Search

Abstract Background Long-term reinforcement in the role of primary care and improvement the healthcare system as a whole requires the involvement of GPs in clinical research processes. However, many clinical studies fail due to failure to achieve sample population targets amongst GPs and their patients. This issue has been identified and discussed, but effective strategies to overcome it are still lacking. One of the reasons is that the positions, requirements, and experiences of GPs on participating in clinical research have hardly been examined up to now. Methods The years 2021 and 2022 saw three quantitative and qualitative surveys amongst GPs in Germany with the aim of shedding light on the attitudes, experiences, and potential issues regarding the involvement of primary care in clinical research projects and participation in cluster-randomised controlled trials (cRCTs) in a general sense. This overview summarises and abstracts conclusions gained from the exploratory series of studies and compares the results with the current research situation. From here, this contribution will then develop an approach towards optimising the integration of GPs into clinical research. Results Most of the GPs asked associated clinical research with opportunities and potential such as closing gaps in healthcare, using evidence-based instruments, optimising diagnostic and therapeutic management, and reinforcement of multiprofessional healthcare. Even so, many GPs unsure as to how far primary care in particular would stand to benefit from studies of this type in the long term. Respondents were also divided on willingness to participate in clinical research. GPs having already participated in Innovation Fund projects generally saw a benefit regarding intervention and cost–benefit relationship. However, some also reported major hurdles and stress factors such as excessive documentation and enrolment requirements, greater interference in practice routines, and sometimes poor integration into project processes such as in communication and opportunities to play an active role in the project. Conclusions Results from the studies presented provide indications as to how GPs perceive clinical research projects and cRCTs as a whole and from their existing project experience, and on the requirements that studies would have to meet for GPs to be willing to participate. In particular, making sure that clinical studies fully conform with GPs would play a major role; this especially applies to freedom to make medical decisions, limitation of documentation obligations, interference in regular practice routine, greater involvement in research planning, and long-term reinforcement in the role of primary care. Clinical research projects and cRCTs should be planned, designed, and communicated for clear and visible relevance to everyday primary care.

Abstract Background Counselling and management of overweight and obesity are tasks for which general practitioners possess favourable qualifications. Based on a long-term doctor-patient relationship, GPs have various options for actions to deal with overweight problems. To date, however, there is only little evidence on the experiences which people with obesity have made with the primary physician model and the care needs and wishes they actually address to their GPs. This study investigated what experiences people with obesity have had with GP care and what care needs and wishes they communicated to their GPs. The results will be used to derive starting points for optimising the primary healthcare setting. Methods A total of 32 individuals affected by obesity were recruited over 24 online health forums. With them, we conducted qualitative interviews in the time between April and October 2022. Results The respondents considered the primary care physician to be the central contact person when they sought advice and support with weight problems. The advice of the GP was associated with an increased willingness to deal with reducing one’s own weight. Despite this positive perception, widespread drawbacks existed from the perspective of the respondents: (1) incidental or late discovery of obesity, (2) absence of continuous weight counselling, (3) no agreement on specific weight reduction goals, (4) no referrals to help and support services, (5) insensitive discussion. Only some of the respondents who have recently been able to reduce their weight sustainably attributed their success primarily to the support they received from their GP. Conclusion GPs should be encouraged to address obesity consistently and promptly. In addition, concrete recommendations and realistic goals for weight loss should be formulated. Continuous and motivating discussions are crucial in this regard. A focus on nutrition and exercise counselling in the GP’s office should also be encouraged. GPs should be strengthened in their role as mediators by integrating their patients into a network of further assistance as needed. The development of care structures for obesity management should be promoted.

Abstract Background General practice offers good conditions to detect and provide care for dementia-related diseases. Nonetheless, the effectiveness of dementia care in general practice is repeatedly criticised. To date, few studies have attempted to form a comprehensive picture of the status quo of dementia care in general practice that focuses on GP perspectives of experience and action. The aim of this study was to identify potential strengths and weaknesses of GP-based dementia care, by means of combined consideration of relevant care and treatment dimensions (construct of ‘dementia sensitivity’). Methods Through an online poll, a total of 4,511 GPs who are active as treatment providers in Baden-Württemberg, Hesse, Rhineland-Palatinate and Saarland were surveyed between September 2022 and January 2023. In addition to the descriptive analysis, a T-test with independent samples was used to identify significant differences between two groups (interval-scaled or metric variables). Pearson’s chi-squared test (χ2) was used to analyze the percentage values. Two levels of significance were tested for (mean difference at p

Abstract Background Hardly any area of application for health apps is seen to be as promising as health and lifestyle support in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Research has emphasised the benefits of such mHealth apps for disease prevention, monitoring, and management, but there is still a lack of empirical data on the role that health apps play in actual type 2 diabetes care. The aim of the present study was to gain an overview of the attitudes and experiences of physicians specialising in diabetes with regard to the benefits of health apps for type 2 diabetes prevention and management. Methods An online survey was conducted amongst all 1746 physicians at practices specialised in diabetes in Germany between September 2021 and April 2022. A total of 538 (31%) of the physicians contacted participated in the survey. In addition, qualitative interviews were conducted with 16 randomly selected resident diabetes specialists. None of the interviewees took part in the quantitative survey. Results Resident diabetes specialists saw a clear benefit in type 2 diabetes-related health apps, primarily citing improvements in empowerment (73%), motivation (75%), and compliance (71%). Respondents rated self-monitoring for risk factors (88%), lifestyle-supporting (86%), and everyday routine features (82%) as especially beneficial. Physicians mainly in urban practice environments were open to apps and their use in patient care despite their potential benefit. Respondents expressed reservations and doubts on app user-friendliness in some patient groups (66%), privacy in existing apps (57%), and the legal conditions of using apps in patient care (80%). Of those surveyed, 39% felt capable of advising patients on diabetes-related apps. Most of the physicians that had already used apps in patient care saw positive effects in increased compliance (74%), earlier detection of or reduction in complications (60%), weight reduction (48%), and decreased HbA1c levels (37%). Conclusions Resident diabetes specialists saw a real-life benefit with added value from health apps for managing type 2 diabetes. Despite the favourable role that health apps may play in disease prevention and management, many physicians expressed reservations regarding usability, transparency, security, and privacy in such apps. These concerns should be addressed more intensively towards bringing about ideal conditions for integrating health apps successfully in diabetes care. This includes uniform standards governing quality, privacy, and legal conditions as binding as possible with regard to apps and their use in a clinical setting.