- affects 0.3 to 1% of the population
- 1/4 of patients receive the diagnosis after the age of 60!
- conventional diagnosis rests on villous atrophy in the small bowel which recovers after a gluten free diet
- screening is possible - anti-endomysial and anti-transglutaminase antibodies are often used
- positive antibody tests are not diagnostic - sometimes they become negative again.
- sometimes positive Ab tests are followed by negative biopsies - it's worth reviewing the biopsy. Has the patient stopped gluten before the biopsy?
- Ab negative cases do occur, most commonly in IgA deficiency.
Monday, May 23, 2005
Coeliac Disease
An excellent BMJ leader prompted me to reconsider this condition. Here are some take home messages:
Cervical cytology
This is a typical example - I knew I needed a cervical cytology update, I hadn't done a smear in 2 years, yet the population I work with seems best at responding to opportunistic interventions rather than appointment invitation based interventions. I hadn't formally noted it as a learning need.
I was pleased to find an invite to a cervical cytology update promoted by the PCT and also involving a local specialist discussing Chlamydia.
What was news? Well the whole local call/recall system has had an overhaul and practices do not need to get involved in sending out invitations. We are still using slides and Aylesbury spatulae but by next Autumn we are moving to wet preps and brushes! When the move comes each practice will get a teaching session, so need to worry about that just yet.
Chlamydia screening is coming but they were hoping to tie it to the smear programme, however since this has moved from starting at 21 year to starting at 25 years this is now considered inappropriate. There was no news on when it was going to start. Our local GU clinician preferred one dose of Azithromycin as treatment, rather than a week of doxycycline for obvious reasons of compliance. Whatever I do, I must not forget the contact tracing. Apparently the fallopian tube blockage is thought to have an immune basis and re-infection increases the risk of this occurring. Treating the woman and not following up with her partner is a sure road to infertility.
I was pleased to find an invite to a cervical cytology update promoted by the PCT and also involving a local specialist discussing Chlamydia.
What was news? Well the whole local call/recall system has had an overhaul and practices do not need to get involved in sending out invitations. We are still using slides and Aylesbury spatulae but by next Autumn we are moving to wet preps and brushes! When the move comes each practice will get a teaching session, so need to worry about that just yet.
Chlamydia screening is coming but they were hoping to tie it to the smear programme, however since this has moved from starting at 21 year to starting at 25 years this is now considered inappropriate. There was no news on when it was going to start. Our local GU clinician preferred one dose of Azithromycin as treatment, rather than a week of doxycycline for obvious reasons of compliance. Whatever I do, I must not forget the contact tracing. Apparently the fallopian tube blockage is thought to have an immune basis and re-infection increases the risk of this occurring. Treating the woman and not following up with her partner is a sure road to infertility.
Learning Styles
What works for me? I thought I would blog to record learning needs and then use it to remind me what I needed to look up, then I'd go and look them up. This doesn't seem to be happening. Probably I'm not very good at spotting a learning need, but perhaps it's because my GP consultations are sufficiently infrequent, and occurring in an environment where the IT is very flaky that I just look things up in a book at the time - I know this happens.
At present, what does seem to work is using the blog to reflect on something I've read or picked up from a meeting or lecture. I'm not giving up on it as a "recording my learning needs tool" just yet though.
At present, what does seem to work is using the blog to reflect on something I've read or picked up from a meeting or lecture. I'm not giving up on it as a "recording my learning needs tool" just yet though.
Monday, May 09, 2005
The 10th National Conference: Management of Drug Users in Primary Care
10 Years On: looking back; moving forward
28th and 29th of April, 2005-05-09
Why did I go?
The RCGP conference is a high quality national event which allows me the opportunity to get a better understanding of national trends in primary care management of people with problematic substance use. In addition I have the opportunity to meet people working in this field and have one to one discussions.
What new knowledge did I acquire?
I attended 4 group work sessions that were really useful.
1) Laura Sheard, Nat Wright and Charlotte Tompkins presented on their work with detoxification. Their pragmatic randomised controlled trial compared 2 week community based detoxification from a primary care setting using dihydrocodeine versus buprenorphine. 60 people were recruited. 8 people were negative for morphine at the end of the 2 weeks, 7 of them in the buprenorphine group – this was not statistically significant. 23% of the survey group were abstinent at 3 months post treatment.
2) Judith Yates led a session on “Managing the needs of older users”. This session echoed some of the content covered in the “Managing Pain….…” seminar. It drew attention to the need to consider older drug users in our plans for treatment services as their needs are distinctly different from younger people. In particular they are more likely to present with other medical problems in addition (or as a consequence of) their substance use. By the time they are in their 60’s many people on long term methadone maintenance have no intention of stopping their treatment. What are the implications of this? Should we have separate “older people’s” sessions? What plans do we need to make for residential care of elderly drug users? Admittedly there were more questions than answers generated by this group but it did open up a new area of thoughts for me on this subject as I have a small number of people in treatment aged >50 years.
