ObjectiveTo estimate the prevalence of HIV testing among patients diagnosed with an indicator condition (IC) for HIV, seen in primary care (PC) in Catalonia, and to estimate the prevalence of HIV infection among those patients.DesignCross-sectional and population-based study in patients aged between 16 and 65 diagnosed with an IC within PC in Catalonia.MethodsData used in this study were extracted from a large population-based public health database in Spain, the Information System for the Development of Research in Primary Care (SIDIAP). All participants registered in SIDIAP from 1 January 2010 to 31 August 2012 and with a diagnosis of an IC were screened to identify those with an HIV test within the following 4 months.Results99 426 patients were diagnosed with an IC during the study period. In these patients, there were 102 647 episodes in which at least one IC was diagnosed. An HIV test was performed within 4 months in only 18 515 of the episodes in which an IC was diagnosed (18.5%). The prevalence of HIV infection was 1.46%. Women (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.39), people aged 50 or over (OR 2.85, 95% CI 2.69 to 3.00) and patients having a single IC (OR 3.59. 95% CI 3.20 to 4.03) had the greatest odds of not having an HIV test.ConclusionsThe study highlights the persistence of missed opportunities for HIV testing within PC in Catalonia. Urgent engagement with PC professionals is required in order to increase HIV testing and prevent late HIV diagnoses.

This study investigated the acceptability of rapid HIV testing among general practitioners (GP) and aimed to identify perceived barriers and needs in order to implement rapid testing in primary care settings. An anonymous questionnaire was distributed online to all members of the two largest Spanish scientific medical societies for family and community medicine. The study took place between 15 June 2012 and 31 October 2010. Completed questionnaires were returned by 1308 participants. The majority (90.8%) of respondents were GP. Among all respondents, 70.4% were aware of the existence of rapid tests for the diagnosis of HIV but they did not know how to use them. Nearly 80% of participants would be willing to offer rapid HIV testing in their practices and 74.7% would be confident of the result obtained by these tests. The barriers most commonly identified by respondents were a lack of time and a need for training, both in the use of rapid tests (44.3% and 56.4%, respectively) and required pre- and post-test counselling (59.2% and 34.5%, respectively). This study reveals a high level of acceptance and willingness on the part of GPs to offer rapid HIV testing in their practices. Nevertheless, the implementation of rapid HIV testing in primary care will not be possible without moving from comprehensive pre-test counselling towards brief pre-test information and improving training in the use of rapid tests.

BackgroundEvidence based medicine (EBM) has made a substantial impact on primary care in Spain over the last few years. However, little research has been done into family physicians (FPs)' attitudes related to EBM. The present study investigates FPs' perceptions of EBM in the primary care context.MethodsThis study used qualitative methodology. Information was obtained from 8 focus groups composed of 67 FPs from 47 health centers in 4 autonomous regions in Spain. Intentional sampling considered participants' previous education in EBM, and their experience as tutors in family medicine or working groups' members of the Spanish Society of Family Practice. Sociological discourse analysis was used with the support of the MAXqda software. Results were validated by means of triangulation among researchers and contrast with participants.ResultsFindings were grouped into three main areas: 1) The tug-of-war between the "science" of EBM and "experience" in the search for good clinical practice in primary care; 2) The development of EBM sensemaking as a reaction to contextual factors and interests; 3) The paradox of doubt and trust in the new EBM experts.The meaning of EBM was dynamically constructed within the primary care context. FPs did not consider good clinical practice was limited to the vision of science that EBM represents. Its use appeared to be conditioned by several factors that transcended the common concept of barriers. Along with concerns about its objectivity, participants showed a tendency to see EBM as the use of simplified guidelines developed by EBM experts.ConclusionsThe identification of science with EBM and its recognition as a useful but insufficient tool for the good clinical practice requires rethinking new meanings of evidence within the primary care reality. Beyond the barriers related to accessing and putting into practice the EBM, its reactive use can determine FPs' questions and EBM development in a direction not always centred on patients' needs. The questioning of experts' authority as a pillar of EBM could be challenged by the emergence of new kinds of EBM texts and experts to believe in.

