Slawomir Chlabicz

Dr. Slawomir Chlabicz

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

27Years (2000-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 February 2013 in The Lancet Infectious Diseases
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
Paul LittlePaul Little
Paul Little
BSBeth Stuart
Beth Stuart
MMMichael Moore
Michael Moore
Samuel CoenenSamuel Coenen
Samuel Coenen
CChris Butler
Chris Butler
TVTheo Verheij
Theo Verheij
Lower-respiratory-tract infection is one of the most common acute illnesses managed in primary care. Few placebo-controlled studies of antibiotics have been done, and overall effectiveness (particularly in subgroups such as older people) is debated. We aimed to compare the benefits and harms of amoxicillin for acute lower-respiratory-tract infection with those of placebo both overall and in patients aged 60 years or older. Patients older than 18 years with acute lower-respiratory-tract infections (cough of ≤28 days' duration) in whom pneumonia was not suspected were randomly assigned (1:1) to either amoxicillin (1 g three times daily for 7 days) or placebo by computer-generated random numbers. Our primary outcome was duration of symptoms rated "moderately bad" or worse. Secondary outcomes were symptom severity in days 2-4 and new or worsening symptoms. Investigators and patients were masked to treatment allocation. This trial is registered with EudraCT (2007-001586-15), UKCRN Portfolio (ID 4175), ISRCTN (52261229), and FWO (G.0274.08N). 1038 patients were assigned to the amoxicillin group and 1023 to the placebo group. Neither duration of symptoms rated "moderately bad" or worse (hazard ratio 1.06, 95% CI 0.96-1.18; p=0.229) nor mean symptom severity (1.69 with placebo vs 1.62 with amoxicillin; difference -0.07 [95% CI -0.15 to 0.007]; p=0.074) differed significantly between groups. New or worsening symptoms were significantly less common in the amoxicillin group than in the placebo group (162 [15.9%] of 1021 patients vs 194 [19.3%] of 1006; p=0.043; number needed to treat 30). Cases of nausea, rash, or diarrhoea were significantly more common in the amoxicillin group than in the placebo group (number needed to harm 21, 95% CI 11-174; p=0.025), and one case of anaphylaxis was noted with amoxicillin. Two patients in the placebo group and one in the amoxicillin group needed to be admitted to hospital; no study-related deaths were noted. We noted no evidence of selective benefit in patients aged 60 years or older (n=595). When pneumonia is not suspected clinically, amoxicillin provides little benefit for acute lower-respiratory-tract infection in primary care both overall and in patients aged 60 years or more, and causes slight harms. European Commission Framework Programme 6, UK National Institute for Health Research, Barcelona Ciberde Enfermedades Respiratorias, and Research Foundation Flanders.

KPKarolina Pogorzelska
Karolina Pogorzelska
SCSlawomir Chlabicz
Slawomir Chlabicz
Telemedicine is a convenient tool for providing medical care remotely. It is routinely offered as an alternative to face-to-face consultations in healthcare settings all over the world. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and increased use of telemedicine in everyday clinical practice, the effectiveness of this modality and patient satisfaction with telemedicine is a subject of growing concern. PubMed and Google Scholar databases were searched. Papers published between January 2020 and August 2021 which met inclusion and exclusion criteria were analyzed. During the COVID-19 pandemic patients have found telemedicine a beneficial tool for consulting healthcare providers. A high level of satisfaction with telehealth was observed in each study across every medical specialty. Telemedicine is undoubtedly a convenient tool that has helped ensure continuity of medical care during the COVID-19 pandemic thanks to its considerable potential. In particular situations, telehealth may adequately replace face-to-face consultation. Regular patients’ feedback is necessary to improve the use of telemedicine in the future.

1 January 2020 in The Lancet
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CChris Butler
Chris Butler
AVAlike W van der Velden
Alike W van der Velden
EBEmily Bongard
Emily Bongard
BSBenjamin R Saville
Benjamin R Saville
JHJane Holmes
Jane Holmes
TVTheo J Verheij
Theo J Verheij

16 April 2009 in BMC Health Services Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
LMLudmila Marcinowicz
Ludmila Marcinowicz
SCSlawomir Chlabicz
Slawomir Chlabicz
RGRyszard Grebowski
Ryszard Grebowski
Background Patient satisfaction is a complex and difficult concept to measure, thus precluding the use of exclusively quantitative methods for its description. The purpose of this survey was firstly to identify particular healthcare dimensions that determine a patient's satisfaction or dissatisfaction; and secondly to attempt to typologise the patients' responses based on their evaluation of healthcare. Methods Using a qualitative research design, thirty-six in-depth interviews with patients of family physicians were conducted: four patients from each of 9 family practices in different regions of Poland were interviewed. The main outcome measure was factors associated with patient satisfaction/dissatisfaction. Results In their evaluations of their contacts with family doctors, the patients cited mostly issues concerning interpersonal relationships with the doctor. Nearly 40% of the statements referred to this aspect of healthcare, with nearly equal proportions of positive and negative comments. The second most frequent category of responses concerned contextual factors (21%) that related to conditions of medical service, with two-thirds of the evaluations being negative. Statements concerning the doctor's competencies (12.9%) and personal qualities (10.5%) were less common. Conclusion To improve the quality of healthcare, family doctors should take special care to ensure the quality of their interactions with patients.

1 June 2008 in Journal of Clinical Virology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SCSlawomir Chlabicz
Slawomir Chlabicz
Robert FlisiakRobert Flisiak
Robert Flisiak
OKOksana Kowalczuk
Oksana Kowalczuk
AGAnna Grzeszczuk
Anna Grzeszczuk
BPBarbara Pytel-Krolczuk
Barbara Pytel-Krolczuk
LCLech Chyczewski
Lech Chyczewski

1 April 2007 in Journal of Health Services Research & Policy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
LMLudmiła Marcinowicz
Ludmiła Marcinowicz
SCSlawomir Chlabicz
Slawomir Chlabicz
RGRyszard Grębowski
Ryszard Grębowski
Objective: To compare replies to open-ended and closed questions about patient satisfaction with family doctors. Methods: Two centres of primary health care in Białystok in northeast Poland were chosen. A self-administered questionnaire was mailed to 1000 people (500 from each centre) aged 18 years and over, randomly selected from the practices. Possible responses to the one closed question were: very good, good, bad, very bad or difficult to say. Replies to two open-ended questions were categorized as positive, neutral, negative or ambivalent. Results: The response rate was 57.9%. There were some discrepancies between the closed-question response and the open-ended question replies. Some of those who replied good or very good to the closed question expressed negative views in response to the two open-ended questions (14.0% and 12.4%). Conclusions: Answers to open-ended questions add value to a patient satisfaction survey by providing information that answers to closed questions may not elicite.