Releases Saturday 6 April 2002
No 7341 Volume 324

Please remember to credit the BMJ as source when publicising an
article and to tell your readers that they can read its full text on the
journal's web site (http://bmj.com).

If your story is posted on a website please include a link back to
the source BMJ article (URL's are given under titles).


(1) PATIENTS PREFER CARE FROM A NURSE
PRACTITIONER THAN FROM A DOCTOR

(2) PARENTS RECOGNISE BENEFITS OF
POSTMORTEMS

(3) WHY ARE DOCTORS SO UNHAPPY?

(4) MENINGITIS C VACCINE IS COST EFFECTIVE

(5) ACTION NEEDED TO TACKLE FAKE DRUGS
TRADE



(1) PATIENTS PREFER CARE FROM A NURSE
PRACTITIONER THAN FROM A DOCTOR

(Systematic review of whether nurse practitioners working in
primary care can provide equivalent care to doctors)
http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7341/819

Patients are more satisfied with care from a nurse practitioner
than from a doctor, finds a study in this week's BMJ.

Researchers in Bristol reviewed 34 studies to determine
whether nurse practitioners working in primary care can
provide equivalent care to doctors.

They found that patients were more satisfied with care by a
nurse practitioner. Nurse practitioners had longer
consultations and carried out more investigations than
doctors. Nurse practitioners made more complete records
and scored better on communication than doctors. They also
offered more advice on self care and management.

"Our review lends support to an increased involvement of
nurse practitioners in primary care," say the authors. Nurse
practitioners seem to provide a quality of care that is at least
as good, and in some ways better, than doctors, although
further research is needed to confirm that nurse practitioner
care is safe in terms of detecting rare but important health
problems.

Contacts:

Chris Salisbury, Consultant Senior Lecturer, Division of
Primary Health Care, University of Bristol, UK

Sue Horrocks, Research Associate

Elizabeth Anderson, Senior Lecturer

(2) PARENTS RECOGNISE BENEFITS OF
POSTMORTEMS

(Cross-sectional survey of parents' experience and views of
the postmortem examination)
http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7341/816

Parents who have lost a baby view the postmortem
examination as a useful and necessary tool in helping to
discover the reasons why their baby died, finds a study in this
week's BMJ.

Researchers at Newcastle University surveyed 258 women
who had attended a bereavement counselling service after
losing a baby during pregnancy or infancy about their
experience and views of the postmortem examination.

Of the 166 women who completed the questionnaire, 81%
agreed to a postmortem examination on their baby. The most
common reasons given for agreeing to an examination were
wanting more information about what had happened and
helping to improve medical knowledge and research.

Twenty-eight women did not agree to a postmortem
examination. The most common reason given was that they
felt their baby had suffered enough.

Eighty-six per cent believed the findings of the examination
had been explained appropriately, although nine women
regretted their decision. Of those who refused an
examination, four had regrets about their decision. One said:
"Now, two years later, I would like to know why they died,"
and another: "an answer may have alleviated the burden of
guilt."

Parents view the postmortem examination as a useful and
necessary tool in helping to discover the reasons why their
baby died, say the authors. All medical staff involved in
consent for postmortem examinations should be fully trained
in how to ask for parental consent, the postmortem
examination procedure, and how to explain the findings.

Contact:

Judith Rankin, Senior Research Associate, School of Health
Sciences, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne,
UK
Email: j.m.rankin@ncl.ac.uk

(3) WHY ARE DOCTORS SO UNHAPPY?

(Unhappy doctors: what are the causes and what can be
done?)
http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7341/835

(The medical profession, the public, and the government)
http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7341/838

Unhappy doctors are a worldwide phenomenon. Two
articles this week's BMJ suggest that the cause is a
breakdown in the implicit compact between doctors,
patients, and society, and outline what a new compact might
look like.

