Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: The internet has transformed the patient-physician relationship by empowering patients with information. Because physicians are no longer the primary gatekeepers of medical information, shared decision making is now emerging as the hallmark of the patient-physician relationship.

Objectives: To assess the reactions of primary care physicians to encounters in which patients present information obtained from the internet (e-patients) and to examine the influence of the physicians' personal and demographic characteristics on their degree of satisfaction with e-patients.

Methods: A questionnaire was developed to assess physician attitudes to e-patients, their knowledge and utilization of the internet, and their personal and professional characteristics. Family physicians in central Israel were interviewed by telephone and in person at a continuing medical education course.

Results: Of the 100 physicians contacted by phone, 93 responded to the telephone interviews and 50 physicians responded to the questionnaire in person. There was an 85% response rate. The mean age of respondents was 49 years. Most physicians were born in Israel, with a mean seniority of 22 years. Most had graduated in Eastern Europe, were not board certified and were employees of one of the four health management organizations in Israel. Most physicians responded positively when data from the internet were presented to them by patients (81%). A number of respondents expressed discomfort in such situations (23%). No association was found between physician satisfaction in relationships with patients and comfort with data from the internet presented by patients.

Conclusions: Physicians in this sample responded favorably to patients bringing information obtained online to the consultation. Though it may be difficult to generalize findings from a convenience sample, Israeli family physicians appear to have accepted internet use by patients.

Objectives: To evaluate the quality of care of diabetic patients in primary care and diabetes clinics in the community in central Israel.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study of a random sample of 209 diabetic patients in a district of the largest health management organization in Israel. Patients were divided into two groups – those treated only by their family physician and those who had attended diabetes clinics. Data included social demographics, medications, risk factors, quality of follow-up, laboratory tests, quality of diabetes control and blood pressure control, and complications of diabetes.

Results: Of the 209 patients 38% were followed by a diabetes clinic and 62% by a family physician. Patients attending the specialist clinic tended to be younger (P = 0.01) and more educated (P = 0.017). The duration of their diabetes was longer (P < 0.01) and they had more diabetic microvascular complications (P = 0.001). The percentage of patients treated with insulin was higher among the diabetes clinic patients (75% vs. 14%, P = 0.0001). More patients with nephropathy received angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in the diabetes clinic (94% vs. 68%, P = 0.02). Follow-up in the specialist clinic as compared to by the family physician was better in the areas of foot examination (P < 0.01), fundus examination (P = 0.0001), and hemoglobin A1c testing (P = 0.01). On a regression model only fundus examination, foot examination and documentation of smoking status were significantly better in the diabetes clinic (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: There is still a large gap between clinical guidelines and clinical practice. Joint treatment of diabetes patients between the family physician and the diabetes specialist may be a proposed model to improve follow-up and diabetes control. This model of treatment should be checked in a prospective study.

Background: The Israeli Blood Pressure Control program was initiated to enhance the control of modifiable risk factors among high risk hypertensive patients followed by general practitioners in Israel.

Objective: To report the baseline results of the state of the treatment regarding blood pressure management, lipid and glucose control as well as obesity and smoking cessation among the patients.

Methods: Hypertensive patients were screened in 30 general practice clinics supervised by family medicine specialists seeing 1,000–5,000 patients each. Between 50 and 250 hypertensive patients were diagnosed at each participating clinic. Blood pressure levels, body mass index, lipid and glucose levels, as well as target organ damage and medications were recorded for all patients.

Results: Of the 4,948 patients registered, 2,079 were males (42%). Mean age was 64.8 ± 12. Blood pressure control was achieved in only 33.1% of total hypertensive patients. Low density lipoprotein control was achieved in 31.1% of all patients, and glucose control in only 28.5%% of diabetic patients (glucose < 126 mg/dl); 20.7% of the diabetics had glucose levels above 200 mg/dl. In this group of patients 38.9% were obese (BMI[1] >30 kg/m²). While there were more obese females than males (48.0% vs. 35.6%), no difference was found in blood pressure, lipid or glucose control between the genders.

Conclusion: Risk factor management of hypertensive patients attending general practice clinics in Israel is not optimal, especially among those with diabetes or in need of secondary prevention measures. A long-term intervention program for high risk patients in the community is needed to improve the current situation.

Background: Guidelines are important for keeping family physicians informed of the constant developments in many fields of medicine.

