Results of studies conducted 10-20 years ago show the prominence of commercial information sources in the adoption process of new drugs. Over the past decade, there has been a growing emphasis on practicing evidence-based medicine in drug prescribing. This raises the question whether professional information sources currently counterbalance the influence of commercial information sources in the adoption process. The aim of this study was to identify determinants influencing the adoption of a new drug class, the angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), by general practitioners (GPs) in The Netherlands. A retrospective study was conducted to assess prevalent ARB prescribing for hypertensive patients using the Integrated Primary Care Information (IPCI) database. We conducted a survey among all GPs who participated in the IPCI project in 2003 to assess their exposure to commercial and professional information sources, perceived benefits and risks of ARBs, perceived influences of the professional network, and general characteristics. Multilevel logistic regression was applied to identify determinants of ARB adoption while adjusting for patient characteristics. Data were obtained from 70 GPs and 9470 treated hypertensive patients. A total of 1093 patients received ARBs (12%). GPs who reported frequent use of commercial information sources were more likely to prescribe ARBs routinely in preference to other antihypertensives, whereas GPs who used a prescribing decision support system and those who were involved in pharmacotherapy education were less likely to prescribe ARBs. Other factors that were associated with higher levels of ARB adoption included a more positive perception of ARBs regarding their effectiveness in lowering blood pressure, and working in single-handed practices or in rural areas. Aside from determinants related to the patient population, adoption of a new drug class among Dutch GPs is still determined more by their reliance on promotional information than by their use of professional information sources. r

PurposeLittle is known about the actual involvement of the general practitioner (GP) during the active breast cancer treatment phase. Therefore, this study explored (disease-specific) primary health care use among women undergoing active treatment for breast cancer compared with women without breast cancer.MethodsA total of 185 women with a first diagnosis of early-stage breast cancer between 1998 and 2007 were identified in the primary care database of the Registration Network Groningen and matched with a reference population of 548 women without breast cancer on birth year and GP.ResultsSince diagnosis, patients with breast cancer had twice as many face-to-face contacts compared with women from the reference population (median 6.0 vs 3.0/year, Mann–Whitney (M-W) test p < 0.001). The median number of drug prescriptions and referrals was also significantly higher among patients than among the reference population (11.0 vs 7.0/year, M-W test p < 0.001 and 1.0 vs 0.0/year, M-W test p < 0.001). More patients than women from the reference population had face-to-face contacts or were prescribed drugs for reasons related to breast cancer and its treatment, including gastrointestinal problems, psychological reasons and endocrine therapy.ConclusionsDuring the active breast cancer treatment phase, GPs are involved in the management of treatment-related side effects and psychological symptoms, as well as in the administration of endocrine therapy. Based on the findings of this study, interventions across the primary/secondary interface can be planned to improve quality of life and other outcomes in patients undergoing breast cancer treatment.

Validity of performance indicators for assessing prescribing quality Pont, LG; Denig, P; van der Molen, T; van der Veen, WJ; Haaijer-Ruskamp, FM Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Abstract Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the concurrent validity between the identification of suboptimal treatment based on clinical information and computer generated indicators. Indicators that are associated with sub-optimal treatment in one of the four steps of asthma management were assessed. Design: The ability of each indicator to identify patients with sub-optimal asthma treatment from computerised general practitioner (GP) prescription records was assessed by comparing them with the results of an individual patient assessment using clinical data. Setting: Chronic asthma patients (n=146) registered with 16 Dutch GPs. Main measures: The sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) of each performance indicator was determined.Results: The step-1 indicator, focusing on patients not prescribed a short-acting b-agonist, had an acceptable sensitivity (0.86), but a low PPV (0.52). The two step-2 indicators, targeting under-prescription of inhaled corticosteroids, had sensitivities of 0.74 and 0.37 and PPVs of 0.46 and 0.71, respectively. The step-3 indicator, which targeted under-dosing of inhaled corticosteroids, had a sensitivity of 0.07 and a PPV of 0.2. The fourth indicator, focusing on under-prescription of long-acting b-agonists, could not be validated due to inadequate numbers of patients with severe asthma in our study sample. Discussion: None of the indicators investigated was considered valid for assessing prescriber performance, despite having good face and content validity. Performance indicators that have not been validated can only provide a broad-brush approach for assessing prescribing quality and should be used with extreme caution.

Nearly half of patients with a new shoulder complaint consult their GP only once. Medical consumption in general practice is highest for male shoulder patients and the 45- to 64-year age group. Shoulder problems are mainly an issue for primary care.