Appendicectomies in Albanians in Greece: outcomes in a highly mobile immigrant patient population

BACKGROUND: Albanian immigrants in Greece comprise a highly mobile population with unknown health care profile. We aimed to assess whether these immigrants were more or less likely to undergo laparotomy for suspected appendicitis with negative findings (negative appendicectomy), by performing a controlled study with individual (1:4) matching. We used data from 6 hospitals in the Greek prefecture of Epirus that is bordering Albania. RESULTS: Among a total of 2027 non-incidental appendicectomies for suspected appendicitis performed in 1994-1999, 30 patients with Albanian names were matched (for age, sex, time of operation and hospital) to 120 patients with Greek names. The odds for a negative appendicectomy were 3.4-fold higher (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.24-9.31, p = 0.02) in Albanian immigrants than in matched Greek-name subjects. The difference was most prominent in men (odds ratio 20.0, 95% CI, 1.41-285, p = 0.02) while it was not formally significant in women (odds ratio 1.56, 95% CI, 0.44-5.48). The odds for perforation were 1.25-fold higher in Albanian-name immigrants than in Greek-name patients (95% CI 0.44- 3.57). CONCLUSIONS: Albanian immigrants in Greece are at high risk for negative appendicectomies. Socioeconomic, cultural and language parameters underlying health care inequalities in highly mobile immigrant populations need better study

“Empathize with me, Doctor!” Medical Undergraduates Training Project: Development, Application, Six-months Follow-up

The aim of the study was to assess the effectiveness of specially designed, empathy training for medical undergraduates, based on the principles of Person-Centered Approach.Within the context of the humanistic person-centered patient care, the experiential, 60-hour “Empathize with me, Doctor!” training program contains theory, personal development and skills development. Role plays, experiential exercises, self-awareness exercises, active listening practice and conduction of a person-centered interview constituted the training.Forty-two medical undergraduates (66% females; 29% fourth year of study, 40% fifth, 31% sixth) from the University of Ioannina in Greece applied and all of them completed the empathy training. Forty-five medical students comprised a similar according to age and year of studies control group.The Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy (JSPE) was used to assess the empathic performance, and Cohen’s d to assess the practical importance of any statistical difference.The JSPE mean score (and standard deviation) before, after and six months follow-up was 109.3(12.7), 121.1(9.0), 121.1(9.5), respectively. The before–after and before–follow-up difference was highly significant (CI95%, p<0.001 in both cases), and of great practical importance (d=1.072, d=1.052, respectively), while no decrease was observed six-months later (CI 95%, p=0.999, d<0.001). Control group reached a JSPE 108.7(10.5), similar to intervention group before training (CI95%, p=0.832), and highly different and important compared to after (CI 95%p<0.001; d=1.268) and follow-up (CI 95%, p<0.001; d=1.238) intervention scores.The “Empathize with me, Doctor!” improved significantly and importantly medical undergraduates’ empathic performance, which was maintained intact for at least six months

Argon plasma coagulation compared with stent placement in the palliative treatment of inoperable oesophageal cancer

BACKGROUND: Self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) are the main palliative modality used in inoperable oesophageal cancer. Other palliative modalities, including argon plasma coagulation (APC), have also been used. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the relative efficacy of SEMS and APC regarding the survival of patients with inoperable oesophageal cancer, not receiving chemo/radiotherapy. METHODS: Single centre, retrospective analysis of all patients (n = 228) with inoperable oesophageal cancer between January 2000 and July 2014, not receiving chemo-radiotherapy, treated with SEMS (n = 160) or APC (n = 68) as primary palliation modalities. Cox regression analysis was performed to identify individual factors affecting survival and Kaplan–Meier curves were created for patients treated with APC and SEMS for stage III and IV disease. Survival intervals were compared by the log-rank test. RESULTS: Type of treatment was the only statistically significant factor affecting survival, after disease stage stratification (hazard ratio (HR): 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.13–1.65 of SEMS over APC, p: 0.002). Median survival for patients treated with APC and SEMS was 257 (interquartile range (IQR): 414, 124) and 151 (IQR: 241, 61) days respectively in stage III disease. It was 135 (IQR: 238, 43) and 70 (IQR: 148, 32) days respectively in stage IV disease. Both differences were statistically significant (p = 0.02 and 0.05 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: APC is a promising palliation modality in inoperable oesophageal cancer, when patients are not candidates for chemo-radiotherapy. A randomized controlled trial will be needed to confirm those results

Screening for and Disclosure of Domestic Violence during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Results of the PRICOV-19 Cross-Sectional Study in 33 Countries

