<?xml version = '1.0' encoding = 'UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/rss/styledrssBMC.css" type="text/css"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:extra="http://www.biomedcentral.com/xml/schemas/extra/" xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/" xmlns:cc="http://web.resource.org/cc/">
	<channel rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/rss">
		<extra:info rdf:parseType="Literal">
			<html:div xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" style="font:14px Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
				<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>
		<title>BMC Family Practice - Latest articles</title>
		<link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcfampract/</link>
		<description>The latest articles from BMC Family Practice (ISSN 1471-2296) published by 
				
				BioMed Central
		</description>
        <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/"/>
        <items>
            <rdf:Seq>
            
				    <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/43"/>			    
            
				    <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/42"/>			    
            
				    <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/41"/>			    
            
				    <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/40"/>			    
            
				    <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/39"/>			    
            
				    <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/38"/>			    
            
				    <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/37"/>			    
            
				    <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/36"/>			    
            
				    <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/35"/>			    
            
				    <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/34"/>			    
            
            </rdf:Seq>
        </items>
    </channel>  
    
		<item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/43">
            
            <title>Physicians' communication skills with patients and legal liability in decided medical malpractice litigation cases in Japan</title>
			<description>Background:
In medical malpractice litigations in recent years in Japan, it is notable that the growing number of medical litigation cases includes the issue of a doctor's explanation to the patient as a pivotal point. The objective of this study was to identify factors of physicians' communication skills with patients, as related to their legal liability, and differences in doctors' communication skills with patients by the type of medical facility.
Methods:
Decisions of medical malpractice litigation cases between 1988 and 2005 in Japan, the pivotal issue of which was a physician's explanation, were analyzed in the study. The content of each decision was summarized using the study variables (information about the patient, doctor, manner of the doctor's explanation, and subsequent litigation), and a database comprising the content of each decision (N = 100) was constructed. In order to evaluate an association between doctors' communication skills with patients and the outcome of the litigation, the analysis was performed based on the outcome of litigation or the type of medical facility.
Results:
The ratio of acknowledged physician liability by court decision was lower in cases in which the doctor's explanation occurred before treatment or surgery (p = 0.013). The ratio of acknowledged physician liability by court decision was higher in cases of elective or non-urgent treatment (p = 0.046). The ratio of acknowledged physician liability by court decision was higher in clinics than in hospital groups (p = 0.036).
Conclusion:
These findings are beneficial for the prevention of medical disputes and improvement of patient-physician communication.</description>
			<link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/43</link>
			
			 	<dc:creator>Tomoko Hamasaki, Tadamichi Takehara and Akihito Hagihara</dc:creator>
			
			<dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2008, 9:43</dc:source>
			<dc:date>2008-07-25</dc:date>
			<dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-9-43</dc:identifier>
			
			
							
					<prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
					
			
							
					<prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
					
			
							
					<prism:volume>9</prism:volume>
					
			
							
					<prism:startingPage>43</prism:startingPage>
					
			
							
					<prism:publicationDate>2008-07-25</prism:publicationDate>
					

            <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/"/>
        </item>
	
		<item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/42">
            
            <title>Knowledge and attitudes of primary care physicians in the management of patients at risk for cardiovascular events</title>
			<description>Background:
Adherence to clinical practice guidelines for management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is suboptimal. The purposes of this study were to identify practice patterns and barriers among U.S. general internists and family physicians in regard to cardiovascular risk management, and examine the association between physician characteristics and cardiovascular risk management.
Methods:
A case vignette survey focused on cardiovascular disease risk management was distributed to a random sample of 12,000 U.S. family physicians and general internists between November and December 2006.
Results:
Responses from a total of 888 practicing primary care physicians who see 60 patients per week were used for analysis. In an asymptomatic patient at low risk for cardiovascular event, 28% of family physicians and 37% of general internists made guideline-based preventive choices for no antiplatelet therapy (p &lt; .01). In a patient at high risk for cardiovascular event, 59% of family physicians and 56% of general internists identified the guideline-based goal for serum fasting LDL level (&lt; 100 mg/dl). Guideline adherence was inversely related to years in practice and volume of patients seen. Cost of medications (87.7%), adherence to medications (74.1%), adequate time for counseling (55.7%), patient education tools (47.1%), knowledge and skills to recommend dietary changes (47.8%) and facilitate patient adherence (52.0%) were cited as significant barriers to CVD risk management.
Conclusion:
Despite the benefits demonstrated for managing cardiovascular risks, gaps remain in primary care practitioners' management of risks according to guideline recommendations. Innovative educational approaches that address barriers may facilitate the implementation of guideline-based recommendations in CVD risk management.</description>
			<link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/42</link>
			
