Search

Abstract Background Access to outpatient mental healthcare can be challenging for patients. In Germany, a national structural reform was implemented in 2017 to accelerate and enhance access to outpatient psychotherapy and reduce waiting times. During the first phase of the study ‘Evaluation of a structural reform of the outpatient psychotherapy guideline (ES-RiP)’ and embedded into a process evaluation, the implementation was to be evaluated through assessing general practitioners’ (GPs) and psychotherapists’ (PTs) perspectives regarding utilization of provided new measures, and perceived potential for optimization. Particular focus was on patients with a comorbidity of mental disorders and chronic physical conditions (cMPs). Methods This exploratory cross-sectional qualitative study used on-site and online focus group discussions and semi-structured telephone interviews with GPs and outpatient PTs. Generated data were analyzed using thematic framework analysis. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze participant characteristics collected via a socio-demographic questionnaire. Results Perspectives on the structural reform were heterogenous. GPs and PTs considered the component of timely initial psychotherapeutic assessment consultations beneficial. GPs disapproved of their deficits in detailed information about the structural reform and exchange with outpatient PTs. Improvement suggestions included structured short information exchange and joint quality circles. The overall number of available outpatient PTs in rural areas was perceived as insufficient. For patients with cMPs, GPs saw patient barriers for therapy access and continuity in low intrinsic motivation, physical impediments and older age. PTs also saw patient challenges regarding low intrinsic motivation and keeping scheduled appointments. They considered post-reform administrative efforts to be high and reported that the regulations (conformity) lead to planning difficulties and financial losses. Reform elements were tailored to fit in with PTs key therapy areas. Stronger networking and joint lectures were suggested as remedy for the currently still limited exchange with GPs. Unlike the GPs, PTs emphasized that accepting patients into psychotherapeutic treatment was independent of a possibly present chronic physical disease. Conclusions The findings contribute to understanding the integration of the delivered structural reform into daily care processes and provide an indication about reached targets and potential improvements. Further phases of the ES-RiP study can build on the findings and broaden insights. Trial registration Registration-ID DRKS00020344 (DRKS German Register of Clinical Trials.

Abstract Background The Chronic Care Model (CCM) is an evidence-based approach to improving the structure of care for chronically ill patients with multimorbidity. The Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (ACIC), an instrument commonly used in international research, includes all aspects of the CCM, but cannot be easily extended to the German context. A new instrument called the "Questionnaire of Chronic Illness Care in Primary Care" (QCPC) was developed for use in Germany for this reason. Here, we present the results of the psychometric properties and test-retest reliability of QCPC. Methods A total of 109 family doctors from different German states participated in the validation study. Participating physicians completed the QCPC, which includes items concerning the CCM and practice structure, at baseline (T0) and 3 weeks later (T1). Internal consistency reliability and test-retest reliability were evaluated using Cronbach's alpha and Pearson's r, respectively. Results The QCPC contains five elements of the CCM (decision support, delivery system design, self-management support, clinical information systems, and community linkages). All subscales demonstrated moderate internal consistency and moderate test-retest reliability over a three-week interval. Conclusions The QCPC is an appropriate instrument to assess the structure of chronic illness care. Unlike the ACIC, the QCPC can be used by health care providers without CCM training. The QCPC can detect the actual state of care as well as areas for improvement of care according to the CCM.

Background The co-occurance of multiple medical conditions has a negative impact on health related quality of life (HRQoL) for patients with type 2 diabetes. These patients demand for intensified care programs. Participation in a disease management program (DMP) for type 2 diabetes has shown to counterbalance this effect. However, it remains unclear which dimensions of HRQoL are influenced by the DMP. The aim of this study was to explore the HRQoL dimensions of patients with type 2 diabetes in the German DMP and patients in routine care (RC). Methods This analysis is part of a comparative evaluation of the German DMP for patients with type 2 diabetes. A questionnaire, including the HRQoL measure EQ-5D, was mailed to a random sample of 3,546 patients with type 2 diabetes (59.3% female). The EQ-5D dimensions were analyzed by grouping patients according to their participation in the German DMP for diabetes into DMP and RC. Results Compared to patients in DMP, patients in RC reported more problems for the dimensions mobility (P < 0.05), self care (P < 0.05) and performing usual activities (P < 0.01). Depending on the number of other conditions, remarkable differences for reporting "no problems" exist for patients with six or more comorbid conditions regarding the dimensions mobility (RC = 8.7%, DMP = 32.3%), self care (RC = 43.5%, DMP = 64.5%), usual activities (RC = 13.0%, DMP = 33.9%) and anxiety or depression (RC = 37.0%, DMP = 48.4%). Conclusion Patients participating in the German DMP for type 2 diabetes mellitus show significantly higher ratings of their HRQoL in the dimensions mobility, self care and performing usual activities compared to patients in RC. This difference can also be observed in patients with significant comorbidities. As these dimensions are known to be essential for diabetes care, the German DMP may contribute to improved care even for comorbid diabetes patients.

Abstract Background The Chronic Care Model (CCM) is an evidence based, population based approach to improve care for people with chronic conditions. The Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (ACIC) instrument is widely used to measure to what extent within a healthcare system the CCM is implemented. The aim of this study was to translate and culturally adapt the ACIC Instrument for the German healthcare system. Methods For translating the ACIC instrument, principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process by the ISPOR Task Force were followed. Focus groups were additionally conducted with general practitioners to adapt the items culturally. Results The ACIC instrument can not be used in the German healthcare system easily due to a multifaceted understanding of words, different levels of knowledge of the CCM and fundamental differences between health systems. Conclusions As following the CCM leads to benefits for patients with chronic illnesses, measuring to which extent it is implemented is of major interest. A new questionnaire using the CCM as its theoretical basis, sensitive to the healthcare systems of the host country has to be created. Knowledge transfer between countries by using an instrument from a different healthcare system can lead to a completely new questionnaire.

Abstract Background Primary care can play an important role in providing cardiovascular risk management in patients with established Cardiovascular Diseases (CVD), patients with a known high risk of developing CVD, and potentially for individuals with a low risk of developing CVD, but who have unhealthy lifestyles. To describe and compare cardiovascular risk management, internationally valid quality indicators and standardized measures are needed. As part of a large project in 9 European countries (EPA-Cardio), we have developed and tested a set of standardized measures, linked to previously developed quality indicators. Methods A structured stepwise procedure was followed to develop measures. First, the research team allocated 106 validated quality indicators to one of the three target populations (established CVD, at high risk, at low risk) and to different data-collection methods (data abstraction from the medical records, a patient survey, an interview with lead practice GP/a practice survey). Secondly, we selected a number of other validated measures to enrich the assessment. A pilot study was performed to test the feasibility. Finally, we revised the measures based on the findings. Results The EPA-Cardio measures consisted of abstraction forms from the medical-records data of established Coronary Heart Disease (CHD)-patients - and high-risk groups, a patient questionnaire for each of the 3 groups, an interview questionnaire for the lead GP and a questionnaire for practice teams. The measures were feasible and accepted by general practices from different countries. Conclusions An internationally standardized measure of cardiovascular risk management, linked to validated quality indicators and tested for feasibility in general practice, is now available. Careful development and pilot testing of the measures are crucial in international studies of quality of healthcare.

