Inge Okkes

The coming of age of ICPC: celebrating the 21st birthday of the International Classification of Primary Care

The International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC) has, since its introduction in 1987, been quite successful. Now in its second revised version, it has been translated in 22 languages, accepted by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a member of the Family of International Classifications, and is being widely used both in routine daily practice and in research. In this contribution, it is explained that ICPC was designed as a theoretical classification, and that it has especially great potential when used (1) supported by the ICPC2/ICD10 Thesaurus, (2) in sufficiently large studies to allow all classes to be observed often enough to provide reliable data, and (3) in studies based on data on episodes of care, rather than encounter data only. Under these conditions, the likelihood ratios of symptoms given a diagnosis, and of co-morbidity become available, which define the clinical content of family practice.

Characterizing breast symptoms in family practice.

PURPOSE The frequency and outcome of breast symptoms have not been well characterized in primary care settings. To enhance and inform physician practice, this study aims to establish the proportion of visits and resultant diagnoses by age by examining longitudinal data on breast-related reasons for encounter. METHODS We used data from a prospective longitudinal sample of patients seeking care in Dutch family physician offices between 1985 and 2003 to provide routine family practice data on breast symptoms as the reason for encounter; all visits were coded using the International Classification of Primary Care. Data on breast symptom prevalence are based upon 84,285 active female patients and 367,834 total encounters. RESULTS Overall breast symptoms were reported in about 3% of all visits by female patients (29.7 per 1,000 active female patients per year); breast pain and breast mass were the most common breast-related complaints. Breast symptom complaints were highest among women aged 25 to 44 years (48 of 1,000) and among women aged 65 years and older (33 per 1,000). Of the women complaining of breast symptoms, 81 (3.2%) had breast cancer diagnosed. Breast mass had a markedly elevated positive likelihood ratio for breast cancer (15.04; 95% confidence interval, 11.74–19.28). CONCLUSIONS As expected, of patients with breast symptoms only a small subset was subsequently given a diagnosis of breast cancer (3.2%); however, the presence of a breast mass was associated with an elevated likelihood of breast cancer. These data illustrate the use of systematic data collection and classification from primary care offices to extract information regarding disease symptoms and diagnoses.

Developing an Appropriate EPR System for the Greek Primary Care Setting

The creation of an electronic patient record (EPR) system with a user-friendly interface based on the concept of the episode of care was considered an urgent priority in the present Greek context, where a Health Care Reform program is in progress. This paper reports the procedures of developing an EPR system, and outlines some of its essentials and key issues. We performed a systematic review and analyzed the perceptions and patterns of use of existing EPR systems among Greek general practitioners. On the basis of this analysis, Transhis was selected using defined criteria for appropriateness, efficiency, and feasibility for general practice as a prototype, for creating a Windows-based EPR system using the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC-2) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) as classifications. The new EPR system seems appropriate for use within the current Greek primary care setting. Further studies are required for its evaluation.

The classification of mental disorders in primary care : A guide through a difficult terrain

Background: Primary care physicians traditionally have a strong interest in the mental health of their patients. Three classification systems are available for them to diagnose, label, and classify mental disorders: 1) The ICD-10 approach with three options, 2) The DSM-IV approach with two options, and 3) the ICPC approach with two options. This article lists important similarities and differences between the systems to help potential users choose the option that best meets their needs. Methods: Definitions for depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, and somatization disorder are compared on five characteristics of classification: 1. the domain, 2. the scope, 3. the nature of the definitions, 4. focus on episodes of care, and 5. clinical guidelines. Results: Primary care physicians and psychiatrists have different perspectives, reflected in different classifications. Each system has specific possibilities and limitations with regard to the diagnosis of mental disorders. For common mental disorders it is possible, however, to choose codes from one system while maintaining compatibility with the other two. Comparability as to the diagnostic content of the different classes, however, is more difficult to establish. The available classification systems give both primary care physicians and psychiatrists options to diagnose, label, and to classify mental disorders from their own perspective, but once a system has been chosen the clinical comparability of a patient with the same diagnosis in other systems is limited. Conclusion: Compatibility among systems can be optimized by strictly following a number of rules. The conversion between ICPC and ICD-10 (and consequently DSM-IV) allows simultaneous use of ICPC and ICD-10 as a classification and DSM-IV as the standard nomenclature. This is of particular interest for computer based patient records in primary care. The clinical comparability of the same diagnosis in different systems however is limited by the characteristics of the different system.

