Kurt Kroenke

Common symptoms in ambulatory care: Incidence, evaluation, therapy, and outcome

PURPOSE AND PATIENTS AND METHODS Many symptoms in outpatient practice are poorly understood. To determine the incidence, diagnostic findings, and outcome of 14 common symptoms, we reviewed the records of 1,000 patients followed by house staff in an internal medicine clinic over a three-year period. The following data were abstracted for each symptom: patient characteristics, symptom duration, evaluation, suspected etiology of the symptom, treatment prescribed, and outcome of the symptom. Cost estimates for diagnostic evaluation were calculated by means of the schedule of prevailing rates for Texas employed by the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services for physician reimbursement. RESULTS A total of 567 new complaints of chest pain, fatigue, dizziness, headache, edema, back pain, dyspnea, insomnia, abdominal pain, numbness, impotence, weight loss, cough, and constipation were noted, with 38 percent of the patients reporting at least one symptom. Although diagnostic testing was performed in more than two thirds of the cases, an organic etiology was demonstrated in only 16 percent. The cost of discovering an organic diagnosis was high, particularly for certain symptoms, such as headache (

Predictors of patient satisfaction

7,778) and back pain (

The difficult patient: prevalence, psychopathology, and functional impairment.

7,263). Treatment was provided for only 55 percent of the symptoms and was often ineffective. Where outcome was documented, 164 (53 percent) of 307 symptoms improved. Three favorable prognostic factors were an organic etiology (p = 0.006), a symptom duration of less than four months (p = 0.009), and a history of two or fewer symptoms (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION The classification, evaluation, and management of common symptoms need to be refined. Diagnostic strategies emphasizing organic causes may be inadequate.

Gender, quality of life, and mental disorders in primary care: Results from the PRIME-MD 1000 study

Correlates of patient satisfaction at varying points in time were assessed using a survey with 2-week and 3-month follow-up in a general medicine walk-in clinic, in USA. Five hundred adults presenting with a physical symptom, seen by one of 38 participating clinicians were surveyed and the following measurements were taken into account: patient symptom characteristics, symptom-related expectations, functional status (Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form Health Survey [SF-6]), mental disorders (PRIME-MD), symptom resolution, unmet expectations, satisfaction (RAND 9-item survey), visit costs and health utilization. Physician perception of difficulty (Difficult Doctor Patient Relationship Questionnaire), and Physician Belief Scale. Immediately after the visit, 260 (52%) patients were fully satisfied with their care, increasing to 59% at 2 weeks and 63% by 3 months. Patients older than 65 and those with better functional status were more likely to be satisfied. At all time points, the presence of unmet expectations markedly decreased satisfaction: immediately post-visit (OR: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.07-0.30), 2-week (OR: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.04-0.13) and 3-month (OR: 0.05, 95% CI: 0.03-0.09). Other independent variables predicting immediate after visit satisfaction included receiving an explanation of the likely cause as well as expected duration of the presenting symptom. At 2 weeks and 3 months, experiencing symptomatic improvement increased satisfaction while additional visits (actual or anticipated) for the same symptom decreased satisfaction. A lack of unmet expectations was a powerful predictor of satisfaction at all time-points. Immediately post-visit, other predictors of satisfaction reflected aspects of patient doctor communication (receiving an explanation of the symptom cause, likely duration, lack of unmet expectations), while 2-week and 3-month satisfaction reflected aspects of symptom outcome (symptom resolution, need for repeat visits, functional status). Patient satisfaction surveys need to carefully consider the sampling time frame as well as adjust for pertinent patient characteristics.

Case-finding for depression in primary care: a randomized trial∗ ∗

OBJECTIVE: To determine the proportion of primary care patients who are experienced by their physicians as “difficult,” and to assess the association of difficulty with physical and mental disorders, functional impairment, health care utilization, and satisfaction with medical care.DESIGN: Survey.SETTING: Four primary care clinics.PATIENTS: Six-hundred twenty-seven adult patients.MEASUREMENTS: Physician perception of difficulty (Difficult Doctor-Patient Relationship Questionnaire), mental disorders and symptoms (Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders, [PRIME-MD]), functional status (Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form Health Survey [SF-20]), utilization of and satisfaction with medical care by patient self-report.RESULTS: Physicians rated 96 (15%) of their 627 patients as difficult (site range 11–20%). Difficult patients were much more likely than not-difficult patients to have a mental disorder (67% vs 25%, p<.0001). Six psychiatric disorders had particularly strong associations with difficulty: multisomatoform disorder (odds ratio [OR]=12.3, 95% confidence interval [CI]=5.9–25.8), panic disorder (OR=6.9, 95% CI=2.6–18.1), dysthymia (OR=4.2, 95% CI=2.0–8.7), generalized anxiety (OR=3.4, 95% CI=1.7–7.1), major depressive disorder (OR=3.0, 95% CI=1.8–5.3), and probable alcohol abuse or dependence (OR=2.6, 95% CI=1.01–6.7). Compared with not-difficult patients, difficult patients had more functional impairment, higher health care utilization, and lower satisfaction with care, whereas demographic characteristics and physical illnesses were not associated with difficulty. The presence of mental disorders accounted for a substantial proportion of the excess functional impairment and dissatisfaction in difficult patients.CONCLUSIONS: Difficult patients are prevalent in primary care settings and have more psychiatric disorders, functional impairment, health care utilization, and dissatisfaction with care. Future studies are needed to determine whether improved diagnosis and management of mental disorders in difficult patients could diminish their excess disability, health care costs, and dissatisfaction with medical care, as well as the physicians’ experience of difficulty.