Abstract Background Case management is an important component of structured and evidence-based primary care for chronically ill patients. Its effectiveness and efficiency has been evaluated in numerous clinical trials. This protocol describes aims and methods of a systematic review of research on the effectiveness and efficiency of case management in primary care. Methods/Design According to this protocol Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsychInfo, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials, DARE, NHS EED, Science Citation Index, The Royal College of Nursing Database, Dissertation Abstracts, registers of clinical trials and the reference lists of retrieved articles will be searched to identify reports on randomized and non-randomized controlled trials of case management interventions in a primary care setting without limitations on language or publication date. We will further ask experts in the field to avoid missing relevant evidence. Study inclusion and data extraction will be performed independently by two reviewers. After assessing risk of bias according to predefined standards, included studies will be described qualitatively. Subgroup analyses are planned for different chronic diseases and intervention strategies. If appropriate, a quantitative synthesis of data will be performed to provide conclusive evidence about the effectiveness and efficiency of primary care based case management in chronic care. Review registration Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (University of York): CRD32009100316.

Abstract Background There has been a marked increase in the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in recent years worldwide. In Germany, apart from 'Heilpraktiker' (= state-licensed, non-medical CAM practitioners), some general practitioners (GPs) provide CAM in their practices. This paper aims to explore the attitudes of GPs about the role of CAM in Germany, in relation to the healthcare system, quality of care, medical education and research. Furthermore, experiences of GPs integrating CAM in their daily practice were explored. Methods Using a qualitative methodological approach 3 focus groups with a convenience sample of 17 GPs were conducted. The discussions were transcribed verbatim and analysed using qualitative content analysis. Results The majority of the participating GPs had integrated one or more CAM therapies into their every-day practice. Four key themes were identified based on the topics covered in the focus groups: the role of CAM within the German healthcare system, quality of care, education and research. Within the theme 'role of CAM within the healthcare system' there were five categories: integration of CAM, CAM in the Statutory Health Insurance, modernisation of the Statutory Health Insurance Act, individual healthcare services and 'Heilpraktiker'. Regarding quality of care there were two broad groups of GPs: those who thought patients would benefit from standardizing CAM and those who feared that quality control would interfere with the individual approach of CAM. The main issues identified relating to research and education were the need for the development of alternative research strategies and the low quality of existing CAM education respectively. Conclusion The majority of the participating GPs considered CAM as a reasonable complementary approach within primary care. The study increased our understanding of GPs attitudes about the role of CAM within the German healthcare system and the use of 'Heilpraktiker' as a competing CAM-provider. It seems to be a need for increased funding for research, better education and remuneration by the Statutory Health Insurance in order to improve access to 'Integrative medicine' in Germany.

Abstract Background Due to technological progress and improvements in medical care and health policy the average age of patients in primary care is continuously growing. In equal measure, an increasing proportion of mostly elderly primary care patients presents with multiple coexisting medical conditions. To properly assess the current situation of co- and multimorbidity, valid scientific data based on an appropriate data structure are indispensable. CONTENT (CONTinuous morbidity registration Epidemiologic NeTwork) is an ambitious project in Germany to establish a system for adequate record keeping and analysis in primary care based on episodes of care. An episode is defined as health problem from its first presentation by a patient to a doctor until the completion of the last encounter for it. The study aims to describe co- and multimorbidity as well as health care utilization based on episodes of care for the study population of the first participating general practices. Methods The analyses were based on a total of 39,699 patients in a yearly contact group (YCG) out of 17 general practices in Germany for which data entry based on episodes of care using the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC) was performed between 1.1.2006 and 31.12.2006. In order to model the relationship between the explanatory variables (age, gender, number of chronic conditions) and the response variables of interest (number of different prescriptions, number of referrals, number of encounters) that were applied to measure health care utilization, we used multiple linear regression. Results In comparison to gender, patients' age had a manifestly stronger impact on the number of different prescriptions, the number of referrals and number of encounters. In comparison to age (β = 0.043, p < 0.0001), multimorbidity measured by the number of patients' chronic conditions (β = 0.51, p < 0.0001) had a manifestly stronger impact the number of encounters for the observation period. Moreover, we could observe that the number of patients' chronic conditions had a significant impact on the number of different prescriptions (β = 0.226, p < 0.0001) as well as on the number of referrals (β = 0.3, p < 0.0001). Conclusion Documentation in primary care on the basis of episodes of care facilitates an insight to concurrently existing health problems and related medical procedures. Therefore, the resulting data provide a basis to obtain co- and multimorbidity patterns and corresponding health care utilization issues in order to understand the particular complex needs caused by multimorbidity.

Abstract Background Studies show that subthreshold depression is highly prevalent in primary care, has impact on the quality of life and causes immense health care costs. Although this points to the clinical relevance of subthreshold depression, contradictory results exist regarding the often self-remitting course of this state. However, first steps towards quality improvement in the care of subthreshold depressive patients are being undertaken. This makes it important to gather information from both a GPs' and a patients' point of view concerning the clinical relevance as well as the status quo of diagnosis and treatment in order to appraise the need for quality improvement research. Method We conducted qualitative, semi-structured interviews for the questioning of 20 GPs and 20 patients with subthreshold depression on aspects of clinical relevance and on the status quo of diagnosis and treatment. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed on a content analytical theoretical background using Atlas.ti software. Results Most of the GPs found subthreshold depression to be clinically significant. Although some problems in diagnosis and treatment were mentioned, the GPs had sensible diagnostic and treatment strategies at hand which resulted from the long and trustful relationship with the patients and which corresponded to the patients' expectations. The patients rather expected their GP to listen to them than to take specific actions towards symptom relief and, in the main, were satisfied with the GPs' care. Conclusion The study shows that subthreshold depression is a clinically relevant issue for GPs but raises the possibility that quality improvement might not be as necessary as past studies showed. Further quantitative research using larger random samples is needed to determine the effectiveness of the strategies used by the GPs, patients' satisfaction with these strategies and the course of these patients' symptoms in primary care.

Abstract Background To assess factors associated with visits to GPs, orthopaedists, and non-physician practitioners of complementary medicine (alternative practitioners) by primary care patients with osteoarthritis (OA). Methods Cross-sectional survey among 1250 consecutively addressed patients from 75 primary care practices in Germany. All patients suffered from OA of the knee or hip according to ACR criteria. They received questionnaires collecting sociodemographic data, data about health service utilisation, prescriptions, comorbidities. They also included established instruments as the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scale (AIMS2-SF) to assess disease-specific quality of life and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) to assess depression. Hierarchical stepwise multiple linear regression models were used to reveal significant factors influencing health service utilization. Results 1021 of 1250 (81.6%) questionnaires were returned. Nonrespondents did not differ from participants. Factors associated with health service use (HSU) varied between providers of care. Not being in a partnership, achieving a high score on the PHQ-9, increased pain severity reflected in the “symptom” scale of the AIMS2-SF, and an increased number of drug prescriptions predicted a high frequency of GP visits. The PHQ-9 score was also a predictor for visits to orthopaedists, as were previous GP contacts, a high score in the "symptom" scale as well as a high score in the "lower limb scale" of the AIMS2-SF. Regarding visits to alternative practitioners, a high score in the AIMS -"social" scale was a positive predictor as older people were less likely to visit them. Conclusion Our results emphasize the need for awareness of psychological factors contributing to the use of health care providers. Addressing the revealed factors associated with HSU appropriately may lead to decreased health care utilization. But further research is needed to assess how this can be done successfully.

