The precise age distribution and calculated stroke risk of screen-detected atrial fibrillation (AF) is not known. Therefore, it is not possible to determine the number needed to screen (NNS) to identify one treatable new AF case (NNS-Rx) (i.e., Class-1 oral anticoagulation [OAC] treatment recommendation) in each age stratum. If the NNS-Rx is known for each age stratum, precise cost-effectiveness and sensitivity simulations can be performed based on the age distribution of the population/region to be screened. Such calculations are required by national authorities and organisations responsible for health system budgets to determine the best age cutoffs for screening programs and decide whether programs of screening should be funded. Therefore, we aimed to determine the exact yield and calculated stroke-risk profile of screen-detected AF and NNS-Rx in 5-year age strata. A systematic review of Medline, Pubmed, and Embase was performed (January 2007 to February 2018), and AF-SCREEN international collaboration members were contacted to identify additional studies. Twenty-four eligible studies were identified that performed a single time point screen for AF in a general ambulant population, including people ≥65 years. Authors from eligible studies were invited to collaborate and share patient-level data. Statistical analysis was performed using random effects logistic regression for AF detection rate, and Poisson regression modelling for CHA₂DS₂-VASc scores. Nineteen studies (14 countries from a mix of low- to middle- and high-income countries) collaborated, with 141,220 participants screened and 1,539 new AF cases. Pooled yield of screening was greater in males across all age strata. The age/sex-adjusted detection rate for screen-detected AF in ≥65-year-olds was 1.44% (95% CI, 1.13%–1.82%) and 0.41% (95% CI, 0.31%–0.53%) for <65-year-olds. New AF detection rate increased progressively with age from 0.34% (<60 years) to 2.73% (≥85 years). Neither the choice of screening methodology or device, the geographical region, nor the screening setting influenced the detection rate of AF. Mean CHA₂DS₂-VASc scores (n = 1,369) increased with age from 1.1 (<60 years) to 3.9 (≥85 years); 72% of ≥65 years had ≥1 additional stroke risk factor other than age/sex. All new AF ≥75 years and 66% between 65 and 74 years had a Class-1 OAC recommendation. The NNS-Rx is 83 for ≥65 years, 926 for 60–64 years; and 1,089 for 70% have ≥1 additional stroke risk factor other than age/sex. Our data, based on the largest number of screen-detected AF collected to date, show the precise relationship between yield and estimated stroke risk profile with age, and strong dependence for NNS-RX on the age distribution of the population to be screened: essential information for precise cost-effectiveness calculations.

To evaluate the effectiveness of motivational interviewing (MI) in improving medication adherence in older patients being treated by polypharmacy. Cluster randomized clinical trial in 16 primary care centers with 27 health care providers and 154 patients. Thirty-two health care providers were assigned to an experimental (EG) or control group (CG). MI training program and review of patient treatments. Providers in the EG carried out MI, whereas those in the CG used an "advice approach". Three follow-up visits were completed, at 15 days and at 3 and 6 months. Medication adherence in both groups was compared (p<0.05). Patients recruited: 70/84 (EG/CG). Mean age: 76 years; female: 68.8%. The proportion of subjects changing to adherence was 7.6% higher in the EG (p<0.001). Therapeutic adherence was higher for patients in the EG (OR=2.84), women (OR=0.24) and those with high educational levels (OR=3.93). A face-to-face motivational approach in primary care helps elderly patients with chronic diseases who are being treated by polypharmacy to achieve an improved level of treatment adherence than traditional strategies of providing information and advice. MI is a patient-centered approach that can be used to improve medication adherence in primary care. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01291966).

Objectives To know the patients’ expectations and the fulfillment of these at family medicine consultations by resident doctors and to assess their effect on some consultation outcomes. Design A prospective cohort study. Participants Patients attending family medicine consultations held by 38 resident doctors: 1,301 eligible patients, 702 filled in all questionnaires. Measurements Before each visit, the patients’ expectations about that particular consultation were registered. Right after the visit was over, their perception of several aspects of the communicative interaction with the doctor was measured. Later, patients were interviewed on the phone to know how their expectations had been fulfilled, how satisfied they were about the consultation, how they had followed the doctor’s suggestions, if they were going to seek further care for the same cause later, and the evolution of their clinical problem. Logistic regression was the main analysis used. Results The most common expectations were the doctor showing interest and listening (30.5%), getting some information about the diagnosis (16.3%), and sharing problems and doubts (11.1%). The rate of main expectations that were met was 76.5%. Satisfaction with the encounter was associated with the clinical evolution [odds ratio (OR) 2.23; confidence interval (CI): 1.32–3.75], and the fulfilling of the patients’ main or two main expectations was significantly related to all the measured outcomes (satisfaction OR 3.51, CI: 1.73–7.8; adherence OR 1.80, CI: 1.11–2.92; clinical evolution OR 1.54, CI: 1.01–2.35; and seeking further care later OR 0.54, CI:0.36–0.81) Conclusions Patients prioritize expectations of a more general sort when they attend primary care consultations and residents fulfill these acceptably. The fulfillment of expectations seems to affect the studied outcomes more than other factors.

Objective. The aim of the present study was to find out if a training programme adapted to family physicians with several years of clinical experience changes their behaviour when they deal with fibromyalgic patients in the sense of introducing the communication skills that define the ‘patient-centred’ approach. Methods. A randomized, and simple blind, educative study was carried out. Twenty full-time family physicians were invited to participate. They were allocated randomly to two groups: an intervention and a control group. A total of 110 patients were recruited from people attending physicians’ surgeries for the first time and who complained of generalized pain that finally fulfilled criteria for generalized musculoskeletal chronic pain/fibromyalgia. This was done for an entire year. The intervention group received an 18 hour intensive course. One week after the course, all doctors carried out a video-recorded encounter with a patient who played the part of a typical fibromyalgia clinical case. The interviews were coded by an observer blind to the training status of the participants, using the GATHARES-CP questionnaire. All patients were contacted by telephone during a 1–2-month period by a different interviewer who was ‘blinded’ to the patient’s experimental status. They were asked to respond to three questions that represent the key components of patient-centred style. Results. The average score on the GATHARES-CP questionnaire was 11.3 ± 0.9 and 9 ± 2.3, for doctors from the intervention and control groups, respectively (P < 0.01). For 11 items, scores were higher in the intervention group. The patients' answers to all three questions showed statistically significant differences in a positive direction for the trained doctors. Conclusions. The doctors improved the use of strategies and skills for carrying out patient-centred consultations after they had received an interactive course. The doctors' behaviour appeared to have changed as much in a more experimental situation as in the actual consultations. Moreover, the gain was observed inmediately after the intervention was completed, and after having run for a variable period of time up to 1 year.