primary care

Epley manoeuvre’s efficacy for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) in primary-care and subspecialty settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author/s: 
Yusuke Saishoji, Norio Yamamoto, Takashi Fujiwara, Hideki Mori, Shunsuke Taito

Although previous studies have reported general inexperience with the Epley manoeuvre (EM) among general physicians, no report has evaluated the effect of EM on benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) in primary care by using point estimates or certainty of evidence. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis and clarified the efficacy of EM for BPPV, regardless of primary-care and subspecialty settings.

Approach to nail trauma for primary care physicians

Author/s: 
Knox, Aaron, Lafreniere, Ann-Sophie, Misati , Griffins

Objective: To provide an overview and approach to common nail bed injuries seen by primary care practitioners.

Sources of information: An Ovid MEDLINE literature search was performed using search terms and studies were graded based on level of evidence.

Main message: Nail trauma is common in primary care practice and requires proper and prompt treatment to avoid lasting effects on finger function and cosmesis. When presented with a fingernail injury, primary care physicians should perform a thorough physical examination to determine extent of injury; take a history to rule out notable risk factors; perform a comprehensive neurovascular examination to assess pulp capillary refill, to do a 2-point discrimination, and to compare with an uninjured digit; and evaluate range of motion. Clinical evaluation may require local anesthesia and a tourniquet. Nail bed trauma can present in different ways and includes subungual hematomas, distal phalanx fractures, Seymour fractures, and-in more severe cases-fragmentation or avulsion of the nail bed. Treatment for subungual hematomas where the nail plate is intact does not require nail plate removal and nail bed exploration; however, exploration and repair are indicated for a nail plate injury, a proximal fracture involving the germinal matrix, and a distal phalanx fracture requiring stabilization.

Conclusion: Fingertips are essential to normal hand function. Nail trauma is common and can be managed by primary care physicians. Shared decision making concerning management is based on the mechanism and extent of the injury and aims to prevent secondary deformities.

Screening for primary aldosteronism in primary care

Author/s: 
Dubrofsky, L., Hundemer, G. L.

Primary aldosteronism (PA) is common among patients with hypokalemia and hypertension. Patients with PA are at an increased risk of chronic disease if undiagnosed or untreated. Expert consensus recommends screening for PA in high-risk populations. Most antihypertensive medications can be continued during the work-up for PA. An elevated aldosterone-to-renin ratio is suggestive of PA.

Women’s health update: A literature review impacting primary care

Author/s: 
Dolan, B. M., Merriam, S., Prifti, C. A., Walsh, J. M.

The authors review studies on key issues in women’s health with potential impact on internal medicine practice. The reviewed articles discuss cardiovascular disease risks, bone health, breast cancer genetics, cervical cancer prevention, depression in the peripartum period, pelvic pain, and emergency contraception.

Evaluation of a Chronic Pain Screening Program Implemented in Primary Care

Author/s: 
Bifulco, L., Anderson, D. R., Blankson, M. L, Channamsetty, V., Blaz, J. W., Nguyen-Louie, T., Scholle, S. H.

Importance: Although pain is among the most common symptoms reported by patients, primary care practitioners (PCPs) face substantial challenges identifying and assessing pain.

Objective: To evaluate a 2-step process for chronic pain screening and follow-up in primary care.

Design, setting, and participants: A cross-sectional study of patients with a primary care visit between July 2, 2018, and June 1, 2019, was conducted at a statewide, multisite federally qualified health center. Participants included 68 PCPs and 58 medical assistants from 13 sites who implemented the screening process in primary care, and 38 866 patients aged 18 years or older with a primary care visit during that time.

Exposures: Single-question assessment of pain frequency, followed by a 3-question PEG (pain, enjoyment of life, general activity) functional assessment for patients with chronic pain.

Main outcomes and measures: Adherence to a 2-step chronic pain screening and PEG process, proportion of patients with positive screening results, mean PEG pain severity greater than or equal to 7, and documented chronic painful condition diagnosis in patient's electronic health record between 1 year before and 90 days after screening.

Results: Of 38 866 patients with a primary care visit, 31 600 patients (81.3%) underwent screening. Mean (SD) age was 46.2 (15.4) years, and most were aged 35 to 54 years (12 987 [41.1%]), female (18 436 [58.3%]), Hispanic (14 809 [46.9%]), and English-speaking (22 519 [71.3%]), and had Medicaid insurance (18 442 [58.4%]). A total of 10 262 participants (32.5%) screened positive and, of these, 9701 (94.5%) completed the PEG questionnaire. PEG responses indicated severe pain interference with activities of daily living (PEG ≥7) in 5735 (59.1%) participants. A chronic painful condition had not been diagnosed in 4257 (43.9%) patients in the year before screening. A new chronic painful condition was diagnosed at screening or within 90 days in 2250 (52.9%) patients. Care teams found the workflow acceptable, but cited lengthy administration time, challenges with comprehension of the PEG questions, and limited comprehensiveness as implementation barriers.

Conclusions and relevance: A systematic, 2-step process for chronic pain screening and functional assessment in primary care appeared to identify patients with previously undocumented chronic pain and was feasible to implement. Patient-provided information on the frequency of pain, pain level, and pain interference can help improve the assessment and monitoring of pain in primary care.

IDENTIFYING AND ADDRESSING SOCIAL NEEDS IN PRIMARY CARE SETTINGS

Social determinants of health (SDOH) are widely recognized as having an important impact on health and
mortality,1 and there is now strong evidence of the benefits of addressing people’s unmet social needs.
For example, ensuring access to healthy foods and providing
supportive housing for people facing homelessness have been
found to lower healthcare utilization and costs.2 In addition, there
is emerging evidence that screening for and attempting to address
unmet needs within a primary care setting can improve patient
health.3 In response to this growing body of evidence, primary care
practices and health systems are increasingly integrating formal
screening for social needs into clinical care services.

