Nederlands tijdschrift voor geneeskunde · 1992
[Family practice management in urethritis. II. Comparison of clinical management to the protocol].
Сравнительное исследованиеАннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wigersma L
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To describe general practitioners' approach to and management of urethritis in men, and to compare this with a general practice protocol for urethritis.
DESIGN: Descriptive.
SETTING: General practices in Amsterdam.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: In 13 general practices in Amsterdam (23,510 patients, of whom 11,627 men) all episodes of urethritis in men (n = 55) were recorded during one year (complaints, medical management, diagnosis, medication, follow-up).
OUTCOME MEASURES: Description of the diagnostic and therapeutic approach and the course of episodes; rough comparison with the urethritis protocol.
RESULTS: In 25% the urine sediment was examined; other office tests were rarely performed. In 30 to 40% out of office microbiological tests were performed. In 50% of new diagnoses medication was underdosed, in some cases medication was wrong or not broad enough. In 25% explicit education was offered. In 22% new medication was given in the follow-up encounter.
CONCLUSIONS: (Comparison with protocol.) Urine sediment examination as an effective test is performed insufficiently often. Other office tests are rarely performed, in accordance with the protocol. Out of office microbiological tests are performed too often, judged by the few changes of diagnosis and the character of new medication in the follow-up. First treatment is often underdosed and sometimes wrong. First treatment should preferably be broad, adequately dosed and independent of out of office microbiology. Too little education is given concerning the risks of ascending infections in female partners and of HIV infection. The referral rate is very low. It is important to pay attention to the outcome of this study in (postgraduate) education for general practitioners, as they treat the vast majority of urethritis patients.
DESIGN: Descriptive.
SETTING: General practices in Amsterdam.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: In 13 general practices in Amsterdam (23,510 patients, of whom 11,627 men) all episodes of urethritis in men (n = 55) were recorded during one year (complaints, medical management, diagnosis, medication, follow-up).
OUTCOME MEASURES: Description of the diagnostic and therapeutic approach and the course of episodes; rough comparison with the urethritis protocol.
RESULTS: In 25% the urine sediment was examined; other office tests were rarely performed. In 30 to 40% out of office microbiological tests were performed. In 50% of new diagnoses medication was underdosed, in some cases medication was wrong or not broad enough. In 25% explicit education was offered. In 22% new medication was given in the follow-up encounter.
CONCLUSIONS: (Comparison with protocol.) Urine sediment examination as an effective test is performed insufficiently often. Other office tests are rarely performed, in accordance with the protocol. Out of office microbiological tests are performed too often, judged by the few changes of diagnosis and the character of new medication in the follow-up. First treatment is often underdosed and sometimes wrong. First treatment should preferably be broad, adequately dosed and independent of out of office microbiology. Too little education is given concerning the risks of ascending infections in female partners and of HIV infection. The referral rate is very low. It is important to pay attention to the outcome of this study in (postgraduate) education for general practitioners, as they treat the vast majority of urethritis patients.