A comparison of physicians' and patients' attitudes toward pharmaceutical industry gifts

BACKGROUND Recently there has been increased interest in the special mental health needs of women. We used data from the PRIME-MD 1000 study to assess gender differences in the frequency of mental disorders in primary care settings, and to explore the potential impact of these differences on health-related quality of life (HRQL). SUBJECTS AND METHODS One thousand primary care patients (559 women) were interviewed during the PRIME-MD study, which was conducted at four primary care clinics affiliated with university hospitals throughout the eastern United States. Patients completed a one-page questionnaire in the waiting room prior to being seen by the physician; patients and physicians then completed together a clinician evaluation guide that used DSM-III-R algorithms to diagnose mood, anxiety, somatoform, eating, and alcohol related disorders. Health-related quality of life was assessed with the Medical Outcomes Study SF-20 General Health Survey. RESULTS Women were more likely than men to have at least one mental disorder (43% versus 33%, P < 0.05). Higher rates were particularly prominent for mood disorders (31% of women versus 19% of men, odds ratio [OR] = 1.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.4 to 2.6), anxiety disorders (22% versus 13%, OR = 1.9, CI = 1.3 to 2.8), and somatoform disorders (18% versus 9%, OR = 2.2, CI = 1.5 to 3.4). Psychiatric comorbidity was also more common in women (26% of women had two or more mental disorders versus 15% of men, P < 0.05). Unadjusted HRQL scores, ranging from 0 to 100, with 100 = best health, were all significantly lower in women than in men (eg, physical function = 67 in women versus 76 in men, P < 0.0001; mental health = 69 in women versus 76 in men, P < 0.0001). Many HRQL differences persisted after controlling for age, education, ethnicity, marital status, and number of physical disorders; however, differences in HRQL were eliminated in 5 of 6 domains after controlling for number of mental disorders. When compared with female patients of male physicians, female patients of female physicians demonstrated similar satisfaction with care, health care utilization, HRQL, and recognition rate of mental disorders. CONCLUSIONS In the 1,000 patients of the PRIME-MD study, mood, anxiety, and somatoform disorders and psychiatric comorbidity were all significantly more common in women than men. The HRQL scores were poorer in women than men, although most of this difference was accounted for by the difference in prevalence of mental disorders. These data suggest that one of the most important aspects of a primary care physicians care of female patients is to screen for and treat common mental disorders.

Increasing the Use of Advance Directives in Medical Outpatients

PURPOSE Depression is a highly prevalent, morbid, and costly illness that is often unrecognized and inadequately treated. Because depression questionnaires have the potential to improve recognition, we evaluated the accuracy and effects on primary care of two case-finding instruments compared to usual care. SUBJECTS AND METHODS The study was conducted at three university-affiliated and one community-based medical clinics. Consecutive patients were randomly assigned to be asked a single question about mood, to fill out the 20-item Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Screen, or to usual care. Within 72 hours, patients were assessed for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Third Revised Edition (DSM-III-R) disorders by an assessor blinded to the screening results. Process of care was assessed using chart audit and administrative databases; patient and physician satisfaction was assessed using Likert scales. At 3 months, depressed patients and a random sample of nondepressed patients were re-assessed for DSM-III-R disorders and symptom counts. RESULTS We approached 1,083 patients, of whom 969 consented to screening and were assigned to the single question (n = 330), 20-item questionnaire (n = 323), or usual care (n = 316). The interview for DSM-III-R diagnosis was completed in 863 (89%) patients; major depression, dysthymia, or minor depression was present in 13%. Both instruments were sensitive, but the 20-item questionnaire was more specific than the single question (75% vs 66%, P = 0.03). The 20-item questionnaire was less likely to be self-administered (54% vs 90%) and took significantly more time to complete (15 vs 248 seconds). Case-finding with the 20-item questionnaire or single question modestly increased depression recognition, 30/77 (39%) compared with 11/38 (29%) in usual care (P = 0.31) but did not affect treatment (45% vs 43%, P = 0.88). Effects on DSM-III-R symptoms were mixed. Recovery from depression was more likely in the case-finding than usual care groups, 32/67 (48%) versus 8/30 (27%, P = 0.03), but the mean improvement in depression symptoms did not differ significantly (1.6 vs 1.5 symptoms, P = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS A simple question about depression has similar performance characteristics as a longer 20-item questionnaire and is more feasible because of its brevity. Case-finding leads to a modest increase in recognition rates, but does not have consistently positive effects on patient outcomes.

