Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

F D Hobbs

Publications and source records attributed to F D Hobbs.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2003

Cardiovascular disease and lipids. Issues and evidence for the management of dyslipidaemia in primary care.

The commonest manifestations of cardiovascular disease, namely coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke, represent the two most common causes of death in the world today. Furthermore, cardiovascular diseases have the highest healthcare utilisation costs in most countries. Both primary and secondary prevention management strategies are essential. Although more than 200 risk factors for CHD have now been identified, the single most powerful predictor of CHD risk is abnormal lipid levels. The relative risk influences of the various lipid sub-fractions are described, with particular emphasis on LDL cholesterol, which represents the principal target for treatment in most management guidelines. Unfortunately, there remains considerable evidence of continued under-management of patients with elevated cholesterol and cardiovascular risk who are eligible for secondary prevention. The barriers contributing to such physician under-performance are numerous. The more recent recognition of the importance of identifying patients at enhanced risk, but without established disease (primary prevention), will require greatly familiarity with the clinical use of CHD risk scoring systems, most of which are based upon the Framingham equation. Special reference is made to groups at particular risk of CHD. In summary, the application of the enormous evidence-base for interventions in cardiovascular disease, especially over the treatment of elevated cholesterol, pose a huge challenge to primary and secondary care in most healthcare systems.

Cardiovascular Diseases↗
PubMed2001

Randomised controlled trial of Helicobacter pylori testing and endoscopy for dyspepsia in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost effectiveness of a strategy of near patient Helicobacter pylori testing and endoscopy for managing dyspepsia. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 31 UK primary care centres. PARTICIPANTS: 478 patients under 50 years old presenting with dyspepsia of longer than four weeks duration. INTERVENTIONS: Near patient testing for H pylori and open access endoscopy for patients with positive results. Control patients received acid suppressing drugs or specialist referral at general practitioner's discretion. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost effectiveness based on improvement in symptoms and use of resources at 12 months; quality of life. RESULTS: 40% of the study group tested positive for H pylori. 45% of study patients had endoscopy compared with 25% of controls. More peptic ulcers were diagnosed in the study group (7.4% v 2.1%, P=0.011). Paired comparison of symptom scores and quality of life showed that all patients improved over time with no difference between study and control groups. No significant differences were observed in rates of prescribing, consultation, or referral. Costs were higher in the study group ( 367.85 pound sterling v 253.16 pound sterling per patient). CONCLUSIONS: The test and endoscopy strategy increases endoscopy rates over usual practice in primary care. The additional cost is not offset by benefits in symptom relief or quality of life.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2001

[Thromboembolism].

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2001

Doctor-patient discussions of alternative medicine for back pain.

OBJECTIVE: To document the frequency of conversations about alternative medicine during primary care consultations for back pain in diverse settings. DESIGN: "Exit interview" type patient survey. SETTINGS: General practices in Seattle, Washington; rural Israel; and Birmingham, England. PATIENTS: A convenience sample of 218 adults completing a doctor visit for back pain. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Frequencies of doctor-patient discussions of alternative medicine. RESULTS: Alternative medicine was discussed in a minority of visits (US site 40%, Israel site 37%, UK site 14%, p < 0.05). At each site, patients initiated at least half of the discussions. Users were five to six times more likely to discuss alternative medicine with their doctor than non-users (p < 0.05 for comparison at each site). The percentage of patients who used alternative medicine but left the consultation without discussing it was similar at all sites (US site 17%, Israel site 23%, UK site 15%). CONCLUSIONS: Discussions of alternative medicine occurred in a minority of consultations for back pain although the rate varied considerably by site. Discussions were initiated primarily by patients who use it.

Back Pain↗
PubMed2001

Cluster randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two primary care interventions aimed at improving attendance for breast screening.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two interventions based in primary care aimed at increasing uptake of breast screening. SETTING: 24 General practices with low uptake in the second round of screening (below 60%) in north west London and the West Midlands, UK. Participants were all women registered with these practices and eligible for screening in the third round. METHODS: Pragmatic factorial cluster randomised controlled trial, with practices randomised to a systematic intervention (general practitioner letter), an opportunistic intervention (flag in women's notes prompting discussion by health professionals), neither intervention, or both. Outcome measures were attendance for screening 6 months after the practices had been screened and cost-effectiveness of the interventions. RESULTS: 6,133 Women were included: 1,721 control; 1,818 letter; 1,232 flag; 1,362 both interventions. Attendance data were obtained for 5,732 (93%) women. The two interventions independently increased breast screening uptake in a logistic regression model adjusted for clustering, with the flag (odds ratio (OR) 1.43, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.14 to 1.79; p=0.0019) marginally more effective than the letter (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.64; p=0.015). Health service costs per additional attendance were 26 pounds (letter) and 41 pounds (flag). CONCLUSIONS: Although both interventions increased attendance for breast screening, the letter was the more cost-effective. Any decision to implement both interventions rather than just the letter will depend on whether the additional (41 pounds) costs are judged worthwhile in terms of the gains in breast screening uptake.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed2001

