<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/rss.css" type="text/css"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
    xmlns:cc="http://web.resource.org/cc/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:extra="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
    xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
    <channel rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/feeds/latestarticles/journal?journal=bmcfampract&amp;quantity=&amp;format=rss&amp;version=">
        <title>BMC Family Practice - Latest Articles</title>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcfampract/</link>
        <description>The latest research articles published by BMC Family Practice</description>
        <dc:date>2012-02-08T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <items>
            <rdf:Seq>
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/13/6" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/13/5" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/13/4" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/13/3" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/13/2" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/13/1" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/144" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/143" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/142" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/141" />
                            </rdf:Seq>
        </items>
                 <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </channel>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/13/6">
        <title>Patient enablement requires physician empathy: a cross-sectional study of general practice consultations in areas of high and low socioeconomic deprivation in Scotland</title>
        <description>Background:
Patient &apos;enablement&apos; is a term closely aligned with &apos;empowerment&apos; and its measurement in a general practice consultation has been operationalised in the widely used patient enablement instrument (PEI), a patient-rated measure of consultation outcome. However, there is limited knowledge regarding the factors that influence enablement, particularly the effect of socio-economic deprivation. The aim of the study is to assess the factors influencing patient enablement in GP consultations in areas of high and low deprivation.
Methods:
A questionnaire study was carried out on 3,044 patients attending 26 GPs (16 in areas of high socio-economic deprivation and 10 in low deprivation areas, in the west of Scotland). Patient expectation (confidence that the doctor would be able to help) was recorded prior to the consultation. PEI, GP empathy (measured by the CARE Measure), and a range of other measures and variables were recorded after the consultation. Data analysis employed multi-level modelling and multivariate analyses with the PEI as the dependant variable.
Results:
Although numerous variables showed a univariate association with patient enablement, only four factors were independently predictive after multilevel multivariate analysis; patients with multimorbidity of 3 or more long-term conditions (reflecting poor chronic general health), and those consulting about a long-standing problem had reduced enablement scores in both affluent and deprived areas. In deprived areas, emotional distress (GHQ-caseness) had an additional negative effect on enablement. Perceived GP empathy had a positive effect on enablement in both affluent and deprived areas. Maximal patient enablement was never found with low empathy.
Conclusions:
Although other factors influence patient enablement, the patients&apos; perceptions of the doctors&apos; empathy is of key importance in patient enablement in general practice consultations in both high and low deprivation settings.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/13/6</link>
                <dc:creator>Stewart Mercer</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Bhautesh Jani</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Margaret Maxwell</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Samuel Wong</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Graham Watt</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2012, null:6</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2012-02-08T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-13-6</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1471-2296-13-6-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>6</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2012-02-08T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>PDF</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/13/5">
        <title>Predictors of warfarin use in atrial fibrillation in the United States: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title>
        <description>Background:
Despite warfarin&apos;s marked efficacy, not all eligible patients receive it for stroke prevention in AF. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the association between prescriber and/or patient characteristics and subsequent prescription of warfarin for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).
Methods:
Observational studies conducted in the US using multivariate analysis to determine the relationship between characteristics and the odds of receiving warfarin for stroke prevention were identified in MEDLINE, EMBASE and a manual review of references. Effect estimates of prescriber and/or patient characteristics from individual studies were pooled to calculate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals.
Results:
Twenty-eight studies reporting results of 33 unique multivariate analyses were identified. Warfarin use across studies ranged from 9.1%-79.8% (median=49.1%). There was a moderately-strong correlation between warfarin use and year of study (r=0.60, p=0.002). Upon meta-analysis, characteristics associated with a statistically significant increase in the odds of warfarin use included history of cerebrovascular accident (OR=1.59), heart failure (OR=1.36), and male gender (OR=1.12). Those associated with a significant reduction in the odds of warfarin use included alcohol/drug abuse (OR=0.62), perceived barriers to compliance (OR=0.87), contraindication(s) to warfarin (OR=0.81), dementia (OR=0.32), falls (OR=0.60), gastrointestinal hemorrhage (OR=0.47), intracranial hemorrhage (OR=0.39), hepatic (OR=0.59), and renal impairment (OR=0.69). While age per 10-year increase (OR=0.78) and advancing age as a dichotomized variable (cut-off varied by study) (OR=0.57) were associated with significant reductions in warfarin use; qualitative review of results of studies evaluating age as a categorical variable did not confirm this relationship.
