The GP’s perceived role and use of language concerning the existential dimension of palliative patients

Background: Palliative patients have to cope with their disease and impending death. Knowing what this means for a patient is crucial for person-centrered care. Although guidelines state it is a GP core task to explore existential issues of palliative patients, this is not standard practice.Aim: Exploring Dutch GPs’ perceived role regarding addressing the existential dimension of palliative patients, and which vocabulary is used.Design and Setting: Qualitative study among Dutch GPs. Participants were recruited by purposive sampling and snowballing, considering gender, working experience and world view.Method: Semi-structured in-depth interviews were performed, transcribed and analysed using content analysis.Results: Seventeen GPs participated. Three themes were identified: Language, Perceived role and Practice. Interviewees generally saw it as their role to pay attention to the existential dimension of their palliative patients. However, not all knew how to define this role, or how to refer patients with existential struggles to a spiritual counsellor. The multidisciplinary Dutch guideline ‘Existential and Spiritual Aspects of Palliative Care’ seemed largely unknown. Interviewees mostly fulfilled their role in an intuitive, pragmatic way. Questions such as “What does it mean for you to be seriously ill?” or “Do you have support from someone or something?” fitted daily practice.Conclusion: This study emphasizes the importance of basic GP education in exploring existential issues. The coexistence of a professionally obliged attention and an intuitive approach seems to be in conflict. We recommend enhancing collaboration between GPs and spiritual counsellors, appropriate training, and implementation of the relevant guideline on well-known platforms.

Early detection of young children at risk of autism spectrum disorder at well-baby clinics in the Netherlands: Perspectives of preventive care physicians

To improve early detection of autism spectrum disorder in preventive care, a Dutch guideline was developed 5 years ago. The guideline provides preventive care physicians at well-baby clinics action-oriented advice and describes a step-by-step approach for children identified at an increased risk for autism spectrum disorder during general healthcare surveillance. This qualitative study evaluated the guideline adherence and studied barriers regarding early detection of autism spectrum disorder at well-baby clinics. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 12 preventive care physicians (one representative per province). Interviews were analyzed using grounded theory. It was found that the vast majority of participants did not follow-up general surveillance with an autism spectrum disorder–specific screener as prescribed by the guideline. Six barriers, to be divided in personal, guideline-related and external factors, were found regarding early detection of autism spectrum disorder and adherence to the guideline. The results of this study highlight the importance of an integrative approach, raising awareness of the benefits regarding early detection of autism spectrum disorder in preventive care, the need of continuous investment in easy and accessible training and active screening, and a closer collaboration between preventive care organizations and autism spectrum disorder experts. Lay Abstract To improve early detection of autism spectrum disorder in preventive care, a Dutch guideline was developed 5 years ago. The guideline provides preventive care physicians at well-baby clinics action-oriented advice and describes a step-by-step approach for children identified at an increased risk for autism spectrum disorder during general healthcare surveillance. The present qualitative study evaluated adherence to the guideline and studied barriers regarding early detection of autism spectrum disorder at well-baby clinics. Interviews were undertaken with 12 preventive care physicians (one representative per province). It was found that the vast majority of participants did not follow-up general surveillance with an autism spectrum disorder -specific screener as prescribed by the guideline. Six barriers (limited knowledge about autism spectrum disorder symptoms in infant and toddlerhood, professional attitude toward early detection, problems in discussing initial worries with parents, limited use of screening instruments, perceptions toward cultural and language differences and constraints regarding availability of healthcare services) were found. The results of this study highlight the importance of an integrative approach, raising awareness of the benefits regarding early detection of autism spectrum disorder in preventive care, the need of continuous investment in easy and accessible training and active screening, and a closer collaboration between preventive care organizations and autism spectrum disorder experts.

The Edge of Perinatal Viability: Understanding the Dutch Position

The current Dutch guideline on care at the edge of perinatal viability advises to consider initiation of active care to infants born from 24 weeks of gestational age on. This, only after extensive counseling of and shared decision-making with the parents of the yet unborn infant. Compared to most other European guidelines on this matter, the Dutch guideline may be thought to stand out for its relatively high age threshold of initiating active care, its gray zone spanning weeks 24 and 25 in which active management is determined by parental discretion, and a slight reluctance to provide active care in case of extreme prematurity. In this article, we explore the Dutch position more thoroughly. First, we briefly look at the previous and current Dutch guidelines. Second, we position them within the Dutch socio-cultural context. We focus on the Dutch prioritization of individual freedom, the abortion law and the perinatal threshold of viability, and a culturally embedded aversion of suffering. Lastly, we explore two possible adaptations of the Dutch guideline; i.e., to only lower the age threshold to consider the initiation of active care, or to change the type of guideline.

