This preprint is under consideration at BMC Primary Care. A preprint is a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
Research Article
Willeke Kitselaar
Leiden University
Corresponding Author
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: Persistent somatic symptoms (PSS) are common in primary care and often accompanied by an increasing disease burden for both the patient and healthcare. In medical practice, PSS is historically considered a diagnosis by exclusion or primarily seen as psychological. As a result, classification and registration of PSS in electronic health records (EHR) is hampered. The present study explores how general practitioners (GPs) currently register PSS, and what their view is regarding necessary improvements in classification, registration, and consultations.
Method: Dutch GPs were invited by email to participate in a national cross-sectional online survey. The survey addressed ICPC-codes used by GPs to register PSS, PSS-related terminology added to free text areas, usage of PSS-related syndrome codes, and GPs’ need for improvement of PSS classification, registration and care.
Results: GPs (n=259) were most likely to use codes specific to the symptom presented (89.3%). PSS-related terminology in free-text areas was used sparsely. PSS-related syndrome codes were reportedly used by 91.5% of GPs, but this was primarily the case for the code for irritable bowel syndrome. The ambiguous registration of PSS is reported as problematic by 47.9% of GPs. Over 56.7% of GPs reported needing additional schooling, tools or other support for PSS classification and consultation. GPs also reported needing other referral options and better guidelines.
Conclusions: Registration of PSS in primary care is currently ambiguous. Approximately half of GPs felt a need for more options for registration of PSS and reported a need for further support. In order to improve classification, registration and care for patients with PSS, there is a need for a more appropriate coding scheme and additional schooling.
Keywords
Clinical Coding, Electronic Health Records, General Practitioners, Medically Unexplained Symptoms, Persistent Somatic Symptoms, Primary Health Care, Classification of Disease
No competing interests reported.
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Under Review
Version 1
Posted 08 Feb, 2021
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 26 Mar, 2021
Reviews received
Received 12 Mar, 2021
Reviewers agreed
On 23 Feb, 2021
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 22 Feb, 2021
Editor assigned
On 11 Feb, 2021
Editor invited
On 03 Feb, 2021
Submission checks complete
On 03 Feb, 2021
First submitted
On 13 Jan, 2021
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
General Practice
Learn more about our company.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
This preprint is under consideration at BMC Primary Care. A preprint is a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research Article
Willeke Kitselaar
Leiden University
Corresponding Author
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Under Review
Version 1
Posted 08 Feb, 2021
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 26 Mar, 2021
Reviews received
Received 12 Mar, 2021
Reviewers agreed
On 23 Feb, 2021
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 22 Feb, 2021
Editor assigned
On 11 Feb, 2021
Editor invited
On 03 Feb, 2021
Submission checks complete
On 03 Feb, 2021
First submitted
On 13 Jan, 2021
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
General Practice
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: Persistent somatic symptoms (PSS) are common in primary care and often accompanied by an increasing disease burden for both the patient and healthcare. In medical practice, PSS is historically considered a diagnosis by exclusion or primarily seen as psychological. As a result, classification and registration of PSS in electronic health records (EHR) is hampered. The present study explores how general practitioners (GPs) currently register PSS, and what their view is regarding necessary improvements in classification, registration, and consultations.
Method: Dutch GPs were invited by email to participate in a national cross-sectional online survey. The survey addressed ICPC-codes used by GPs to register PSS, PSS-related terminology added to free text areas, usage of PSS-related syndrome codes, and GPs’ need for improvement of PSS classification, registration and care.
Results: GPs (n=259) were most likely to use codes specific to the symptom presented (89.3%). PSS-related terminology in free-text areas was used sparsely. PSS-related syndrome codes were reportedly used by 91.5% of GPs, but this was primarily the case for the code for irritable bowel syndrome. The ambiguous registration of PSS is reported as problematic by 47.9% of GPs. Over 56.7% of GPs reported needing additional schooling, tools or other support for PSS classification and consultation. GPs also reported needing other referral options and better guidelines.
Conclusions: Registration of PSS in primary care is currently ambiguous. Approximately half of GPs felt a need for more options for registration of PSS and reported a need for further support. In order to improve classification, registration and care for patients with PSS, there is a need for a more appropriate coding scheme and additional schooling.
No competing interests reported.
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...