Medically unexplained physical symptoms in primary care:Identification, management and societal aspects

Horst, H.E. van der [Promotor]Numans, M.E. [Promotor]Wouden, J.C. van der [Copromotor

High versus low dietary protein intake and bone health in older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Protein may play a beneficial role in the prevention of bone loss and in slowing down osteoporosis. The effect of dietary protein may be different in older adults compared to younger adults, since this population has a greater need for protein. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the impact of a dietary protein intake above the Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) of 0.8 g/kg body weight/day from any source on Bone Mineral Density (BMD)/Bone Mineral Content (BMC), bone turnover markers, and fracture risk in older adults compared to a lower dietary protein intake. A systematic search was conducted through October 2018 in 3 databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE. We included all prospective cohort studies and Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) among adults aged ≥65 years that examined the relation between protein intake on bone health outcomes. Two investigators independently conducted abstract and full-text screenings, data extractions, and risk of bias assessments. Authors were contacted for missing data. After screening of 523 records, twelve cohort studies and one RCT were included. Qualitative evaluation showed a positive trend between higher protein intakes and higher femoral neck and total hip BMD. Meta-analysis of four cohort studies showed that higher protein intakes resulted in a significant decrease in hip fractures (pooled hazard ratio: 0.89; 95% confidence interval: 0.84, 0.94). This systematic review supports that a protein intake above the current RDA may reduce hip fracture risk and may play a beneficial role in BMD maintenance and loss in older adults

The general practitioners perspective regarding registration of persistent somatic symptoms in primary care: a survey

BackgroundPersistent somatic symptoms (PSS) are common in primary care and often accompanied by an increasing disease burden for both the patient and healthcare. In medical practice, PSS is historically considered a diagnosis by exclusion or primarily seen as psychological. Besides, registration of PSS in electronic health records (EHR) is ambiguous and possibly does not reflect classification adequately. The present study explores how general practitioners (GPs) currently register PSS, and their view regarding the need for improvements in classification, registration, and consultations.MethodDutch GPs were invited by email to participate in a national cross-sectional online survey. The survey addressed ICPC-codes used by GPs to register PSS, PSS-related terminology added to free text areas, usage of PSS-related syndrome codes, and GPs’ need for improvement of PSS classification, registration and care.ResultsGPs (n = 259) were most likely to use codes specific to the symptom presented (89.3%). PSS-related terminology in free-text areas was used sparsely. PSS-related syndrome codes were reportedly used by 91.5% of GPs, but this was primarily the case for the code for irritable bowel syndrome. The ambiguous registration of PSS is reported as problematic by 47.9% of GPs. Over 56.7% of GPs reported needing additional training, tools or other support for PSS classification and consultation. GPs also reported needing other referral options and better guidelines.ConclusionsRegistration of PSS in primary care is currently ambiguous. Approximately half of GPs felt a need for more options for registration of PSS and reported a need for further support. In order to improve classification, registration and care for patients with PSS, there is a need for a more appropriate coding scheme and additional training.Stress-related psychiatric disorders across the life spa

Identifying patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms in electronic medical records in primary care: a validation study

Prevention, Population and Disease management (PrePoD

Management of patients with persistent medically unexplained symptoms: a descriptive study

Background: In 2013 the Dutch guideline for management of medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) was published. The aim of this study is to assess medical care for patients with persistent MUS as recorded in their electronic medical records, to investigate if this is in line with the national guideline for persistent MUS and whether there are changes in care over time. Methods: We conducted an observational study of adult primary care patients with MUS. Routinely recorded health care data were extracted from electronic medical records of patients participating in an ongoing randomised controlled trial in 30 general practices in the Netherlands. Data on general practitioners’ (GPs’) management strategies during MUS consultations were collected in a 5-year period for each patient prior. Management strategies were categorised according to the options offered in the Dutch guideline. Changes in management over time were analysed. Results: Data were collected from 1035 MUS consultations (77 patients). Beside history-taking, the most frequently used diagnostic strategies were physical examination (24.5%) and additional investigations by the GP (11.1%). Frequently used therapeutic strategies were prescribing medication (24.6%) and providing explanations (11.2%). As MUS symptoms persisted, GPs adjusted medication, discussed progress and scheduled follow-up appointments more frequently. The least frequently used strategies were exploration of all complaint dimensions (i.e. somatic, cognitive, emotional, behavioural and social) (3.5%) and referral to a psychologist (0.5%) or psychiatrist (0.1%). Conclusions: Management of Dutch GPs is partly in line with the Dutch guideline. Medication was possibly prescribed more frequently than recommended, whereas exploration of all complaint dimensions, shared problem definition and referral to mental health care were used less