Model-based effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of risk-based selection strategies for adjuvant chemotherapy in Dutch stage II colon cancer patients

Background: We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of risk-based strategies to improve the selection of surgically treated stage II colon cancer (CC) patients for adjuvant chemotherapy. Methods: Using the ‘Personalized Adjuvant TreaTment in EaRly stage coloN cancer’ (PATTERN) model, we evaluated five selection strategies: (1) no chemotherapy, (2) Dutch guideline recommendations assuming observed adherence, (3) Dutch guideline recommendations assuming perfect adherence, (4) biomarker mutation OR pT4 stage strategy in which patients with MSS status combined with a pT4 stage or a mutation in BRAF and/or KRAS receive chemotherapy assuming perfect adherence and (5) biomarker mutation AND pT4 stage strategy in which patients with MSS status combined with a pT4 stage tumor and a BRAF and/or KRAS mutation receive chemotherapy assuming perfect adherence. Outcomes were number of CC deaths per 1000 patients and total discounted costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) per patient (pp). Analyses were conducted from a societal perspective. The robustness of model predictions was assessed in sensitivity analyses. Results: The reference strategy, that is, no adjuvant chemotherapy, resulted in 139 CC deaths in a cohort of 1000 patients, 8.077 QALYs pp and total costs of €22,032 pp. Strategies 2–5 were more effective (range 8.094–8.217 QALYs pp and range 118–136 CC deaths per 1000 patients) and more costly (range €22,404–€25,102 pp). Given a threshold of €50,000/QALY, the optimal use of resources would be to treat patients with either the full adherence strategy and biomarker mutation OR pT4 stage strategy. Conclusion: Selection of stage II CC patients for chemotherapy can be improved by either including biomarker status in the selection strategy or by improving adherence to the Dutch guideline recommendations.

Patterns of recurring dispensing of guideline antibiotics for uncomplicated urinary tract infection in women over a 5-year period: Longitudinal patterns of recurring dispensings of Dutch guideline UTI antibiotics

Background Urinary tract infection (UTI) is one of the most prevalent medical conditions among women seeking primary care. About 20–40% of the women have a UTI recurrence during their lifetime. Objective To provide insight in the patterns of recurring annual dispensing for antibiotics commonly used for UTI treatment in women, aged 18 years or older, during a 5-year follow-up period in the Netherlands. Methods The Dutch Foundation of Pharmaceutical statistics collects dispensing data from more than 90% of all community pharmacies. Pharmacies with complete data between years 2011 and 2017 were included. Women of age 18 years or older with a first dispensing of nitrofurantoin, fosfomycin, or trimethoprim in 2012 and a dispensing of any medication in 2017 were selected. For each year between 2013 and 2017, the proportions of women with recurring dispensing of nitrofurantoin, fosfomycin or trimethoprim were calculated and stratified for age categories. Results Within 1517 eligible community pharmacies, 463 821 women, aged 18 years or older, were dispensed one of the antibiotics in 2012, and 239 292 women still visited the same pharmacy in 2017. About 56% of them received at least one recurring dispensing during 5 years of follow-up. Each year, ~20% of the source population had at least one recurring dispensing. Approximately 2% of the source population had at least one recurring dispensing in each year of follow-up. Conclusions Over the 5-year study period, more than 50% of the source population had at least one recurring dispensing for uncomplicated UTI, most of them with at least 1 year without UTI dispensing in between.

Interpretation and adherence to the updated risk-stratified guideline for colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy – a nationwide survey

Background and study aims Low adherence to the Dutch guideline for colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy led to release of a new guideline in 2013. This new guideline was risk-stratified at a more detailed level than the previous one to achieve more efficient use of colonoscopy resources. This study assessed the feasibility of the risk-stratified guideline by evaluating correct interpretation of and adherence to this guideline. Methods Based on semi-structured interviews with 10 gastroenterologists, we developed an online survey to evaluate gastroenterologists’ recommendations for surveillance in 15 example cases of patients with polyps. If recommended intervals differed from the new guideline, respondents were asked to indicate their motives for doing so. Results Ninety-one of 592 (15.4 %) invited gastroenterologists responded to at least one case, of whom 84 (14.2 %) completed the survey. Gastroenterologists gave a correct recommendation in a median of 10 of 15 cases and adherence per case ranged from 14 % to 95 % (median case 76 %). The two cases that addressed management of serrated polyps were least often answered correctly (14 % and 28 % correct answers). Discrepancies were mainly due to misinterpretation of the guideline with respect to serrated polyps (48 %) or misreading of the questions (30 %). Conclusions Median adherence to the updated colonoscopy surveillance guideline of 76 % seems reasonable, and is higher than adherence to the previous guideline (range: 22 %-80 %, median 59 %). This shows that detailed (more complex) risk stratification for designation of a surveillance interval is feasible. Adherence could potentially be improved by clarifying correct interpretation of serrated polyps.