168 research outputs found

    Urinary tract infection in men

    Get PDF
    Uri nary tract in fec tion in men Ab stract. Ob jec tive: To ex plore the prev alence and mi cro bi ol ogy of uri nary tract in fection (UTI) in symp tom atic men in a pri mary care set ting and to de ter mine the ap pro pri ateness of pa tient man age ment of these con ditions by the gen eral prac ti tio ners. Meth ods: A cross-sec tional sur vey was car ried out matching doc u men ta tion of symp toms and man agement with urine cul ture and re sults of sus cep tibil ity tests. All pa tients pre sent ing with symptoms typ i cal for a UTI in 36 teach ing gen eral prac tices in the area of Göttingen, Ger many, were el i gi ble for en rol ment in the study. 15% (n = 90) of all pa tients were adult men. Gen eral prac ti tio ners (GPs) were in structed to man age pa tients as usual. Pa tient char ac ter is tics, dipstick tests and treat ment were matched with results of urine cul tures and sus cep ti bil ity testing. Re sults: Men pre sent ing with symp toms in dic a tive of UTI were pre dom i nantly el derly (me dian age 61 years) and 41% had ad di tional risk fac tors. An ti bi ot ics were pre scribed for 36%, but these were not well-tar geted. Urine cul ture re vealed UTI in 60%, of which half had low col ony counts (23% of all pa tients) or multi ple bac te rial growth (7%); 40% had ster ile urine. Dip stick tests proved un help ful: leu kocytes and ni trite had sen si tiv i ties of 54% and 38%, specificities of 55% and 84%, pos i tive pre dic tive val ues of 65% and 78% and neg ative pre dic tive val ues of 44% and 46%, re spectively. Re sis tance lev els were 53% for amoxicillin and cefaclor, 28% for cefixim, 22% for ciprofloxacin, 34% for both trimethoprim as in di vid ual sub stance and the com bi na tion with sulfamethoxazole (cotrimoxazole) and 25% for ni tro fu ran toin. Con clusion: Men with symp toms in dic a tive of a UTI should not be treated em pir i cally. A urine culture and antibiogram should be ob tained before a treat ment de ci sion is made. A low-count UTI was com mon and should not be con sidered nor mal

    Background paper to the recommendation for routine rotavirus vaccination of infants in Germany

    Get PDF
    Two rotavirus (RV) vaccines were introduced to the European market in 2006. To support the decision-making process of the German Standing Committee on Vaccination ("Ständige Impfkommission", STIKO) regarding adoption of routine RV vaccination into the national vaccination schedule in Germany relevant scientific background was reviewed. According to STIKO’s Standard Operating Procedures for the development of evidence-based vaccination recommendations, a set of key questions was addressed and systematic reviews were performed with a focus on the efficacy, effectiveness, impact and safety of RV vaccines. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was applied to assess the quality of available evidence. Data from 5 randomized controlled trials demonstrated a high efficacy of RV vaccines in preventing severe RV-associated gastroenteritis (91%) and hospitalization (92%) in settings comparable to Germany. Post-marketing observational studies confirmed these findings. In several countries, impact studies suggest that age groups not eligible for vaccination might also benefit from herd effects and demonstrated a decrease in the number of nosocomial RV infections after RV vaccine introduction. The vaccines were considered safe, except for a slightly increased risk of intussusception shortly after the first dose, corresponding to 1-2 additional cases per 100,000 infants vaccinated (relative risk =1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68-2.14). RV case-fatality is extremely low in Germany. However, RV incidence among children age

    Practices, patients and (im)perfect data - feasibility of a randomised controlled clinical drug trial in German general practices