Conclusions:
Warfarin use has increased somewhat over time.  The decision to prescribe warfarin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation is based upon multiple prescriber and patient characteristics. These findings can be used by family practice prescribers and other healthcare decision-makers to target interventions or methods to improve utilization of warfarin when it is indicated for stroke prevention.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/13/5</link>
                <dc:creator>Victoria Baczek</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Wendy Chen</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Jeffrey Kluger</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Craig Coleman</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2012, null:5</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2012-02-03T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-13-5</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1471-2296-13-5-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>5</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2012-02-03T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>PDF</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/13/4">
        <title>Dying at home in Belgium: a descriptive GP interview study</title>
        <description>Background:
While increasing attention is being paid to enabling terminal patients to remain at home until death, limited information is available on the circumstances in which people at home actually die. Therefore this study aims to describe patient characteristics, functional and cognitive status and physical and psychological symptom burden in the last three months of life among Belgian patients dying at home, according to their GPs.
Methods:
In 2005, a nationwide and retrospective interview study with GPs took place on people dying at home in Belgium as reported by Sentinel Network of GPs in Belgium. GPs registered all deaths (patients aged 1 year or more) weekly and were interviewed about all patients dying non-suddenly at home, using face-to-face structured interviews.
Results:
Interviews were obtained on 205 patients (90% response rate). Between the second and third month before death, 55% were fully invalid or limited in self-care. In the last week of life, almost all were fully invalid. Fifty four percent were unconscious at some point during the last week; 46% were fully conscious. Most frequently reported symptoms were lack of energy, lack of appetite and feeling drowsy. Conditions most difficult for GPs to manage were shortness of breath, lack of energy and pain.
Conclusions:
Many people dying at home under the care of their GPs in Belgium function relatively well until the last week of life and cognitive status seems to be preserved until the end in many cases. However, symptoms which GPs find difficult to control still manifest in many patients in the final week of life.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/13/4</link>
                <dc:creator>Kathleen Leemans</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Lieve Van den Block</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Johan Bilsen</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Joachim Cohen</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Nicole Boffin</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Luc Deliens</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2012, null:4</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2012-01-19T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-13-4</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1471-2296-13-4-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>4</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2012-01-19T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>PDF</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/13/3">
        <title>COPD exacerbations in general practice: variability in oral prednisolone courses</title>
        <description>Background:
The use of oral corticosteroids as treatment of COPD exacerbations in primary care is well established and evidence-based. However, the most appropriate dosage regimen has not been determined and remains controversial. Corticosteroid therapy is associated with a number of undesirable side effects, including hyperglycaemias, so differences in prescribing might be relevant. This study examines the differences between GPs in dosage and duration of prednisolone treatment in patients with a COPD exacerbation. It also investigates the number of general practitioners (GPs) who adjust their treatment according to the presence of diabetic co-morbidity.
Methods:
Cross-sectional study among 219 GPs and 25 GPs in training, located in the Northern part of the Netherlands.
Results:
The response rate was 69%. Nearly every GP prescribed a continuous dose of prednisolone 30 mg per day. Among GPs there were substantial differences in treatment duration. GPs prescribed courses of five, seven, ten, or fourteen days. A course of seven days was most common. The duration of treatment depended on exacerbation and disease severity. A course of five days was especially prescribed in case of a less severe exacerbation. In a more severe exacerbation duration of seven to fourteen days was more common. Hardly any GP adjusted treatment to the presence of diabetic co-morbidity.
