将医疗保健干预措施从试验转化为实践

成千上万的试验结果从未被用于实践,因为其发表的报告未能详细地描述具体的干预措施。如何才能改进这些报告呢？     

不同干预措施对减少全麻苏醒期寒战的对比研究

目的:探讨不同干预措施对全麻苏醒期寒战的影响。方法:选择100例妇科腹腔镜手术且在苏醒期发生寒战的患者,随机分为四组,每组25例。寒战发生后,A组给予充气式保温毯保暖;B组给予缓慢静脉注射曲马多1mg/kg;C组给予充气式保温毯保暖,缓慢静脉注射曲马多1mg/kg;D组为对照组,给予等量生理盐水静脉注射。观察并记录干预前(T1)、干预后5min(T2)和15min(T3)患者的寒战级别,患者的不良反应(恶心呕吐、头晕等)和返回病房后2h内寒战复发率,以及核心温度(鼓膜温度)的变化。结果:T1时点四组患者寒战程度无显著性差异(P>0.05);T2时点A、B、C组寒战等级低于D组(P<0.05),与A组比较,B、C组寒战疗效更好(P<0.05);T3时点A、B、C组疗效优于D组(P<0.05);A、B、C三组间比较C组疗效最佳(P<0.05)。四组患者各个时间点鼓膜温度无显著性差异(P>0.05)。返回病房后2h内寒战复发率C组明显低于A、B、D组(P<0.05);B、C组不良反应率比较无显著性差异(P>0.05)。结论:充气式保温毯加曲马多,对治疗全麻苏醒期寒战效果显著,不良反应少,且寒战复发率低。     

Simulated patients in general practice: a different look at the consultation

To develop a better empirical basis for developing quality assessment in general practice three simulated patients made appointments with 48 general practitioners during actual surgery hours and collected facts about their performance. The simulated patients were indistinguishable from real patients and presented a standardised story of a symptomatic urinary tract infection. Two months later the same general practitioners received a written simulation about a patient who had the same urinary tract infection and were asked how they would handle this in real practice. Both results were scored against an existing consensus standard. The overall score for both methods did not show any substantial differences. A more differentiated analysis, however, showed that general practitioners performed significantly better with simulated patients. It also showed that general practitioners answering the written simulation performed significantly more unnecessary and superfluous actions. The results of this study show that the use of simulated patients seems to show the efficient performance of general practitioners in practice.     

Psychopharmacology in general practice

With the advent of more safe and user-friendly drugs in the modern era of psychopharmacology and their use in general practice, a brief discussion regarding the pharmacological aspect of the new drugs has been attempted in the present article so that they may be used more effectively in practice.     

Co-morbidity in general practice

Background: Co-morbidity, or the presence of more than one clinical condition, is gaining increased attention in epidemiological and health services research. However, the clinical relevance of co-morbidity has yet to be defined. In general practice, few studies have been conducted into co-morbidity, either at a single health care encounter, an episode of care, or for a defined time period. Aims: To describe the major co-morbidity cluster profiles recorded by general practitioners. Another aim of this study is to describe the common clusters of co-prescribing. Methods and results: Twelve month data from patients attending 156 GPs from 95 practices around a six month period of January to June 2003 were analysed. This represented 840 961 encounters from about 200 000 individual patients at these participating practices. Co-morbidity and co-prescribing cluster profiles are represented by problems managed and reasons for prescribing for the top 10 presentations and top 10 prescribed drugs in the study period. Conclusions: By analysing the 10 most prevalent problems and 10 most prevalent drugs prescribed in consultations in a community sample, other co-morbidities that are particular to general practice, for example hypertension and lipid disorders, can be uncovered. Whether these clusters are causally related or occur by chance requires further analysis.