Sick leave certification: an unwelcome administrative burden for the family doctor? The role of sickness certification in Maltese family practice

Introduction: In Malta, sickness certificates are needed from the first day of illness, and are issued by family doctors (FDs) either employed in the government primary healthcare system, or self-employed in private practice, or employed directly by an employer for this purpose alone. Patients visiting self-employed FDs pay directly, and are not reimbursed unless privately insured. We aimed to contribute to die discussion on die impact of sickness certification in family practice by studying the phenomenon using electronic data from an electronic patient record (EPR) used by self-employed FDs. We used this data to study the frequency of sickness certification and the relationship between the patients reason for encounter, with or without a formal request for a certificate, and the doctors diagnosis and certification practice. Methods: We used data collected by FDs in day-to-day private family practice using an episode-oriented EPR. The EPR database included all encounters in all episodes of care over a period of one year (1 January to 31 December 2001) documented by ten self-employed FDs, comprehensively coded with ICPC-2-E (Electronic Version of the International Classification of Primary Care, version 2). Results: The EPR database documented care for 7497 patients (45.4% male) over one year. During 15,781 encounters, sickness certificates were issued in 11.3% of 16,319 episodes of care. 5.7% of the reasons for encounter presented by the patient in new episodes were requests for administrative procedures, and this request was made in 8.2% of all new episodes of care. Conclusion: The distribution of morbidity seen by the FDs appeared to be very wide, with a dominance of acute respiratory, gastrointestinal and musculoskeletal symptoms and diagnoses, and the role of sickness certification was quite important. The frequency of sick leave certification in Malta is comparable with that in other European countries, but the average duration of episodes is shorter. Just over 11% of private FD encounters involve issuing a sickness certificate. The high proportion of reasons for encounter formulated as a request for a sickness certificate suggests that the active role of FDs in this form of social security in the Maltese population has supported the local development of family practice.

An international comparative family medicine study of the Transition Project data from the Netherlands, Malta, Japan and Serbia. An analysis of diagnostic odds ratios aggregated across age bands, years of observation and individual practices

INTRODUCTION This is a study of the process of diagnosis in family medicine (FM) in four practice populations from the Netherlands, Malta, Serbia and Japan. Diagnostic odds ratios (ORs) for common reasons for encounter (RfEs) and episode titles are used to study the process of diagnosis in international FM and to test the assumption that data can be aggregated across different age bands, practices and years of observation. METHODOLOGY Participating family doctors (FDs) recorded details of all their patient contacts in an episode of care (EoC) structure using the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC). RfEs presented by the patient and the diagnostic labels (EoC titles) recorded for each encounter were classified with ICPC. The relationships between RfEs and episode titles were expressed as ORs using Bayesian probability analysis to calculate the posterior (post-test) odds of an episode title given an RfE, at the start of a new EoC. RESULTS The distributions of diagnostic ORs from the four population databases are tabled across age groups, years of observation and practices. CONCLUSIONS There is a lot of congruence in diagnostic process and concepts between populations, across age groups, years of observation and FD practices, despite differences in the strength of such diagnostic associations. There is particularly little variability of diagnostic ORs across years of observation and between individual FD practices. Given our findings, it makes sense to aggregate diagnostic data from different FD practices and years of observation. Our findings support the existence of common core diagnostic concepts in international FM.

Once tired, always tired? Limitations in function over time of tired patients in Dutch general practice

Objective: To gain insight into limitations in function over time of general-practice patients who presented and were diagnosed with “tiredness”. Methods: In a routine family-practice electronic register based on use of the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC), 684 patients were identified who presented (in 1997 or 1998) with the complaint tiredness, who were given the same symptom diagnosis, and who still had this diagnosis on 1 August 1999. A questionnaire (WONCA/COOP charts, HAD Scale, recent medical care, tiredness and attribution) was sent to these 684 “cases” and 858 controls. In a logistic regression analysis (16 dichotomous variables), we constructed five models for optimizing sensitivity and specificity for the detection of patients with an episode of care for “tiredness”. Results: We received 385 fully completed questionnaires of cases, on average 19 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 months after the start of their episode of care for “tiredness”. The results of the 1997 and 1998 cases were similar. Cases did considerably worse than did the 385 optimally matched controls: e.g., seriously limited by tiredness: 52% of cases vs 32% of controls; poor overall health: 35% of cases vs 20% of controls; HAD Scale scores indicating anxiety or depression: about 20% of cases vs about 10% of controls. Highest sensitivity (70%) was reached by including poor overall health, recent medical care and HAD Scale depression score >10 in the model; and highest specificity (65%) by including poor overall health and a HAD Scale anxiety score >7. Conclusion: Patients who present with tiredness and receive the same diagnosis have a high probability of suffering from substantial limitations in function in the years following diagnosis. Their limitations are more serious than those of controls, but no indication is found for a specific limitation. The indicators are strongly related and concentrate around “poor overall health”.