Discontinuation of reimbursement of benzodiazepines in the Netherlands: does it make a difference?

BACKGROUND: In an attempt to control chronic benzodiazepine use and its costs in the Netherlands, health care insurance reimbursement of this medication was stopped on January 1(st) 2009. This study investigates whether benzodiazepine prescriptions issued by general practitioners changed during the first two years following implementation of this regulation. METHODS: Registry study based on data from all benzodiazepine users derived from the Registration Network Groningen. This general practice-based research network collects longitudinal data on the primary care administered to about 30,000 patients. Based on the number of quarterly accumulated prescription days, a comparison was made of benzodiazepine prescriptions issued between 2007/2008 and 2009/2010. Also investigated was which type of user (i.e. short-term or long-term) showed the most change. RESULTS: Information on benzodiazepine prescriptions among 5,200 patients from 16 consecutive trimesters between 2007 and 2010 was available for analysis. A significant reduction in prescription days was observed between 2007/2008 and 2009/2010. Overall, an estimated 1.73 (CI:-1.94 to -1.53; p<0.001) days were less prescribed per trimester after the termination of reimbursement. In particular, short-term users experienced a reduction in prescription days in 2009 and 2010. The number of long-term users decreased by 2.3%, while the number of individuals that did not use increased by 4.2%. CONCLUSIONS: A total reduction of almost 14 prescription days was observed over eight trimesters after implementation of the regulation to terminate the reimbursement of benzodiazepines. Short-term users were mainly responsible for this reduction in prescription days in 2009 and 2010. Although long-term users did not alter their benzodiazepine use in 2009 and 2010, the number of long-term users decreased slightly

Skin lesions suspected of malignancy:an increasing burden on general practice

BACKGROUND: Skin cancer is believed to impose a heavy burden on healthcare services, but the burden of skin lesions suspected of malignancy on primary healthcare has never been evaluated. Therefore the aim of this study was to determine the demand for care in general practice due to these suspected skin lesions (i.e. lesions that are suspected of malignancy by either the patient or the GP). METHODS: Registry study based on data (2001–2010) from the Registration Network Groningen. This is a general practice registration network in the northern part of the Netherlands with an average annual population of approximately 30,000 patients. All patient contacts are coded according to the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC). Consultations for skin lesions suspected of malignancy were selected according to the assigned ICPC codes. Subsequently, the number of consultations per year and the annual percent change in number of contacts (using the JoinPoint regression program) were calculated and analysed. Additionally, the percentage of patients referred to secondary care or receiving minor surgery within one year after the first contact were calculated. RESULTS: From 2001 onwards we found an annual increase in demand for care due to skin lesions suspected of malignancy of 7.3% (p < 0.01) and in 2010 the benign:malignant ratio was 10:1. In total 13.0% of the patients were referred and after 2006, minor surgery was performed on 31.2% of the patients. Most surgeries and referrals took place within 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: Suspected skin lesions impose an increasing burden on primary healthcare and most likely on healthcare costs as well. General practitioners should therefore be trained in diagnosing skin lesions suspected of malignancy, as a high diagnostic accuracy can save lives in the case of melanoma, and may also prevent unnecessary, costly, excisions and referrals to secondary healthcare

Increased primary health care use in the first year after colorectal cancer diagnosis

OBJECTIVE: The view that the general practitioner (GP) should be more involved during the curative treatment of cancer is gaining support. This study aimed to assess the current role of the GP during treatment of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). DESIGN: Historical prospective study, using primary care data from two cohorts. SETTING: Registration Network Groningen (RNG) consisting of 18 GPs in three group practices with a dynamic population of about 30,000 patients. SUBJECTS: Patients who underwent curative treatment for CRC (n = 124) and matched primary care patients without CRC (reference population; n = 358). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary healthcare use in the period 1998-2009. FINDINGS: Patients with CRC had higher primary healthcare use in the year after diagnosis compared with the reference population. After correction for age, gender, and consultation behaviour, CRC patients had 54% (range 23-92%) more face-to-face contacts, 68% (range 36-108%) more drug prescriptions, and 35% (range -4-90%) more referrals compared with reference patients. Patients consulted their GP more often for reasons related to anaemia, abdominal pain, constipation, skin problems, and urinary infections. GPs also prescribed more acid reflux drugs, laxatives, anti-anaemic preparations, analgesics, and psycholeptics for CRC patients. CONCLUSIONS: The GP plays a significant role in the year after CRC diagnosis. This role may be associated with treatment-related side effects and psychological problems. Formal guidelines on the involvement of the GP during CRC treatment might ensure more effective allocation and communication of care between primary and secondary healthcare services

