Fink Waltraud, Kamenski Gustav, Konitzer Martin
Straning, Austria.
Karl Landsteiner Institute for Systematics in General Medicine, Angern, Austria.
J Eval Clin Pract. 2018 Feb;24(1):293-300. doi: 10.1111/jep.12710. Epub 2017 Mar 31.
Experienced primary care physicians handle most illnesses to everyone's satisfaction despite limited resources of time and means. However, cases can be multifaceted in that harmless-presenting symptoms may also be warning signals or an indicator of a health disorder that too infrequently presents in family practice to be diagnosed correctly. On the basis of these observations, RN Braun developed 82 diagnostic protocols for a structured recording of various complaints.
All consultations during the years 2001 to 2014, in which 1 author (WF) had used diagnostic protocols in her single-handed practice, were analyzed retrospectively regarding reasons for encounter, diagnostic classification, and long-term outcome.
During the period, a diagnostic protocol was used 1686 times. It was applied at a rate of approximately 5% of 2500 new complaints annually, most often (1366 times) for febrile conditions. In 320 consultations for other complaints, 43 different diagnostic protocols were applied. Among them, the "tabula diagnostica" for various undifferentiated symptoms was used most frequently (n = 54), followed by diagnostic protocols for headache (n = 45), dizziness (n = 36), precordial pain (n = 20), nonspecific abdominal pain (n = 15), low back pain (n = 14), hypertension (n = 12), diarrhea > 1 week (n = 12), epigastralgia (n = 11), depression (n = 10), polyarthralgia (n = 8), cough, and lower abdominal pain (each n = 7). A final diagnosis was established in less than 20% of cases.
This observational study from routine practice gives an insight how diagnostic protocols helped to manage complex patient presentations. A broader use of diagnostic protocols could investigate the potential of this consultation tool to handle the complexity of primary health care. The use of a standardized diagnostic approach could stimulate research, in particular on managing common complaints/undifferentiated illness and their inherent diagnostic uncertainty.
经验丰富的初级保健医生尽管时间和资源有限,但能令患者满意地处理大多数疾病。然而,病例可能是多方面的,因为表现无害的症状也可能是警示信号或健康紊乱的指标,而这些在家庭医疗中很少出现,难以正确诊断。基于这些观察结果,RN·布劳恩制定了82种诊断方案,用于对各种症状进行结构化记录。
回顾性分析2001年至2014年期间,一位作者(WF)在其单人执业中使用诊断方案的所有会诊情况,包括就诊原因、诊断分类和长期结果。
在此期间,诊断方案共使用了1686次。每年约占2500例新症状的5%,最常用于发热情况(1366次)。在针对其他症状的320次会诊中,应用了43种不同的诊断方案。其中,针对各种未分化症状的“诊断表”使用最为频繁(n = 54),其次是头痛(n = 45)、头晕(n = 36)、心前区疼痛(n = 20)、非特异性腹痛(n = 15)、腰痛(n = 14)、高血压(n = 12)、腹泻超过1周(n = 12)、上腹部疼痛(n = 11)、抑郁症(n = 10)、多关节痛(n = 8)、咳嗽和下腹部疼痛(各n = 7)。不到20%的病例得出了最终诊断。
这项来自常规医疗实践的观察性研究揭示了诊断方案如何有助于处理复杂的患者症状。更广泛地使用诊断方案可以研究这种会诊工具处理初级卫生保健复杂性的潜力。使用标准化诊断方法可以促进研究,特别是关于处理常见症状/未分化疾病及其内在诊断不确定性的研究。