Study of the sensitivity and specificity of smell and taste disorders as a predictive factor of SARS-CoV-2 infection among primary care healthcare professionals

Backgroundamong the manifestations of COVID-19 are Taste and Smell Disorders (TSDs).AimThe aim of the study is to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of TSDs and other associated symptoms to estimate predictive values for determining SARS-CoV-2 infection.Design and settingRetrospective observational study.Methodsa study of the sensitivity and specificity of TSDs has been carried out using the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 as the Gold Standard value. Logistic regressions adjusted for age and sex were performed to identify additional symptoms that might be associated with COVID-19.Resultsthe results are based on 226 healthcare workers with clinical symptoms suggestive of COVID-19, 116 with positive PCR and 111 with negative PCR. TSDs had an OR of 12.43 (CI 0.95 6.33–26.19), sensitivity 60.34% and specificity 89.09%. In the logistic regression model, the association of TSD, fever or low-grade fever, shivering, dyspnoea, arthralgia and myalgia obtained an area under the curve of 85.7% (CI 0.95: 80.7 % - 90.7 %), sensitivity 82.8 %, specificity 80% and positive predictive values 81.4% and negative 81.5%.ConclusionsTSDs are a strong predictor of COVID-19. The association of TSD, fever, low-grade fever or shivering, dyspnoea, arthralgia and myalgia correctly predicts 85.7% of the results of the COVID-19 test.

Clinical prediction rules for childhood UTIs: a cross-sectional study in ambulatory care

BackgroundDiagnosing childhood urinary tract infections (UTI) is challenging.AimValidate clinical prediction rules (UTIcalc, DUTY, Gorelick) for paediatric UTIs in primary care.Design & settingPost-hoc analysis of a cross-sectional study in 39 general practices and 2 emergency departments (Belgium, March 2019 to March 2020).MethodPhysicians recruited acutely ill children ≤18 years and sampled urine systematically for culture. Per rule, we performed an apparent validation; calculated sensitivities and specificities with 95%CI per threshold in the target group. For the DUTY coefficient-based algorithm, we performed a logistic calibration and calculated the Area Under the Curve with 95%CI.ResultsOf 834 children ≤18 years recruited, there were 297 children <5 years. The UTIcalc and Gorelick score had high to moderate sensitivity and low specificity (UTIcalc ≥2%) 75%; and 16% respectively; Gorelick (≥2 variables) 91%; and 8%. In contrast, the DUTY score ≥5 points had low sensitivity (8%), but high specificity (99%). Urine samples would be obtained in 72% vs 38% (UTIcalc), 92% vs 38% (Gorelick) or 1% vs 32% (DUTY) of children, compared to routine care. The number of missed infections per score was 1/4 (UTIcalc), 2/23 (Gorelick) and 24/26 (DUTY). The UTIcalc+ dipstick model had high sensitivity and specificity (100%; and 91%); resulting in no missed cases and 59% (95%CI 49%–68%) of antibiotics prescribed inappropriately.ConclusionIn this study, the UTIcalc and Gorelick score were useful for ruling out UTI but resulted in high urine sampling rates. The DUTY score had low sensitivity, meaning that 92% of UTIs would be missed.

Patients’ and physicians’ experiences with remote consultations in primary care, during the covid-19 pandemic: a multi-method rapid review of the literature.

BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, many countries implemented remote consultations in primary care to protect patients and staff from infection.AimThe aim of this review was to synthesise the literature exploring patients’ and physicians’ experiences with remote consultations in primary care, during the pandemic, with the further aim of informing their future delivery.Design & settingRapid literature review.MethodWe searched PubMed and PsychInfo for studies that explored patients’ and physicians’ experiences with remote consultations in primary care. To determine the eligibility of studies, we reviewed their titles and abstracts, prior to the full paper. We then extracted qualitative and quantitative data from those that were eligible, and synthesised the data using thematic and descriptive synthesis.ResultsA total of twenty-four studies were eligible for inclusion in the review. Most were performed in the United States of America (n=7, 29%) or Europe (n=7, 29%). Patient and physician experiences were categorised into perceived ‘advantages’ and ‘issues’. Key advantages experienced by patients and physicians included: ‘Reduced risk of COVID-19’ and ‘Increased convenience’, while key issues included: ‘a lack of confidence in / access to required technology’ and a ‘loss of non-verbal communication’, which exacerbated clinical decision making.ConclusionThis review identified a number of advantages and issues experienced by patients and physicians using remote consultations in primary care. The results suggest that, while remote consultations are more convenient, and protect patients and staff against COVID-19, they result in the loss of valuable non-verbal communication, and are not accessible to all.

