Effect of faecal calprotectin testing on referrals for children with chronic gastrointestinal symptoms in primary care:study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

Introduction Children with chronic gastrointestinal symptoms are frequently seen in primary care, yet general practitioners (GPs) often experience challenges distinguishing functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGID) from organic disorders. We, therefore, aim to evaluate whether a test strategy that includes point-of-care testing (POCT) for faecal calprotectin (FCal) can reduce the referral rate to paediatric specialist care among children with chronic gastrointestinal symptoms. The study findings will contribute to improving the recommendations on FCal use among children in primary care.Methods and analysis In this pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial, we will randomise general practices into intervention and control groups. The intervention group will use FCal-POCT when indicated, after completing online training about its indication, interpretation and follow-up as well as communicating an FGID diagnosis. The control group will test and treat according to Dutch GP guidelines, which advise against FCal testing in children. GPs will include children aged 4–18 years presenting to primary care with chronic diarrhoea and/or recurrent abdominal pain. The primary outcome will be the referral rate for children with chronic gastrointestinal symptoms within 6 months after the initial assessment. Secondary outcomes will be evaluated by questionnaires completed at baseline and at 3- and 6-month follow-up. These outcomes will include parental satisfaction and concerns, gastrointestinal symptoms, impact of symptoms on daily function, quality of life, proportion of children with paediatrician-diagnosed FGID referred to secondary care, health service use and healthcare costs. A sample size calculation indicates that we need to recruit 158 GP practices to recruit 406 children.Ethics and dissemination The Medical Research Ethics Committee (MREC) of the University Medical Center Groningen (The Netherlands) approved this study (MREC number: 201900309). The study results will be made available to patients, GPs, paediatricians and laboratories via peer-reviewed publications and in presentations at (inter)national conferences.Trial registration number The Netherlands Trial Register: NL7690 (Pre-results

Patient experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic:A qualitative study in Dutch primary care

Background Changes in primary care provision during the COVID-19 pandemic could have affected patient experience of primary care both positively and negatively. Aim To assess the experiences of patients in primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design & setting A qualitative study of patients from regions with high and low COVID-19 prevalence in the Netherlands. Method A qualitative study using a phenomenological framework was performed among purposively sampled patients. Individual semi-structured interviews were performed and transcribed. Data were thematically analysed by means of an inductive approach. Results Twenty-eight patients were interviewed (13 men and 15 women, aged 27–91 years). After thematic analysis, two main themes emerged: accessibility and continuity of primary care. Changes considered positive during the pandemic regarding accessibility and continuity of primary care included having a quieter practice, having more time for consultations, and the use of remote care for problems with low complexity. However, patients also experienced decreases in both care accessibility and continuity, such as feeling unwelcome, the GP postponing chronic care, seeing unfamiliar doctors, and care being segregated. Conclusion Despite bringing several benefits, patients indicated that the changes to primary care provision during the COVID-19 pandemic could have threatened care accessibility and continuity, which are core values of primary care. These insights can guide primary care provision not only in this and future pandemics, but also when implementing permanent changes to care provision in primary care

Management of children with non-acute abdominal pain and diarrhea in Dutch primary care:a retrospective cohort study based on a routine primary care database (AHON)

Objective: To describe the testing, prescription, referral, and follow-up management by general practitioners (GPs) for children presenting with non-acute abdominal pain and/or diarrhea in primary care. Design: Retrospective cohort study with one-year follow-up. Setting: Registry data from a Dutch primary care database (AHON) between 2015 and 2019. Subjects: Children aged 4–18 years old who presented by face-to-face consultation in primary care for non-acute abdominal pain and/or diarrhea (&gt;7 days). Main outcome measures: We recorded the proportions of children who received (1) diagnostic testing, medicine prescriptions, follow-up consultations, and referrals at their first visit and (2) repeat consultations and referrals by one-year of follow-up. Results: Among the 2200 children (median age, 10.5 years; interquartile range, 7.0–14.6) presenting to a GP with non-acute abdominal pain and/or diarrhea, most reported abdominal pain (78.7%). At the first visit, GPs performed diagnostic testing for 32.2%, provided a prescription to 34.5%, and referred 2.5% to secondary care. Twenty-five percent of the children had a follow-up consultation within four weeks and 20.8% had a repeat consultation between four weeks and one year. Thirteen percent of the children were referred to secondary care by one year. However, only 1% of all children had documentation of an organic diagnosis needing management in secondary care. Conclusion: One-third of children received diagnostic testing or a medicine prescription. Few had a follow-up consultation and &gt;10% was referred to pediatric care. Future research should explore the motivations of GPs why and which children receive diagnostic and medical interventions.</p

Management of children with non-acute abdominal pain and diarrhea in Dutch primary care:a retrospective cohort study based on a routine primary care database (AHON)