Objectives: To compare the knowledge of gastroenterologists and family physicians regarding the diagnosis and treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease in order to determine the need for expert guidelines.

Methods: A 25 item questionnaire on the definition, diagnosis and treatment of GERD[1] was presented to 35 gastroenterologists and 35 family physicians. Each item was rated on a four point scale from 1 = highly recommended to 4 = not recommended. A voting system was used for each group on separate occasions. The proportions of correct answers according to the level of recommendation were compared between the groups.

Results: The groups' responses agreed on only 4 of the 25 items; differences between the remaining 21 were all statistically significant. For 14 items, 70% of the gastroenterologists chose the grade 1 recommendation, whereas more than 70% of the family physicians chose mostly grade 2.

Conclusions: The gap in knowledge on gastroesophageal reflux disease between gastroenterologists and family physicians is significant and may have a profound impact on diagnosis and treatment. Clear and accurate guidelines may improve patient evaluation in the community.

Background: Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer mortality in Israel. Unfortunately, compliance  with annual fecal occult blood testing is very low.

Objective: To assess the effectiveness of interventions to increase FOBT[1] screening in primary care clinics in Israel.

Methods: A prospective, randomized study included all 50–75 year old enrollees of six family physicians in two primary care clinics. The register of two physicians, one from each clinic, was allocated to one of three groups. Two FOBT reminder strategies were tested: a physician reminder (753 patients), and a patient reminder that was either a phone call (312 patients) or a letter (337 patients). The control group (913 patients) of physicians continued administering their regular level of care. The main outcome measure was the percentage of patients undergoing FOBT screening in each study arm at the conclusion of the one year study period.

Results: In the intervention groups 14.3% (201/1,402) were screened using the FOBT over the course of the study year. Using an intent-to-screen analysis, the screening rate in the physician and patient reminder groups was significantly higher than in the control group(16.5 and 11.9%,vs. 1.2% respectively, P < 0.0001). Phone reminders were significantly more efective as compared to letters (14.7 vs. 9.2%, P = 0.01).

Conclusions: Our study has shown the benefit of various FOBT reminder systems, especially those centered around the family physician. Further research should focus on this area, in conjunction with other novel approaches.

__________________________________

[1] FOBT = fecal occult blood testing

Background: Family physicians coordinate the care of their patients and follow them in a longitudinal manner. Do they have a role to play while their patients are hospitalized? Does the system of care expect them to play a role, and how does it support or integrate it?

Objectives: To discuss the various models of relations between hospital and primary care physicians in the world as compared to those in Israel.

Method: Short cases are reported describing the author’s personal experiences and difficulties encountered in a family practice.

Discussion: Identifying and defining problems encountered, as well as their origin and development within the history and evolution of the system of delivery of care in Israel, will lead to some suggestions for a possible solution. Maturation of the system, especially education of the junior staff within the hospital system, is still needed to facilitate the hospital-physician relationship.

Conclusion: More active participation of the family physician offers added value to patients’ management during their hospital stay and is welcomed by them. The full implementation of a system promoting continuity of care requires further attempts at developing suitable models of cooperation between hospital and family physicians.
 

Background: Most countries today are experiencing an accelerated pace of population aging. The management of the elderly housebound patient presents a special challenge to the family physician.

Objectives: To investigate a series of home visits to housebound patients, the therapeutic procedures used, the equipment needed, and the diagnostic conclusions reached.

Methods: The details of 379 consecutive home visits to housebound patients were recorded by 91 family doctors serving 125,000 patients in Israel.

Results: The average age of the patients was 76.1 years. The vast majority of the visits were during office hours (94%). In 24.1% it was the doctor who decided to make the home visit on his/her own initiative. The most common initial reason for a home visit was undefined general symptoms, but the doctor was usually able to arrive at a more specific diagnosis after the visit. Medications were prescribed in 59.1% of the visits, and in 23.5% the medication was administered directly by the physician. The commonest drugs used were analgesics and antibiotics. In 19.3% of visits no action at all, other than examination and counseling, was undertaken. The equipment needed included prescription pads (73%), a stethoscope (81%), sphygmomanometer (74.9%), and otoscope/torch (30.6%). Only 15% of visits resulted in referral to hospital.

Conclusions: Home visits to housebound patients serve as a support to caregivers, provide diagnostic information, and help the family with the decision as to when hospitalization is appropriate. The specific medical cause for the patient being housebound had little effect on the process of home visiting.