Conclusion:
Under normal conditions GPs prescribe prednisolone quite uniformly, within the range of the current Dutch guidelines. There is insufficient guidance regarding how to adjust corticosteroid treatment to exacerbation severity, disease severity and the presence of diabetic co-morbidity. Under these circumstances, there is a substantial variation in treatment duration.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/13/3</link>
                <dc:creator>Marianne de Vries</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Annette Berendsen</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Henk Bosveld</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Huib Kerstjens</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Thys van der Molen</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2012, null:3</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2012-01-12T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-13-3</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1471-2296-13-3-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>3</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2012-01-12T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>PDF</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/13/2">
        <title>Coding of procedures documented by general practitioners in Swedish primary care - an explorative study using two procedure coding systems</title>
        <description>Background:
Procedures documented by general practitioners in primary care have not been studied in relation to procedure coding systems. We aimed to describe procedures documented by Swedish general practitioners in electronic patient records and to compare them to the Swedish Classification of Health Interventions (KV&#197;) and SNOMED CT.
Methods:
Procedures in 200 record entries were identified, coded, assessed in relation to two procedure coding systems and analysed.
Results:
417 procedures found in the 200 electronic patient record entries were coded with 36 different Classification of Health Interventions categories and 148 different SNOMED CT concepts. 22.8% of the procedures could not be coded with any Classification of Health Interventions category and 4.3% could not be coded with any SNOMED CT concept. 206 procedure-concept/category pairs were assessed as a complete match in SNOMED CT compared to 10 in the Classification of Health Interventions.
Conclusions:
Procedures documented by general practitioners were present in nearly all electronic patient record entries. Almost all procedures could be coded using SNOMED CT.Classification of Health Interventions covered the procedures to a lesser extent and with a much lower degree of concordance. SNOMED CT is a more flexible terminology system that can be used for different purposes for procedure coding in primary care.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/13/2</link>
                <dc:creator>Anna Vikstrom</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Maria Hagglund</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Mikael Nystrom</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Lars-Erik Strender</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Sabine Koch</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Per Hjerpe</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Ulf Lindblad</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Gunnar Nilsson</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2012, null:2</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2012-01-09T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-13-2</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1471-2296-13-2-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>2</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2012-01-09T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/13/1">
        <title>General practitioners&apos; and practice nurses&apos; views and experience of managing depression in coronary heart disease: a qualitative interview study.</title>
        <description>Background:
Depression is common in coronary heart disease (CHD). Affected patients have an increased incidence of coronary symptoms and death. Little is known about how best to manage primary care patients with both CHD and depression. This study is part of the UPBEAT-UK programme of research and was designed to understand general practitioners&apos; (GPs) and practice nurses&apos; (PNs) views and experience of managing depression in CHD.
Methods:
Individual in-depth interviews with 10 GPs and 12 PNs in South East London. Data were analysed using constant comparison.
Results:
GPs and PNs had similar views. Distress following diagnosis or a cardiac event was considered to resolve spontaneously; if it endured or became severe it was treated as depression. GPs and PNs felt that psychosocial problems contributed to depression in patients with CHD. However, uncertainty was expressed as to their perceived role and responsibility in addressing these. In this respect, depression in patients with CHD was considered similar to depression in other patients and no coherent management approach specific for depression in CHD was identified. An individualised approach was favoured, but clinicians were unsure how to achieve this in the face of conflicting patient preferences and the treatment options they considered available.
Conclusions:
GPs and PNs view depression in CHD similarly to depression uncomplicated by physical illness. However, uncertainty exists as to how best to manage depression associated psychosocial issues. Personalised interventions are needed which account for individual need and which enable and encourage clinicians and patients to make use of existing resources to address the psychosocial factors which contribute to depression.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/13/1</link>
                <dc:creator>Elizabeth Barley</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Paul Walters</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Andre Tylee</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Joanna Murray</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2012, null:1</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2012-01-05T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-13-1</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1471-2296-13-1-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>1</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2012-01-05T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/144">
        <title>Effectiveness of an implementation strategy for a breastfeeding guideline in Primary Care: cluster randomised trial.

