OBJECTIVE: To determine the participation of the primary care physician in the diagnosis and follow-up of thyroid pathology. DESIGN: A descriptive study of a crossover type. SETTING: The Isabel II Health centre at Parla (Madrid). PATIENTS: All those diagnosed with thyroid pathology registered with the two primary care teams at the Isabel II Health Centre up to august 1992. Data were obtained from the morbidity records and the District's Endocrinology Clinic. MAIN RESULTS: 196 patients, with 250 diagnoses overall, were located. The main ones were: hypothyroidism (27.6%), normally functioning goitres (24.4%) and hyperthyroidism (23.2%). The general practitioner was aware of the illness in 87% of cases, as against the specialist in 97%. The provisional diagnosis was carried out at the primary care level in 56% of cases; the final one only in 18%. With respect to patients' subsequent treatment, it was exclusively specialist in 72% of cases and joint in 19%. CONCLUSIONS: The primary care doctor is aware of the majority of his/her patients' thyroid illnesses, but not all. We recommend greater participation of primary care in the initial diagnostic approach to these conditions; and, in particular, a closer involvement in the treatment of these pathologies, which requires that the primary care doctor must have access to precise diagnostic methods.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the participation of the primary care physician in the diagnosis and follow-up of thyroid pathology. DESIGN: A descriptive study of a crossover type. SETTING: The Isabel II Health centre at Parla (Madrid). PATIENTS: All those diagnosed with thyroid pathology registered with the two primary care teams at the Isabel II Health Centre up to august 1992. Data were obtained from the morbidity records and the District's Endocrinology Clinic. MAIN RESULTS: 196 patients, with 250 diagnoses overall, were located. The main ones were: hypothyroidism (27.6%), normally functioning goitres (24.4%) and hyperthyroidism (23.2%). The general practitioner was aware of the illness in 87% of cases, as against the specialist in 97%. The provisional diagnosis was carried out at the primary care level in 56% of cases; the final one only in 18%. With respect to patients' subsequent treatment, it was exclusively specialist in 72% of cases and joint in 19%. CONCLUSIONS: The primary care doctor is aware of the majority of his/her patients' thyroid illnesses, but not all. We recommend greater participation of primary care in the initial diagnostic approach to these conditions; and, in particular, a closer involvement in the treatment of these pathologies, which requires that the primary care doctor must have access to precise diagnostic methods.