Patients’ and clinicians’ perspectives on the primary care consultations for acute respiratory infections during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: an eight-country qualitative study in Europe

BackgroundThe impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients’ and clinicians’ perceptions of healthcare-seeking behaviour and delivery of care is unclear. The pandemic accelerated the use of remote care and understanding its benefits and drawbacks may inform its implementation during this and future healthcare emergencies.AimTo explore patients’ and primary care professionals’ (PCPs) experiences of primary care delivery in the first wave of the pandemic.Design & settingQualitative study using semi-structured interviews in primary care in eight European countriesResultsWe conducted 146 interviews with 80 PCPs and 66 patients consulting for respiratory tract infection (RTI) symptoms, in eight European countries (England, Ireland, Belgium, the Netherlands, Greece, Poland, Sweden and Germany). Data was collected between April and July 2020 and analysed using thematic analysis. We found that patients accepted telemedicine when PCPs spent time to understand and address their concerns, but a minority preferred in-person consultations. PCPs felt that remote consultations created emotional distance between themselves and patients, and they reported having to manage diverse COVID-19-related medical and social concerns.ConclusionRemote consultations for RTI symptoms may be acceptable long-term if both groups are happy to use this format but it is important that PCPs take time to address patients’ concerns and provide safety-netting advice.

Point of care testing, antibiotic prescribing and prescribing confidence for respiratory tract infections in primary care: Prospective audit in 18 European countries

BackgroundBetween-country differences have been described in antibiotic prescribing for RTI in primary care, but not yet for diagnostic testing procedures and prescribing confidence.AimTo describe between-country differences in RTI management, particularly diagnostic testing and antibiotic prescribing, and investigate which factors relate to antibiotic prescribing and GPs’ prescribing confidence.Design & settingProspective audit in 18 European countries.MethodGPs registered patient-, clinical- and management characteristics, and confidence in their antibiotic prescribing decision for patients presenting with sore throat and/or lower RTI (n=4,982). Factors related to antibiotic prescribing and confidence were analysed using multi-level logistic regression.ResultsAntibiotic prescribing proportions varied considerably:<20% in four countries, and >40% in six countries. There was also considerable variation in POC testing (0% in Croatia, Moldova, Romania, and >65% in Denmark, Norway, mainly CRP and Strep A), and in lab/hospital-based testing (<3% in Hungary, Netherlands, Spain, and >30% in Croatia, Georgia, Greece, Moldova, mainly chest X-ray and white blood cell counting). Antibiotic prescribing was related to illness severity, comorbidity, age, fever and ‘country’, but not to having performed a POC test. In nearly 90% of consultations, GPs were confident in their antibiotic prescribing decision.ConclusionDespite high confidence in decisions about antibiotic prescribing, there is considerable variation in the primary care of RTI in European countries, with GPs prescribing antibiotics overall more often than is considered appropriate. POC testing may enhance the quality of antibiotic prescribing decisions if it can safely reverse decisions confidently made on clinical grounds alone to prescribe antibiotics.

Heard, known and safe in general practice? An interview study with patients with severe and persistent mental illness

BackgroundAlthough GPs provide care to many patients with severe and persistent mental illness, the role and skillset of the GP in this space are contested. Patients are less satisfied with GP care of mental health than physical health issues.AimTo explore patient expectations and experiences of GP roles in their mental health, and identify opportunities for improving mental health care in general practice.Design & settingPatient participants were recruited from community mental health clinics in Brisbane, Australia.MethodIndividual semi-structured interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of patients. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed professionally. The authors conducted an inductive thematic analysis, attending to participant vulnerability and reflexivity.Results16 interviews were conducted by one author (RW), average duration 29 minutes. Three overarching themes were identified: being heard; being known; and being safe. Participants greatly valued ‘good GPs’ who were able to detect early signs of relapse, and with whom they came to feel heard, known and safe over time. Experiences of perfunctory, hurried care and avoidance of mental health issues were also reported. Many participants were uncertain whether GP training in mental health was sufficient to keep them safe. Patients may suspect negative attitudes to mental illness in GPs who actively engage predominantly with their physical health.ConclusionSome GPs play central roles in patients’ mental healthcare. Barriers for others need further exploration, and may include time, confidence and/or expertise. Findings challenge GPs to engage more actively and effectively with these patients in theirgeneral practice consultations.