			 	<dc:creator>Hamidreza Doroodchi, Maziar Abdolrasulnia, Jill A Foster, Elyse Foster, Mintu P Turakhia, Kimberly A Skelding, Kiran Sagar and Linda L Casebeer</dc:creator>
			
			<dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2008, 9:42</dc:source>
			<dc:date>2008-07-08</dc:date>
			<dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-9-42</dc:identifier>
			
			
							
					<prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
					
			
							
					<prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
					
			
							
					<prism:volume>9</prism:volume>
					
			
							
					<prism:startingPage>42</prism:startingPage>
					
			
							
					<prism:publicationDate>2008-07-08</prism:publicationDate>
					

            <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/"/>
        </item>
	
		<item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/41">
            
            <title>Long term GP opinions and involvement after a consultation-liaison intervention for mental health problems</title>
			<description>Background:
Shared Mental Health care between Psychiatry and Primary care has been developed to improve the care of common mental health problems but has not hitherto been adequately evaluated. The present study evaluated a consultation-liaison intervention with two objectives: to explore long-term GP opinions (relating to impact on their management and on patient medical outcome) and to determine the secondary referral rate, after a sufficient time lapse following the intervention to reflect a "real-world" primary care setting.
Methods:
All the 139 collaborating GPs (response rate: 84.9%) were invited two years after the intervention to complete a retrospective telephone survey for each patient (181 patients; response rate: 69.6%).
Results:
91.2% of GPs evaluated effects as positive for primary care management (mainly as support) and 58.9% noted positive effects for patient medical outcome. Two years post-intervention, management was shared care for 79.7% of patients (the GP as the psychiatric care provider) and care by a psychiatrist for 20.3% patients. Secondary referral occurred finally in 44.2% of cases.
Conclusion:
The intervention supported GP partners in their management of patients with common mental health problems. Further studies are required on the appropriateness of the care provider.</description>
			<link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/41</link>
			
			 	<dc:creator>Nadia Youn&#232;s, Christine Passerieux, Marie-Christine Hardy-Bayle, Bruno Falissard and Isabelle Gasquet</dc:creator>
			
			<dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2008, 9:41</dc:source>
			<dc:date>2008-07-02</dc:date>
			<dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-9-41</dc:identifier>
			
			
							
					<prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
					
			
							
					<prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
					
			
							
					<prism:volume>9</prism:volume>
					
			
							
					<prism:startingPage>41</prism:startingPage>
					
			
							