Abstract Background The aim of the study was to examine the validity of a translated and culturally adapted version of the Physicians' Reaction to Uncertainty scales (PRU) in primary care physicians. Methods In a structured process, the original questionnaire was translated, culturally adapted and assessed after administering it to 93 GPs. Test-retest reliability was tested by sending the questionnaire to the GPs again after two weeks. Results The principal factor analysis confirmed the postulated four-factor structure underlying the 15 items. In contrast to the original version, item 5 achieved a higher loading on the 'concern about bad outcomes' scale. Consequently, we rearranged the scales. Good item-scale correlations were obtained, with Pearson's correlation coefficient ranging from 0.56–0.84. As regards the item-discriminant validity between the scales 'anxiety due to uncertainty' and 'concern about bad outcomes', partially high correlations (Pearson's correlation coefficient 0.02–0.69; p < 0.001) were found, indicating an overlap between both constructs. The assessment of internal consistency revealed satisfactory values; Cronbach's alpha of the rearranged version was 0.86 or higher for all scales. Test-retest-reliability, assessed by means of the intraclass-correlation-coefficient (ICC), exceeded 0.84, except for the 'reluctance to disclose mistakes to physicians' scale (ICC = 0.66). In this scale, some substantial floor effects occurred, with 29.3% of answers showing the lowest possible value. Conclusion Dealing with uncertainty is an important issue in daily practice. The psychometric properties of the rearranged German version of the PRU are satisfying. The revealed floor effects do not limit the significance of the questionnaire. Thus, the German version of the PRU could contribute to the further evaluation of the impact of uncertainty in primary care physicians.

Abstract Background Referrals of patients from primary care to medical specialist care are an important activity in any health care system. German data show that the number of referrals by GPs have increased since 2004, but detailed insight into the experiences of patients, GPs and consultants regarding referrals is very limited. This study aimed at describing the experiences of consultants, GPs and patients with referrals from primary care to medical specialist care. An additional objective was to examine the impact of purpose regarding the referral and of the referrer on the experiences of GPs and patients. Methods Referrals of 26 general practitioners (GPs) from 25 practices in Marbach, a rural region in the south of Germany were studied. All adult patients referred after consulting these GPs in a period of five weeks were eligable for the study. GPs, consultants and patients completed short structured forms to document factual characteristics of each referral and their experiences with the referral. GPs and patients completed forms before and after the referral was made, while the consultants completed forms after the patient had consulted them. Results Overall, consultants were very positive about appropriateness of the referral (91%). They were somewhat more critical regarding the information provided on the patients' medical history (61%) and prescriptions (48%). In 258 referrals (63%) GPs perceived clear diagnostic benefits, while in 202 referrals (49%) they perceived clear treatment benefits. GPs' experiences were more positive if the GP's purpose was to reduce diagnostic uncertainty (beta = 0.318, p < 0.001) or if the purpose was to exclude serious illness (beta = 0.143, p < 0.010). Other purposes of the referral had no impact on their experiences. Patients' expectations regarding the referrals mostly referred to diagnosis, including increased diagnostic certainty (80%), detailed information about the illness (66%) and exclusion of serious illness (62%). They were overall satisfied with the referral (83%). Their experiences with the referral were more positive if the initiative for the referral came from the physician (beta = 0.365, p < 0.000). Conclusion Patients, GPs and consultants have positive views on the value of referrals from primary care to medical specialists. Patients were most positive if the physician had initiated the referral, which supports the gate keeper role of the GP.

Abstract Background The increasing prevalence and impact of obstructive lung diseases and new insights, reflected in clinical guidelines, have led to concerns about the diagnosis and therapy of asthma and COPD in primary care. In Germany diagnoses written in medical records are used for reimbursement, which may influence physicians' documentation behaviour. For that reason it is unclear to what respect ICD-10 codes reflect the real problems of the patients in general practice. The aim of this study was to assess the appropriateness of the recorded diagnoses and to determine what diagnostic information is used to guide medical treatment. Methods All patients with lower airway symptoms (n = 857) who had attended six general practices between January and June 2003 were included into this cross sectional observational study. Patients were selected from the computerised medical record systems, focusing on ICD-10-codes concerning lower airway diseases (J20-J22, J40-J47, J98 and R05). The performed diagnostic procedures and actual medication for each identified patient were extracted manually. Then we examined the associations between recorded diagnoses, diagnostic procedures and prescribed treatment for asthma and COPD in general practice. Results Spirometry was used in 30% of the patients with a recorded diagnosis of asthma and in 58% of the patients with a recorded diagnosis of COPD. Logistic regression analysis showed an improved use of spirometry when inhaled corticosteroids were prescribed for asthma (OR = 5.2; CI 2.9–9.2) or COPD (OR = 4.7; CI 2.0–10.6). Spirometry was also used more often when sympathomimetics were prescribed (asthma: OR = 2.3; CI 1.2–4.2; COPD: OR = 4.1; CI 1.8–9.4). Conclusions This study revealed that spirometry was used more often when corticosteroids or sympathomimetics were prescribed. The findings suggest that treatment was based on diagnostic test results rather than on recorded diagnoses. The documented ICD-10 codes may not always reflect the real status of the patients. Thus medical care for asthma and COPD in general practice may be better than initially found on the basis of recorded diagnoses, although further improvement of practice patterns in asthma and COPD is still necessary.

