A study to evaluate the effectiveness of multiphasic screening in Yugoslavia

Titograd was selected as the site for a controlled 6-year study of the effectiveness of health screening in Yugoslavia. After a census of the city's population in 1969, 6,577 out of 13,150 individuals in the 30- to 49-year-old age group were assigned to the study group and the remainder to the control group. After an initial background interview, the study group then received a thorough screening examination and follow-up care.The data collected are still being evaluated and only preliminary results are available. Of those examined by general practitioners, referrals were made to specialists for suspected conditions, as follows: tuberculosis 6.2%, bronchitis and emphysema 10%; cardiovascular disease 37.1%; rheumatoid arthritis 5.2%; diabetes 8.9%, and nephritis 7.9%. One of the major findings was that 74% of the examinees were in need of dental services. Final results will report on mortality, morbidity, absence from work, and utilization of medical services.     

Cervical screening in general practice

Abstract: This study examined the effect of three interventions for encouraging women to have a Pap smear in a general practice: tagging the medical record to remind the doctor to offer a Pap smear, sending an invitation to make an appointment for a Pap smear, and sending an invitation with an appointment to attend for a Pap smear at a special screening clinic staffed by women. The study took place in a university general practice at Lockridge, near Perth. A computerised practice age-sex register provided 2139 women in the age range 36 to 69 inclusive. Of these, 757 were eligible for inclusion in the study and were allocated randomly to one of three intervention groups or a control group. In total, 177 women had a Pap smear during the study. Significantly more Pap smears were taken for the appointment-letter and letter-only groups than the control group (odds ratio (OR) 2.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.34 to 3.57, and OR 1.67, CI 1.01 to 2.77 respectively), but there was no significant difference between the tagged-notes and the control groups. Women who attended the screening clinic rated the experience positively. Attendance, however, was inadequate for the clinic's viability in a private practice.     

Improving population-based cervical cancer screening in general practice: effects of a national strategy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of a Dutch national prevention programme, aimed at general practitioners (GPs), on the adherence to organizational guidelines for effective cervical cancer screening in general practice. To identify the characteristics of general practices determining success. DESIGN: A prospective questionnaire study with pre- and post-measurement (before and 15 months after the introduction of the national programme). SETTING AND STUDY PARTICIPANTS: A random sample of one-third of all 4758 Dutch general practices. One GP was asked to participate per practice. INTERVENTION: A national GP prevention programme to improve population-based prevention of cervical cancer combining various methods for quality improvement in general practice, performed on a national, district and practice level. Outreach visitors were a key strategy in bringing about behavioural changes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of practices adhering to 10 recommendations (in four guidelines) to organize effective cervical cancer screening. RESULTS: After 15 months, all Dutch practices showed significant improvement in adherence to nine out of 10 recommendations. Two recommendations, in particular 'identifying women who should be medically excluded from screening' and 'sending a reminder to non-compliers' showed the largest absolute increases of 26% and 33%, respectively. Besides more intensive support of outreach visitors, practice characteristics such as 'computerization' and 'delegation of many clinical tasks to the practice assistant' were important in improving the adherence to guidelines. CONCLUSION: The national programme, with a combination of various methods for quality improvement, appeared to be effective in improving the organization of cervical screening in general practice. Computerization and, to a lesser extent, delegation of many clinical tasks to the practice assistant and more intensive support to practices, positively influenced the effectiveness of the national programme.     

From general practice to primary care: the industrialisation of family medicine in Britain

Health services are multi-unit enterprises providing multi-component services, and organisationally are equivalent to very large, diversified companies. Although public health services like Britain's National Health service (NHS) are not for-profit enterprises, they may share characteristics of such enterprises, particularly where these characteristics offer methods of cost-containment. Since all health services, however organised, face the same problem of resources being insufficient to meet demand for health care, they exhibit an underlying tendency towards solving problems in health care using mechanisms borrowed from other industries. This paper attempts to answer the question: to what extent has general practice (family medicine) in Britain's NHS adopted industrial modes of organisation from productive (for-profit) industries?     

Use of recording booklets to evaluate teaching in general practice

Recording booklets have been introduced for students during their course of general practice teaching at the University of Glasgow. The booklets guide the students with patients in the community who have chronic and complicated diseases. Each case history in the booklet was marked and this provided an evaluation of the teaching. This showed an improvement in the students' overall ability but was most marked in the areas of social history and problem list, thus fulfilling the aims of the teaching.     

