[The recommendations of nephrologist are poorly followed by the primary care physician. The example of vaccination against hepatitis B]

Abstract

The relationship between specialist physician and primary care physician (PCP) has been poorly evaluated in France. We have studied the application of a specialist's recommendation by the PCP. Vaccination against hepatitis B in patients with chronic renal failure was the follow-up marker. After consultation, the nephrologist wrote in his report to the PCP that the vaccination was recommended. At the next nephrological consultation, the patient was asked if the PCP had proposed vaccination. The clinical, biological characteristics and history of the patients were recorded as well as number and location of the PCP consultations. Five nephrology centers recruited 315 patients. In 61.6% (194/315) of the cases, the vaccination was not proposed by the PCP. Only the estimated GFR (lowest in vaccinated patients, 29.5 vs. 34.5mL/min/1.73m²), the delay between the two consultations of the nephrologist (shorter in vaccinated patients, 18.7 vs. 22.9 weeks) and the nephrologist's practice center (17.5 to 52% vaccination rate) are statistically significant in univariate analysis. In multivariate analysis, only the center effect persists. The lack of vaccination was argued by a letter from the PCP in 2 cases (1%). In the absence of a direct questioning of the PCP, the reasons for not following the recommendation remain unexplained. Overall, the recommendation of the nephrologist was little followed. Our study can contribute to the reflection on the shared follow-up of patients suffering from chronic diseases.

Keywords: Chronic renal insufficiency; Hepatitis B; Hépatite B; Insuffisance rénale chronique; Médecin spécialiste; Médecin traitant; Primary care physician; Specialist physician; Vaccination.