Background: Due to technological progress and improvements in medical care and health policy the average age of patients in primary care is continuously growing. In equal measure, an increasing proportion of mostly elderly primary care patients presents with multiple coexisting medical conditions. To properly assess the current situation of co- and multimorbidity, valid scientific data based on an appropriate data structure are indispensable. CONTENT (CONTinuous morbidity registration Epidemiologic NeTwork) is an ambitious project in Germany to establish a system for adequate record keeping and analysis in primary care based on episodes of care. An episode is defined as health problem from its first presentation by a patient to a doctor until the completion of the last encounter for it. The study aims to describe co- and multimorbidity as well as health care utilization based on episodes of care for the study population of the first participating general practices.Methods: The analyses were based on a total of 39,699 patients in a yearly contact group (YCG) out of 17 general practices in Germany for which data entry based on episodes of care using the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC) was performed between 1.1.2006 and 31.12.2006. In order to model the relationship between the explanatory variables (age, gender, number of chronic conditions) and the response variables of interest (number of different prescriptions, number of referrals, number of encounters) that were applied to measure health care utilization, we used multiple linear regression.Results: In comparison to gender, patients' age had a manifestly stronger impact on the number of different prescriptions, the number of referrals and number of encounters. In comparison to age (beta = 0.043, p < 0.0001), multimorbidity measured by the number of patients' chronic conditions (beta = 0.51, p < 0.0001) had a manifestly stronger impact the number of encounters for the observation period. Moreover, we could observe that the number of patients' chronic conditions had a significant impact on the number of different prescriptions (beta = 0.226, p < 0.0001) as well as on the number of referrals (beta = 0.3, p < 0.0001).Conclusion: Documentation in primary care on the basis of episodes of care facilitates an insight to concurrently existing health problems and related medical procedures. Therefore, the resulting data provide a basis to obtain co- and multimorbidity patterns and corresponding health care utilization issues in order to understand the particular complex needs caused by multimorbidity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There has been a marked increase in the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in recent years worldwide. In Germany, apart from 'Heilpraktiker' (= state-licensed, non-medical CAM practitioners), some general practitioners (GPs) provide CAM in their practices. This paper aims to explore the attitudes of GPs about the role of CAM in Germany, in relation to the healthcare system, quality of care, medical education and research. Furthermore, experiences of GPs integrating CAM in their daily practice were explored.Methods: Using a qualitative methodological approach 3 focus groups with a convenience sample of 17 GPs were conducted. The discussions were transcribed verbatim and analysed using qualitative content analysis.Results: The majority of the participating GPs had integrated one or more CAM therapies into their every-day practice. Four key themes were identified based on the topics covered in the focus groups: the role of CAM within the German healthcare system, quality of care, education and research. Within the theme 'role of CAM within the healthcare system' there were five categories: integration of CAM, CAM in the Statutory Health Insurance, modernisation of the Statutory Health Insurance Act, individual healthcare services and 'Heilpraktiker'. Regarding quality of care there were two broad groups of GPs: those who thought patients would benefit from standardizing CAM and those who feared that quality control would interfere with the individual approach of CAM. The main issues identified relating to research and education were the need for the development of alternative research strategies and the low quality of existing CAM education respectively.Conclusion: The majority of the participating GPs considered CAM as a reasonable complementary approach within primary care. The study increased our understanding of GPs attitudes about the role of CAM within the German healthcare system and the use of 'Heilpraktiker' as a competing CAM-provider. It seems to be a need for increased funding for research, better education and remuneration by the Statutory Health Insurance in order to improve access to 'Integrative medicine' in Germany. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Climate change is seen as the biggest health threat of the twenty-first century. Making outpatient medical practices resilient is therefore crucial to protect vulnerable groups and maintain quality of care. Awareness is a precondition for action. This study aims to explore awareness (knowledge, experience and attention) of climate change adaptation among stakeholders of outpatient medical practices., Methods: Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with stakeholders of outpatient medical practices were conducted. The qualitative data were analysed in a two-step Thematic Analysis process., Results: In total, n = 40 stakeholders participated in two focus groups and 26 interviews. The findings show a mixed degree of awareness in outpatient medical practices. The spectrum ranged from a passive role with curative acting only, handing over responsibility to others and a low perceived self-efficacy to a proactive and responsible implementation of adaptation strategies. Participants who saw the need and responsibility of climate change adaptation in medical practices perceived low additional workload. In general, implementation of climate change adaptation measures and general awareness of climate change adaptation appeared to be depending on a certain tension for change and a higher self-efficacy., Conclusion: Medical practices, and specifically primary care, plays a crucial role in climate change adaptation, and awareness needs to be increased further in order to cope with consequences of climate change. To facilitate this, there should be a strong emphasis on climate change adaptation strategies being part of outpatient care provider roles rather than being perceived as an "add-on" to already high workloads., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) is a standard therapy for intensive care patients with respiratory failure. With increasing population age and multimorbidity, the number of patients who cannot be weaned from IMV increases, resulting in impaired quality of life and high costs. In addition, human resources are tied up in the care of these patients., Methods: The PRiVENT intervention is a prospective, mixed-methods interventional, multicentre study with a parallel comparison group selected from insurance claims data of the health insurer Allgemeine Ortskrankenkasse Baden-Württemberg (AOK-BW) conducted in Baden-Württemberg, Germany, over 24 months. Four weaning centres supervise 40 intensive care units (ICUs), that are responsible for patient recruitment. The primary outcome, successful weaning from IMV, will be evaluated using a mixed logistic regression model. Secondary outcomes will be evaluated using mixed regression models., Discussion: The overall objective of the PRiVENT project is the evaluation of strategies to prevent long-term IMV. Additional objectives aim to improve weaning expertise in and cooperation with the adjacent Intensive Care Units., Trial Registration: This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05260853)., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Integrated mental health care models that provide rapid access to video consultations with mental health specialists for primary care patients are a promising short-term, low-threshold treatment option and may reduce waiting times for specialist care. This qualitative study, nested within a randomized feasibility trial, aimed to explore participants' views on this type of care model, its influence on the lived experience of patients, and barriers and facilitators for its delivery., Methods: In five primary care practices, 50 adults with depression and/or anxiety were randomly assigned to either an integrated care model (maximum of five video consultations with a mental health specialist) or usual care (primary care or another treatment option). Prior to obtaining the trial results, interviews were held with participants who had received video consultations. Interviews were transcribed and analysed thematically., Results: Twenty of the 23 patients who received video consultations participated in the interviews. Patients engaged well with the care model and reported positive effects on their most pressing needs, while denying safety concerns. Generally, they perceived the usability of video consultations as high, and temporary connectivity failures were not considered a substantial barrier. We identified two key mechanisms of impacts on the patients' lived experience: fast access to specialist mental healthcare and the emerging rapport with the specialist. In particular, patients with no prior mental healthcare experience indicated that familiarity with the primary practice and their physician as a gatekeeper were important facilitators of proactive treatment., Conclusions: From the patients' perspective, mental health care models integrating video consultations with mental health specialists into primary care are linked to positive lived experiences. Our findings imply that primary care physicians should promote their role as gatekeepers to (1) actively engage patients, (2) apply integrated care models to provide a familiar and safe environment for conducting mental health care video consultations, and (3) be able to regularly assess whether certain patients need in-person services. Scaling up such models may be worthwhile in real-world service settings, where primary care physicians are faced with high workloads and limited specialist services., Trial Registration: DRKS00015812., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Introduction: The VESPEERA programme is a multifaceted programme to enhance information transfer between general practice and hospital across the process of hospital admission, stay and discharge. It was implemented in 7 hospitals and 72 general practices in Southern Germany. Uptake was heterogeneous and overall low. A process evaluation aimed at identifying factors associated with the implementation of the VESPEERA programme., Methods: This was a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews in a purposeful sample of health workers in hospitals and general practices in the VESPEERA programme. Qualitative framework analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was performed and revealed the topic of previous and new routines to be protruding. Inductive content analysis was used for in-depth examination of stages in the process of staying in a previous or falling into a new routines., Results: Thirty-six interviews were conducted with 17 participants from general practices and 19 participants from hospitals. The interviewees were in different stages of the implementation process at the time of the interviews. Four stages were identified: Stage 1,'Previous routine and tension for change', describes the situation in which VESPEERA was to be implemented and the factors leading to the decision to participate. In stage 2,'Adoption of the VESPEERA programme', factors that influenced whether individuals decided to employ the innovation are relevant. Stage 3 comprises 'Determinants for falling into and staying in the new VESPEERA-routine' relates to actual implementation and finally, in stage 4, the participants reflect on the success of the implementation., Conclusions: The individuals and organisations participating in the VESPEERA programme were in different stages of a process from the previous to the new routine, which were characterised by different determinants of implementation. In all stages, organisational factors were main determinants of implementation, but different factors emerged in different implementation stages. A low distinction between decision-making power and executive, as well as available resources, were beneficial for the implementation of the innovation., Trial Registration: DRKS00015183 on DRKS / Universal Trial Number (UTN): U1111-1218-0992., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Stakeholders in the German state of Baden-Wuerttemberg agreed upon the central aims for healthcare planning. These include a focus on geographical districts; a comprehensive, cross-sectoral perspective on healthcare needs and services; and use of regional data for healthcare planning. Therefore, healthcare data at district level is needed. Nevertheless, decision makers face the challenge to make a selection from numerous indicators and frameworks, which all have limitations or do not well apply to the targeted setting. The aim of this study was to identify district level indicators to be used in Baden-Wuerttemberg for the purpose of cross-sectoral and needs-based healthcare planning involving stakeholders of the health system., Methods: A conceptual framework for indicators was developed. A structured search for indicators identified 374 potential indicators in indicator sets of German and international institutions and agencies (n = 211), clinical practice guidelines (n = 50), data bases (n = 35), indicator databases (n = 25), published literature (n = 35), and other sources (n = 18). These indicators were categorised according to the developed framework dimensions. In an online survey, institutions of various stakeholders were invited to assess the relevance of these indicators from December 2016 until January 2017. Indicators were selected in terms of a median value of the assessed relevance., Results: 22 institutions selected 212 indicators for the five dimensions non-medical determinants of health (20 indicators), health status (25), utilisation of the health system (34), health system performance (87), and healthcare provision (46)., Conclusions: Stakeholders assessed a large number of indicators as relevant for use in healthcare planning on district level., Trial Registration: Not applicable.

