyse the associations between general practitioner (GP) retirement, job satisfaction and attitudes towards a mandatory accreditation scheme. External interventions such as mandatory accreditation schemes may be perceived negatively by GPs, causing early retirement from practice. In Denmark, almost half of the GPs had negative attitudes prior to the implementation of a mandatory accreditation scheme, constituting a possible risk of early practice retirement.

SETTING

In January 2015 all 3,404 Danish GPs were invited to participate in a survey on attitudes towards a forthcoming mandatory accreditation programme.

PARTICIPANTS

1,906 GPs (56%) answered the questionnaire. In total, 391 (11%) retired from practice in the following period from 1 January 2015 to 31 January 2017. Of these, 193 GPs (49%) answered the questionnaire.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was GP retirement. Labour union data on practice retirement were linked with data from the questionnaire survey on job satisfaction and attitudes prior to implementation of mandatory accreditation. Logistic regression analyses were used to determine the associations between practice retirement and job satisfaction and attitudes towards accreditation.

RESULTS

Practice retirement was associated with job dissatisfaction (OR: 2.5, 95% CI 1.6 to 3.7). Retirement was not associated with any of the other surveyed attitudinal variables. Retirement rate was relatively high in the accreditation start-up period.

CONCLUSION

Practice retirement was associated with job dissatisfaction but not to a priori attitudes towards an upcoming mandatory accreditation programme. However, the retirement rate was relatively high in the start-up period of the accreditation programme. Future research should evaluate the effects of external interventions on preterm retirement from general practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02762240.