					<prism:publicationDate>2008-07-02</prism:publicationDate>
					

            <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/"/>
        </item>
	
		<item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/40">
            
            <title>Exploring and explaining low participation in physical activity among children and young people with asthma: a review</title>
			<description>Background:
Asthma is the most common chronic illness among children and accounts for 1 in 5 of all child GP consultations. This paper reviews and discusses recent literature outlining the growing problem of physical inactivity among young people with asthma and explores the psychosocial dimensions that may explain inactivity levels and potentially relevant interventions and strategies, and the principles that should underpin them.
Methods:
A narrative review based on an extensive and documented search of search of CinAHL, Embase, Medline, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library.Results &amp; DiscussionChildren and young people with asthma are generally less active than their non-asthmatic peers. Reduced participation may be influenced by organisational policies, family illness beliefs and behaviours, health care advice, and inaccurate symptom perception and attribution. Schools can be reluctant to encourage children to take part in physical education or normal play activity due to misunderstanding and a lack of clear corporate guidance. Families may accept a child's low level of activity if it is perceived that breathlessness or the need to take extra inhalers is harmful. Many young people themselves appear to accept sub-optimal control of symptoms and frequently misinterpret healthy shortness of breath on exercising with the symptoms of an impending asthma attack.
Conclusion:
A multi-faceted approach is needed to translate the rhetoric of increasing activity levels in young people to the reality of improved fitness. Physical activity leading to improved fitness should become part of a goal orientated management strategy by schools, families, health care professionals and individuals. Exercise induced asthma should be regarded as a marker of poor control and a need to increase fitness rather as an excuse for inactivity. Individuals' perceptual accuracy deserves further research attention.</description>
			<link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/40</link>
			
			 	<dc:creator>Brian Williams, Alison Powell, Gaylor Hoskins and Ron Neville</dc:creator>
			
			<dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2008, 9:40</dc:source>
			<dc:date>2008-06-30</dc:date>
			<dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-9-40</dc:identifier>
			
			
							
					<prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
					
			
							
					<prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
					
			
							
					<prism:volume>9</prism:volume>
					
			
							
					<prism:startingPage>40</prism:startingPage>
					
			
							
					<prism:publicationDate>2008-06-30</prism:publicationDate>
					

            <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/"/>
        </item>
	
		<item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/39">
            
            <title>Trends in total cholesterol screening and in prescribing lipid-lowering drugs in general practice in the period 1994&#8211;2003</title>
			<description>Background:
General Practitioners (GPs) play a central role in controlling an important risk factor for cardiovascular diseases, i.e. cholesterol levels in serum. In the past few decades different studies have been published on the effect of treating hyperlipidemia with statins. Guidelines for treatment have been adopted. We investigated the consequences on the practice of GPs screening cholesterol levels and on the timing of starting statin prescription.
Methods:
For this descriptive study, data from the Intego database were used, composed with data from the electronic medical records (EMR) of 47 general practices in Flanders. GPs had not received special instructions for testing specific patients. For each patient the mean cholesterol level per year was calculated. A patient belonged to the group with lipid-lowering drugs if there was at least one prescription of the drug in a year in his EMR. Mixed model linear regression models were used to quantify the effect of covariates on total cholesterol values.
Results:
In the period 1994&#8211;2003 total cholesterol was tested in 47,254 out of 139,148 different patients. Twelve percent of those tested took lipid-lowering medication. The proportion of patients with at least one cholesterol test a year, increased over a period of ten years in all age groups, but primarily for those over the age of 65.The mean cholesterol level decreased in the treated as well as in the non-treated group. Of the patients with a cardiovascular antecedent who were on lipid-lowering drugs in 2003, 56% had a cholesterol level &#8804; 199 mg/dl, 31% between 200&#8211;239 and 13% over 240 mg/dl.
Conclusion:
The indications for testing and treating cholesterol levels broadened considerably in the period examined. In 2003 cholesterol was tested in many more patients and patients were already treated at lower cholesterol values than in previous years. Comparisons of cholesterol levels over different years should therefore be interpreted with caution as they are a reflection of changes in medical care, and not necessarily of efficacy of treatment.</description>
			<link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/39</link>
			
			 	<dc:creator>Stefaan Bartholomeeusen, Jan P Vandenbroucke, Carla Truyers and Frank Buntinx</dc:creator>
			
			<dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2008, 9:39</dc:source>
			<dc:date>2008-06-30</dc:date>
			<dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-9-39</dc:identifier>
			
			
							
					<prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
					
			
							
					<prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
					
			
							
					<prism:volume>9</prism:volume>
					
			
							