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Randomised controlled clinical (drug) trials supply high quality evidence for therapeutic strategies in primary care. Until now, experience with drug trials in German general practice has been sparse. In 2007/2008, the authors conducted an investigator-initiated, non-commercial, double-blind, randomised controlled pilot trial (HWI-01) to assess the clinical equivalence of ibuprofen and ciprofloxacin in the treatment of uncomplicated urinary tract infection (UTI). Here, we report the feasibility of this trial in German general practices and the implementation of Good Clinical Practice (GCP) standards as defined by the International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) in mainly inexperienced general practices.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This report is based on the experience of the HWI-01 study conducted in 29 German general practices. Feasibility was defined by 1) successful practice recruitment, 2) sufficient patient recruitment, 3) complete and accurate data collection and 4) appropriate protection of patient safety.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The final practice recruitment rate was 18%. In these practices, 79 of 195 screened UTI patients were enrolled. Recruitment differed strongly between practices (range 0-12, mean 2.8 patients per practice) and was below the recruitment goal of approximately 100 patients. As anticipated, practice nurses became the key figures in the screening und recruitment of patients. Clinical trial demands, in particular for completing symptom questionnaires, documentation of source data and reporting of adverse events, did not agree well with GPs' documentation habits and required support from study nurses. In many cases, GPs and practice staff seemed to be overwhelmed by the amount of information and regulations. No sudden unexpected serious adverse reactions (SUSARs) were observed during the trial.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>To enable drug trials in general practice, it is necessary to adapt the setup of clinical research infrastructure to the needs of GPs and their practice staff. Risk adaption of clinical trial regulations is necessary to facilitate non-commercial comparative effectiveness trials in primary health care.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Trial registration number: <a href="http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN00470468">ISRCTN00470468</a></p

    Influence of patient symptoms and physical findings on general practitioners' treatment of respiratory tract infections: a direct observation study

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: The high rate of antibiotic prescriptions general practitioners (GPs) make for respiratory tract infections (RTI) are often explained by non-medical reasons e.g. an effort to meet patient expectations. Additionally, it is known that GPs to some extent believe in the necessity of antibiotic treatment in patients with assumed bacterial infections and therefore attempt to distinguish between viral and bacterial infections by history taking and physical examination. The influence of patient complaints and physical examination findings on GPs' prescribing behaviour was mostly investigated by indirect methods such as questionnaires. METHODS: Direct, structured observation during a winter "cough an cold period" in 30 (single handed) general practices. All 273 patients with symptoms of RTI (age above 14, median 37 years, 51% female) were included. RESULTS: The most frequent diagnoses were 'uncomplicated upper RTI/common cold' (43%) followed by 'bronchitis' (26%). On average, 1.8 (95%-confidence interval (CI): 1.7–2.0) medicines per patient were prescribed (cough-and-cold preparations in 88% of the patients, antibiotics in 49%). Medical predictors of antibiotic prescribing were pathological findings in physical examination such as coated tonsils (odds ratio (OR) 15.4, 95%-CI: 3.6–66.2) and unspecific symptoms like fatigue (OR 3.1, 95%-CI 1.4–6.7), fever (OR 2.2, 95%-CI: 1.1–4.5) and yellow sputum (OR 2.1, 95%-CI: 1.1–4.1). Analysed predictors explained 70% of the variance of antibiotic prescribing (R(2 )= 0,696). Efforts to reduce antibiotic prescribing, e.g. recommendations for self-medication, counselling on home remedies or delayed antibiotic prescribing were rare. CONCLUSIONS: Patient complaints and pathological results in physical examination were strong predictors of antibiotic prescribing. Efforts to reduce antibiotic prescribing should account for GPs' beliefs in those (non evidence based) predictors. The method of direct observation was shown to be accepted both by patients and GPs and offered detailed insights into the GP-patient-interaction

    Antimicrobial management and appropriateness of treatment of urinary tract infection in general practice in Ireland

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are the second most common bacterial infections in general practice and a frequent indication for prescription of antimicrobials. Increasing concern about the association between the use of antimicrobials and acquired antimicrobial resistance has highlighted the need for rational pharmacotherapy of common infections in general practice.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Management of urinary tract infections in general practice was studied prospectively over 8 weeks. Patients presenting with suspected UTI submitted a urine sample and were enrolled with an opt-out methodology. Data were collected on demographic variables, previous antimicrobial use and urine samples. Appropriateness of different treatment scenarios was assessed by comparing treatment with the laboratory report of the urine sample.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 22 practices participated in the study and included 866 patients. Bacteriuria was established for 21% of the patients, pyuria without bacteriuria for 9% and 70% showed no laboratory evidence of UTI. An antimicrobial agent was prescribed to 56% (481) of the patients, of whom 33% had an isolate, 11% with pyuria only and 56% without laboratory evidence of UTI. When taking all patients into account, 14% patients had an isolate identified and were prescribed an antimicrobial to which the isolate was susceptible. The agents most commonly prescribed for UTI were co-amoxyclav (33%), trimethoprim (26%) and fluoroquinolones (17%). Variation between practices in antimicrobial prescribing as well as in their preference for certain antimicrobials, was observed. Treatment as prescribed by the GP was interpreted as appropriate for 55% of the patients. Three different treatment scenarios were simulated, i.e. if all patients who received an antimicrobial were treated with nitrofurantoin, trimethoprim or ciprofloxacin only. Treatment as prescribed by the GP was no more effective than treatment with nitrofurantoin for all patients given an antimicrobial or treatment with ciprofloxacin in all patients. Prescribing cost was lower for nitrofurantoin. Empirical treatment of all patients with trimethoprim only was less effective due to the higher resistance levels.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>There appears to be considerable scope to reduce the frequency and increase the quality of antimicrobial prescribing for patients with suspected UTI.</p

