The World Health Organization defines a “critical shortage” of health workers as being fewer than 2.28 health workers per 1000 population and failing to attain 80% coverage for deliveries by skilled birth attendants. We aimed to quantify the number of health workers in five African countries and the proportion of these currently working in primary health care facilities, to compare this to estimates of numbers needed and to assess how the situation has changed in recent years. This study is a review of published and unpublished “grey” literature on human resources for health in five disparate countries: Mali, Sudan, Uganda, Botswana and South Africa. Health worker density has increased steadily since 2000 in South Africa and Botswana which already meet WHO targets but has not significantly increased since 2004 in Sudan, Mali and Uganda which have a critical shortage of health workers. In all five countries, a minority of doctors, nurses and midwives are working in primary health care, and shortages of qualified staff are greatest in rural areas. In Uganda, shortages are greater in primary health care settings than at higher levels. In Mali, few community health centres have a midwife or a doctor. Even South Africa has a shortage of doctors in primary health care in poorer districts. Although most countries recognize village health workers, traditional healers and traditional birth attendants, there are insufficient data on their numbers. There is an “inverse primary health care law” in the countries studied: staffing is inversely related to poverty and level of need, and health worker density is not increasing in the lowest income countries. Unless there is money to recruit and retain staff in these areas, training programmes will not improve health worker density because the trained staff will simply leave to work elsewhere. Information systems need to be improved in a way that informs policy on the health workforce. It may be possible to use existing resources more cost-effectively by involving skilled staff to supervise and support lower level health care workers who currently provide the front line of primary health care in most of Africa.

Antibiotics are still overprescribed for self-limiting upper respiratory tract infections such as acute sore throat, and physicians mention patient's desire for antibiotics as a driving force. We studied patients' concerns when visiting their family physician for acute sore throat, more specifically the importance they attach to antibiotic treatment and pain relief. Family physicians in 6 peer groups in Belgium participated in an observational postvisit questionnaire survey. Patients aged 12 years and older making an office visit for acute sore throat were invited to indicate the importance of different reasons for the visit. Sixty-eight family physicians provided data from 298 patients. The 3 most frequently endorsed reasons for visiting the physician were examination to establish the cause of the symptoms, pain relief, and information on the course of the disease. Hopes for an antibiotic ranked 11th of 13 items. Patients who considered antibiotics very/rather important valued pain relief significantly more than patients who considered them little/not important (P <.001). Patients who hoped for antibiotics felt more unwell (P <.001), had more faith in antibiotics to speed recovery (P <.001), and were less convinced that sore throat was a self-limiting disease (P <.012). A multivariate model, adjusted for age, sex, and educational status, showed that the desire for pain relief is a strong predictor of the hope to receive a prescription for antibiotics. Our study suggests that patients with acute sore throat and who hope for antibiotics may in fact want treatment for pain. Trials are needed to test whether exploring patients' expectations about pain management and offering adequate analgesia can assist physicians in managing sore throats without prescribing antibiotics.

Objective. To identify associations between the characteristics of general practitioners and practices, and patients’ evaluations of the availability of general practice. Design. Written surveys completed by patients. Setting. General practice care in nine European countries: Denmark, Germany, The Netherlands, Norway, UK, Belgium (Flanders and Wallonia), Switzerland, Slovenia, and Spain. Study participants. 15 996 adults patients consecutively visiting the general practitioner (response rates per country varied between 47 and 89%). Main measures. The Europep instrument to assess patients’ evaluations of five aspects of the availability of general practice care: (1) getting an appointment, (2) getting through on the phone, (3) being able to speak to the practitioner on the telephone, (4) waiting time in the waiting room, and (5) providing quick services for urgent health problems. Each general practitioner recorded age, sex, number of years in the practice, number of practitioners and other care providers in the practice, and urbanization level of the practice. Results. Patients’ more positive evaluations were associated with fewer general practitioners in the practice, except for quick services for urgent health problems (range of conditional overall odds ratios, 1.69–2.02). In addition, a number of significant unconditional overall odds ratios were found, particularly those related to the number of general practitioners’ working hours and the number of care providers in the practice. None of the associations was found consistently in all countries. Conclusion. Patients favour small practices and full-time general practitioners, which contradicts developments in general practice in many countries. Policy makers should consider how the tensions between patients’ views and organizational developments can be solved.

Poor handwriting has been shown to be associated with developmental disorders such as Developmental Coordination Disorder, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, autism, and learning disorders. Handwriting difficulties could lead to academic underachievement and poor self-esteem. Therapeutic intervention has been shown to be effective in treating children with poor handwriting, making early identification critical. The SOS test (Systematic Screening for Handwriting Difficulties) has been developed for this purpose. A child copies a sample of writing within 5 min. Handwriting quality is evaluated using six criteria and writing speed is measured. The Dutch SOS test was administered to 860 Flemish children (7–12 years). Inter- and intrarater reliability was excellent. Test–retest reliability was moderate. A correlation coefficient of 0.70 between SOS and “Concise Assessment Methods of Children Handwriting” test (Dutch version) confirmed convergent validity. The SOS allowed discrimination between typically developing children and children in special education, males and females, and different age groups.