Background: Type 2 diabetes represents an increasingly critical challenge for health policy worldwide. It absorbs massive resources from both patients and national economies to sustain direct costs of the treatment of type 2 diabetes and its complications and indirect costs related to work loss and wages. More recently, there are innovations based on remote control and personalised programs that promise a more cost-effective diabetes management while reducing diabetes-related complications. In such a context, this work attempts to update cost analysis reviews on type 2 diabetes, focusing on France and Germany, in order to explore most significant cost drivers and cost-saving opportunities through innovations in diabetes care. Although both countries approach care delivery differently, France and Germany represent the primary European markets for diabetes technologies., Methods: A systematic review of the literature listed in MEDLINE, Embase and EconLit has been carried out. It covered interventional, observational and modelling studies on expenditures for type 2 diabetes management in France or Germany published since 2012. Included articles were analysed for annual direct, associated and indirect costs of type 2 diabetes patients. An appraisal of study quality was performed. Results were summarised narratively., Results: From 1260 records, the final sample was composed of 24 papers selected according to predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Both France and Germany revealed a predominant focus on direct costs. Comparability was limited due to different study populations and cost categories used. Indirect costs were only available in Germany. According to prior literature, reported cost drivers are hospitalisation, prescriptions, higher HbA1c and BMI, treatment with insulin and complications, all indicators of disease severity. The diversity of available data and included costs limits the results and may explain the differences found., Conclusions: Complication prevention and glycaemic control are widely recognized as the most effective ways to control diabetes treatment costs. The value propositions of self-based supports, such as hybrid closed-loop metabolic systems, already implemented in type 1 diabetes management, are the key points for further debates and policymaking, which should involve the perspectives of caregivers, patients and payers.

Background: Hospitalisations are a critical event in the care process. Insufficient communication and uncoordinated follow-up care often impede the recovery process of the patient resulting in a high number of rehospitalisations and increased health care costs. The overall aim of this study is the development, implementation and evaluation of a structured programme (VESPEERA) to improve the admission and discharge process., Methods: We will conduct an open quasi-experimental multi-centre study with four intervention arms. A cohort selected from insurance claims data will serve as a control group reflecting usual care. The intervention will be implemented in 25 hospital departments and 115 general practices in 9 districts in Baden-Wurttemberg. Eligibility criteria for patients are: age > 18 years, hospital admission or hospitalisation, insurance at the sickness fund "AOK Baden-Wurttemberg", enrolment in general practice-centred care contract. Each study arm will receive different intervention components based on the point of study enrolment and the patient's medical need. The interventions comprise a) a structured assessment in the general practice prior to admission resulting in an admission letter b) a discharge conversation by phone between hospital and general practice, c) a structured assessment and care plan post-discharge and d) telephone monitoring for patients with a high risk of rehospitalisation. The assessments are supported by a software tool ("CareCockpit"), originally developed for structured case management programmes. The primary outcome (rehospitalisation due to the same indication within 90 days) and a range of secondary outcomes (rehospitalisation due to the same indication within 30 days; hospitalisations due to ambulatory care-sensitive conditions; delayed prescription of medication and medical products/ devices and referral to other health practitioner/s after discharge; utilisation of emergency or rescue services within 3 months; average care cost per year and patient participating in the VESPEERA programme) and quality indicators will be determined based on insurance claims data and CareCockpit data. Additionally, a patient survey on satisfaction with cross-sectoral care and health related quality of life will be conducted., Discussion: Based on the results, area-wide implementation in usual care is well sought. This study will contribute to an improvement of cross-sectoral care during the admission and discharge process., Trial Registration: DRKS00014294 on DRKS / Universal Trial Number (UTN): U1111-1210-9657, Date of registration 12/06/2018.

Background: The Kenyan Ministry of Health- Department of Standards and Regulations sought to operationalize the Kenya Quality Assurance Model for Health. To this end an integrated quality management system based on validated indicators derived from the Kenya Quality Model for Health (KQMH) was developed and adapted to the area of Reproductive and Maternal and Neonatal Health, implemented and analysed., Methods: An integrated quality management (QM) approach was developed based on European Practice Assessment (EPA) modified to the Kenyan context. It relies on a multi-perspective, multifaceted and repeated indicator based assessment, covering the 6 World Health Organization (WHO) building blocks. The adaptation process made use of a ten step modified RAND/UCLA appropriateness Method. To measure the 303 structure, process, outcome indicators five data collection tools were developed: surveys for patients and staff, a self-assessment, facilitator assessment, a manager interview guide. The assessment process was supported by a specially developed software (VISOTOOL®) that allows detailed feedback to facility staff, benchmarking and facilitates improvement plans. A longitudinal study design was used with 10 facilities (6 hospitals; 4 Health centers) selected out of 36 applications. Data was summarized using means and standard deviations (SDs). Categorical data was presented as frequency counts and percentages., Results: A baseline assessment (T1) was carried out, a reassessment (T2) after 1.5 years. Results from the first and second assessment after a relatively short period of 1.5 years of improvement activities are striking, in particular in the domain 'Quality and Safety' (20.02%; p < 0.0001) with the dimensions: use of clinical guidelines (34,18%; p < 0.0336); Infection control (23,61%; p < 0.0001). Marked improvements were found in the domains 'Clinical Care' (10.08%; p = 0.0108), 'Management' (13.10%: p < 0.0001), 'Interface In/out-patients' (13.87%; p = 0.0246), and in total (14.64%; p < 0.0001). Exemplarily drilling down the domain 'clinical care' significant improvements were observed in the dimensions 'Antenatal care' (26.84%; p = 0.0059) and 'Survivors of gender-based violence' (11.20%; p = 0.0092). The least marked changes or even a -not significant- decline of some was found in the dimensions 'delivery' and 'postnatal care'., Conclusions: This comprehensive quality improvement approach breathes life into the process of collecting data for indicators and creates ownership among users and providers of health services. It offers a reflection on the relevance of evidence-based quality improvement for health system strengthening and has the potential to lay a solid ground for further certification and accreditation.

