<?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>2009-07-10T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <items>
            <rdf:Seq>
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/51" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/50" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/49" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/48" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/47" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/46" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/45" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/44" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/43" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/42" />
                            </rdf:Seq>
        </items>
        <extra:info rdf:parseType="Literal">
            <html:div style="font:14px Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
                <html:span style="font-weight:bold">
                    This is an RSS newsfeed from BioMed Central
                </html:span>
                <html:br />
                <html:span style="font-size: 12px;">
                    It is intended to be used with an RSS reader. For more information about RSS newsfeeds from BioMed Central, visit
                    <html:br />
                    <html:a href="http://www.biomedcentral.com/info/about/rss/" style="color:#3333CC; font-size:12px;">
                        http://www.biomedcentral.com/info/about/rss/
                    </html:a>
                    <html:br />
                </html:span>
            </html:div>
        </extra:info>
        <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </channel>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/51">
        <title>Health literacy: setting an international collaborative research agenda</title>
        <description>Background:
Health literacy is an increasingly important topic in both in the policy and research agendas of many countries. During the recent 36th Annual Meeting of the North American Primary Care Research Group, the authors led an audio-taped 3-hour forum, &quot;Studying Health Literacy: Developing an International Collaboration,&quot; where the current state of health literacy (HL) in the United States (US) and United Kingdom (UK) was presented and attendees were encouraged to debate a future research agenda.Discussion of Forum ThemesThe debate centred around three distinct themes, including: (1) refining HL definitions and conceptual models, (2) HL measurement and assessment tools, and (3) developing a collaborative international research agenda. The attendees agreed that future research should be theoretically grounded and conceptual models employed in studies should be explicit to allow for international comparisons to be drawn.Summary and Author ReflectionsThe importance of HL research and its possible contribution to health disparities is becoming increasingly recognised internationally. International collaborations and comparative studies could illuminate some of the possible determinants of disparities, and also possibly provide a vehicle to examine other research questions of interest.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/51</link>
                <dc:creator>Joanne Protheroe</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Lorraine Wallace</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Gillian Rowlands</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Jennifer DeVoe</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2009, 10:51</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2009-07-10T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-10-51</dc:identifier>
        <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>10</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>51</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2009-07-10T00:00:00Z</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/1471-2296/10/50">
        <title>Discussing prognosis with older people with musculoskeletal pain: a cross-sectional study in general practice</title>
        <description>Background:
Prognosis has been described as an important but neglected branch of clinical science. While patients&apos; views have been sought in the context of life-threatening illness, similar research is lacking for patients presenting with common, non-life-threatening musculoskeletal complaints. The aim of this study was to gauge whether and why older patients with musculoskeletal pain think prognostic information is important, and how often they felt prognosis was discussed in the general practice consultation.
Methods:
A cross-sectional survey of consecutive patients aged 50 years of over presenting with non-inflammatory musculoskeletal pain to 5 Central Cheshire general practices. The frequency of responses to the prognostic questions were described and the association with sociodemographic, presenting pain complaint, and psychosocial variables explored using logistic regression.
Results:
502 participants (77%) responded to the postal questionnaire. 165 (33%) participants reported discussing prognosis in the consultation with their GP. Discussions about prognosis were more often reported by male patients (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.09, 2.71) and those for whom this was their first consultation (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.16, 2.80). 402 (82%) participants thought that prognostic information was important. This was highest among those currently in paid employment (OR 2.95, 95% CI 1.33, 6.57). The reasons patients gave for believing prognostic information was important included &apos;knowing for the sake of knowing&apos; and planning future activity. Reasons for not believing prognostic information to be important included the belief that progression of pain was inevitable and that nothing could be done to help.