Opportunistic screening for Chlamydia in general practice: the experience of health professionals

Chlamydia trachomatis is the most common curable bacterial sexually transmitted infection in the UK. The infection is asymptomatic in up to 70% of women, and if untreated, can lead to pelvic inflammatory disease, ectopic pregnancy and infertility. Chlamydial infection can be diagnosed using urine testing and is easily treated with antibiotics. In 1999, the UK Department of Health funded a pilot opportunistic Chlamydia screening programme in two health authorities. All sexually active women between the ages of 16 and 24 years attending general practices and other healthcare settings, such as family planning clinics, antenatal clinics and genito-urinary medicine services, were offered the opportunity to be screened for Chlamydia, regardless of the purpose of their visit. This evaluation was funded to assess the feasibility and acceptability of opportunistic screening. The evaluation was conducted using both qualitative and quantitative methods. The present paper describes findings from the qualitative evaluation study arising from the health professionals' experience of opportunistic screening in general practice. Receptionists were central to the opportunistic screening model in general practice and it was this aspect of the model that raised most concerns. Whilst general practitioners reported that the involvement of receptionists saved them time, the receptionists themselves were sometimes drawn into discussions for which they felt ill equipped and unsuitably located. This research suggests that a call-recall national screening programme would provide a better model to undertake Chlamydia screening in general practice. The advantages of this model are threefold. First, each individual within the target age range can receive information about Chlamydia through the post. Secondly, the test and more detailed information can be managed by a practice nurse in a private and confidential setting. Thirdly, individuals are not repeatedly offered the test when visiting the surgery.     

Patients' views on health screening in general practice

This paper describes the reactions of 159 patients to the way in which they were invited to participate in a health screening programme and their views on the screening appointment itself. It was found that those invited by letter, rather than opportunistically during a routine consultation, thought their appointment time harder to keep. A group of patients identified as relatively infrequent consulters were less likely to believe that the invite showed the practice to be interested in their health. However, overall the patients' perceptions of both the way in which they were invited and the screening appointment itself were found to be very positive and their satisfaction ratings high.     

Patient education and multiphasic screening: it can change behavior

Two hundred ninety-two residents of Sonoma County, California, underwent multiphasic screeening and two sessions of group patient education aimed at reducing risk factors for cardiovascular disease, cancer, and automobile accidents. Approximately one year later all the participants were retested. A significant reduction was noted in systolic blood pressure in men and women, ages 50 to 70, cholesterol in men over age 40, and reported alcohol consumption in men. A significant increase was noted in the reported frequency of monthly breast self-examination in women, and in the amount of exercise and percentage of time seat belts were used in both sexes. No change was noted in reported amount of cigarette smoking, weight, fasting blood glucose, and triglycerides. The combined use of health hazard appraisal, multiphasic screening, and patient education can lead to a reduction in cardiac and other risk factors in well-motivated groups.     

National screening policies in general practice: a case study of routine screening for partner abuse

Internationally-recognised criteria for screening for a particular disorder require the following: availability of a clear diagnosis; a suitable validated screening test; acceptability of routine screening by patients and health providers; benefits of earlier detection and application of appropriate interventions to prevent the progression of a disorder, and hence reduction in incidence of morbidity and mortality; identification of possible harm from screening (false positives, false negatives, adverse effects of labelling, early diagnosis or unnecessary treatment of persons with true-positive test results with inconsequential disease) and weighing this against potential benefits; identification of possible sub-populations with the possibility of targeted screening of high-risk populations; good quality evidence of interventions effective in preventing or managing the disorder; and a cost-effectiveness assay. The New Zealand Ministry of Health have launched a best-practice guideline recommending all female general practice patients sixteen years and over be routinely screened for physical and sexual abuse by their partners. Inter-partner violence, especially against women by male partners and expartners, is a serious public health problem. However, review of existing research indicates that this guideline meets none of the criteria listed above. Considerable funding is invested in training health providers to implement this screening protocol, but, in the absence of effectiveness studies, cost-effectiveness cannot be assessed. Under current conditions, routine screening of adult women for partner abuse cannot be justified. However, GPs should be encouraged to learn about partner abuse and consider this possibility in patients presenting with physical injuries, psychological disturbance or social dysfunction, especially in high-risk patients. Research should be supported for the development and validation of effective, acceptable screening tools and randomised controlled trials of appropriate interventions. The desire to intervene for the public good should not dictate the implementation of a screening programme that disregards accepted screening criteria.     

A preliminary study of the decision-making process within general practice

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to explore the factors that contribute to the process of decision making within general practice, over and above evidence-based information. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured interviews on a purposeful sample of GPs, based in the South West of England. Each interview was tape-recorded and transcribed verbatim. RESULTS: Five broad categories emerged from the data: practitioner; patient; practitioner-patient relationship; verbal and non-verbal communication; evidence-based medicine; and external factors. CONCLUSION: The nature of general practice is such that the process of making clinical decisions is complex. In an era when GPs are being overwhelmed by evidence-based information, consideration needs to be given to the implications that the nature of the decision-making process has upon the way 'evidence' is constructed and promoted within general practice.     