Background: The STarT-Back-Approach (STarT: Subgroups for Targeted Treatment) was developed in the UK and has demonstrated clinical and cost effectiveness. Based on the results of a brief questionnaire, patients with low back pain are stratified into three treatment groups. Since the organisation of physiotherapy differs between Germany and the UK, the aim of this study is to explore German physiotherapists' views and perceptions about implementing the STarT-Back-Approach., Methods: Three two-hour think-tank workshops with physiotherapists were conducted. Focus groups, using a semi-structured interview guideline, followed a presentation of the STarT-Back-Approach, with discussions audio recorded, transcribed and qualitatively analysed using content analysis., Results: Nineteen physiotherapists participated (15 female, mean age 41.2 (SD 8.6) years). Three main themes emerged, each with multiple subthemes: 1) the intervention (15 subthemes), 2) the healthcare context (26 subthemes) and 3) individual characteristics (8 subthemes). Therapists' perceptions of the extent to which the STarT-Back intervention would require changes to their normal clinical practice varied considerably. They felt that within their current healthcare context, there were significant financial disincentives that would discourage German physiotherapists from providing the STarT-Back treatment pathways, such as the early discharge of low-risk patients with supported self-management materials. They also discussed the need for appropriate standardised graduate and post-graduate skills training for German physiotherapists to treat high-risk patients with a combined physical and psychological approach (e.g., communication skills)., Conclusions: Whilst many German physiotherapists are positive about the STarT-Back-Approach, there are a number of substantial barriers to implementing the matched treatment pathways in Germany. These include financial disincentives within the healthcare system to early discharge of low-risk patients. Therapists also highlighted the need for solutions in respect of scalable physiotherapy training to gain skills in combined physical and psychological approaches.

Background: Hospitalizations for ambulatory care sensitive (ACS) conditions are established indicators for the availability and quality of ambulatory care. We aimed to assess the differences between asylum-seeking children and children of the general population in a German city with respect to (i) the prevalence of ACS hospitalizations, and (ii) the utilization of emergency outpatient services for ACS conditions., Methods: Using anonymous account data, all children admitted to the University Hospital Heidelberg in 2015 were included in our study. A unique cost unit distinguished asylum seekers residing in a nearby reception center (exposed) from the children of the general population. We adapted international lists of ACS conditions and calculated the prevalence of ACS hospitalizations and the utilization of emergency outpatient services for ACS conditions, attributable fractions among the exposed (Afe) and the population attributable fraction among total admissions (PAF) for each outcome. Differences in the prevalence of each outcome between exposed and controls were analyzed in logistic regression models adjusted for sex, age group and quarterly admission., Results: Of the 32,015 admissions in 2015, 19.9% (6287) were from inpatient and 80.1% (25,638) from outpatient care. In inpatient care, 9.8% (622) of all admissions were hospitalizations for ACS conditions. The Afe of ACS hospitalizations was 46.57%, the PAF was 1.12%. Emergency service use for ACS conditions could be identified in 8.3% (3088) of all admissions (Afe: 79.57%, PAF: 5.08%). The odds ratio (OR) of asylum-seeking children being hospitalized for ACS conditions in comparison to the control group was 1.81 [95% confidence interval, CI: 1.02; 3.2]. The OR of the asylumseeking population compared to the general population for the utilization of emergency service use for ACS conditions was 4.93 [95% CI: 4.11; 5.91]., Conclusions: Asylum-seeking children had significantly higher odds of ACS hospitalization and of utilization of emergency outpatient services for ACS conditions. Using the concept of ACS conditions allowed measuring the strength of primary care provided to this local asylum-seeking population. This approach could help to compare the strength of primary care provision in different locations, and allow an objective.

Background: Lung cancer patients are often diagnosed in an advanced stage of disease. In a situation of palliative treatment, both patients and their relatives experience existential burden. Evidence suggests that multi-professional teams should deal with them as dyads. However, little is known about differences in their individual situation. The purpose of this study is to explore and compare reflections that arise out of the context of diagnosis and to compare how patients and their relatives try to handle advanced lung cancer., Methods: Data was collected by qualitative interviews. A total of 18 participants, 9 patients diagnosed with advanced lung cancer (ICD- 10 C-34, stage IV) starting or receiving palliative treatment and 9 relatives were interviewed. Data was interpreted using qualitative content analysis., Results: Reflection aspects were "thoughts about the cause", "meaning of belief" and "experience of inequity". Patients often experienced the diagnosis as inequity and were more receptive for believing in treatment success. The main strategies found were "repression", "positive attitude", "strong focus on the present" and "adjustment of life terms". Patient and relative dyads used the same strategies, but with different emphasis. That life time is limited was more frequently realized by relatives than by patients., Conclusion: While strategies used by relatives are similar to those of patients', they are less reflective and more pragmatic in terms of handling daily life and organizing care. The interviewed patients were mostly not able to takeover these tasks. To strong was their belief in treatment success, their repression of the future and the focus on the present. This implicates, that in terms of end-of-life care, relatives are important to reach patients who are often not receptive to this topic.

Background: A program to strengthen general practice care for patients with chronic disease was offered in Germany. Enrollment was a free individual choice for both patients and physicians. This study aimed to examine the long-term impact of this program., Methods: Two comparative evaluations were done, at 4 and 5 years (T1 and T2) after start of the program. In each year, patients in the program were compared with patients in usual care. Measures were based on routinely collected data and concerned 11 aspects of primary care and hospital care. Study groups were compared, using regression analysis adjusted for confounders and clustering., Results: Data on 1.187.597 and 1.591.017 eligible patients were available for the analysis for T1 and T2, respectively. Compared to usual care, the program was associated with more visits to the GP per patient (adjusted difference at T2: +1.98), more drugs prescribed per patient (+0.071), lower percentage of drugs that should be avoided (-0.699), and lower yearly medication costs per patient (-85.39 euro). The number of referrals to ambulatory specialists, either with or without referral from GP, was reduced at T2. In hospital care, the program was associated with fewer hospital admissions per patient per year (-0.017) and fewer avoidable hospital admissions of all admissions (-1.165%). Total hospital costs were slightly higher in T1, but lower in T2. Days in hospital and number of readmissions were lower at T2 only., Conclusion: The program has increased the role of general practice in healthcare for patients who chose to be included in the program of intensified general practice care.

Background: In many countries, rural areas are facing a shortage of general practitioners (GPs). Appropriate strategies to address this challenge are needed. From a health care delivery point of view, the term rural area is often poorly defined. However rural areas have to be adequately defined to ensure specific strategies are tailored to these environments. The aims of this study were to translate the New Zealand 6-item Rural Ranking Scale (RRS), to culturally adapt it and to implement it to identify rural areas from a health care delivery perspective. Therefore we aimed to validate the RRS by defining cut-off scores for urban, semi-rural and rural areas in Germany., Methods: After receiving permission, two researchers independently translated the RRS. In a consensus meeting, four items were identified that had to be culturally adapted. The modified RRS-Germany (mRRS-G) was sent to 724 GPs located in urban, semi-rural and rural areas to validate the "rurality" scoring system for conditions in Germany., Results: Four items, "travelling time to next major hospital", "on-call duty", "regular peripheral clinic" and "on-call for major traumas" had to be adapted due to differences in the health care system. The survey had a response rate of 33.7%. A factor analysis showed a three dimensional structure of the mRRS-G scale with a poor internal consistency. Nevertheless, the three items regarding "on-call duty", "next major hospital" and "most distant boundary covered by your practice" were identified as significant predictors for rurality. The adapted cut-off point for rurality in Germany was 16. From this study's participants, 9 met the RRS cut-off point for rurality (a score of 35 or more)., Conclusion: Compared with New Zealand rurality scores based on this tool, German scores are far less rural from a health care delivery point of view. We consider that the construct of rurality has more aspects than those assessed by the mRRS-G. Nevertheless, rural areas from a health care delivery viewpoint can be effectively defined using mRRS-G and therefore it can support tailored strategies against GPs shortage.