Gestational diabetes mellitus follow-up in Norwegian primary health care: a qualitative study

BackgroundWomen with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) have a tenfold increased risk of developing diabetes, and a high risk of recurrent GDM. Endorsing the life-course approach aiming to prevent disease and promote health across generations, the Norwegian GDM guideline recommends follow-up in primary care after delivery, with information on the increased risks, lifestyle counselling, and annual diabetes screening. Few reports exist on Norwegian women’s experiences of GDM follow-up. AimTo elucidate women’s experiences with follow-up of GDM in pregnancy and after delivery, and to explore their attitudes to diabetes risk and motivation for lifestyle changes. Design & settingQualitative study in primary care in the region of Stavanger, Norway. MethodSemi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted 24–30 months after delivery with 14 women aged 28–44 years, with a history of GDM. Data were analysed thematically. ResultsMost women were satisfied with the follow-up during pregnancy; however, only two women were followed-up according to the guideline after delivery. In most encounters with GPs after delivery, GDM was not mentioned. To continue the healthy lifestyle adopted in pregnancy, awareness of future risk was a motivational factor, and the women asked for tailored information on individual risk and improved support. The main themes emerging from the analysis were as follows: stigma and shame; uncertainty; gaining control and finding balance; and a need for support to sustain change. ConclusionWomen experienced a lack of support for GDM in Norwegian primary care after delivery. To maintain a healthy lifestyle, women suggested being given tailored information and improved support.

Experiences of telehealth in general practice in Australia: research protocol for a mixed methods study

BackgroundDue to the COVID-19 pandemic, use of telehealth has expanded rapidly. However, little is known about the impact of delivering care through telehealth on communication between clinicians and patients. At an interactional level, the ways in which clinicians establish rapport and connection with their patients in telehealth consultations is not well understood.AimThis study will explore interactional practices of general practitioners (GPs) and patients in telehealth consultations to develop evidence-based resources to improve communication.Design & settingThe study will be conducted within the Australian general practice setting.MethodConversation analysis and sociolinguistic discourse analysis of recorded telehealth consultations will provide direct evidence of specific elements contributing to successful and less successful instances of telehealth communication. This analysis will be complemented by co-design techniques such as qualitative and reflective interviews and collaborative workshops with telehealth users, including both general practitioners and patients.ConclusionEffective communication is critical for telehealth consultations and is central to achieving optimal clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. This study will co-develop with end-users, evidence-based guidelines encompassing effective telehealth communication strategies.

Exploration of sedentary behaviour among general practitioners: A cross-sectional study

BackgroundSedentary behaviour, which may have increased among GPs due to increasing use of telemedicine, is associated with many illnesses and increased all-cause mortality.AimTo explore levels of sedentary behaviour among GPs and General Practice Specialty Trainees (GPSTs).Design & settingSequential, cross-sectional design (initial online sedentary behaviour questionnaire, subsequent thigh-worn accelerometer sub-study) of GPs and GPSTs in Northern Ireland.MethodSelf-reported questionnaire data were aggregated and compared with device-measured accelerometry data.ResultsData from 353 participants (17.7% of GPs and GPSTs in Northern Ireland) revealed doctors in general practice self-reported higher workday sedentary time (10.33 (SD =2.97) hours) than those in secondary care (7.9 (SD =3.43) hours) (MD 2.43 hours; P<0.001). An active workstation (eg, sit-stand desk), was used by 5.6% of participants in general practice, while 86.0% of those without one would consider using one in future. Active workstation users self-reported lower workday sedentary time (7.88 (SD =3.2) hours) than non-users (10.47 (SD =2.88) hours) (MD –2.58 hours, P=0.001). Accelerometer sub-study participants underestimated their workday sedentary time by 0.17 hours (95% CI –1.86, 2.20; P=0.865), and non-workday sedentary time by 2.67 hours (95% CI 0.99, 4.35; P=0.003). Most GPs (80.7%) reported increased workday sitting time compared to prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, while 87.0% would prefer less workday sitting time.ConclusionGPs have high levels of workday sedentary time, which may be detrimental to their health. It is imperative to develop methods to address sedentary behaviour among GPs on workdays, both for their own health and the health of their patients.