In the first article, based on workshops with doctors in the
US and UK, Nigel Edwards and colleagues argue that
workload and pay, though important, do not fully explain the
problem. A key factor seems to be a change in the
psychological compact between the profession, employers,
patients, and society so that the job is now different from
what doctors expected.

A new compact is needed, spelling out the rights and
responsibilities of the government, the medical profession,
and the public, say the authors. Clinical leaders have a crucial
role in developing a new compact that improves care for
patients, improves the effectiveness of the healthcare
organisation, and helps create a happier workforce, they
conclude.

The old implicit compact between the government, the
medical profession, and the public has been undermined over
the years and needs to be updated, say Chris Ham and
George Alberti in the second article.

This will not be easy to agree but is essential to enable the
different partners to make an effective contribution to the
reform of the NHS. It is time to stop grieving for the past and
to meet the challenges of the new world and the future, they
conclude.

Contacts:

Nigel Edwards, Policy Director, NHS Confederation,
London, UK
Email: nigel.edwards@nhsconfed.org

George Alberti President, Royal College of Physicians,
London, UK (via Linda Cuthbertson, Press and PR
Manager)
Email: Linda.Cuthbertson@rcplondon.ac.uk

(4) MENINGITIS C VACCINE IS COST EFFECTIVE

(Modelling cost effectiveness of meningococcal serogroup C
conjugate vaccination campaign in England and Wales)
http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7341/809

The introduction of meningococcal C vaccine in the UK in
1999 has rapidly and substantially reduced the incidence of
meningitis in young people and is cost effective, finds a study
in this week's BMJ.

Researchers at the Public Health Laboratory Service in
London assessed the cost effectiveness of the vaccination
campaign in people aged 0-17 years.

Immediately before the introduction of the vaccine, the
burden of meningitis C was considerable, with an estimated
1,137 cases in people aged 0-17 years and at least 72
deaths annually. The vaccination campaign is estimated to
have cost between £126m ($180m) and £241m ($343m)
and the cost per life year saved is estimated to be £6,259
($8919).

School based vaccination was more cost effective than
routine vaccination of infants because delivery costs are
lower and fewer doses are required, conclude the authors.

Contact:

John Edmunds, Research Fellow, Immunisation Division,
PHLS Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre, London,
UK
Email: jedmunds@phls.org.uk

(5) ACTION NEEDED TO TACKLE FAKE DRUGS
TRADE

(Editorial: Murder by fake drugs )
http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7341/800

The World Health Organisation estimates that fake drugs
account for 10% of global pharmaceutical commerce.
Researchers in this week's BMJ call for urgent international
action to tackle this murderous trade.

Recent examples of fake drugs include neomycin eye drops
and meningococcal vaccine made of tap water; paracetamol
syrup made of industrial solvent; and contraceptive pills made
of wheat flour. Some counterfeit drugs even contain actively
harmful ingredients, not just bogus placebos.

Death and illness arising from this murderous trade are
considerable, especially in developing countries, say the
authors. Guidelines have been produced, but most
developing countries do not have the infrastructure and
financial resources to implement them. In the past, drug
companies have tended to avoid publicising the problem for
fear of "damaging public confidence in medicines". Some
countries, well aware of the scale of their problem, have
preferred to ignore it, they add.

Much of the counterfeit drug trade is probably linked to
organised crime, corruption, the narcotics trade, unregulated
pharmaceutical companies, and the business interests of
unscrupulous politicians, say the authors. Much greater
international political will to eliminate the problem is required,
they conclude.

Contact:

Paul Newton, Clinical Lecturer, Nuffield Department of
Clinical Medicine, Oxford University, Oxford, UK
Email: newtonpaul100@hotmail.com


FOR ACCREDITED JOURNALISTS

Embargoed press releases and articles are available from:

Public Affairs Division
BMA House
Tavistock Square
London WC1H 9JR
(contact: pressoffice@bma.org.uk)

and from:

the EurekAlert website, run by the American Association for the
Advancement of Science
(http://www.eurekalert.org)