Background: Primary care for chronic illness varies across European healthcare systems. In patients suffering from coronary heart disease (CHD), factors associated with patients' experiences of receiving structured chronic care and counselling at the patient and practice level were investigated., Methods: In an observational study comprising 140 general practices from five European countries (Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the United Kingdom), 30 patients with Coronary Heart Disease (CHD) per practice were chosen at random to partake in this research. Patients were provided with a questionnaire and the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC-5A) - instrument. Practice characteristics were assessed through a practice questionnaire and face to face interviews. Data were aggregated to obtain two practice scores representing quality management and CHD care, respectively. A hierarchical multilevel analysis was performed to examine the impact of patient and practice characteristics on PACIC scores., Results: The final sample included 1745 CHD-patients from 131 general practices with a mean age of 67.8 (SD 9.9) years. The overall PACIC score was 2.84 (95%CI: 2.79; 2.89) and the 5A score reflecting structured lifestyle counselling was 2.75 (95% CI: 2.69; 2.79). At the patient level, male gender, more frequent practice contact and fewer related or unrelated conditions were associated with higher PACIC scores. At the practice level, performance scores reflecting quality management (p = 0.013) and CHD care (p = 0.009) were associated with improved assessment of the structured chronic care and counselling received., Conclusions: Patients' perceived quality of care varies. However, good practice management and organisation of care were positively reflected in patients' assessments of receiving structured chronic illness care. This highlights the importance of integrating patient experiences into quality measurements to provide feedback to health care professionals.

Background: The co-occurance of multiple medical conditions has a negative impact on health related quality of life (HRQoL) for patients with type 2 diabetes. These patients demand for intensified care programs. Participation in a disease management program (DMP) for type 2 diabetes has shown to counterbalance this effect. However, it remains unclear which dimensions of HRQoL are influenced by the DMP. The aim of this study was to explore the HRQoL dimensions of patients with type 2 diabetes in the German DMP and patients in routine care (RC)., Methods: This analysis is part of a comparative evaluation of the German DMP for patients with type 2 diabetes. A questionnaire, including the HRQoL measure EQ-5D, was mailed to a random sample of 3,546 patients with type 2 diabetes (59.3% female). The EQ-5D dimensions were analyzed by grouping patients according to their participation in the German DMP for diabetes into DMP and RC., Results: Compared to patients in DMP, patients in RC reported more problems for the dimensions mobility (P < 0.05), self care (P < 0.05) and performing usual activities (P < 0.01). Depending on the number of other conditions, remarkable differences for reporting "no problems" exist for patients with six or more comorbid conditions regarding the dimensions mobility (RC = 8.7%, DMP = 32.3%), self care (RC = 43.5%, DMP = 64.5%), usual activities (RC = 13.0%, DMP = 33.9%) and anxiety or depression (RC = 37.0%, DMP = 48.4%)., Conclusion: Patients participating in the German DMP for type 2 diabetes mellitus show significantly higher ratings of their HRQoL in the dimensions mobility, self care and performing usual activities compared to patients in RC. This difference can also be observed in patients with significant comorbidities. As these dimensions are known to be essential for diabetes care, the German DMP may contribute to improved care even for comorbid diabetes patients.

Background: The Chronic Care Model (CCM) is an evidence based, population based approach to improve care for people with chronic conditions. The Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (ACIC) instrument is widely used to measure to what extent within a healthcare system the CCM is implemented. The aim of this study was to translate and culturally adapt the ACIC Instrument for the German healthcare system., Methods: For translating the ACIC instrument, principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process by the ISPOR Task Force were followed. Focus groups were additionally conducted with general practitioners to adapt the items culturally., Results: The ACIC instrument can not be used in the German healthcare system easily due to a multifaceted understanding of words, different levels of knowledge of the CCM and fundamental differences between health systems., Conclusions: As following the CCM leads to benefits for patients with chronic illnesses, measuring to which extent it is implemented is of major interest. A new questionnaire using the CCM as its theoretical basis, sensitive to the healthcare systems of the host country has to be created. Knowledge transfer between countries by using an instrument from a different healthcare system can lead to a completely new questionnaire., (© 2011 Steinhaeuser et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.)

Background: Primary care can play an important role in providing cardiovascular risk management in patients with established Cardiovascular Diseases (CVD), patients with a known high risk of developing CVD, and potentially for individuals with a low risk of developing CVD, but who have unhealthy lifestyles. To describe and compare cardiovascular risk management, internationally valid quality indicators and standardized measures are needed. As part of a large project in 9 European countries (EPA-Cardio), we have developed and tested a set of standardized measures, linked to previously developed quality indicators., Methods: A structured stepwise procedure was followed to develop measures. First, the research team allocated 106 validated quality indicators to one of the three target populations (established CVD, at high risk, at low risk) and to different data-collection methods (data abstraction from the medical records, a patient survey, an interview with lead practice GP/a practice survey). Secondly, we selected a number of other validated measures to enrich the assessment. A pilot study was performed to test the feasibility. Finally, we revised the measures based on the findings., Results: The EPA-Cardio measures consisted of abstraction forms from the medical-records data of established Coronary Heart Disease (CHD)-patients--and high-risk groups, a patient questionnaire for each of the 3 groups, an interview questionnaire for the lead GP and a questionnaire for practice teams. The measures were feasible and accepted by general practices from different countries., Conclusions: An internationally standardized measure of cardiovascular risk management, linked to validated quality indicators and tested for feasibility in general practice, is now available. Careful development and pilot testing of the measures are crucial in international studies of quality of healthcare.

Background: Case management is an important component of structured and evidence-based primary care for chronically ill patients. Its effectiveness and efficiency has been evaluated in numerous clinical trials. This protocol describes aims and methods of a systematic review of research on the effectiveness and efficiency of case management in primary care., Methods/design: According to this protocol Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsychInfo, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials, DARE, NHS EED, Science Citation Index, The Royal College of Nursing Database, Dissertation Abstracts, registers of clinical trials and the reference lists of retrieved articles will be searched to identify reports on randomized and non-randomized controlled trials of case management interventions in a primary care setting without limitations on language or publication date. We will further ask experts in the field to avoid missing relevant evidence. Study inclusion and data extraction will be performed independently by two reviewers. After assessing risk of bias according to predefined standards, included studies will be described qualitatively. Subgroup analyses are planned for different chronic diseases and intervention strategies. If appropriate, a quantitative synthesis of data will be performed to provide conclusive evidence about the effectiveness and efficiency of primary care based case management in chronic care., Review Registration: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (University of York): CRD32009100316.

Background: Studies show that subthreshold depression is highly prevalent in primary care, has impact on the quality of life and causes immense health care costs. Although this points to the clinical relevance of subthreshold depression, contradictory results exist regarding the often self-remitting course of this state. However, first steps towards quality improvement in the care of subthreshold depressive patients are being undertaken. This makes it important to gather information from both a GPs' and a patients' point of view concerning the clinical relevance as well as the status quo of diagnosis and treatment in order to appraise the need for quality improvement research., Method: We conducted qualitative, semi-structured interviews for the questioning of 20 GPs and 20 patients with subthreshold depression on aspects of clinical relevance and on the status quo of diagnosis and treatment. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed on a content analytical theoretical background using Atlas.ti software., Results: Most of the GPs found subthreshold depression to be clinically significant. Although some problems in diagnosis and treatment were mentioned, the GPs had sensible diagnostic and treatment strategies at hand which resulted from the long and trustful relationship with the patients and which corresponded to the patients' expectations. The patients rather expected their GP to listen to them than to take specific actions towards symptom relief and, in the main, were satisfied with the GPs' care., Conclusion: The study shows that subthreshold depression is a clinically relevant issue for GPs but raises the possibility that quality improvement might not be as necessary as past studies showed. Further quantitative research using larger random samples is needed to determine the effectiveness of the strategies used by the GPs, patients' satisfaction with these strategies and the course of these patients' symptoms in primary care.