Radiating low back pain in general practice:Incidence, prevalence, diagnosis, and long-term clinical course of illness

Objective. The aim of this study was to calculate the incidence and prevalence of radiating low back pain, to explore the long-term clinical course of radiating low back pain including the influence of radiculopathy (in a subsample of the study population) and non-radiating low back pain thereon, and to describe general practitioners' (GPs') treatment strategies for radiating low back pain. Design. A historic prospective cohort study. Setting. Dutch general practice. Subjects. Patients over 18 years of age with a first episode of radiating low back pain, registered by the ICPC code L86. Main outcome measures. Incidence and prevalence, clinical course of illness, initial diagnoses established by the GPs, and treatment strategies. Results. Mean incidence was 9.4 and mean prevalence was 17.2 per 1000 person years. In total, 390 patients had 1193 contacts with their GPs; 50% had only one contact with their GP. Consultation rates were higher in patients with a history of non-radiating low back pain and in patients with a diagnosis of radiculopathy in the first five years. In this study's subsample of 103 patients, L86 episodes represented radiculopathy in 50% of cases. Medication was prescribed to 64% of patients, mostly NSAIDs. Some 53% of patients were referred, mainly to physiotherapists and neurologists; 9% of patients underwent surgery. Conclusion. Watchful waiting seems to be sufficient general practice care in most cases of radiating low back pain. Further research should be focused on clarifying the relationship between radicular radiating low back pain, non-radicular radiating low back pain, and non-radiating low back pain

Primary care diagnostic and treatment pathways in Dutch women with urinary incontinence

OBJECTIVE: To investigate how GPs manage women with urinary incontinence (UI) in the Netherlands and to assess whether this is in line with the relevant Dutch GP guideline. Because UI has been an underreported and undertreated problem for decades despite appropriate guidelines being created for general practitioners (GPs). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Routine primary care data for 2017 in the Netherlands. SUBJECTS: We included the primary care records of women aged 18-75 years with at least one contact registered for UI, and then extracted information about baseline characteristics, diagnosis, treatment, and referral to pelvic physiotherapy or secondary care. RESULTS: In total, 374 records were included for women aged 50.3 ± 15.1 years. GPs diagnosed 31.0%, 15.2%, and 15.0% women with stress, urgency, or mixed UI, respectively; no diagnosis of type was recorded in 40.4% of women. Urinalysis was the most frequently used diagnostic test (42.5%). Education was the most common treatment, offered by 17.9% of GPs; however, no treatment or referral was reported in 15.8% of cases. As many as 28.7% and 21.7% of women were referred to pelvic physiotherapy and secondary care, respectively. CONCLUSION: Female UI is most probably not managed in line with the relevant Dutch GP guideline. It is also notable that Dutch GPs often fail to report the type of UI, to use available diagnostic approaches, and to provide appropriate education. Moreover, GPs referred to specialists too often, especially for the management of urgency UI.Key pointsUrinary incontinence (UI) has been an underreported and undertreated problem for decades. Despite various guidelines, UI often lies outside the GPs comfort zone.•According to this study: general practitioners do not treat urinary incontinence according to guidelines.•The type of incontinence is frequently not reported and diagnostic approaches are not fully used.•We believe that increased awareness will help improve treatment and avoidable suffering

Increased primary health care use in the fi rst year after colorectal cancer diagnosis

Abstract Objective. The view that the general practitioner (GP) should be more involved during the curative treatment of cancer is gaining support. This study aimed to assess the current role of the GP during treatment of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). Design. Historical prospective study, using primary care data from two cohorts. Setting. Registration Network Groningen (RNG) consisting of 18 GPs in three group practices with a dynamic population of about 30 000 patients. Subjects. Patients who underwent curative treatment for CRC (n ϭ 124) and matched primary care patients without CRC (reference population; n ϭ 358). Main outcome measures. Primary healthcare use in the period 1998 -2009. Findings . Patients with CRC had higher primary healthcare use in the year after diagnosis compared with the reference population. After correction for age, gender, and consultation behaviour, CRC patients had 54% (range 23 -92%) more face-to-face contacts, 68% (range 36 -108%) more drug prescriptions, and 35% (range -4 -90%) more referrals compared with reference patients. Patients consulted their GP more often for reasons related to anaemia, abdominal pain, constipation, skin problems, and urinary infections. GPs also prescribed more acid refl ux drugs, laxatives, anti-anaemic preparations, analgesics, and psycholeptics for CRC patients. Conclusions. The GP plays a signifi cant role in the year after CRC diagnosis. This role may be associated with treatment-related side effects and psychological problems. Formal guidelines on the involvement of the GP during CRC treatment might ensure more effective allocation and communication of care between primary and secondary healthcare services