The COVID-19 pandemic left no one untouched, and reports of domestic violence (DV) increased during the crisis. DV victims rarely seek professional help, yet when they do so, they often disclose it to their general practitioner (GP), with whom they have a trusting relationship. GPs rarely screen and hence rarely take the initiative to discuss DV with patients, although victims indicate that offering this opportunity would facilitate their disclosure. This paper aims to describe the frequency of screening for DV by GPs and disclosure of DV by patients to the GP during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to identify key elements that could potentially explain differences in screening for and disclosure of DV. The PRICOV-19 data of 4295 GP practices from 33 countries were included in the analyses, with practices nested in countries. Two stepwise forward clustered ordinal logistic regressions were performed. Only 11% of the GPs reported (much) more disclosure of DV by patients during COVID-19, and 12% reported having screened for DV (much). Most significant associations with screening for and disclosure of DV concerned general (pro)active communication. However, (pro)active communication was performed less frequently for DV than for health conditions, which might indicate that GPs are insufficiently aware of the general magnitude of DV and its impact on patients and society, and its approach/management. Thus, professional education and training for GPs about DV seems highly and urgently needed

Has the COVID-19 Pandemic Led to Changes in the Tasks of the Primary Care Workforce? An International Survey among General Practices in 38 Countries (PRICOV-19)

peer reviewedThe COVID-19 pandemic has had a large and varying impact on primary care. This paper studies changes in the tasks of general practitioners (GPs) and associated staff during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data from the PRICOV-19 study of 5093 GPs in 38 countries were used. We constructed a scale for task changes and performed multilevel analyses. The scale was reliable at both GP and country level. Clustering of task changes at country level was considerable (25%). During the pandemic, staff members were more involved in giving information and recommendations to patients contacting the practice by phone, and they were more involved in triage. GPs took on additional responsibilities and were more involved in reaching out to patients. Problems due to staff absence, when dealt with internally, were related to more task changes. Task changes were larger in practices employing a wider range of professional groups. Whilst GPs were happy with the task changes in practices with more changes, they also felt the need for further training. A higher-than-average proportion of elderly people and people with a chronic condition in the practice were related to task changes. The number of infections in a country during the first wave of the pandemic was related to task changes. Other characteristics at country level were not associated with task changes. Future research on the sustainability of task changes after the pandemic is needed

Exploring dementia management attitudes in primary care: a key informant survey to primary care physicians in 25 European countries

Background: Strategies for the involvement of primary care in the management of patients with presumed or diagnosed dementia are heterogeneous across Europe. We wanted to explore attitudes of primary care physicians (PCPs) when managing dementia: (i) the most popular cognitive tests, (ii) who had the right to initiate or continue cholinesterase inhibitor or memantine treatment, and (iii) the relationship between the permissiveness of these rules/guidelines and PCP's approach in the dementia investigations and assessment. Methods: Key informant survey. Setting: Primary care practices across 25 European countries. Subjects: Four hundred forty-five PCPs responded to a self-administered questionnaire. Two-step cluster analysis was performed using characteristics of the informants and the responses to the survey. Main outcome measures: Two by two contingency tables with odds ratios and 95 confidence intervals were used to assess the association between categorical variables. A multinomial logistic regression model was used to assess the association of multiple variables (age class, gender, and perceived prescription rules) with the PCPs' attitude of "trying to establish a diagnosis of dementia on their own". Results: Discrepancies between rules/guidelines and attitudes to dementia management was found in many countries. There was a strong association between the authorization to prescribe dementia drugs and pursuing dementia diagnostic work-up (odds ratio, 3.45; 95 CI 2.28-5.23). Conclusions: Differing regulations about who does what in dementia management seemed to affect PCP's engagement in dementia investigations and assessment. PCPs who were allowed to prescribe dementia drugs also claimed higher engagement in dementia work-up than PCPs who were not allowed to prescribe

International ranking systems for universities and institutions: a critical appraisal

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Ranking of universities and institutions has attracted wide attention recently. Several systems have been proposed that attempt to rank academic institutions worldwide.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We review the two most publicly visible ranking systems, the Shanghai Jiao Tong University 'Academic Ranking of World Universities' and the Times Higher Education Supplement 'World University Rankings' and also briefly review other ranking systems that use different criteria. We assess the construct validity for educational and research excellence and the measurement validity of each of the proposed ranking criteria, and try to identify generic challenges in international ranking of universities and institutions.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>None of the reviewed criteria for international ranking seems to have very good construct validity for both educational and research excellence, and most don't have very good construct validity even for just one of these two aspects of excellence. Measurement error for many items is also considerable or is not possible to determine due to lack of publication of the relevant data and methodology details. The concordance between the 2006 rankings by Shanghai and Times is modest at best, with only 133 universities shared in their top 200 lists. The examination of the existing international ranking systems suggests that generic challenges include adjustment for institutional size, definition of institutions, implications of average measurements of excellence versus measurements of extremes, adjustments for scientific field, time frame of measurement and allocation of credit for excellence.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Naïve lists of international institutional rankings that do not address these fundamental challenges with transparent methods are misleading and should be abandoned. We make some suggestions on how focused and standardized evaluations of excellence could be improved and placed in proper context.</p