Improving attendance for breast screening among recent non-attenders: a randomised controlled trial of two interventions in primary care.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two primary care based interventions aimed at increasing breast screening uptake for women who had recently failed to attend. SETTING: 13 General practices with low uptake in the second round of breast screening (below 60%) in north west London and the West Midlands, United Kingdom. Participants were women in these practices who were recent non-attenders for breast screening in the third round. METHODS: Pragmatic factorial randomised controlled trial, with people randomised to a systematic intervention (general practitioner letter), an opportunistic intervention (flag in women's notes prompting discussion by health professionals), neither intervention, or both. Outcome measures were attendance for screening 6 months after randomisation and cost-effectiveness of the interventions. RESULTS: 1,158 Women were individually randomised as follows: 289 control; 291 letter; 290 flag; 288 both interventions. Attendance was ascertained for 1,148 (99%) of the 1,158 women. Logistic regression adjusting for the other intervention and practice produced an odds ratio (OR) for attendance of 1.51 (95% confidence interval (95% CI 1.02 to 2.26; p=0.04) for the letter, and 1.39 (95% CI 0.93 to 2.07; p=0.10) for the flag. Health service costs/ additional attendance were 35 pounds (letter) and 65 pounds (flag). CONCLUSIONS: Among recent non-attenders, the letter was effective in increasing breast screening attendance. The flag was of equivocal effectiveness and was considerably less cost-effective than the letter.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Cost effectiveness of initial endoscopy for dyspepsia in patients over age 50 years: a randomised controlled trial in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Dyspepsia can be managed by initial endoscopy and treatment based on endoscopic findings, or by empirical prescribing. We aimed to determine the cost effectiveness of initial endoscopy compared with usual management in patients with dyspepsia over age 50 years presenting to their primary care physician. METHODS: 422 patients were recruited and randomly assigned to initial endoscopy or usual management. Primary outcomes were effect of treatment on dyspepsia symptoms and cost effectiveness. Secondary outcomes were quality of life and patient satisfaction. Total costs were calculated from individual patient's use of resources with unit costs applied from national data. Statistical analysis of uncertainty on incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was done along with a sensitivity analysis on unit costs with cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. FINDINGS: In the 12 months following recruitment, 213 (84%) patients had an endoscopy compared with 75 (41%) controls. Initial endoscopy resulted in a significant improvement in symptom score (p=0.03), and quality of life pain dimension (p=0.03), and a 48% reduction in the use of proton pump inhibitors (p=0.005). The ICER was Pound Sterling1728 (UK Pound Sterling) per patient symptom-free at 12 months. The ICER was very sensitive to the cost of endoscopy, and could be reduced to Pound Sterling165 if the unit cost of this procedure fell from Pound Sterling246 to Pound Sterling100. INTERPRETATION: Initial endoscopy in dyspeptic patients over age 50 might be a cost-effective intervention.

Aged↗
PubMed2000

Initial management strategies for dyspepsia.

BACKGROUND: This review considers management strategies (combinations of initial investigation and empirical treatments) for dyspeptic patients. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness, acceptability, and cost effectiveness of the following initial management strategies for patients presenting with dyspepsia (a) initial pharmacological therapy (including endoscopy for treatment failures) (b) early endoscopy (c) testing for Helicobacter pylori and endoscope only those positive (d) H.pylori eradication therapy with or without prior testing. SEARCH STRATEGY: Trials were located through electronic searches and extensive contact with trialists. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials of dyspeptic patients presenting in primary care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data was collected on dyspeptic symptoms, quality of life and use of resources. MAIN RESULTS: Ten papers reporting 12 comparisons were found. Trials comparing proton pump inhibitors (PPI) with antacids (2 trials) and H2 receptor antagonists (3 trials), and of early endoscopy compared with initial acid suppression (3 trials) were pooled. PPIs were significantly more effective than both H2RA s and antacids. Relative risks (RR) and 95% CI were, for PPI: antacid 0.72 (0.64-0.80), PPI: H2RA 0.63 (0.47-0.85). Results for other drug comparisons were either absent or inconclusive. Early endoscopy was not more effective than initial prescribing (RR 0.90 (0.77-1.04), but current studies lack power. No eligible trials of H.pylori test and endoscopy or test and eradicate were found. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: PPIs are effective in the treatment of dyspepsia in these trials which may not adequately exclude patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. The relative efficacy of H2RA and PPI is uncertain. Early investigation may benefit some patients with dyspepsia. The review will be updated shortly with several large trials that have recently been completed.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