Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    In: Family Practice, Oxford University Press (OUP), Vol. 39, No. 4 ( 2022-07-19), p. 762-770
    Abstract: Sexually transmitted infections are a major public health issue, both in France and worldwide. Primary healthcare professionals play a key role in sexual health and prevention, but few take on this subject. Prevention strategies are diverse, thus risk reduction strategies focussing on behavioural changes are still needed. Purpose We conducted a systematic review to analyse risk reduction interventions focussing on behavioural change in OECD countries in primary healthcare settings to help develop a prevention tool easy to apply in primary care. Methods We searched for English- or French-language controlled trials in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, PsycINFO, PsycArticle, PBSC, SocINDEX, Google Scholar, and CAIRN, supplemented with the bibliographies of previous systematic reviews. Thirty controlled, randomized, or nonrandomized trials were included in the systematic review. We did not conduct any meta-analysis due to the diversity of populations, outcomes and study designs. Results There are efficient interventions in primary healthcare settings for reducing sexual risk behaviours and/or incident STI. Their efficiency seems to grow with the length and intensity of the intervention. Most interventions target only young, high-risk patients, and their long-term impact is uncertain. Most included studies had an overall risk of bias estimated as high or with some concerns. Conclusions Some tools could be used in primary care, with possible efficiency though results are difficult to generalize, and value should be assessed in daily practice. Future research should also focus on older population given the epidemiological evolutions, but also lower-risk population to target all patients seen in primary care settings.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1460-2229
    Language: English
    Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
    Publication Date: 2022
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1484852-1
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: Archives of Public Health, Springer Science and Business Media LLC, Vol. 80, No. 1 ( 2022-12-03)
    Abstract: The emergency set-up and implementation of outpatient clinical trials on epidemic emerging infectious diseases such as COVID-19 raise many issues in terms of research structuration, regulations, and health systems organization. We aimed to describe the experience and points of view of different stakeholders involved in a French home-based outpatient trial on COVID-19 and to identify the early barriers and facilitators to the trial implementation. Methods We conducted a mixed-methods study in July 2020. A self-administered questionnaire was emailed to 213 clinical, operational and research stakeholders involved in the Coverage trial; individual semi-directed interviews were conducted among 14 stakeholders. Questionnaire data and written interview notes are presented together by key theme. Results One hundred fifty six stakeholders responded to the questionnaire. 53.4% did not have prior experience in clinical research. The motivation of most stakeholders to participate in the Coverage trial was to feel useful during the pandemic. 87.9% agreed that the trial had an unusual set-up timeframe, and many regretted a certain lack of regulatory flexibility. Mobile medical teams and specific professional skills were perceived as instrumental for outpatient research. Conclusions The implementation of a home-based outpatient clinical trial on COVID-19 was perceived as relevant and innovative although requiring important adaptations of usual professional responsibilities and standard research procedures. Lessons learned from the Coverage trial underline the need for improved networks between hospital and community medicine, and call for a dedicated and reactive outpatient research platform on emerging or threatening infectious diseases.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2049-3258
    Language: English
    Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
    Publication Date: 2022
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2133388-9
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    Frontiers Media SA ; 2023
    In:  Frontiers in Medicine Vol. 9 ( 2023-1-9)
    In: Frontiers in Medicine, Frontiers Media SA, Vol. 9 ( 2023-1-9)
    Abstract: Statins are a first line, evidence-based yet underprescribed treatment for cardiovascular primary prevention. In primary care settings, multimorbidity is a complex situation which makes it difficult to apply prevention guidelines. Aim To assess the associations between multimorbidity and prescription of statins in accordance with the 2016 ESC recommendations (“appropriate prescription”), and to identify the factors and conditions associated with these prescriptions. Design and setting Cross-sectional prospective study in the French region of Rhône-Alpes among 40 general practitioners and their patients. Methods We examined the association between appropriate statin prescription and several patient characteristics, including multimorbidity, using multivariate logistic regression models. Results Between August 2017 and February 2019, 327 patients were included in the study. Seventy-four (22.6%) were on statin medication and 199 (60.9%) exhibited multimorbidity, defined as ≥2 diseases. Only 22.5% of eligible patients were prescribed statins for primary prevention. Diabetes was most strongly associated with appropriate statin prescription (aOR 8.10, CI 95: 3.81–17.80). Multimorbidity was not associated with appropriate statin prescription (aOR 1.31, CI 95: 0.54–3.26), except in the presence of diabetes which defined diabetic multimorbidity (aOR 10.46, CI 95: 4.87–23.35). Conversely, non-diabetic multimorbidity was associated with lower odds of being appropriately prescribed a statin (aOR 0.26, CI 95: 0.12–0.56). Conclusion Multimorbidity, in itself, does not seem to be a determinant factor for appropriate statin prescription. The latter appears to be determined by a patient’s type of multimorbidity, especially the presence or not of diabetes. Differentiating between diabetic and non-diabetic multimorbidity may be a pragmatic way for GPs to improve primary prevention in a patient-centered and shared decision-making approach.