Conclusion:
Prognostic information is thought to be important amongst older people with musculoskeletal pain yet discussions occur infrequently in primary care. Barriers to effective prognostic communication and the exact information needs of patients are still unknown and warrant further research.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/50</link>
                <dc:creator>Christian Mallen</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>George Peat</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2009, 10:50</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2009-07-07T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-10-50</dc:identifier>
        <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>10</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>50</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2009-07-07T00:00:00Z</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/1471-2296/10/49">
        <title>Frequency of GP communication addressing the patient&apos;s resources and coping strategies in medical interviews: a video-based observational study</title>
        <description>Background:
There is increasing focus on patient-centred communicative approaches in medical consultations, but few studies have shown the extent to which patients&apos; positive coping strategies and psychological assets are addressed by general practitioners (GPs) on a regular day at the office. This study measures the frequency of GPs&apos; use of questions and comments addressing their patients&apos; coping strategies or resources.
Methods:
Twenty-four GPs were video-recorded in 145 consultations. The consultations were coded using a modified version of the Roter Interaction Analysis System. In this study, we also developed four additional coding categories based on cognitive therapy and solution-focused therapy: attribution, resources, coping, and solution-focused techniques.The reliability between coders was established, a factor analysis was applied to test the relationship between the communication categories, and a tentative validating exercise was performed by reversed coding.
Results:
Cohen&apos;s kappa was 0.52 between coders. Only 2% of the utterances could be categorized as resource or coping oriented. Six GPs contributed 59% of these utterances. The factor analysis identified two factors, one task oriented and one patient oriented.
Conclusions:
The frequency of communication about coping and resources was very low. Communication skills training for GPs in this field is required. Further validating studies of this kind of measurement tool are warranted.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/49</link>
                <dc:creator>Trond Mjaaland</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Arnstein Finset</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2009, 10:49</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2009-07-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-10-49</dc:identifier>
        <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>10</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>49</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2009-07-01T00:00:00Z</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/1471-2296/10/48">
        <title>Improving the physician-patient cardiovascular risk dialogue to improve statin adherence
</title>
        <description>Background:
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a patient education program developed to facilitate statin adherence.
Methods:
A controlled trial was designed to test the effectiveness of a multifaceted patient education program to facilitate statin adherence. The program included a brief, in-office physician counseling kit followed by patient mailings.  The primary end point was adherence to filling statin prescriptions during a 120-day period. Patients new to statins enrolled and completed a survey. Data from a national pharmacy claims database were used to track adherence.
Results:
Patients new to statin therapy exposed to a patient counseling and education program achieved a 12.4 higher average number of statin prescription fill days and were 10% more likely to fill prescriptions for at least 120 days (p=.01).
Conclusions:
Brief in-office counseling on cardiovascular risk followed by patient education mailings can be effective in increasing adherence. Physicians found a one-minute counseling tool and pocket guidelines useful in counseling patients.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/48</link>
                <dc:creator>Linda Casebeer</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Craig Huber</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Nancy Bennett</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Rachael Shillman</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Maziar Abdolrasulnia</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Gregory Salinas</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Sijian Zhang</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2009, 10:48</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2009-06-30T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-10-48</dc:identifier>
        <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>10</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>48</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2009-06-30T00:00:00Z</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/1471-2296/10/47">
        <title>It&apos;s all about recognition! Qualitative study of the value of interpersonal continuity in general practice</title>
        <description>Background:
Continuity of care has traditionally been regarded as a core quality of general practice, but the long-term doctor-patient relationship has been put under pressure. In many places practices are expanding, with larger teams and more registered patients, thereby threatening the possibility of patients staying with their own general practitioner (GP). GPs often take it for granted that interpersonal continuity is valuable. However, little is known about how patient satisfaction is related to interpersonal continuity. The purpose of this study is to explore the creation of patient satisfaction or dissatisfaction in the interpersonal relation with the GP, and in a comprehensive way to investigate how this is related to continuity of care.
Methods:
Qualitative study based on 22 interviews with patients from two practices in Denmark. A total of 12 patients saw a regular doctor and 10 saw an unfamiliar doctor. The patients were selected after an observed consultation and sampled purposefully according to reason for encounter, age and sex. Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) was used to study how patients perceive meeting either a regular or an unfamiliar GP. The analysis explored the patients&apos; perception of their interpersonal relationship with their GP, and interpreted the accounts by using social psychological theories.
