Does disaster affect immigrant victims more than non-immigrant victims in Dutch general practice: a matched cohort study

Background: In the literature, immigrant victims appear to be more vulnerable to health effects of a disaster than indigenous victims. Most of these studies were performed without pre-disaster measurement and without using a control group. Aim: The objective of the study is to monitor differences between two groups of victims, Turkish immigrants and indigenous Dutch, in utilization and morbidity as presented in general practice after a man-made disaster. Methods: A matched cohort study was performed with pre-disaster (1 year) and post-disaster (4 years) measurements of patients from 30 general practices in Enschede. Turkish victims (N=303) and Dutch victims (N=606), matched on age, gender and socioeconomic status, were included. Main outcome measures were psychological problems and physical symptoms as recorded by the general practitioner, using the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC). Results: The Turkish victims showed higher utilization than the Dutch victims prior to the disaster. In the 1st post-disaster year, both groups of victims showed an increase in utilization, but the increases did not differ significantly. The Turkish group showed no significantly greater increase than the Dutch group in the five most prevalent clusters of health problems (psychological, respiratory, skin, musculoskeletal, and digestive). Conclusion: The Turkish victims in general practice were as vulnerable as the Dutch victims for the effects on their health of this man-made disaster. Differences between Turkish and native Dutch victims of this man-made disaster can largely be explained by the differences that existed already before the disaster

Striking variations in consultation rates with general practice reveal family influence

BACKGROUND: The reasons why patients decide to consult a general practitioner vary enormously. While there may be individual reasons for this variation, the family context has a significant and unique influence upon the frequency of individuals' visits. The objective of this study was to explore which family factors can explain the differences between strikingly high, and correspondingly low, family consultation rates in families with children aged up to 21. METHODS: Data were used from the second Dutch national survey of general practice. This survey extracted from the medical records of 96 practices in the Netherlands, information on all consultations with patients during 2001. We defined, through multilevel analysis, two groups of families. These had respectively, predominantly high, and low, contact frequencies due to a significant family influence upon the frequency of the individual's first contacts. Binomial logistic regression analyses were used to analyse which of the family factors, related to shared circumstances and socialisation conditions, can explain the differences in consultation rates between the two groups of families. RESULTS: In almost 3% of all families, individual consultation rates decrease significantly due to family influence. In 11% of the families, individual consultation rates significantly increase due to family influence. While taking into account the health status of family members, family factors can explain family consultation rates. These factors include circumstances such as their economic status and number of children, as well as socialisation conditions such as specific health knowledge and family beliefs. The chance of significant low frequencies of contact due to family influences increases significantly with factors such as, paid employment of parents in the health care sector, low expectations of general practitioners' care for minor ailments and a western cultural background. CONCLUSION: Family circumstances can easily be identified and will add to the understanding of the health complaints of the individual patient in the consulting room. Family circumstances related to health risks often cannot be changed but they can illuminate the reasons for a visit, and mould strategies for prevention, treatment or recovery. Health beliefs, on the other hand, may be influenced by providing specific knowledge

Executive function does not predict coping with symptoms in stable patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Associations between coping with and control over psychotic symptoms were examined using the Maastricht Assessment of Coping Strategies-24, testing the hypothesis that the cognitive domain of executive functioning predicted quality and quantity of coping.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>MACS-24 was administered to 32 individuals with a diagnosis of schizophrenia. For each of 24 symptoms, experience of distress, type of coping and the resulting degree of perceived control were assessed. Coping types were reduced to two contrasting coping categories: symptomatic coping (SC) and non-symptomatic coping (NSC; combining active problem solving, passive illness behaviour, active problem avoiding, and passive problem avoiding). Cognitive functioning was assessed using the GIT (Groninger Intelligence Test), the Zoo map (BADS: Behavioural Assessment of Dysexecutive function), Stroop-test and Trail making.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Cognitive function was not associated with frequency of coping, nor did cognitive function differentially predict SC or NSC. Cognitive function similarly was not associated with symptom distress or level of perceived control over the symptom.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>There was no evidence that cognitive function predicts quantity or quality of coping with symptoms in people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia. Variation in the realm of emotion regulation and social cognition may be more predictive of coping with psychotic symptoms.</p

Does disaster affect immigrant victims more than non-immigrant victims in Dutch general practice: a matched cohort study

International audienc

Experienced continuity of care in patients at risk for depression in primary care

Existing studies about continuity of care focus on patients with a severe mental illness. Explore the level of experienced continuity of care of patients at risk for depression in primary care, and compare these to those of patients with heart failure. Explorative study comparing patients at risk for depression with chronic heart failure patients. Continuity of care was measured using a patient questionnaire and defined as ( 1 ) number of care providers contacted (personal continuity); ( 2 ) collaboration between care providers in general practice (team continuity) (six items, score 1-5); and ( 3 ) collaboration between GPs and care providers outside general practice (cross-boundary continuity) (four items, score 1-5). Most patients at risk for depression contacted several care providers throughout the care spectrum in the past year. They experienced high team continuity and low cross-boundary continuity. In their general practice, they contacted more different care providers for their illness than heart failure patients did (P < 0.01). Patients at risk for depression experienced a slightly better collaboration between these care providers in their practice: a mean score of 4.3 per item compared to 4.0 for heart failure patients (P = 0.03). The perceived cross-boundary continuity, however, was reversed: a mean score of 3.5 per item for patients at risk for depression, compared to 4.0 for heart failure patients (P = 0.01). The explorative comparison between patients at risk for depression and heart failure patients shows small differences in experienced continuity of care. This should be analysed further in a more robust stud

Male and female health problems in general practice: The differential impact of social position and social roles

Sex, social position and social roles have been identified as important health predictors. Moreover, various social variables have been found to bear differently upon female as compared to male health. This study analyses data from a large-scale registration project in general practice (the Continuous Morbidity Registration), pertaining to the medical diagnoses of nearly 10,000 patients over a five year period. The effects of sex, social class, marital and parental status on a number of distinct categories of health problems were established, and a possible differential impact of social position and social roles on male and female health was explored. Categories of health problems studied were 'overall health problems', 'sex specific conditions', 'symptoms without disease', 'prevention and diagnostics' and 'trauma'. Sex and, above all, social class were identified as important predictors of most categories of health problems, especially during the reproductive period of life. Marital status and parental status did not contribute substantially to most types of health problems. Rates of prevention and diagnostics, sex specific conditions and total number of health problems could to a certain extent be predicted by the four sociodemographic variables, as opposed to trauma rates and symptoms without disease rates. Social class appeared the only variable with a substantially different effect on male vs female rates of sex specific conditions, prevention and diagnostics and trauma, but not so for overall health problems and symptoms without disease. Marital status and parental status did not differ significantly in their effect on male vs female health. Results illustrate that differentiation of the health variable into categories of health problems elucidates the relationship between sex, social variables and health.general practice health inequalities social roles sex differences