Suppr超能文献

[法国全科医生识别使用患者健康问卷确定的常见精神障碍的能力:随着守门人制度的引入以及选择医生进行注册,这种能力有变化吗?]

[Ability of French General Practitioners to detect common mental disorders identified using the Patient Health Questionnaire: Has this changed with the introduction of gatekeeping and registration with a chosen doctor?].

作者信息

Norton J, David M, Gandubert C, Bouvier C, Gutierrez L-A, Frangeuil A, Macgregor A, Oude Engberink A, Mann A, Capdevielle D

机构信息

Inserm, U1061, hôpital La Colombière, Pavillon 42, 39, avenue Charles-Flahault, 34093 Montpellier cedex 5, France; Université de Montpellier, U1061, 34093 Montpellier cedex 5, France.

Département de médecine générale, faculté de médecine Nîmes-Montpellier, université de Montpellier, Montpellier, France.

出版信息

Encephale. 2018 Feb;44(1):22-31. doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2016.07.009. Epub 2016 Oct 15.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The general practitioner (GP) is the most frequently consulted health professional by patients with common mental disorders (CMD). Yet approximately half of cases are not detected by the GP. Many factors linked to the patient, the doctor and the health care system influence detection. For example, detection rates are higher when patients are better known to their GP. On the other hand, patients visiting a different GP for reasons of dissatisfaction with previous care are more likely to be detected on the survey-day. In France, a form of gatekeeping was introduced in 2005 to encourage patients to register with a doctor (most often a GP) of their choice (known as the Preferred Doctor), responsible for care coordination and referral if necessary to secondary care. Visiting a different GP, other than for non-avoidable reasons (for e.g. GP unreachable, patient on holiday), is still possible but financially sanctioned with lower reimbursement rates. We aimed to compare GP detection rates before and after the introduction of this gatekeeping scheme. Patient service use behaviour such as doctor-shopping and GP referral to secondary care were also compared.

METHODS

Two cross-sectional surveys using the same study methods were carried out 10 years apart. In 2003, 46 GPs and 1151 patients participated (approximately 25 patients per GP), with a 32.7% GP participation rate. In 2013, 38 GPs participated (of which 29 had participated in the previous study, with a 85.3% "recapture" rate) and 1133 patients (approximately 30 patients per GP). Patient participation rates were 89.8% and 67%, respectively. Patients completed self-report questionnaires in the waiting room of which the DSM-IV diagnostic criteria Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) and an adapted version of the Client Service Receipt Inventory (CSRI) on contacts with health care services in the previous six months. For each patient, the GP completed a questionnaire giving his rating of psychiatric illness on a five-point scale with his/her diagnosis for cases, and action undertaken.

RESULTS

Of the patients, 27% and 25.4% had a CMD according to the PHQ (defined as a diagnosis of minor or major depression, panic attack, anxiety or somatoform disorder) in 2003 and 2013 respectively. Corresponding detection rates were 51% and 52.6%. Rates were highest for threshold disorders: panic disorder (69.4% and 79.9% in 2003 and 2013, respectively), major depression (75% and 63.3% in 2003 and 2013, respectively) and other anxiety disorders (69.1% and 78.8% in 2003 and 2013, respectively). In 2003, the GPs declared seeing 15.5% for the first time on the survey-day, compared to 9.6% in 2013 (P=0.006). Doctor-shopping declined between the two studies, from 18.4% to 12.1% for practical and mostly unavoidable reasons, and from 9.8% to 4.2% for dissatisfaction reasons (P<0.0001). Referral to specialist doctors increased from 9.7% in 2003 to 14.7% in 2013 (P=0.014). In 2013, on the survey-day, 94.8% of patients had registered with a Preferred Doctor and 81.2% were seeing this Preferred Doctor. In 2003, 93.5% of patients declared having a usual GP and 79.9% were visiting this GP on the survey-day.

CONCLUSIONS

This is one of the first studies to report data from two repeated surveys carried out before and after a change in the health service organisation, with data collected from both the patient and the GP. We report relatively high GP detection rates for the two periods, with about 50% of CMDs, including subsyndromic conditions, detected by the GP. Rates are considerably higher for the threshold disorders. The overall detection rate did not increase as expected between the two studies. Detection is a complex topic, involving issues such as the suitability of applying categorical DSM-IV criteria diagnoses to primary care, the relevance of detecting subthreshold conditions and the ability of cross-sectional studies to correctly assess the ability of GPs to recognise cases. The introduction of gatekeeping with the choice of a Preferred Doctor has led to a decline in the frequency of doctor-shopping, whatever its reason, with patients no doubt being better known to the GP. Yet it appears most patients had already chosen a GP they were loyal to before the scheme, with a similar proportion of patients consulting their chosen GP or Preferred Doctor on both survey-days in 2003 and 2013, suggesting the scheme may to some extent only have officialised what already existed with respect to having a usual GP. The French reform still allows for doctor-shopping which can be considered as a positive aspect of the scheme: patients either dissatisfied with previous care or needing to change GP are thus able to "test" and choose the doctor that best suits their needs.