					<prism:startingPage>39</prism:startingPage>
					
			
							
					<prism:publicationDate>2008-06-30</prism:publicationDate>
					

            <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/"/>
        </item>
	
		<item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/38">
            
            <title>Raising positive expectations helps patients with minor ailments: A cross-sectional study</title>
			<description>Background:
Consultations for minor ailments constitute a large part of the workload of general practitioners (GPs). As medical interventions are not always available, specific communication strategies, such as active listening and positive communication, might help GPs to handle these problems adequately. This study examines to what extent GPs display both strategies during consultations for minor ailments and investigates how each of these relate to the patients' perceived health, consultation frequency and medication adherence.
Methods:
524 videotaped consultations between Dutch GPs and patients aged 18 years or older were selected. All patients presented a minor ailment, and none of them suffered from a diagnosed chronic illness. The observation protocol included the validated Active Listening Observation Scale (ALOS-global), as well as three domains of positive communication, i.e. providing reassurance, a clear explanation, and a favourable prognosis. Patients completed several questionnaires before, immediately after, and two weeks after the consultation. These included measures for state anxiety (STAI), functional health status (COOP/WONCA charts) and medication adherence (MAQ). Consultation frequency was available from an ongoing patient registration. Data were analysed using multivariate regression analyses.
Results:
Reassurance was related to patients' better overall health. Providing a favourable prognosis was linked to patients feeling better, but only when accompanied by a clear explanation of the complaints. A clear explanation was also related to patients feeling better and less anxious, except when patients reported a low mood pre-visit. Active listening alone was positively associated with patients feeling worse. Among patients in a good mood state, active listening was associated with less adherence.
Conclusion:
To some extent, it seems helpful when GPs are at the same time clear and optimistic about the nature and course of minor ailments. Yet, it does not seem helpful always and in all cases, e.g. when patients feel low upon entering the consulting room. Although communication strategies might to some extent contribute to the management of minor ailments, the results of this observational study also indicate that it is important for a physician to pay attention to the mood of the patient who enters the consulting room.</description>
			<link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/38</link>
			
			 	<dc:creator>Thijs Fassaert, Sandra van Dulmen, Fran&#231;ois Schellevis, Liesbeth van der Jagt and Jozien Bensing</dc:creator>
			
			<dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2008, 9:38</dc:source>
			<dc:date>2008-06-30</dc:date>
			<dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-9-38</dc:identifier>
			
			
							
					<prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
					
			
							
					<prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
					
			
							
					<prism:volume>9</prism:volume>
					
			
							
					<prism:startingPage>38</prism:startingPage>
					
			
							
					<prism:publicationDate>2008-06-30</prism:publicationDate>
					

            <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/"/>
        </item>
	
		<item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/37">
            
            <title>An evaluation of the 'Designated Research Team' approach to building research capacity in primary care</title>
			<description>Background:
This paper describes an evaluation of an initiative to increase the research capability of clinical groups in primary and community care settings in a region of the United Kingdom. The 'designated research team' (DRT) approach was evaluated using indicators derived from a framework of six principles for research capacity building (RCB) which include: building skills and confidence, relevance to practice, dissemination, linkages and collaborations, sustainability and infrastructure development.
Methods:
Information was collated on the context, activities, experiences, outputs and impacts of six clinical research teams supported by Trent Research Development Support Unit (RDSU) as DRTs. Process and outcome data from each of the teams was used to evaluate the extent to which the DRT approach was effective in building research capacity in each of the six principles (as evidenced by twenty possible indicators of research capacity development).
Results:
The DRT approach was found to be well aligned to the principles of RCB and generally effective in developing research capabilities. It proved particularly effective in developing linkages, collaborations and skills. Where research capacity was slow to develop, this was reflected in poor alignment between the principles of RCB and the characteristics of the team, their activities or environment. One team was unable to develop a research project and the funding was withdrawn at an early stage. For at least one individual in each of the remaining five teams, research activity was sustained beyond the funding period through research partnerships and funding successes. An enabling infrastructure, including being freed from clinical duties to undertake research, and support from senior management were found to be important determinants of successful DRT development. Research questions of DRTs were derived from practice issues and several projects generated outputs with potential to change daily practice, including the use of research evidence in practice and in planning service changes.
Conclusion:
The DRT approach was effective at RCB in teams situated in a supportive organisation and in particular, where team members could be freed from clinical duties and management backing was strong. The developmental stage of the team and the research experience of constituent members also appeared to influence success. The six principles of RCB were shown to be useful as a framework for both developing and evaluating RCB initiatives.</description>
			<link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/37</link>
			