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2296-858X
    Language: Unknown
    Publisher: Frontiers Media SA
    Publication Date: 2023
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2775999-4
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    In: Clinical Microbiology and Infection, Elsevier BV, Vol. 28, No. 7 ( 2022-07), p. 1010-1016
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1198-743X
    Language: English
    Publisher: Elsevier BV
    Publication Date: 2022
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2020034-1
    SSG: 12
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    In: Trials, Springer Science and Business Media LLC, Vol. 21, No. 1 ( 2020-12)
    Abstract: To assess the efficacy of several repurposed drugs to prevent hospitalisation or death in patients aged 65 or more with recent symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19) and no criteria for hospitalisation. Trial design Phase III, multi-arm (5) and multi-stage (MAMS), randomized, open-label controlled superiority trial. Participants will be randomly allocated 1:1:1:1:1 to the following strategies: Arm 1: Control arm Arms 2 to 5: Experimental treatment arms Planned interim analyses will be conducted at regular intervals. Their results will be reviewed by an Independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board. Experimental arms may be terminated for futility, efficacy or toxicity before the end of the trial. New experimental arms may be added if new evidence suggests that other treatments should be tested. A feasibility and acceptability substudy as well as an immunological substudy will be conducted alongside the trial. Participants Inclusion criteria are: 65-year-old or more; Positive test for SARS-CoV-2 on a nasopharyngeal swab; Symptoms onset within 3 days before diagnosis; No hospitalisation criteria; Signed informed consent; Health insurance. Exclusion criteria are: Inability to make an informed decision to participate ( e.g .: dementia, guardianship); Rockwood Clinical Frailty Scale ≥7; Long QT syndrome; QTc interval 〉 500 ms; Heart rate 〈 50/min; Kalaemia 〉 5.5 mmol/L or 〈 3.5 mmol/L; Ongoing treatment with piperaquine, halofantrine, dasatinib, nilotinib, hydroxyzine, domperidone, citalopram, escitalopram, potent inhibitors or inducers of cytochrome P450 CYP3A4 isoenzyme, repaglinide, azathioprine, 6-mercaptopurine, theophylline, pyrazinamide, warfarin; Known hypersensitivity to any of the trial drugs or to chloroquine and other 4-aminoquinolines, amodiaquine, mefloquine, glafenine, floctafenine, antrafenine, ARB; Hepatic porphyria; Liver failure (Child-Pugh stage ≥B); Stage 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease (GFR 〈 30 mL/min/1.73 m²); Dialysis; Hypersentivity to lactose; Lactase deficiency; Abnormalities in galactose metabolism; Malabsorption syndrome; Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency; Symptomatic hyperuricemia; Ileus; Colitis; Enterocolitis; Chronic hepatitis B virus disease. The trial is being conducted in France in the Bordeaux, Corse, Dijon, Nancy, Paris and Toulouse areas as well as in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. Participants are recruited either at home, nursing homes, general practices, primary care centres or hospital outpatient consultations. Intervention and comparator The four experimental treatments planned in protocol version 1.2 (April 8 th , 2020) are: (1) Hydroxychloroquine 200 mg, 2 tablets BID on day 0, 2 tablets QD from day 1 to 9; (2) Imatinib 400 mg, 1 tablet QD from day 0 to 9; (3) Favipiravir 200 mg, 12 tablets BID on day 0, 6 tablets BID from day 1 to 9; (4) Telmisartan 20 mg, 1 tablet QD from day 0 to 9. The comparator is a complex of vitamins and trace elements (AZINC Forme et Vitalité®), 1 capsule BID for 10 days, for which there is no reason to believe that they are active on the virus. In protocol version 1.2 (April 8th, 2020): People in the control arm will receive a combination of vitamins and trace elements; people in the experimental arms will receive hydroxychloroquine, or favipiravir, or imatinib, or telmisartan. Main outcome The primary outcome is the proportion of participants with an incidence of hospitalisation and/or death between inclusion and day 14 in each arm. Randomisation Participants are randomized in a 1:1:1:1:1 ratio to each arm using a web-based randomisation tool. Participants not treated with an ARB or ACEI prior to enrolment are randomized to receive the comparator or one of the four experimental drugs. Participants already treated with an ARB or ACEI are randomized to receive the comparator or one of the experimental drugs except telmisartan ( i.e .: hydroxychloroquine, imatinib, or favipiravir). Randomisation is stratified on ACEI or ARBs treatment at inclusion and on the type of residence (personal home vs . nursing home). Blinding (masking) This is an open-label trial. Participants, caregivers, investigators and statisticians are not blinded to group assignment. Numbers to be randomised (sample size) A total of 1057 participants will be enrolled if all arms are maintained until the final analysis and no additional arm is added. Three successive futility interim analyses are planned, when the number of participants reaches 30, 60 and 102 in the control arm. Two efficacy analyses (interim n°3 and final) will be performed successively. Trial Status This describes the Version 1.2 (April 8 th , 2020) of the COVERAGE protocol that was approved by the French regulatory authority and ethics committee. The trial was opened for enrolment on April 15 th , 2020 in the Nouvelle Aquitaine region (South-West France). Given the current decline of the COVID-19 pandemic in France and its unforeseeable dynamic in the coming months, new trial sites in 5 other French regions and in Luxembourg are currently being opened. A revised version of the protocol was submitted to the regulatory authority and ethics committee on June 15 th , 2020. It contains the following amendments: (i) Inclusion criteria: age ≥65 replaced by age ≥60; time since first symptoms 〈 3 days replaced by time since first symptoms 〈 5 days; (ii) Withdrawal of the hydroxychloroquine arm (due to external data); (iii) increase in the number of trial sites. Trial registration The trial was registered on Clinical Trials.gov on April 22 nd , 2020 (Identifier: NCT04356495): and on EudraCT on April 10 th , 2020 (Identifier: 2020-001435-27). Full protocol The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2).
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1745-6215
    Language: English
    Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
    Publication Date: 2020
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2040523-6
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 6
    In: Family Practice, Oxford University Press (OUP), ( 2023-07-18)
    Abstract: A better understanding of the determinants involved in general practitioners’ (GPs) decision-making processes when it comes to prescribing statins as primary prevention in patients with multimorbidity could provide insights for improving implementation of primary prevention guidelines. Methods We conducted a qualitative study using a deductive framework-based and inductive analysis of GPs’ semi-structured interviews verbatim, from which expertise profiles of prescribers were also drawn. The analytical framework was built from a pragmatic synthesis of the evidence-based medicine, Modelling using Typified Objects (MOT) model of clinical reasoning processes, Theoretical Domains Framework, and shared decision-making frameworks. Results Fifteen GPs were interviewed between June 2019 and January 2020. Diabetes seemed to represent a specific motivation for deciding about statin prescription for primary prevention purposes; and in situations of multimorbidity, GPs differentiated between cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular multimorbidity. Expert prescribers seemed to have integrated the utilisation of cardiovascular risk calculation scores throughout their practice, whereas non-expert prescribers considered them difficult to interpret and preferred using more of a “rule of thumb” process. One interviewee used the risk calculation score as a support for discussing statin prescription with the patient. Conclusion Our results shed light on the reasons why statins remain under-prescribed for primary prevention and why non-diabetic multimorbid patients have even lower odds of being prescribed a statin. They call for a change in the use of risk assessment scores, by placing them as decision aids, to support and improve personalised shared decision-making discussions as an efficient approach to improve the implementation of recommendations about statins for primary prevention.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1460-2229
    Language: English
    Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
    Publication Date: 2023
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1484852-1
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 7
    In: Pédagogie Médicale, EDP Sciences, Vol. 22, No. 1 ( 2021), p. 15-26
    Abstract: Introduction: Reflection is considered by many authors as an essential component of professionalism, at the heart of its development and the construction of professional identity. Portfolios, when used as learning and assessment support, usually includes reflective written works. There is no tool validated in French to assess students’ reflection through written works. Objective: To translate and adapt the REFLECT rubric, validated in English, for it to be used in French. Methods: We conducted a double forward translation, then a double reverse translation to ensure cultural adaptation consistent with the original version. We then ran pilot tests on the preliminary French version, to assess content-validity. Finally, we ran validation tests. Results: The final French version is a four-levels and five criteria rubric. The French version has a high content validity index. Conclusion: The French REFLECT Rubric will help improve the development of students’ reflection and will help supervisors provide a more precise feedback.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1625-6484 , 1627-4784
    Language: French
    Publisher: EDP Sciences
    Publication Date: 2021
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. Further information can be found on the KOBV privacy pages