</title>
        <description>Background:
The protection and promotion of breastfeeding is considered a priority in Europe where only 22 % of infants less than 6 months old are exclusively breastfed. In Spain this percentage reaches 24.8 % but in our city it falls to 18.26 %. Various studies emphasise that the improvement of these results should be based upon the training of health professionals. Following the recommendations of a breastfeeding guide can modify the practice of health professionals and improve results with respect to exclusively or predominatly breastfed children at 6 months of age.Method/DesignThis study involves a community based cluster randomized trial in primary healthcare centres in Leganes (Madrid, Spain). The project aims to determine whether the use of an implementation strategy (including training session, information distribution, opinion leader) of a breastfeeding guideline in primary care is more effective than usual diffusion.The number of patients required will be 240 (120 in each arm).  It will be included all the mothers of infants born during the study period (6 months) who come to the health centre on the first visit of the child care programme and who give their consent to participate. The main outcome variable is the  exclusive o predominant breastfeeding at 6 moths of age..Main effectiveness will be analyzed by comparing the percentage of infants with exclusive or predominant breastfeeding at 6 months between the intervention group and the control group. All statistical tests will be performed with intention to treat. Logistic regression with random effects will be used to adjust for prognostic factors. Confounding factors or factors that might alter the effect recorded will be taken into account in this analysis.DiscussionStrategies need to be found which facilitate the giving of effective advice on breastfeeding by professionals and which provide support to women during the breastfeeding period. By applying the guide&apos;s recommendations, clinical variability can be reduced and the care received by patients can be improved.Trial registration: The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01474096</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/144</link>
                <dc:creator>Susana Martin</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Isabel Del-cura-gonzalez</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Teresa Sanz-cuesta</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Celina Arana-canedo_arguelles</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Mercedes Rumayor-zarzuelo</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Marta Alvarez-de la riva</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Ana Lloret-saez_bravo</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Rosa Fernandez-arroyo</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Jose Arejula-torres</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Oscar Aguado-arroyo</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Francisco Gongora-maldonado</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Manuela Garcia-corraliza</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Nazareth Sandoval-encinas</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Margarita Tomico-delrio</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Ana Cornejo-gutierrez</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2011, null:144</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-12-30T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-12-144</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1471-2296-12-144-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>144</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-12-30T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>PDF</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/143">
        <title>The Influence of Self-Owned Home Blood Pressure Monitoring (HBPM) on Primary Care Patients With Hypertension: a Qualitative Study </title>
        <description>Background:
Home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) is gaining popularity among hypertensive patients. This study aimed to explore the influence of self-initiated HBPM on primary care patients with hypertension.
Methods:
Six in-depth interviews and two focus group discussions were conducted, taking into consideration the experiences of 24 primary care patients with hypertension. These patients had been using HBPM as part of their hypertension management. The overriding influences were grouped under themes which emerged from analyzing the data using the grounded theory approach.
Results:
There are both positive and negative influences of self-initiated HBPM. Patients used the readings of their HBPM to decide on many aspects of their hypertension management. The HBPM readings both influenced their adherence to diet and exercise and provided certain reassurance when they experienced symptoms. In addition, the act of discussing their HBPM readings with their health care providers resulted in an enhanced doctor-patient therapeutic relationship. Nevertheless, HBPM created confusion at times in some patients, particularly with regard to the target blood pressure level and the need for medication. This led to some patients making their own medical decisions based on their own standards.
Conclusions:
HBPM is becoming an integral part of hypertension management. Primary care patients who self-initiated HBPM reported being more self-efficacious, but lack of participation and guidance from their doctors created confusion, and hindered the true benefit of HBPM.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/143</link>
                <dc:creator>Adina Abdullah</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Sajaratulnisah Othman</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2011, null:143</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-12-30T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-12-143</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1471-2296-12-143-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>143</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-12-30T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/142">
        <title>Improving accuracy of medication identification in an older population using a medication bottle color symbol label system</title>
        <description>Background:
The purpose of this pilot study was to evaluate and refine an adjuvant system of color-specific symbols that are added to medication bottles and to assess whether this system would increase the ability of patients 65 years of age or older in matching their medication to the indication for which it was prescribed.