摘要

目的

全科医生(GP)是常见精神障碍(CMD)患者最常咨询的医疗专业人员。然而,约有一半的病例未被全科医生检测到。许多与患者、医生和医疗保健系统相关的因素会影响检测。例如,当全科医生对患者更熟悉时,检测率会更高。另一方面,因对先前治疗不满而就诊于不同全科医生的患者在调查当天更有可能被检测到。在法国,2005年引入了一种守门制度,鼓励患者选择自己的医生(通常是全科医生)注册(称为首选医生),负责护理协调,并在必要时转诊至二级护理。除了不可避免的原因(例如无法联系到全科医生、患者在度假)外,就诊于其他全科医生仍然是可能的,但会受到经济制裁,报销率较低。我们旨在比较引入该守门制度前后全科医生的检测率。还比较了患者的服务使用行为,如更换医生就诊和全科医生转诊至二级护理的情况。

方法

相隔10年进行了两项采用相同研究方法的横断面调查。2003年,46名全科医生和1151名患者参与(每位全科医生约25名患者),全科医生参与率为32.7%。2013年,38名全科医生参与(其中29名参与了先前的研究,“再捕获”率为85.3%)和1133名患者(每位全科医生约30名患者)。患者参与率分别为89.8%和67%。患者在候诊室完成自我报告问卷,其中包括DSM-IV诊断标准患者健康问卷(PHQ)以及前六个月与医疗保健服务接触情况的客户服务收据清单(CSRI)的改编版本。对于每位患者,全科医生完成一份问卷,用五点量表对精神疾病进行评分,并给出病例诊断及采取的行动。

结果

根据PHQ,2003年和2013年分别有27%和25.4%的患者患有CMD(定义为轻度或重度抑郁症、惊恐发作、焦虑或躯体形式障碍的诊断)。相应的检测率分别为51%和52.6%。阈值疾病的检测率最高:惊恐障碍(2003年和2013年分别为69.4%和79.9%)、重度抑郁症(2003年和2013年分别为75%和63.3%)以及其他焦虑障碍(2003年和2013年分别为69.1%和78.8%)。2003年,全科医生宣称在调查当天首次见到15.5%的患者,而2013年为9.6%(P = 0.006)。在两项研究之间,更换医生就诊情况有所下降,因实际且大多不可避免的原因从18.4%降至12.1%,因不满原因从9.8%降至4.2%(P < 0.0001)。转诊至专科医生的比例从2003年的9.7%增加到2013年的14.7%(P = 0.014)。2013年,在调查当天,94.8%的患者已注册首选医生,81.2%的患者正在就诊于该首选医生。2003年,93.5%的患者宣称有固定的全科医生,79.9%的患者在调查当天就诊于该全科医生。

结论

这是首批报告在卫生服务组织变革前后进行的两项重复调查数据的研究之一,数据来自患者和全科医生。我们报告了两个时期相对较高的全科医生检测率,约50%的CMD(包括亚综合征情况)被全科医生检测到。阈值疾病的检测率要高得多。两项研究之间总体检测率并未如预期那样增加。检测是一个复杂的话题,涉及诸如将分类的DSM-IV标准诊断应用于初级保健的适用性、检测亚阈值情况的相关性以及横断面研究正确评估全科医生识别病例能力的能力等问题。引入选择首选医生的守门制度导致无论何种原因更换医生就诊的频率下降,患者无疑为全科医生所更熟悉。然而,似乎大多数患者在该制度实施之前就已经选择了他们忠诚的全科医生,2003年和2013年调查当天咨询其选择的全科医生或首选医生的患者比例相似,这表明该制度在某种程度上可能只是将拥有固定全科医生的现有情况正式化了。法国的改革仍然允许更换医生就诊,这可被视为该制度的一个积极方面:对先前治疗不满或需要更换全科医生的患者因此能够“测试”并选择最适合其需求的医生。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验