Results:
A long-term continuous relationship with the GP could be satisfactory, but it could also be the reverse. The same pattern was shown in case of an unfamiliar GP. Therefore, patient satisfaction and interpersonal continuity were not causally related. On the contrary, there was a general pattern of how the satisfactory and trustful doctor-patient relationship from the patients&apos; point of view could be created, maintained or destroyed. A pattern where the process of recognition, by respecting and remembering, on the one hand created and maintained satisfaction while humiliation on the other hand destroyed satisfaction in the relationship.
Conclusion:
It was not valuable to have a continuous relationship unless the GP recognized the patient. The social psychological concept of recognition had two different meanings and the GP had to do both, respect and remember the patient, in order to create and sustain the trustful relationship. The added value of interpersonal continuity had to be combined with recognition.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/47</link>
                <dc:creator>Heidi Bogelund Frederiksen</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Jakob Kragstrup</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Gitte Dehlholm-Lambertsen</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2009, 10:47</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2009-06-26T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-10-47</dc:identifier>
        <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>10</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>47</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2009-06-26T00:00:00Z</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/1471-2296/10/46">
        <title>The TrueBlue study: Is practice nurse-led collaborative care effective in the management of depression for patients with heart disease or diabetes?</title>
        <description>Background:
In the presence of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) or coronary heart disease (CHD), depression is under diagnosed and under treated despite being associated with worse clinical outcomes. Our earlier pilot study demonstrated that it was feasible, acceptable and affordable for practice nurses to extend their role to include screening for and monitoring of depression alongside biological and lifestyle risk factors. The current study will compare the clinical outcomes of our model of practice nurse-led collaborative care with usual care for patients with depression and T2DM or CHD
Methods:
This is a cluster-randomised intervention trial. Eighteen general practices from regional and metropolitan areas agreed to join this study, and were allocated randomly to an intervention or control group. We aim to recruit 50 patients with co-morbid depression and diabetes or heart disease from each of these practices. In the intervention group, practice nurses (PNs) will be trained for their enhanced roles in this nurse-led collaborative care study. Patients will be invited to attend a practice nurse consultation every 3 months prior to seeing their usual general practitioner. The PN will assess psychological, physiological and lifestyle parameters then work with the patient to set management goals. The outcome of this assessment will form the basis of a GP Management Plan document. In the control group, the patients will continue to receive their usual care for the first six months of the study before the PNs undergo the training and switch to the intervention protocol. The primary clinical outcome will be a reduction in the depression score. The study will also measure the impact on physiological measures, quality of life and on patient attitude to health care delivered by practice nurses.
Conclusions:
The strength of this programme is that it provides a sustainable model of chronic disease management with monitoring and self-management assistance for physiological, lifestyle and psychological risk factors for high-risk patients with co-morbid depression, diabetes or heart disease. The study will demonstrate whether nurse-led collaborative care achieves better outcomes than usual care.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/46</link>
                <dc:creator>Mark Morgan</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>James Dunbar</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Prasuna Reddy</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Michael Coates</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Robert Leahy</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2009, 10:46</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2009-06-23T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-10-46</dc:identifier>
        <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>10</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>46</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2009-06-23T00:00:00Z</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/1471-2296/10/45">
        <title>Family physicians&apos; effort to stay in charge of the medical treatment when patients have home care by district nurses. A grounded theory study </title>
        <description>Background:
District nurses (DNs) provide home care for old persons with a mixture of chronic diseases, symptoms and reduced functional ability. Family physicians (FPs) have been criticised for their lack of involvement in this care. The aim of this study was to obtain increased knowledge concerning the FP&apos;s experience of providing medical treatment for patients with home care provided by DNs by developing a theoretical model that elucidates how FPs handle the problems they encounter regarding the individual patients and their conditions.
Methods:
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 Swedish FPs concerning one of their registered patients with home care by a DN, and the treatment of this patient. Grounded theory methodology (GTM) was used in the analyses.
