title: [Strategies of hepatitis C screening in general practice. Results of a two-center randomized trial].
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To improve the detection of patients infected with hepatitis C virus.
  
  
  METHODS
  A study was undertaken in the general medicine setting in two hepatitis C networks. General practitioners volunteered and received training on hepatitis C, then were randomly assigned to one of two screening strategies: group 1: general practitioners prescribed hepatitis C virus testing if the risk factors for HCV hepatitis C virus infection were identified during questioning of patients, group 2: general practitioners were helped in their screening approach by posters and leaflets on the risk factors of hepatitis C virus, available in the waiting room.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A total of 184 general practitioners enrolled 90 from group 1 and 94 from group 2. During a 15-month-period, 617 serologies were prescribed, 323 by general practitioners in group 1 (in patients who were an average of 40 year-old) and 294 in group 2 (in patients who were an average of 44 year-old); 489 serologies (79.3%) were actually performed (261 and 228 respectively) and 25 (5.1%) tested positive (15 and 10 respectively). The number of prescribed, performed, and positive serologies did not differ from one group to the other. The motive for hepatitis C virus screening was similar in both groups and included a history of transfusion in 27% of cases, intravenous drug use in 6%, increased ALT or symptoms compatible with hepatitis in 13%, nosocomial exposure in 22%. Risk factors in the 25 patients who were hepatitis C virus positive were drug use (44%), history of transfusion before 1991 (16%), elevated ALT or symptoms (12%), others (28%).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  This study comparing screening strategies in general medicine, resulted in the diagnosis of hepatitis C virus infection in 5% of tested patients, regardless of the strategy. However, the fewer serologies prescribed by general practitioners (an average of 3 tests in a 15-month-period) suggests a low rate of identified risk factors in general practice, and emphasizes that other types of screening procedures should be implemented and evaluated.
authors.affiliation: Service de Santé Publique, Hôpital Henri-Mondor, Créteil.
authors.forename: F
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Roudot-Thoraval
authors.forename: E
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Monnet
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Mercet
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Bastie
authors.forename: D
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Dhumeaux
authors.forename: J P
authors.initials: JP
authors.lastname: Miguet
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D000410:Alanine Transaminase / Q000097:blood; D002648:Child; D002675:Child, Preschool; D004796:Clinical Enzyme Tests; D003627:Data Interpretation, Statistical; D005194:Family Practice; D005260:Female; D005602:France; D006526:Hepatitis C / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000209:etiology / Q000276:immunology; D018937:Hepatitis C Antibodies / Q000032:analysis; D006801:Humans; D007223:Infant; D008297:Male; D008403:Mass Screening; D008875:Middle Aged; D012307:Risk Factors; D015819:Substance Abuse, Intravenous / Q000150:complications; D013653:Tattooing / Q000009:adverse effects; D065227:Transfusion Reaction
chemical_list: D018937:Hepatitis C Antibodies; D000410:Alanine Transaminase