Quick Guide to Primary Care First

Author/s: 
Primary Care First

Primary Care First is a voluntary five-year payment model that rewards value and quality by offering an innovative payment structure to support advanced primary care delivery. Primary Care First aims to improve quality and access to care for all patients, particularly those with complex chronic conditions. The model also aims to reduce Medicare spending by preventing avoidable inpatient hospital admissions.

Risk Factors Associated With Transition From Acute to Chronic Low Back Pain in US Patients Seeking Primary Care

Author/s: 
Stevans, Joel M., Delitto, Anthony, Khoja, Samannaaz, Patterson, Charity G., Smith, Clair N., Schneider, Michael J., Freburger, Janet K., Greco, Carol M., Freel, Jennifer A., Sowa, Gwendolyn A., Wasan, Ajay D., Brennan, Gerard P., Hunter, Stephen J., Minick, Kate I., Wegener, Stephen T., Ephraim, Patti L., Friedman, Michael", Jason M., Robert B.

Importance: Acute low back pain (LBP) is highly prevalent, with a presumed favorable prognosis; however, once chronic, LBP becomes a disabling and expensive condition. Acute to chronic LBP transition rates vary widely owing to absence of standardized operational definitions, and it is unknown whether a standardized prognostic tool (ie, Subgroups for Targeted Treatment Back tool [SBT]) can estimate this transition or whether early non-guideline concordant treatment is associated with the transition to chronic LBP.

Objective: To assess the associations between the transition from acute to chronic LBP with SBT risk strata; demographic, clinical, and practice characteristics; and guideline nonconcordant processes of care.

Design, setting, and participants: This inception cohort study was conducted alongside a multisite, pragmatic cluster randomized trial. Adult patients with acute LBP stratified by SBT risk were enrolled in 77 primary care practices in 4 regions across the United States between May 2016 and June 2018 and followed up for 6 months, with final follow-up completed by March 2019. Data analysis was conducted from January to March 2020.

Exposures: SBT risk strata and early LBP guideline nonconcordant processes of care (eg, receipt of opioids, imaging, and subspecialty referral).

Main outcomes and measures: Transition from acute to chronic LBP at 6 months using the National Institutes of Health Task Force on Research Standards consensus definition of chronic LBP. Patient demographic characteristics, clinical factors, and LBP process of care were obtained via electronic medical records.

Results: Overall, 5233 patients with acute LBP (3029 [58%] women; 4353 [83%] White individuals; mean [SD] age 50.6 [16.9] years; 1788 [34%] low risk; 2152 [41%] medium risk; and 1293 [25%] high risk) were included. Overall transition rate to chronic LBP at six months was 32% (1666 patients). In a multivariable model, SBT risk stratum was positively associated with transition to chronic LBP (eg, high-risk vs low-risk groups: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.45; 95% CI, 2.00-2.98; P < .001). Patient and clinical characteristics associated with transition to chronic LBP included obesity (aOR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.28-1.80; P < .001); smoking (aOR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.29-1.89; P < .001); severe and very severe baseline disability (aOR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.48-2.24; P < .001 and aOR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.60-2.68; P < .001, respectively) and diagnosed depression/anxiety (aOR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.28-2.15; P < .001). After controlling for all other variables, patients exposed to 1, 2, or 3 nonconcordant processes of care within the first 21 days were 1.39 (95% CI, 1.21-2.32), 1.88 (95% CI, 1.53-2.32), and 2.16 (95% CI, 1.10-4.25) times more likely to develop chronic LBP compared with those with no exposure (P < .001).

Conclusions and relevance: In this cohort study, the transition rate to chronic LBP was substantial

Recognizing Axial Spondyloarthritis: A Guide for Primary Care

Author/s: 
Magrey, Marina N., Danve, Abhijeet S., Ermann, Joerg, Walsh, Jessica A.

Axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is an important cause of chronic low back pain and affects approximately 1% of the US population. The back pain associated with axSpA has a characteristic pattern referred to as inflammatory back pain (IBP). Features of IBP include insidious onset before age 45 years, association with morning stiffness, improvement with exercise but not rest, alternating buttock pain, and good response to treatment with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. In patients with IBP, it is essential to look for other features associated with spondyloarthritis (SpA), such as enthesitis, dactylitis, peripheral arthritis, extra-articular manifestations (eg, psoriasis, uveitis, or inflammatory bowel disease), human leukocyte antigen B27 positivity, and a family history of SpA. Axial SpA is underrecognized, and a delay of several years between symptom onset and diagnosis is common. However, with new and effective therapies available for the treatment of active axSpA, early recognition and diagnosis are of critical importance. For this narrative review, we conducted a literature search of English-language articles using PubMed. Individual searches were performed to identify potential articles of interest related to axSpA (search terms: ["axSpA" OR "axial SpA" OR "axial spondyloarthritis" OR "ankylosing spondylitis"]) in combination with terms related to IBP ("inflammatory back pain" OR "IBP" OR "chronic back pain" OR "CBP" OR "lower back pain" OR "LBP"), diagnosis (["diagn∗" OR "classification"] AND ["criteria" OR "recommend∗" OR "guidelines"]), and referral ("refer∗"). No date range was formally selected, as we were interested in providing an overview of the evolution of these concepts in clinical practice. We supplemented the review with insights based on our clinical expertise. Patients with chronic back pain should be screened for IBP and other SpA features; suspicion for axSpA should trigger referral to a rheumatologist for further evaluation.

Subscribe to primary care