			 	<dc:creator>Jo Cooke, Susan Nancarrow, Jane Dyas and Martin Williams</dc:creator>
			
			<dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2008, 9:37</dc:source>
			<dc:date>2008-06-27</dc:date>
			<dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-9-37</dc:identifier>
			
			
							
					<prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
					
			
							
					<prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
					
			
							
					<prism:volume>9</prism:volume>
					
			
							
					<prism:startingPage>37</prism:startingPage>
					
			
							
					<prism:publicationDate>2008-06-27</prism:publicationDate>
					

            <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/"/>
        </item>
	
		<item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/36">
            
            <title>Asthma and COPD in primary health care, quality according to national guidelines: a cross-sectional and a retrospective study</title>
			<description>Background:
In recent decades international and national guidelines have been formulated to ensure that patients suffering from specific diseases receive evidence-based care. In 2004 the National Swedish Board of Health and Welfare (SoS) published guidelines concerning the management of patients with asthma and COPD. The guidelines identify quality indicators that should be fulfilled. The aim of this study was to survey structure and process indicators, according to the asthma and COPD guidelines, in primary health care, and to identify correlations between structure and process quality results.
Methods:
A cross-sectional study of existing structure by using a questionnaire, and a retrospective study of process quality based on a review of measures documented in asthma and COPD medical records. All 42 primary health care centres in the county council of &#214;sterg&#246;tland, Sweden, were included.
Results:
All centres showed high quality regarding structure, although there was a large difference in time reserved for Asthma and COPD Nurse Practice (ACNP). The difference in reserved time was reflected in process quality results. The time needed to reach the highest levels of spirometry and current smoking habit documentation was between 1 and 1 1/2 hours per week per 1000 patients registered at the centre. Less time resulted in fewer patients examined with spirometry, and fewer medical records with smoking habits documented. More time did not result in higher levels, but in more frequent contact with each patient. In the COPD group more time resulted in higher levels of pulse oximetry and weight registration.
Conclusion:
To provide asthma and COPD patients with high process quality in primary care according to national Swedish guidelines, at least one hour per week per 1000 patients registered at the primary health care centre should be reserved for ACNP.</description>
			<link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/36</link>
			
			 	<dc:creator>Siw Carlfjord and Malou Lindberg</dc:creator>
			
			<dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2008, 9:36</dc:source>
			<dc:date>2008-06-19</dc:date>
			<dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-9-36</dc:identifier>
			
			
							
					<prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
					
			
							
					<prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
					
			
							
					<prism:volume>9</prism:volume>
					
			
							
					<prism:startingPage>36</prism:startingPage>
					
			
							
					<prism:publicationDate>2008-06-19</prism:publicationDate>
					

            <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/"/>
        </item>
	
		<item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/35">
            
            <title>Mix of methods is needed to identify adverse events in general practice: A prospective observational study</title>
			<description>Background:
The validity and usefulness of incident reporting and other methods for identifying adverse events remains unclear. This study aimed to compare five methods in general practice.
Methods:
In a prospective observational study, with five general practitioners, five methods were applied and compared. The five methods were physician reported adverse events, pharmacist reported adverse events, patients' experiences of adverse events, assessment of a random sample of medical records, and assessment of all deceased patients.
Results:
A total of 68 events were identified using these methods. The patient survey accounted for the highest number of events and the pharmacist reports for the lowest number. No overlap between the methods was detected. The patient survey accounted for the highest number of events and the pharmacist reports for the lowest number.
Conclusion:
A mix of methods is needed to identify adverse events in general practice.</description>
			<link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/35</link>
			