Methods:
This study was conducted in two phases, consisting of three focus groups of patients from a family medicine clinic (n=25) and a pre-post medication identification test in a second group of patient participants (n=100).  Results of focus group discussions were used to refine the medication label symbols according to themes and messages identified through qualitative triangulation mechanisms and data analysis techniques.  A pre-post medication identification test was conducted in the second phase of the study to assess differences between standard labeling alone and the addition of the refined color-specific symbols.  The pre-post test examined the impact of the added labels on participants&apos; ability to accurately match their medication to the indication for which it was prescribed when placed in front of participants and then at a distance of two feet.
Results:
Participants appreciated the addition of a visual aid on existing medication labels because it would not be necessary to learn a completely new system of labeling, and generally found the colors and symbols used in the proposed labeling system easy to understand and relevant. Concerns were raised about space constraints on medication bottles, having too much information on the bottle, and having to remember what the colors meant.  Symbols and colors were modified if they were found unclear or inappropriate by focus group participants.  Pre-post medication identification test results in a second set of participants demonstrated that the addition of the symbol label significantly improved the ability of participants to match their medication to the appropriate medical indication at a distance of two feet (p&lt;0.001) and approached significant improvement when placed directly in front of participants (p=0.07).
Conclusions:
The proposed medication symbol label system provides a promising adjunct to national efforts in addressing the issue of medication misuse in the home through the improvement of medication labeling.  Further research is necessary to determine the effectiveness of the labeling system in real-world settings.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/142</link>
                <dc:creator>Roberto Cardarelli</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Christopher Mann</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Kimberly Fulda</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Elizabeth Balyakina</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Anna Espinoza</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Sue Lurie</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2011, null:142</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-12-29T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-12-142</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1471-2296-12-142-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>142</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-12-29T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>PDF</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/141">
        <title>What factors affect patients&apos; recall of general practitioners&apos; advice?</title>
        <description>Background:
In order for patients to adhere to advice, provided by family doctors, they must be able to recall it afterwards. However, several studies have shown that most patients do not fully understand or memorize it. The aim of this study was to determine the influence of demographic characteristics, education, amount of given advice and the time between consultations on recalled advice.
Methods:
A prospective survey, lasting 30 months, was conducted in an urban family practice in Slovenia. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify the risk factors for poorer recall.
Results:
250 patients (87.7% response rate) received at least one and up to four pieces of advice (2.4 &#177; 0.8). A follow-up consultation took place at 47.4 &#177; 35.2 days. The determinants of better recall were high school (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.15-0.99, p = 0.049) and college education (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.10-1.00, p = 0.050), while worse recall was determined by number of given instructions three or four (OR 26.1, 95% CI 3.15-215.24, p = 0.002; OR 56.8, 95% CI 5.91-546.12, p &lt; 0.001, respectively) and re-test interval: 15-30 days (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.06-10.13, p = 0.040), 31-60 days (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.28-8.07, p = 0.013) and more than 60 days (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.05-6.02, p = 0.038).
Conclusions:
Education was an important determinant factor and warrants further study. Patients should be given no more than one or two instructions in a consultation. When more is needed, the follow-up should be within the next 14 days, and would be of a greater benefit to higher educated patients.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/141</link>
                <dc:creator>Polona Selic</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Igor Svab</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Marija Repolusk</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Nena Gucek</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2011, null:141</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-12-28T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-12-141</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1471-2296-12-141-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>141</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-12-28T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <cc:License rdf:about="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/">
        <cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#Reproduction" />
        <cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#Distribution" />
        <cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#DerivativeWorks" />
    </cc:License>
</rdf:RDF>