3) In the same session Roy Robertson presented work from Edinburgh which looked at a trial of methadone versus dihydrocodeine for maintenance. As a pilot they examined whether patients could identify which treatment they were taking and demonstrated that they could! Their subsequent trial was therefore “open label”. There was no difference in any outcome measures at 36 months, dihydrocodeine was slightly better for retention in treatment at 6 months.
4) “Managing pain in opiate dependence” was lead by Mark Gabbay. Case studies were used to demonstrate a number of points. The summary information that I took away was:
a) Where patients are being admitted for treatment, consider negotiation with the pain team. Below the waist surgical interventions might be managed with spinal/epidural anaesthesia.
b) Methadone’s analgesic effects are relatively short lived – 4-8 hours, therefore consider co-prescribing short acting narcotic analgesics where necessary. Some delegates considered oxycodone to be a useful adjunct to methadone maintenance in the treatment of pain. Apparently it has an affinity for kappa receptors, whereas methadone is mainly a mu receptor agonist.
c) Use pain scales to tailor treatment to the patient.
d) In dihydrocodeine dependence consider the use of dihydrocodeine reduction programmes.
Full Hall Sessions
Bob Newman from “The International Center for Advancement of Addiction Treatment Baron Edmond de Rothschild Chemical Dependency Institute of Beth Israel Medical Center” spoke on the rights of drug dependent persons to treatment access and choice of provider, and the right to be cared for under the same conditions as apply to the management of all other chronic medical conditions. This much I took as a given, what surprised me was his comments about treatment facilities in the U.S. which seem to be punitive, secondary sector and inaccessible. Bob told us that the predominant philosophy on treatment remained a “Just Say No” legacy of the Reagan era.
Jez Thompson did some “blue sky thinking” leading to discussion of the future for drugs and drug services. Points of note include the developing role of the expert patient, the increase in coercive treatments, our expectations that all doctors in the future will be better educated about drug problems, we might have immunisations against some drug problems, injectable treatments – what does the future hold, we need to consider the children of drug users and what the future holds for them, we need to consider the long term future of our “die hard” opiate users.
28th and 29th of April, 2005-05-09
Why did I go?
The RCGP conference is a high quality national event which allows me the opportunity to get a better understanding of national trends in primary care management of people with problematic substance use. In addition I have the opportunity to meet people working in this field and have one to one discussions.
What new knowledge did I acquire?
I attended 4 group work sessions that were really useful.
1) Laura Sheard, Nat Wright and Charlotte Tompkins presented on their work with detoxification. Their pragmatic randomised controlled trial compared 2 week community based detoxification from a primary care setting using dihydrocodeine versus buprenorphine. 60 people were recruited. 8 people were negative for morphine at the end of the 2 weeks, 7 of them in the buprenorphine group – this was not statistically significant. 23% of the survey group were abstinent at 3 months post treatment.
2) Judith Yates led a session on “Managing the needs of older users”. This session echoed some of the content covered in the “Managing Pain….…” seminar. It drew attention to the need to consider older drug users in our plans for treatment services as their needs are distinctly different from younger people. In particular they are more likely to present with other medical problems in addition (or as a consequence of) their substance use. By the time they are in their 60’s many people on long term methadone maintenance have no intention of stopping their treatment. What are the implications of this? Should we have separate “older people’s” sessions? What plans do we need to make for residential care of elderly drug users? Admittedly there were more questions than answers generated by this group but it did open up a new area of thoughts for me on this subject as I have a small number of people in treatment aged >50 years.
3) In the same session Roy Robertson presented work from Edinburgh which looked at a trial of methadone versus dihydrocodeine for maintenance. As a pilot they examined whether patients could identify which treatment they were taking and demonstrated that they could! Their subsequent trial was therefore “open label”. There was no difference in any outcome measures at 36 months, dihydrocodeine was slightly better for retention in treatment at 6 months.
4) “Managing pain in opiate dependence” was lead by Mark Gabbay. Case studies were used to demonstrate a number of points. The summary information that I took away was:
a) Where patients are being admitted for treatment, consider negotiation with the pain team. Below the waist surgical interventions might be managed with spinal/epidural anaesthesia.
b) Methadone’s analgesic effects are relatively short lived – 4-8 hours, therefore consider co-prescribing short acting narcotic analgesics where necessary. Some delegates considered oxycodone to be a useful adjunct to methadone maintenance in the treatment of pain. Apparently it has an affinity for kappa receptors, whereas methadone is mainly a mu receptor agonist.
c) Use pain scales to tailor treatment to the patient.
d) In dihydrocodeine dependence consider the use of dihydrocodeine reduction programmes.