This study reveals a high level of acceptance and willingness on the part of GPs to offer rapid HIV testing in their practices. Nevertheless, the implementation of rapid HIV testing in primary care will not be possible without moving from comprehensive pre-test counselling towards brief pre-test information and improving training in the use of rapid tests.

Background: The philosophy of evidence-based medicine (EBM) was introduced in the early 90s as a new approach to the practice of medicine, using the best available evidence to make decisions about health care. Despite ongoing controversy, EBM has developed enormously and physicians' attitude towards it is generally positive. Nevertheless, in Spain little is known about this topic. We will therefore undertake a study to explore perceptions, attitudes and knowledge about EBM among primary care physicians.

BackgroundEvidence on the effectiveness of the Epley manoeuvre in primary care is scarce.AimTo evaluate effectiveness at 1 week, 1 month, and 1 year of a single Epley manoeuvre versus a sham manoeuvre in primary care.Design and settingMulticentre, double-blind randomised controlled trial in two primary care practices in Spain from November 2012 to January 2015.MethodPatients were ≥18 years diagnosed with subjective or objective posterior benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (vertigo only, or vertigo and nystagmus after a Dix–Hallpike test [DHT]). The intervention group received the Epley manoeuvre, and the control group received a sham manoeuvre. Betahistine was prescribed following the same regimen in both groups. The main outcome measures were the DHT result classified as negative (neither vertigo nor nystagmus) or positive. Positive results were further divided into a positive result for both vertigo and nystagmus (positive DHT with nystagmus), and a positive result for vertigo only (positive DHT without nystagmus); self-reported resolution of vertigo; and self-reported severity of vertigo evaluated on a 10-point Likert scale (10 = worst imaginable vertigo).ResultsIn total, 134 patients were randomised to either the intervention group (n = 66) or the sham group (n = 68). The intervention group showed better results in the unadjusted analyses at 1 week, with a lower rate of positive DHT with nystagmus (P = 0.022). A positive baseline DHT with nystagmus was associated with a reduction in vertigo severity (marginal effect for 10-point Likert-like question −1.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −2.95 to −0.51) and better positive DHT rates in the intervention group (adjusted odds ratio 0.09, 95% CI = 0.01 to 0.92) in the multivariate analyses.ConclusionA single Epley manoeuvre performed in primary care is an effective treatment for reversing a positive DHT and reducing vertigo severity in patients with baseline nystagmus in the DHT.

The BODE index and the ADO index showed a significant association with HRQOL. Exacerbations and dyspnea were the best individual factors related to HRQoL.

BackgroundVertigo is a common medical condition with a broad spectrum of diagnoses which requires an integrated approach to patients through a structured clinical interview and physical examination. The main cause of vertigo in primary care is benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV), which should be confirmed by a positive D-H positional test and treated with repositioning maneuvers. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of Epley’s maneuver performed by general practitioners (GPs) in the treatment of BPPV.Methods/DesignThis study is a randomized clinical trial conducted in the primary care setting. The study’s scope will include two urban primary care centers which provide care for approximately 49,400 patients. All patients attending these two primary care centers, who are newly diagnosed with benign paroxysmal positional vertigo, will be invited to participate in the study and will be randomly assigned either to the treatment group (Epley’s maneuver) or to the control group (a sham maneuver). Both groups will receive betahistine. Outcome variables will be: response to the D-H test, patients’ report on presence or absence of vertigo during the previous week (dichotomous variable: yes/no), intensity of vertigo symptoms on a Likert-type scale in the previous week, total score on the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) and quantity of betahistine taken.We will use descriptive statistics of all variables collected. Groups will be compared using the intent-to-treat approach and either parametric or nonparametric tests, depending on the nature and distribution of the variables. Chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test will be conducted to compare categorical measures and Student’s t-test or Mann–Whitney U-test will be used for intergroup comparison variables.DiscussionPositive results from our study will highlight that treatment of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo can be performed by trained general practitioners (GPs) and, therefore, its widespread practice may contribute to improve the quality of life of BPPV patients.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01969513.