Burden of cardiovascular disease across 29 countries and GPs' decision to treat hypertension in oldest-old

OBJECTIVES: We previously found large variations in general practitioner (GP) hypertension treatment probability in oldest-old (>80 years) between countries. We wanted to explore whether differences in country-specific cardiovascular disease (CVD) burden and life expectancy could explain the differences. DESIGN: This is a survey study using case-vignettes of oldest-old patients with different comorbidities and blood pressure levels. An ecological multilevel model analysis was performed. SETTING: GP respondents from European General Practice Research Network (EGPRN) countries, Brazil and New Zeeland. SUBJECTS: This study included 2543 GPs from 29 countries. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: GP treatment probability to start or not start antihypertensive treatment based on responses to case-vignettes; either low (/=50% started treatment). CVD burden is defined as ratio of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) lost due to ischemic heart disease and/or stroke and total DALYs lost per country; life expectancy at age 60 and prevalence of oldest-old per country. RESULTS: Of 1947 GPs (76%) responding to all vignettes, 787 (40%) scored high treatment probability and 1160 (60%) scored low. GPs in high CVD burden countries had higher odds of treatment probability (OR 3.70; 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.00-4.57); in countries with low life expectancy at 60, CVD was associated with high treatment probability (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.12-4.25); but not in countries with high life expectancy (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.56-1.98). CONCLUSIONS: GPs' choice to treat/not treat hypertension in oldest-old was explained by differences in country-specific health characteristics. GPs in countries with high CVD burden and low life expectancy at age 60 were most likely to treat hypertension in oldest-old. Key Points * General practitioners (GPs) are in a clinical dilemma when deciding whether (or not) to treat hypertension in the oldest-old (>80 years of age). * In this study including 1947 GPs from 29 countries, we found that a high country-specific cardiovascular disease (CVD) burden (i.e. myocardial infarction and/or stroke) was associated with a higher GP treatment probability in patients aged >80 years. * However, the association was modified by country-specific life expectancy at age 60. While there was a positive association for GPs in countries with a low life expectancy at age 60, there was no association in countries with a high life expectancy at age 60. * These findings help explaining some of the large variation seen in the decision as to whether or not to treat hypertension in the oldest-old

Variation in GP decisions on antihypertensive treatment in oldest-old and frail individuals across 29 countries

BACKGROUND: In oldest-old patients (>80), few trials showed efficacy of treating hypertension and they included mostly the healthiest elderly. The resulting lack of knowledge has led to inconsistent guidelines, mainly based on systolic blood pressure (SBP), cardiovascular disease (CVD) but not on frailty despite the high prevalence in oldest-old. This may lead to variation how General Practitioners (GPs) treat hypertension. Our aim was to investigate treatment variation of GPs in oldest-olds across countries and to identify the role of frailty in that decision. METHODS: Using a survey, we compared treatment decisions in cases of oldest-old varying in SBP, CVD, and frailty. GPs were asked if they would start antihypertensive treatment in each case. In 2016, we invited GPs in Europe, Brazil, Israel, and New Zealand. We compared the percentage of cases that would be treated per countries. A logistic mixed-effects model was used to derive odds ratio (OR) for frailty with 95% confidence intervals (CI), adjusted for SBP, CVD, and GP characteristics (sex, location and prevalence of oldest-old per GP office, and years of experience). The mixed-effects model was used to account for the multiple assessments per GP. RESULTS: The 29 countries yielded 2543 participating GPs: 52% were female, 51% located in a city, 71% reported a high prevalence of oldest-old in their offices, 38% and had >20 years of experience. Across countries, considerable variation was found in the decision to start antihypertensive treatment in the oldest-old ranging from 34 to 88%. In 24/29 (83%) countries, frailty was associated with GPs' decision not to start treatment even after adjustment for SBP, CVD, and GP characteristics (OR 0.53, 95%CI 0.48-0.59; ORs per country 0.11-1.78). CONCLUSIONS: Across countries, we found considerable variation in starting antihypertensive medication in oldest-old. The frail oldest-old had an odds ratio of 0.53 of receiving antihypertensive treatment. Future hypertension trials should also include frail patients to acquire evidence on the efficacy of antihypertensive treatment in oldest-old patients with frailty, with the aim to get evidence-based data for clinical decision-making