Recognition of patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms by family physicians: results of a focus group study

BACKGROUND: Patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) form a heterogeneous group and frequently attend their family physician (FP). Little is known about how FPs recognize MUPS in their patients. We conducted a focus group study to explore how FPs recognize MUPS and whether they recognize specific subgroups of patients with MUPS. Targeting such subgroups might improve treatment outcomes. METHODS: Six focus groups were conducted with in total 29 Dutch FPs. Two researchers independently analysed the data applying the principles of constant comparative analysis in order to detect characteristics to recognize MUPS and to synthesize subgroups. RESULTS: FPs take into account various characteristics when recognizing MUPS in their patients. More objective characteristics were multiple MUPS, frequent and long consultations and many referrals. Subjective characteristics were negative feelings towards patients and the feeling that the FP cannot make sense of the patient's story. Experience of the FP, affinity with MUPS, consultation skills, knowledge of the patient's context and the doctor-patient relationship seemed to influence how and to what extent these characteristics play a role. Based on the perceptions of the FPs we were able to distinguish five subgroups of patients according to FPs: 1) the anxious MUPS patient, 2) the unhappy MUPS patient, 3) the passive MUPS patient, 4) the distressed MUPS patient, and 5) the puzzled MUPS patient. These subgroups were not mutually exclusive, but were based on how explicit and predominant certain characteristics were perceived by FPs. CONCLUSIONS: FPs believe that they can properly identify MUPS in their patients during consultations and five distinct subgroups of patients could be distinguished. If these subgroups can be confirmed in further research, personalized treatment strategies can be developed and tested for their effectiveness

commentaar: SOLK hoeft niet naar de psycholoog

Item does not contain fulltex

Cultural competency in dietetic diabetes care-A qualitative study of the dietician's perspective

Contains fulltext : 221014.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)INTRODUCTION: Diabetes type 2 is more prevalent in ethnic minorities in the Netherlands, and outcomes of health care in general are worse compared to other Dutch patients. The purpose of this study is to explore the experiences of dieticians and the knowledge, skills and attitudes they consider to be important for effective dietetic care in migrant patients. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were held with 12 dieticians, of various ages, ethnic backgrounds and experience. The interview guide was based on Seeleman's cultural competence model and the Dutch dietetic consultation model. Interviews were transcribed, coded and thematically analysed, revealing 7 main themes. RESULTS: Dieticians were uncertain whether their care fulfilled their migrant patients' needs. They experienced language differences as a major barrier for retrieving information and tailoring advice to the patient's needs. Furthermore, dieticians feel they lack cultural knowledge. An open and respectful attitude was considered important for effective care. The communication barrier hindered building a trusting relationship; however, few dieticians mentioned a need for communication training. They expressed a need for cultural competence training, specifically to acquire cultural knowledge. CONCLUSION: Dieticians struggle with providing dietetic care for migrant diabetes patients due to communication barriers and difficulty in building a trusting relationship. They are conscious of their lack of cultural knowledge, and acknowledge the need for an open and respectful attitude and essential communication skills in order to collect and convey information. They seem unaware of the impact of low (health) literacy. Cultural competence training is needed for effective dietetic care for migrants

Non-pharmacological interventions for somatoform disorders and medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) in adults, a Cochrane systematic review

Prevention, Population and Disease management (PrePoD