Results:
The core category was the effort to stay in charge of the medical treatment. This involved three types of problems: gaining sufficient insight, making adequate decisions, and maintaining appropriate medical treatment. For three categories of patients, the FPs had problems staying in charge. Patients with reduced functional ability had problems providing information and maintaining treatment. Patients who were &quot;fixed in their ways&quot; did not provide information and did not comply with recommendations, and for patients with complex conditions, making adequate decisions could be problematic. To overcome the problems, four different strategies were used: relying on information from others, supporting close observation and follow-up by others, being constantly ready to change the goal of the treatment, and relying on others to provide treatment.
Conclusions:
The patients in this study differed from most other patients seen at the healthcare centre as the consultation with the patient could not provide the usual foundation for decisions concerning medical treatment. Information from and collaboration with the DN and other home care providers was essential for the FP&apos;s effort to stay in charge of the medical treatment. The complexity of the situation made it problematic for the FP to make adequate decisions about the goal of the medical treatment. The goal of the treatment had to be constantly evaluated based on information from the DN and other care providers, and thus this information was absolutely crucial.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/45</link>
                <dc:creator>Sonja Modin</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Lena Tornkvist</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Ann-Karin Furhoff</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Ingrid Hylander</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2009, 10:45</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2009-06-22T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-10-45</dc:identifier>
        <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>10</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>45</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2009-06-22T00:00:00Z</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/1471-2296/10/44">
        <title>GP-support by means of AGnES-practice assistants and the use of telecare devices in a sparsely populated region in Northern Germany - proof of concept</title>
        <description>Background:
In many rural regions in Germany, the proportion of the elderly population increases rapidly. Simultaneously, about one-third of the presently active GPs will retire until 2010. Often it is difficult to find successors for vacant GP-practices. These regions require innovative concepts to avoid the imminent shortage in primary health care.The AGnES-concept comprises the delegation of GP-home visits to qualified AGnES-practice assistants (AGnES: GP-supporting, community-based, e-health-assisted, systemic intervention).  Main objectives were the assessment of the acceptance of the AGnES-concept by the participating GPs, patients, and AGnES-practice assistants, the kind of delegated tasks, and the feasibility of home telecare in a GP-practice.
Methods:
In this paper, we report first results of the implementation of this concept in regular GP-practices, conducted November 2005 - March 2007 on the Island of Rugen, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Germany. This study was meant as a proof of concept.The GP delegated routine home-visits to qualified practice employees (here: registered nurses). Eligible patients were provided with telecare-devices to monitor disease-related physiological values.All delegated tasks, modules conducted and questionnaire responses were documented. The participating patients were asked for their acceptance based on standardized questionnaires. The GPs and AGnES-practice assistants were asked for their judgement about different project components, the quality of health care provision and the competences of the AGnES-practice assistants.
Results:
550 home visits were conducted. 105 patients, two GPs and three AGnES-practice assistants (all registered nurses) participated in the project. 48 patients used telecare-devices to monitor health parameters. 87.4% of the patients accepted AGnES-care as comparable to common GP-care. In the course of the project, the GPs delegated an increasing number of both monitoring and interventional tasks to the AGnES-practice assistants. The GPs agreed that delegating tasks to a qualified practice assistant relieves them in their daily work.
Conclusions:
A part of the GPs home visits can be delegated to AGnES-practice assistants to support GPs in regions with an imminent or already existing undersupply in primary care. The project triggered discussions among the institutions involved in the German healthcare system and supported a reconciliation of the respective competences of physicians and other medical professions.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/44</link>
                <dc:creator>Neeltje van den Berg</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Thomas FiSZ</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Claudia Meinke</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Romy Heymann</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Sibylle Scriba</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Wolfgang Hoffmann</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2009, 10:44</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2009-06-19T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-10-44</dc:identifier>
        <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>10</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>44</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2009-06-19T00:00:00Z</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/1471-2296/10/43">
        <title>How accurate is patients&apos; anatomical knowledge : a cross-sectional, questionnaire study of six patient groups and a general public sample.</title>
        <description>Background:
Older studies have shown that patients often do not understand the terms used by doctors and many do not even have a rudimentary understanding of anatomy. The present study was designed to investigate the levels of anatomical knowledge of different patient groups and the general public in order to see whether this has improved over time and whether patients with a specific organ pathology (e.g. liver disease) have a relatively better understanding of the location of that organ.
