Anne-Marie Magnier

Impact of physician preferences for homeopathic or conventional medicines on patients with musculoskeletal disorders: results from the EPI3‐MSD cohort

The objective of this study was to assess the effect of physician practicing preferences (PPP) in primary care for homeopathy (Ho), CAM (Complementary and alternative medicines) with conventional medicine (Mx) or exclusively conventional medicine (CM) on patients with musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), with reference to clinical progression, drug consumption, side effects and loss of therapeutic opportunity.

Who seeks primary care for sleep, anxiety and depressive disorders from physicians prescribing homeopathic and other complementary medicine? Results from the EPI3 population survey

Objectives To describe and compare patients seeking treatment for sleep, anxiety and depressive disorders (SADD) from physicians in general practice (GPs) with three different practice preferences: strictly conventional medicine (GP-CM), mixed complementary and conventional medicine (GP-Mx) and certified homeopathic physicians (GP-Ho). Design and setting The EPI3 survey was a nationwide, observational study of a representative sample of GPs and their patients, conducted in France between March 2007 and July 2008. Participants 1572 patients diagnosed with SADD. Primary and secondary outcomes The patients’ attitude towards complementary and alternative medicine; psychotropic drug utilisation. Results Compared to patients attending GP-CM, GP-Ho patients had healthier lifestyles while GP-Mx patients showed similar profiles. Psychotropic drugs were more likely to be prescribed by GP-CM (64%) than GP-Mx (55.4%) and GP-Ho (31.2%). The three groups of patients shared similar SADD severity. Conclusion Our results showed that patients with SADD, while differing principally in their sociodemographic profiles and conventional psychotropic prescriptions, were actually rather similar regarding the severity of SADD in terms of comorbidities and quality of life. This information may help to better plan resource allocation and management of these common health problems in primary care.

Généralistes et dépistage du cancer de la prostate : sommes-nous « cohérents » ? Une enquête auprès des médecins généralistes d'Île-de-France

Background: The issue of screening for prostate cancer is a daily issue in general practice. It makes controversy. Method: Survey by auto and hetero questionnaire with 98 GPs tutors at the University Pierre et Marie Curie Paris VI (65 responses) and their patients (325 responses). Results: The female doctors and more trained doctors were less likely to systematically screen their patients (p = 0.0057 and p = 0.02 respectively), 45% of doctors prescribed PSA alone, 41% associate dosage PSA and digital rectal examination, 28% used transrectal ultrasonography, 37% took into account the family history of the patient. Discussion: Paris GPs surveyed are rather “consistent”. CME contributes to practise “no screening”. The lack of consistency observed in some GPs seems to reflect the uncertainty of the current controversy. Conclusion: This type of investigation could allow a reliable assessment for other practices.