scholarly journals ID-Migraine™ questionnaire and accurate diagnosis of migraine

2017 ◽  
Vol 75 (7) ◽  
pp. 446-450 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Carolina Musser Tavares de Mattos ◽  
Jano Alves de Souza ◽  
Pedro Ferreira Moreira Filho ◽  
Mauro Eduardo Jurno ◽  
Luis Guilhermo Coca Velarde
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Positive Predictive Value ◽  
Care Setting ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Primary Care Setting ◽  
Tertiary Hospital ◽  
Accurate Diagnosis ◽  
International Studies ◽  
Portuguese Version ◽  
Id Migraine

ABSTRACT Objective To analyze the applicability of the Portuguese version of ID-MigraineTM in a sample of Brazilian patients. Methods Patients with headache were recruited from the neurology outpatient clinic of a tertiary hospital and submitted to the ID-MigraineTM questionnaire. The diagnosis of headache was made according to the ICHD-2 criteria. Results Of the 232 patients, 86% had migraine. The questionnaire showed a sensitivity of 92% (95%CI, 88% to 95%), specificity of 60% (95%CI, 43% to 77%) and a positive predictive value of 93% (95%CI, 89% to 96%). Discussion Our results were similar to other international studies of the ID-MigraineTM application. The Portuguese version is considered easy to use, and an appropriate screening tool for migraine diagnosis in our sample. Conclusion Considering the characteristics of our health system, we can infer that this questionnaire would be beneficial in a Brazilian primary care setting; however, more studies are necessary.

The Brief Sexual Symptom Checklist as a Screening Tool for Sex-Related Problems in the Primary Care Setting: Focus on Erectile Dysfunction

2018 ◽  
Vol 101 (1) ◽  
pp. 98-105
Author(s):  
Javier Romero Otero ◽  
Borja García Gómez ◽  
José Medina Polo ◽  
Esther García Rojo ◽  
Eduardo García Cruz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Erectile Dysfunction ◽  
Care Setting ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Primary Care Setting ◽  
Symptom Checklist

scholarly journals Prospective Analysis of Scrotal Pathology Referrals – Are Referrals Appropriate and Accurate?

2006 ◽  
Vol 88 (4) ◽  
pp. 363-366 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul W Foster ◽  
Alastair WS Ritchie ◽  
David J Jones
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Testicular Cancer ◽  
Care Setting ◽  
Primary Care Setting ◽  
Care Physician ◽  
Accurate Diagnosis ◽  
Benign Pathology ◽  
Clinical Diagnoses ◽  
Treatable Condition ◽  
Referral Practice

INTRODUCTION Testicular cancer is a relatively uncommon, treatable condition. A general practitioner would expect to see, on average, one case of testicular cancer in the whole of their career. Benign scrotal conditions are extremely common and the source of many primary care consultations. The main patient expectations of these attendances are accurate diagnosis and adequate re-assurance as often they are the source of much anxiety and perceived embarrassment. The aim of this study was to examine the content and referral practice of primary care referral of testicular pathology and the resultant findings of the specialist practitioner. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 201 patients referred with scrotal pathology were prospectively analysed at the time of specialist practitioner assessment by means of data recording in a urological surgery unit and regional peripheral community clinics. RESULTS In the study group, 53 patients were referred under the 2-week rule. Of these, 9 (17%) were found to have testicular cancer. Five (36%) cancers were referred outside the 2-week rule referrals; 1 cancer was missed and 2 diagnoses delayed. In total, 44% of final clinical diagnoses differed between the referring primary care physician and the specialist practitioner. Of the 71 (35%) patients referred with a suspicion of cancer, 62 (87%) were subsequently found to be of clinically benign pathology. Overall, 80% of patients were referred more urgently than the opinion of the specialist practitioner. CONCLUSIONS Scrotal examination in the primary care setting appears to be of variable accuracy. Many patients referred with a high suspicion of cancer are found to have benign pathology. Two-week rule referrals have an acceptable positive predictive value for testicular cancer (17%). Disagreements exist in the referral priority of patients.

scholarly journals A combination of the IPAG questionnaire and PiKo-6® flow meter is a valuable screening tool for COPD in the primary care setting

2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 184-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lazaros Sichletidis ◽  
Dionisios Spyratos ◽  
Maria Papaioannou ◽  
Diamantis Chloros ◽  
Anastasios Tsiotsios ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Care Setting ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Primary Care Setting ◽  
Flow Meter

scholarly journals Development and Validation of an Automated Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Tool for Primary Care Setting

Diabetes Care ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (10) ◽  
pp. e147-e148
Author(s):  
Alauddin Bhuiyan ◽  
Arun Govindaiah ◽  
Avnish Deobhakta ◽  
Meenakashi Gupta ◽  
Richard Rosen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Diabetic Retinopathy ◽  
Care Setting ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Primary Care Setting ◽  
Diabetic Retinopathy Screening ◽  
Development And Validation ◽  
Retinopathy Screening

scholarly journals The PHQ-PD as a Screening Tool for Panic Disorder in the Primary Care Setting in Spain

PLoS ONE ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. e0161145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger Muñoz-Navarro ◽  
Antonio Cano-Vindel ◽  
Cristina Mae Wood ◽  
Paloma Ruíz-Rodríguez ◽  
Leonardo Adrián Medrano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Panic Disorder ◽  
Care Setting ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Primary Care Setting

scholarly journals Evaluation of a brief cognitive screening tool in primary care setting

2015 ◽  
Vol 357 ◽  
pp. e129
Author(s):  
D. Jiménez ◽  
M. Lavados ◽  
P. Rojas ◽  
C. Henriquez ◽  
M. Guillon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Care Setting ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Primary Care Setting ◽  
Cognitive Screening

scholarly journals When “unclear headache” has an obvious reason—Applying ID-Migraine™ to referral letters

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 251581631986620
Author(s):  
Stephanie Kluser ◽  
Andrew Chan ◽  
Niklaus Meier
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Clinical Characteristics ◽  
Care Setting ◽  
Primary Care Setting ◽  
Diagnostic Yield ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Obvious Reason ◽  
Id Migraine ◽  
Headache Center ◽  
Referral Letters

Background: Migraine is underdiagnosed especially by general practitioners and non-neurologists. In our experience, validated screening and diagnosing tools for migraine are generally not used outside neurology. The three-item identification of migraine (ID-Migraine™) is a short and validated screening/diagnosing tool; positive predictive value for migraine is 93% if at least two out of nausea, photophobia, or disability are present. Aim: To investigate the diagnostic yield of ID-Migraine™ when applied to the information provided in the referral letters. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 95 referral letters of patients referred for undetermined headache who were finally diagnosed with migraine at our Tertiary Care Headache Center. Results: Median age was 34 years, and 75% were women. Migraine was suspected by the referring physician in 33% of patients, whereas the remainder were classified as unclear. ID-Migraine™ criteria were fulfilled in 59% of patients with referral diagnosis of suspected migraine and 23% of patients with unclear headache, respectively. Clinical characteristics associated with migraine suspicion were photophobia and other visual symptoms. Conclusion: Applying ID-Migraine™ in primary care, emergency departments, or in specialists’ consultations outside neurology might lead to an increased frequency of migraine recognition. Knowledge about and access to those criteria should be increased, especially in the primary care setting.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document