Methods:
Level of anatomical knowledge was assessed on a multiple-choice questionnaire, in a sample of 722 participants, comprising approximately 100 patients in each of 6 different diagnostic groups and 133 in the general population, using a between-groups, cross-sectional design. Comparisons of relative accuracy of anatomical knowledge between the present and earlier results, and across the clinical and general public groups were evaluated using Chi square tests. Associations with age and education were assessed with the Pearson correlation test and one-way analysis of variance, respectively.
Results:
Across groups knowledge of the location of body organs was poor and has not significantly improved since an earlier equivalent study over 30 years ago (&#967;2 = 0.04, df = 1, ns). Diagnostic groups did not differ in their overall scores but those with liver disease and diabetes were more accurate regarding the location of their respective affected organs (&#967;2 = 18.10, p &lt; 0.001, df = 1; &#967;2 = 10.75, p &lt; 0.01, df = 1). Age was significantly negatively correlated (r = -0.084, p = 0.025) and education was positively correlated with anatomical knowledge (F = 12.94, p = 0.000). Although there was no overall gender difference, women were significantly better at identifying organs on female body outlines.
Conclusion:
Many patients and general public do not know the location of key body organs, even those in which their medical problem is located, which could have important consequences for doctor-patient communication. These results indicate that healthcare professionals still need to take care in providing organ specific information to patients and should not assume that patients have this information, even for those organs in which their medical problem is located.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/43</link>
                <dc:creator>John Weinman</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Gibran Yusuf</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Robert Berks</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Sam Rayner</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Keith Petrie</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2009, 10:43</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2009-06-12T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-10-43</dc:identifier>
        <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>10</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>43</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2009-06-12T00:00:00Z</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/1471-2296/10/42">
        <title>Prevalence of problem alcohol use among patients attending primary care for methadone treatment</title>
        <description>Background:
Problem alcohol use is associated with adverse health outcomes among current or former heroin users and primary care is providing methadone treatment for increasing numbers of this population. This study aimed todetermine the prevalence of problem alcohol use among current or former heroin users attending primary care for methadone treatment and to describe the socio-demographic characteristics and health service utilisation characteristics associated with problem alcohol uses.
Methods:
We conducted a cross sectional survey of patients sampled from a national database of patients attending general practice for methadone treatment. Participants were recruited by their general practitioner and data was collected using an interviewer-administered questionnaire, which included the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (&apos;AUDIT&apos;), with a score of &gt;7 considered abnormal (ie &apos;AUDIT positive cases&apos;) and socio-demographic, medical and substance use characteristics.
Results:
We interviewed 196 patients (71% of those invited, 31% of those sampled, 11% of the national database). The median age was 32 years, 55% were hepatitis C positive, 79% had used illicit drugs in the previous month and 68% were male. Sixty-eight &apos;AUDIT positive&apos; cases were identified (prevalence of 35%, 95% CI = 28&#8211;41%) and these were more likely to have attended a local Emergency Department in the previous year (p &lt; 0.05) and less likely to have attended a hospital clinic in the previous year (p &lt; 0.05). Twenty-seven (14%) scored 20 or higher indicating possible alcohol dependence.
Conclusion:
Problem alcohol use has a high prevalence among current or former heroin users attending primary care for methadone treatment and interventions that address this issue should be explored as a priority. Interventions that address problem alcohol use in this population should be considered as a priority, although the complex medical and psychological needs of this population may make this challenging.</description>
        <link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/10/42</link>
                <dc:creator>Niamh Ryder</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Walter Cullen</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Joseph Barry</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Gerard Bury</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Eamon Keenan</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Bobby Smyth</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2009, 10:42</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2009-06-11T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-10-42</dc:identifier>
        <prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>10</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>42</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2009-06-11T00:00:00Z</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>
