No abstract

ObjectivesPercutaneous coronary interventions do not provide a benefit over medical therapy for stable patients. However, an overuse of cardiac catheterisation (CC) for stable coronary artery disease (CAD) is documented in Germany and other countries. In this study, we aim to understand patient factors that foster this overuse.DesignOur study is an exploratory qualitative interview study with narrative, structured interviews. The interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis by Mayring.SettingThe interviews were conducted in two German teaching practices.Participants24 interviews with 25 patients were conducted; 17 (68%) patients were male, the average age was 73.9 years (range 53–88 years). All patients suffered from CAD and had undergone at least one CC. Patients with known anxiety disorders were excluded from the study.ResultsThe analysis identified six patient factors which contributed to or prevented the overuse of CC: (1) unquestioned acceptance of prescheduled appointments for procedures/convenience; (2) disinterest in and/or lack of disease-specific knowledge; (3) helplessness in situations with varying opinions on the required care; (4) fear of another cardiac event, (5) patient–physician relationship and (6) the patient’s experience that repeat interventions did not result in a change of health status or care.ConclusionsConducted in a country with documented overuse of CC, we showed that most patients trusted their physicians’ recommendations for repeat coronary angiographies even if they were asymptomatic. Strategies to align physician adherence with guidelines and corresponding patient information are needed to prevent overuse.

No abstract

BackgroundAfter documenting insufficient vaccinations in 444 liver transplant (LT) patients, we investigated the effects of a combined strategy (addressing both patients and primary care physicians) on immunization prevalences after a 3‐year follow‐up.MethodsThe primary care physicians of all adult LT patients from a university center received a written recommendation addressing immunization needs. Patients were asked for their vaccination documents by phone. Changes in immunization rates for vaccine‐preventable diseases after the intervention were calculated based on patients’ immunization documents from 2014‐2016.ResultsThe study cohort consisted of 401 patients. Prevalence rates for all vaccinations improved during the intervention period compared to the baseline study: tetanus from 88.3% to 92.8%, diphtheria from 80.0% to 89.0%, hepatitis A from 50.1% to 60.8%, hepatitis B from 66.3% to 77.1%, and pneumococci from 62.8% to 76.3%. The influenza vaccination rate improved, but remained at a low level before (2010:13%, 2011:11.5%, 2012:19%) and during the intervention (2014:27.4%, 2015:24.4%, 2016:23.2%). Despite these vaccinations, the prevalence rates of the quality indicators standard vaccinations completed (2013:17.2%; 2016:21.2%), indicated vaccinations completed (2013:2.7%, 2016:4.5%), and all vaccinations completed (2013:1%; 2016 1.5%) improved only slightly.ConclusionsOur results demonstrated that intensified communication by written information to the primary care physician and phone calls to the patients improved the number of vaccinations. Nonetheless, a potential for further improvement persists, especially with regard to annual influenza vaccinations.

Comparison of eGFR calculated by MDRD and CKD-EPI equations demonstrated no clinically relevant difference. In addition, CKD classification by both equations agreed highly. As both equations performed equally well, the simpler and more established MDRD equation should be preferred in patients with or at high risk of CKD managed in primary care. Patients' characteristics seem to account for previously reported differences in the performance of CKD-EPI and MDRD equations.