    Systematic techniques for assisting recruitment to trials (START): study protocol for embedded, randomized controlled trials

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials play a central role in evidence-based practice, but recruitment of participants, and retention of them once in the trial, is challenging. Moreover, there is a dearth of evidence that research teams can use to inform the development of their recruitment and retention strategies. As with other healthcare initiatives, the fairest test of the effectiveness of a recruitment strategy is a trial comparing alternatives, which for recruitment would mean embedding a recruitment trial within an ongoing host trial. Systematic reviews indicate that such studies are rare. Embedded trials are largely delivered in an ad hoc way, with interventions almost always developed in isolation and tested in the context of a single host trial, limiting their ability to contribute to a body of evidence with regard to a single recruitment intervention and to researchers working in different contexts. METHODS/DESIGN: The Systematic Techniques for Assisting Recruitment to Trials (START) program is funded by the United Kingdom Medical Research Council (MRC) Methodology Research Programme to support the routine adoption of embedded trials to test standardized recruitment interventions across ongoing host trials. To achieve this aim, the program involves three interrelated work packages: (1) methodology - to develop guidelines for the design, analysis and reporting of embedded recruitment studies; (2) interventions - to develop effective and useful recruitment interventions; and (3) implementation - to recruit host trials and test interventions through embedded studies. DISCUSSION: Successful completion of the START program will provide a model for a platform for the wider trials community to use to evaluate recruitment interventions or, potentially, other types of intervention linked to trial conduct. It will also increase the evidence base for two types of recruitment intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The START protocol covers the methodology for embedded trials. Each embedded trial is registered separately or as a substudy of the host trial

    The respiratory research agenda in primary care in Portugal: a Delphi study

    Get PDF
    Background: A research agenda can help to stimulate and guide research. The International Primary Care Respiratory Group (IPCRG) published a Research Needs Statement (RNS) in 2010 in which 145 research questions were identified. In 2012, priorities for respiratory research were established, based on these questions. To date, there has been no statement on primary care respiratory research needs in Portugal. The aim of the study was to develop a national consensus on research priorities in respiratory diseases in primary care in Portugal and to assess the applicability of the priorities for respiratory research set by the IPCRG. Method: We conducted a Delphi study by electronic mail with a panel of experts on respiratory disease from primary and secondary care in Portugal. In the first round, the research needs in respiratory disease in Portugal were identified. In the second round, 196 research questions in six disease areas, derived from the first round and from the IPCRG Respiratory needs statement, were prioritised on a five-point Likert-type scale. In the third round, the questions were prioritized again with feed-back provided on the median scores for each item in the second round. Consensus was considered to have been reached when 80 % of the participants gave a score of 4 or 5 out of five on a given item. Results: The 40 experts identified 121 respiratory research questions in Round 1 and expressed their views on 196 questions in Rounds 2 and 3. Twelve research questions (6 %) reached consensus. There were five questions in the asthma domain on early diagnosis, pulmonary function tests, the use of inhalers, and adherence to treatment. There were four questions in the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease domain on vaccinations, on routine monitoring and evaluation of treatment, on diagnosis, and on adherence to treatments. There was one question in the smoking domain on the effects of brief counselling. There were two questions on respiratory tract infections on the treatment of children and on the prescription of antibiotics. An additional 23 research questions (12 %) achieved consensus between 75 and 79 %. Conclusion: The results reflect the Portuguese reality in response the international agenda for research on respiratory diseases published by the IPCRG. They can support the development of future respiratory disease research in Portugal.Financial support for this work was provided by FEDER funds through the Operational Programme Competitiveness Factors - COMPETE and National Funds through FCT - Foundation for Science and Technology under the project POCI-01-0145-FEDER-007038; and by the project NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-000013, supported by Norte Portugal Regional Operational Programme (NORTE 2020), under the PORTUGAL 2020 Partnership Agreement, through the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). PMT is partially supported by a grant from the International Primary Care Respiratory Group
    corecore