Objective: To describe the testing, prescription, referral, and follow-up management by general practitioners (GPs) for children presenting with non-acute abdominal pain and/or diarrhea in primary care. Design: Retrospective cohort study with one-year follow-up. Setting: Registry data from a Dutch primary care database (AHON) between 2015 and 2019. Subjects: Children aged 4–18 years old who presented by face-to-face consultation in primary care for non-acute abdominal pain and/or diarrhea (&gt;7 days). Main outcome measures: We recorded the proportions of children who received (1) diagnostic testing, medicine prescriptions, follow-up consultations, and referrals at their first visit and (2) repeat consultations and referrals by one-year of follow-up. Results: Among the 2200 children (median age, 10.5 years; interquartile range, 7.0–14.6) presenting to a GP with non-acute abdominal pain and/or diarrhea, most reported abdominal pain (78.7%). At the first visit, GPs performed diagnostic testing for 32.2%, provided a prescription to 34.5%, and referred 2.5% to secondary care. Twenty-five percent of the children had a follow-up consultation within four weeks and 20.8% had a repeat consultation between four weeks and one year. Thirteen percent of the children were referred to secondary care by one year. However, only 1% of all children had documentation of an organic diagnosis needing management in secondary care. Conclusion: One-third of children received diagnostic testing or a medicine prescription. Few had a follow-up consultation and &gt;10% was referred to pediatric care. Future research should explore the motivations of GPs why and which children receive diagnostic and medical interventions.</p

Management of children with non-acute abdominal pain and diarrhea in Dutch primary care:a retrospective cohort study based on a routine primary care database (AHON)

Objective: To describe the testing, prescription, referral, and follow-up management by general practitioners (GPs) for children presenting with non-acute abdominal pain and/or diarrhea in primary care. Design: Retrospective cohort study with one-year follow-up. Setting: Registry data from a Dutch primary care database (AHON) between 2015 and 2019. Subjects: Children aged 4–18 years old who presented by face-to-face consultation in primary care for non-acute abdominal pain and/or diarrhea (&gt;7 days). Main outcome measures: We recorded the proportions of children who received (1) diagnostic testing, medicine prescriptions, follow-up consultations, and referrals at their first visit and (2) repeat consultations and referrals by one-year of follow-up. Results: Among the 2200 children (median age, 10.5 years; interquartile range, 7.0–14.6) presenting to a GP with non-acute abdominal pain and/or diarrhea, most reported abdominal pain (78.7%). At the first visit, GPs performed diagnostic testing for 32.2%, provided a prescription to 34.5%, and referred 2.5% to secondary care. Twenty-five percent of the children had a follow-up consultation within four weeks and 20.8% had a repeat consultation between four weeks and one year. Thirteen percent of the children were referred to secondary care by one year. However, only 1% of all children had documentation of an organic diagnosis needing management in secondary care. Conclusion: One-third of children received diagnostic testing or a medicine prescription. Few had a follow-up consultation and &gt;10% was referred to pediatric care. Future research should explore the motivations of GPs why and which children receive diagnostic and medical interventions.</p

What can we learn from experiences in general practice during the COVID-19 pandemic?:A qualitative study

Background: Experiences with organizational changes in daytime general practices and out-of-hours (OOH) services during the COVID-19 pandemic may help to address the challenges in general practice care that were already a concern before the crisis. This study aimed to describe these experiences and the potential usefulness of the organizational changes for future general practice care and any future pandemics.Methods: Semi-structured interviews were performed among 11 directors of OOH services, and 19 (locum) general practitioners (GPs) or practice managers, who were purposively sampled. Video or telephone interviews were performed in two rounds: between November 2020 and January 2021 and between May 2021 and August 2021. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis methods.Results: Three themes emerged from the data: (1) Changes in the triage procedures; in GP practices and OOH services, stricter triage criteria were implemented, and GPs were more actively involved in the triage process. These measures helped to reduce the number of ‘low urgency’ face-to-face consultations. (2) Changes in GP care; there was a shift towards video and telephone consultations, allowing GPs to spend more time with patients during the remaining face-to-face consultations. For chronic patients, the shift towards telemonitoring appeared to encourage self-care, and postponing face-to-face consultations for regular checkups appeared to be unproblematic for stable patients. (3) Coordination of GP care and information communication flow during the COVID-19 pandemic; OOH directors perceived a lack of consistency in the information from various governmental and non-governmental parties on containment measures and guidelines related to COVID-19, making it difficult to act on them. The COVID-19 pandemic intensified collaboration between GPs, OOH services, and other healthcare professionals.Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that some of the organizational changes, such as stricter triage, remote consultations, and changes in managed care of chronic patients, may help in tackling the pre-existing challenges in GP care from before the COVID-19 pandemic. However, more extensive research and continuous monitoring are necessary to establish the effects on patients and their health outcomes. To navigate future pandemics, the intensified collaboration between health professionals should be maintained, while there is considerable room for improvement in the provision of unambiguous information.</p