			 	<dc:creator>Raymond Wetzels, Ren&#233; Wolters, Chris van Weel and Michel Wensing</dc:creator>
			
			<dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2008, 9:35</dc:source>
			<dc:date>2008-06-15</dc:date>
			<dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-9-35</dc:identifier>
			
			
							
					<prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
					
			
							
					<prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
					
			
							
					<prism:volume>9</prism:volume>
					
			
							
					<prism:startingPage>35</prism:startingPage>
					
			
							
					<prism:publicationDate>2008-06-15</prism:publicationDate>
					

            <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/"/>
        </item>
	
		<item rdf:about="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/34">
            
            <title>Screening and diagnosing depression in women visiting GPs' drop in clinic in Primary Health Care</title>
			<description>Background:
Only half of all depressions are diagnosed in Primary Health Care (PHC). Depression can remain undetected for a long time and entail high costs for care and low quality of life for the individuals. Drop in clinic is a common form of organizing health care; however the visits are short and focus on solving the most urgent problems. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence and severity of depression among women visiting the GPs' drop in clinic and to identify possible clues for depression among women.
Methods:
The two-stage screening method with "high risk feedback" was used. Beck's Depression Inventory (BDI) was used to screen 155 women visiting two GPs' drop in clinic. Women who screened positive (BDI score &#8805;10) were invited by the GP to a repeat visit. Major depression (MDD) was diagnosed according to DSM-IV criteria and the severity was assessed with Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Women with BDI score &lt;10 constituted a control group. Demographic characteristics were obtained by questionnaire. Chart notations were examined with regard to symptoms mentioned at the index visit and were categorized as somatic or mental.
Results:
The two-stage method worked well with a low rate of withdrawals in the second step, when the GP invited the women to a repeat visit. The prevalence of depression was 22.4% (95% CI 15.6&#8211;29.2). The severity was mild in 43%, moderate in 53% and severe in 3%. The depressed women mentioned mental symptoms significantly more often (69%) than the controls (15%) and were to a higher extent sick-listed for a longer period than 14 days. Nearly one third of the depressed women did not mention mental symptoms. The majority of the women who screened as false positive for depression had crisis reactions and needed further care from health professionals in PHC. Referrals to a psychiatrist were few and revealed often psychiatric co-morbidity.
Conclusion:
The prevalence of previously undiagnosed depression among women visiting GPs' drop in clinic was high. Clues for depression were identified in the depressed women's symptom presentation; they often mention mental symptoms when they visit the GP for somatic reasons e.g. respiratory infections. We suggest that GPs do selective screening for depression when women mention mental symptoms and offer to schedule a repeat visit for follow-up rather than just recommending that the patient return if the mental symptoms do not disappear.</description>
			<link>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/9/34</link>
			
			 	<dc:creator>Ranja Stromberg, Estera Wernering, Anna Aberg-Wistedt, Anna-Karin Furhoff, Sven-Erik Johansson and Lars G Backlund</dc:creator>
			
			<dc:source>BMC Family Practice 2008, 9:34</dc:source>
			<dc:date>2008-06-13</dc:date>
			<dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1471-2296-9-34</dc:identifier>
			
			
							
					<prism:publicationName>BMC Family Practice</prism:publicationName>
					
			
							
					<prism:issn>1471-2296</prism:issn>
					
			
							
					<prism:volume>9</prism:volume>
					
			
							
					<prism:startingPage>34</prism:startingPage>
					
			
							
					<prism:publicationDate>2008-06-13</prism:publicationDate>
					

            <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>