Background: To assess factors associated with visits to GPs, orthopaedists, and non-physician practitioners of complementary medicine (alternative practitioners) by primary care patients with osteoarthritis (OA)., Methods: Cross-sectional survey among 1250 consecutively addressed patients from 75 primary care practices in Germany. All patients suffered from OA of the knee or hip according to ACR criteria. They received questionnaires collecting sociodemographic data, data about health service utilisation, prescriptions, comorbidities. They also included established instruments as the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scale (AIMS2-SF) to assess disease-specific quality of life and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) to assess depression. Hierarchical stepwise multiple linear regression models were used to reveal significant factors influencing health service utilization., Results: 1021 of 1250 (81.6%) questionnaires were returned. Nonrespondents did not differ from participants. Factors associated with health service use (HSU) varied between providers of care. Not being in a partnership, achieving a high score on the PHQ-9, increased pain severity reflected in the "symptom" scale of the AIMS2-SF, and an increased number of drug prescriptions predicted a high frequency of GP visits. The PHQ-9 score was also a predictor for visits to orthopaedists, as were previous GP contacts, a high score in the "symptom" scale as well as a high score in the "lower limb scale" of the AIMS2-SF. Regarding visits to alternative practitioners, a high score in the AIMS -"social" scale was a positive predictor as older people were less likely to visit them., Conclusion: Our results emphasize the need for awareness of psychological factors contributing to the use of health care providers. Addressing the revealed factors associated with HSU appropriately may lead to decreased health care utilization. But further research is needed to assess how this can be done successfully.

Background: The aim of the study was to examine the validity of a translated and culturally adapted version of the Physicians' Reaction to Uncertainty scales (PRU) in primary care physicians., Methods: In a structured process, the original questionnaire was translated, culturally adapted and assessed after administering it to 93 GPs. Test-retest reliability was tested by sending the questionnaire to the GPs again after two weeks., Results: The principal factor analysis confirmed the postulated four-factor structure underlying the 15 items. In contrast to the original version, item 5 achieved a higher loading on the 'concern about bad outcomes' scale. Consequently, we rearranged the scales. Good item-scale correlations were obtained, with Pearson's correlation coefficient ranging from 0.56-0.84. As regards the item-discriminant validity between the scales 'anxiety due to uncertainty' and 'concern about bad outcomes', partially high correlations (Pearson's correlation coefficient 0.02-0.69; p < 0.001) were found, indicating an overlap between both constructs. The assessment of internal consistency revealed satisfactory values; Cronbach's alpha of the rearranged version was 0.86 or higher for all scales. Test-retest-reliability, assessed by means of the intraclass-correlation-coefficient (ICC), exceeded 0.84, except for the 'reluctance to disclose mistakes to physicians' scale (ICC = 0.66). In this scale, some substantial floor effects occurred, with 29.3% of answers showing the lowest possible value., Conclusion: Dealing with uncertainty is an important issue in daily practice. The psychometric properties of the rearranged German version of the PRU are satisfying. The revealed floor effects do not limit the significance of the questionnaire. Thus, the German version of the PRU could contribute to the further evaluation of the impact of uncertainty in primary care physicians.

Background: Referrals of patients from primary care to medical specialist care are an important activity in any health care system. German data show that the number of referrals by GPs have increased since 2004, but detailed insight into the experiences of patients, GPs and consultants regarding referrals is very limited. This study aimed at describing the experiences of consultants, GPs and patients with referrals from primary care to medical specialist care. An additional objective was to examine the impact of purpose regarding the referral and of the referrer on the experiences of GPs and patients., Methods: Referrals of 26 general practitioners (GPs) from 25 practices in Marbach, a rural region in the south of Germany were studied. All adult patients referred after consulting these GPs in a period of five weeks were eligible for the study. GPs, consultants and patients completed short structured forms to document factual characteristics of each referral and their experiences with the referral. GPs and patients completed forms before and after the referral was made, while the consultants completed forms after the patient had consulted them., Results: Overall, consultants were very positive about appropriateness of the referral (91%). They were somewhat more critical regarding the information provided on the patients' medical history (61%) and prescriptions (48%). In 258 referrals (63%) GPs perceived clear diagnostic benefits, while in 202 referrals (49%) they perceived clear treatment benefits. GPs' experiences were more positive if the GP's purpose was to reduce diagnostic uncertainty (beta = 0.318, p < 0.001) or if the purpose was to exclude serious illness (beta = 0.143, p < 0.010). Other purposes of the referral had no impact on their experiences. Patients' expectations regarding the referrals mostly referred to diagnosis, including increased diagnostic certainty (80%), detailed information about the illness (66%) and exclusion of serious illness (62%). They were overall satisfied with the referral (83%). Their experiences with the referral were more positive if the initiative for the referral came from the physician (beta = 0.365, p < 0.000)., Conclusion: Patients, GPs and consultants have positive views on the value of referrals from primary care to medical specialists. Patients were most positive if the physician had initiated the referral, which supports the gate keeper role of the GP.

Background: The increasing prevalence and impact of obstructive lung diseases and new insights, reflected in clinical guidelines, have led to concerns about the diagnosis and therapy of asthma and COPD in primary care. In Germany diagnoses written in medical records are used for reimbursement, which may influence physicians' documentation behaviour. For that reason it is unclear to what respect ICD-10 codes reflect the real problems of the patients in general practice. The aim of this study was to assess the appropriateness of the recorded diagnoses and to determine what diagnostic information is used to guide medical treatment., Methods: All patients with lower airway symptoms (n = 857) who had attended six general practices between January and June 2003 were included into this cross sectional observational study. Patients were selected from the computerised medical record systems, focusing on ICD-10-codes concerning lower airway diseases (J20-J22, J40-J47, J98 and R05). The performed diagnostic procedures and actual medication for each identified patient were extracted manually. Then we examined the associations between recorded diagnoses, diagnostic procedures and prescribed treatment for asthma and COPD in general practice., Results: Spirometry was used in 30% of the patients with a recorded diagnosis of asthma and in 58% of the patients with a recorded diagnosis of COPD. Logistic regression analysis showed an improved use of spirometry when inhaled corticosteroids were prescribed for asthma (OR = 5.2; CI 2.9-9.2) or COPD (OR = 4.7; CI 2.0-10.6). Spirometry was also used more often when sympathomimetics were prescribed (asthma: OR = 2.3; CI 1.2-4.2; COPD: OR = 4.1; CI 1.8-9.4)., Conclusions: This study revealed that spirometry was used more often when corticosteroids or sympathomimetics were prescribed. The findings suggest that treatment was based on diagnostic test results rather than on recorded diagnoses. The documented ICD-10 codes may not always reflect the real status of the patients. Thus medical care for asthma and COPD in general practice may be better than initially found on the basis of recorded diagnoses, although further improvement of practice patterns in asthma and COPD is still necessary.