Psychiatric disorders and functional impairment in patients with persistent dizziness

OBJECTIVE: To compare physicians’ and their patients’ attitudes toward pharmaceutical gifts.DESIGN: Survey of physicians and their patients.SETTING: Two tertiary-care medical centers, one military and one civilian.PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred sixty-eight of 392 consecutively surveyed physicians, 100 of 103 randomly selected patients at the military center, and 96 patients in a convenience sample at the civilian center completed the survey.MEASUREMENTS: Participants rated 10 pharmaceutical gifts on whether they were appropriate for physicians to accept and whether they were likely to influence prescribing. Patients found gifts less appropriate and more influential than did their physicians. About half of the patients were aware of such gifts; of those unaware, 24% responded that this knowledge altered their perception of the medical profession. Asked whether they thought their own physician accepted gifts, 27% said yes, 20% no, and 53% were unsure. For patients, feeling that gifts were inappropriate was best predicted by a belief that gifts might influence prescribing, while for physicians, the best predictor was knowledge of guidelines.CONCLUSIONS: Patients feel pharmaceutical gifts are more influential and less appropriate than do their physicians. Physicians may want to consider this in deciding whether to accept particular gifts. Broader dissemination of guidelines may be one means of changing physician behavior. At the same time, future guidelines should further consider the potentially different viewpoints of patients and physicians.

Symptoms in medical patients: An untended field

ObjectiveWe studied whether a simple educational intervention would increase patient completion of advance directives and discussions on end-of-life issues.DesignRandomized, controlled trial.SettingOutpatient clinic of a teaching hospital.SubjectsOne hundred eighty-seven outpatients of a primary care internal medicine clinic.InterventionStudy subjects attended a 1-hour interactive seminar and received an informational pamphlet and advance directive forms. Control subjects received by mail the pamphlet and forms only.Measurements and main resultsCompletion of the advance directive was the main measurement. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics of either group. Follow-up at 1 month revealed advance directive completion in 38% of study versus 24% of control subjects (p=.04), and discussions on advance planning in 73% of study versus 57% of control subjects (p=.02). Patients most likely to complete the documents were white, married, or attendees at the educational seminar.ConclusionsInteractive group seminars for medical outpatients increased discussions and use of written advance directives.

A controlled trial of a seminar to improve medical student attitudes toward, knowledge about, and use of the medical literature.

Objective: To determine the prevalence and predictors of psychiatric dizziness and to measure functional impairment associated with dizziness.Design: Consecutive outpatients with a chief complaint of dizziness.Setting: Four outpatient clinics at a military teaching hospital.Patients: 100 dizzy patients and 25 control patients.Measurements and main results: Structured psychiatric interviews were conducted using the Diagnostic Interview Schedule, and functional status was assessed with the Sickness Impact Profile and the 20-item MOS (Medical Outcomes Study) Short-Form. Psychiatric disorders were a primary or contributory cause of dizziness for 40% of the dizzy patients. Compared with the control patients, the dizzy patients had a higher lifetime (46% vs 32%) as well as recent (37% vs 20%) prevalence of axis I disorders. The greatest differences were in disorders of depression and somatization. The dizzy patients had a higher lifetime prevalence (2 3% vs 8%) as well as recent history (11 % vs 0%) of major depression or dysthymia. Also, somatization disorders were strikingly more common among the dizzy patients than among the control patients (37% vs 8%, p=0.005), with the dizzy patients reporting more than three times as many psychiatric or unexplained physical symptoms (5.2 vs 1.5). Age <40 years, related complaints of weakness or headaches, and dizziness provoked by hyperventilation or standing were independent predictors of psychiatric dizziness. The dizzy patients reported moderate functional impairment, which was most severe among those with psychiatric disorders.Conclusions: Persistent dizziness is associated with increased functional impairment and psychiatric comorbidity, particularly depression and somatization. Moreover, psychiatric disorders aggravate the impairment that occurs with dizziness alone.