Full Hall Sessions
Bob Newman from “The International Center for Advancement of Addiction Treatment Baron Edmond de Rothschild Chemical Dependency Institute of Beth Israel Medical Center” spoke on the rights of drug dependent persons to treatment access and choice of provider, and the right to be cared for under the same conditions as apply to the management of all other chronic medical conditions. This much I took as a given, what surprised me was his comments about treatment facilities in the U.S. which seem to be punitive, secondary sector and inaccessible. Bob told us that the predominant philosophy on treatment remained a “Just Say No” legacy of the Reagan era.
Jez Thompson did some “blue sky thinking” leading to discussion of the future for drugs and drug services. Points of note include the developing role of the expert patient, the increase in coercive treatments, our expectations that all doctors in the future will be better educated about drug problems, we might have immunisations against some drug problems, injectable treatments – what does the future hold, we need to consider the children of drug users and what the future holds for them, we need to consider the long term future of our “die hard” opiate users.
Consensus Statement from the Conference
- We recognise the importance of meaningful user engagement in the commissioning of drug treatment service, and call for secure funding and structures to fund this.
- We welcome the large increase in funding for drug treatment services in recent years but there needs to be urgent review of the evidence base underpinning how services are accessed and delivered to ensure that they optimise health gain for drug users.
- The primary care team needs to work in partnership with all other drug treatment services to assess and address the problems of individual drug users within a holistic framework.
Was this helpful to my working role? Was the information gained in line with my current practice? Do I need to change my practice? Do I need to disseminate this information to other members of my team?
Yes, as usual the conference was thought provoking. I need to consider the older drug users in our local services and look at their needs. People with ongoing needs such as chronic pain or an acute need for pain relief need better support – I hope that our hospital liaison nurse helps us meet these needs. I need to continue to scan the horizons for new developments in this field.
I was reassured that there was still no good evidence to support using dihydrocodeine in detoxification. Its use in maintenance is more promising but the systems, such as supervised consumption, that we have in place to safeguard our service users and their families do not currently lend themselves to dihydrocodeine prescribing.
My current practice will not change a great deal but I need to think about the differing needs of older people and those people who have acute or chronic pain in addition to their drug dependence needs.
To disseminate the information I will forward this to Lifeline team leaders and present some of this information to our local shared care forum.
Sunday, May 08, 2005
ECG material
The web is a mine of useful information on the ECG. I found a very useful primer at http://www.fleshandbones.com/readingroom/pdf/505.pdf. After a quick read of this I found some more material at http://medstat.med.utah.edu/kw/ecg/ on pages dedicated to an old master of ECG teaching in the U.S. This site has lots of information and some really useful quizzes to test your knowledge. I was very impressed with the explanation of the cardiac axis - the first time I really understood this I think!
Anyway, useful thoughts are:
Anyway, useful thoughts are:
- Check there is a 1mV calibration 1cm high and that the paper speed is 25mm/s (that much I remembered from my student days.
- Report rate, rhythm, axis, the QRS and then the ST segment and T waves, again this seemed familiar.
- Normal ranges are - rate 60-90 beats per minute, P-R interval (start of P to end of QRS) - 0.12-1.2ms, QRS less than or equal to 0.12ms, axis -30 to +90 degrees
- Look for the P waves, are they a consistent distance from the QRS? Is the distance in the normal range?
- Look at the QRS, is it a normal duration? Are there Q waves where there shouldn't be Q waves?
- Is the ST segment depressed? Elevated?
- Are T waves inverted?
- Back to calculating rates and intervals - one little square = 0.04s, one big square = 0.20s. For rate, count the little squares between 2 complexes and divide into 1500, assuming sinus rhythm.
Tuesday, May 03, 2005
A busy few days
Last week I attended the RCGP 10th annual conference on drugs, "10 years on, looking back and moving forward" a silly title I think. Anyway, I hope to link and report from that in the next few days.
Today was my GP day and I felt rusty from the word go. It's a long time since I reported an ECG. When I arrived at the surgery I found an ECG I had requested a couple of weeks ago had actually been done - the patient had turned up for the investigation! Unfortunately our ECG machine generates a report and it seems as if any slight deviation from the norm has to be reported. I thought the ECG was normal, the machine disagreed. Thankfully my partner was on my side .... but I felt so rusty I decided a crash course in ECG reading had to be done. Watch out for a further report ASAP.
Today was my GP day and I felt rusty from the word go. It's a long time since I reported an ECG. When I arrived at the surgery I found an ECG I had requested a couple of weeks ago had actually been done - the patient had turned up for the investigation! Unfortunately our ECG machine generates a report and it seems as if any slight deviation from the norm has to be reported. I thought the ECG was normal, the machine disagreed. Thankfully my partner was on my side .... but I felt so rusty I decided a crash course in ECG reading had to be done. Watch out for a further report ASAP.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