GP and patient predictors of PSA screening in Australian general practice

OBJECTIVE: We determined GP and patient variables associated first with men's prior uptake of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and, subsequently, its initiation during an 'index consultation' in Australian general practice. METHODS: From the practices of 60 GPs, we recruited a sample of 423 male patients aged 40-70 years. In a waiting room questionnaire completed before their 'index consultation' (retrospective component), men reported their previous PSA screening status. We obtained demographic and clinical data, including the presence of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Men also were mailed a questionnaire 2 days after their 'index consultation' to ascertain whether the GP had discussed PSA screening (prospective component) for prostate cancer and other behaviours. GPs themselves completed questionnaires eliciting demographic and practice characteristics as well as their propensity to screen and understanding of the evidence about PSA testing. GP and patient study variables were modelled simultaneously in analyses. RESULTS: Of those 348 men consulting with their regular GP, 80 (23.0%) reported previously having had a PSA screening test. Men were significantly and independently more likely ever to have had PSA screening if their regular GP reported a propensity to initiate screening [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 2.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23-4.20; P = 0.009]. GP age also was independently associated with men's PSA screening status [chi-squared (3) P < 0.0001] as was men's age and severity of LUTS (AOR = 2.38, 95% CI 1.58-3.57, P < 0.0001 and AOR = 1.79, 95% CI 1.00-3.19, P = 0.004, respectively). Current smokers were less likely ever to have had a PSA screening test (AOR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.16-0.69; P = 0.003). Discussion of PSA screening in their 'index consultation' was recalled independently more often by older men (AOR = 1.46, 95% CI 1.00-2.13; P = 0.04), those with moderate/severe LUTS (AOR = 1.94, 1.07-3.49; P = 0.04), those whose GP had performed or discussed a cholesterol test (AOR = 2.26, 95% CI 1.03-4.92; P = 0.04) and those whose GP had postgraduate training in family medicine (AOR = 3.13, 95% CI 1.23-8.00; P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: In the absence as yet of compelling evidence that PSA screening will prolong life or enhance its quality, our findings identify GP and patient factors that could be targeted to modify PSA screening.     

Strategies to improve cancer screening in general practice: are guidelines the answer?

BACKGROUND: GPs are ideally placed to recommend appropriate cancer screening for their patients. However, opportunities to discuss screening are often missed and screening procedures are not always recommended in accordance with national policy. The development of clinical practice guidelines represents one strategy for improving cancer screening in general practice. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to ascertain Australian GPs' ratings of current clinical practice guidelines and their views of the likely usefulness of 18 strategies to improve cancer screening in general practice. METHOD: A self-administered questionnaire was mailed to a national random sample of 1271 GPs in May 1996. Responders rated the usefulness of each of eight clinical practice guidelines current at the time of the survey. They then rated the usefulness of each of 18 strategies for support of cancer screening. RESULTS: We received 855 completed questionnaires (a 67% response rate). There was greatest support for guidelines already available on breast and cervical cancer. The most popular strategy to improve cancer screening was seminars with experts in preventive care, rated as 'very useful' by 658 (77%), followed by NHMRC guidelines (597, 70%) and pamphlets for patients (587, 69%). There was less support for more innovative strategies including assessment and feedback (35%), case finding by nurse practitioners (11%) and academic detailing (10%). CONCLUSION: Responders indicated that strategies involving passive dissemination of information would be most useful for improving cancer screening in general practice. Identification of an effective combination of acceptable initiatives is needed.     

Cost-effectiveness of interventions to promote cervical screening in general practice

Abstract: A cost-effectiveness study of three different interventions to promote the uptake of screening for cervical cancer in general practice was carried out in Perth in 1991. Women eligible for a Pap smear were randomly allocated to one of four groups: one receiving letters with specific appointments to attend a screening clinic staffed by female doctors, one receiving letters informing them of the availability of the clinic and suggesting they make an appointment, one whose files were tagged to remind a doctor to offer a smear during a consultation, and a comparison control group that received opportunistic screening only. Variable and fixed costs for each group were itemised and summarised to give an average cost per smear taken. The cost and effectiveness of each intervention were then compared with those of the control group. Sensitivity analysis was performed on the major component of the costs, the doctor's time. Opportunistic screening cost $14.60 per smear and attained 16 per cent recruitment. Tagging files was the cheapest intervention ($14.75 per smear) although it was the least effective in recruiting women (20 per cent). This result held true for different scenarios of doctor's time allocated. Intervention by invitation letter with no appointment cost $45.35 per smear and attained 26 per cent recruitment, and intervention with a specific appointment cost $48.21 per smear and attained 30 per cent recruitment. Compared with the control group, the incremental cost-effectiveness for the tagged group was $15.40, for the letter-without-appointment group $97.75 and for the letter-with-appointment group $86.50.