Search

In the late 1970s, the Federal Republic of Germany witnessed a period of committed public outreach for Vietnamese refugees. While West Germany had not accepted significant numbers of non-European refugees before then, now tens of thousands of ›Boat People‹ rescued from the sea or flown out of camps found shelter as ›quota refugees‹. This article analyses the role civil society groups and political parties, media, and bureaucracy played in this. It shows that it was initially increasing public and international pressure that persuaded the social-liberal administration to accept refugees from Indochina, and that the concurrence of civic and state action subsequently reinforced the decision. Public pressure was created in large part by media campaigns and initiatives by Christian Democrats, who took a decisive stand in favour of taking in the refugees. A critical factor here was that the ›Boat People‹ were connected discursively with German post-war history. The article shows how refugee admission methods and new forms of humanitarian aid developed, both of which can be interpreted as civic and bureaucratic change. Rising xenophobia in the early 1980s eventually curbed this support. * * * In der Bundesrepublik entfaltete sich Ende der 1970er-Jahre eine engagierte Hilfe für Flüchtlinge aus Vietnam. Während Westdeutschland bis dahin kaum außereuropäische Flüchtlinge aufgenommen hatte, fanden nun mehrere zehntausend »Boat People« Schutz als »Kontingentflüchtlinge«, die im Meer gerettet und aus Lagern eingeflogen wurden. Der Aufsatz analysiert, welche Rolle dabei zivilgesellschaftliche Gruppen, politische Parteien, Medien und Bürokratie spielten. Anfangs bewegte vor allem öffentlicher und internationaler Druck die sozialliberale Regierung zur Aufnahme der Indochina-Flüchtlinge; später ergänzten sich zivilgesellschaftliches und staatliches Handeln aber wechselseitig. Der öffentliche Druck entstand insbesondere durch mediale Kampagnen und durch christdemokratische Initiativen, die entschieden für die Aufnahme der Flüchtlinge eintraten. Eine wichtige Rolle spielte dabei, dass die »Boat People« diskursiv mit der deutschen Nachkriegsgeschichte verbunden wurden. Gezeigt wird, wie Techniken der Flüchtlingsaufnahme und neue Formen humanitärer Hilfe entstanden, die sich als zivilgesellschaftlicher und bürokratischer Wandel interpretieren lassen. Gebremst wurde dieses Engagement schließlich durch das Aufkommen ausländerfeindlicher Stimmen Anfang der 1980er-Jahre.

When interpreting the 1970s today, special emphasis is placed on the socioeconomic and sociocultural changes which accompanied the oil crisis of 1973. By contrast, this article focuses on the reforms and reactions to the crises at the end of the 1970s. In 1979, in particular, a number of events with global repercussions prompted paradigm shifts. This article addresses historical events relating to energy, economics, and political and cultural transformation, and pays special attention to the significance now commonly ascribed to religion and history. All these occurrences and long-term trends can also be understood as manifestations of and practices of globalisation. Distant events such as the nuclear accident near Harrisburg, the change of power in Nicaragua, or the revolution in Iran, led (even in the Federal Republic of Germany) to new perceptions and patterns of behaviour. A transnational approach to events occurring before and after 1979 makes it possible to interpret anew key issues of contemporary history – issues which can only partially be answered with reference to the upheavals of 1989/90. ∗ ∗ ∗ Bei der derzeitigen Deutung der 1970er-Jahre werden insbesondere die sozioökonomischen und soziokulturellen Veränderungen hervorgehoben, die mit der Ölkrise 1973 einhergingen. Demgegenüber unterstreicht der vorliegende Aufsatz die Umbrüche und Krisenreaktionen Ende der 1970er-Jahre. Insbesondere 1979 verdichteten sich zahlreiche globale Ereignisse, die Paradigmenwechsel bewirkten. Verdeutlicht wird dies für den Bereich der Energie- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte, den Wandel der Politik sowie im Feld der Kultur exemplarisch für die neue öffentliche Bedeutung der Religion und der Geschichte. Die markanten Ereignisse und längerfristigen Trends lassen sich zugleich als Ausdruck und Praxis der Globalisierung fassen: Weit entfernte Ereignisse wie der Atomunfall bei Harrisburg, der Machtwechsel in Nicaragua oder die Revolution im Iran führten auch in der Bundesrepublik zu neuen Wahrnehmungs- und Handlungsmustern. Ein genauerer, transnationaler Blick auf die Jahre um 1979 eröffnet zudem zusätzliche Interpretationshorizonte für Kernfragen der Zeitgeschichte, die sich aus dem Umbruch 1989/90 nur bedingt beantworten lassen.

Abstract Aim To assess the feasibility and applicability of a standardized programme to facilitate family participation in essential care activities in the intensive care unit. Design Pilot study with a cross‐sectional survey design. Methods A standardized programme to facilitate family participation in essential nursing care activities was implemented in intensive care units of three hospitals in the Netherlands from November 2018 until March 2019. The feasibility and applicability of the programme were assessed with surveys of the patients, relatives and healthcare providers. Results Three intensive care units successfully implemented the standardized programme. Three patients, ten relatives and 37 healthcare providers responded to the surveys. Patients appreciated family participation and recognized that their relatives liked to participate. Relatives appreciated being able to do something for the patient (80%) and to participate in essential care activities (60%). The majority of relatives (60%) felt they had sufficient knowledge and skills to participate and did not feel obliged nor uncomfortable. Healthcare providers felt they were trained adequately and motivated to apply family participation; application was perceived as easy, clear and relatively effortless according to the majority. According to 68% of the healthcare providers, most relatives were perceived to be capable of learning to participate in essential care activities. Some healthcare providers felt uncertain about the patient's wishes regarding family participation, with some indicating the behaviours of relatives and patients discouraged them from offering family participation. Use of a standardized programme to facilitate family participation in essential care activities in the intensive care unit seems feasible and applicable as determined by relatives and healthcare providers.

Background Bedside lung ultrasound (LUS) is an affordable diagnostic tool that could contribute to identifying COVID-19 pneumonia. Different LUS protocols are currently used at the emergency department (ED) and there is a need to know their diagnostic accuracy.Design A multicentre, prospective, observational study, to compare the diagnostic accuracy of three commonly used LUS protocols in identifying COVID-19 pneumonia at the ED.Setting/patients Adult patients with suspected COVID-19 at the ED, in whom we prospectively performed 12-zone LUS and SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription PCR.Measurements We assessed diagnostic accuracy for three different ultrasound protocols using both PCR and final diagnosis as a reference standard.Results Between 19 March 2020 and 4 May 2020, 202 patients were included. Sensitivity, specificity and negative predictive value compared with PCR for 12-zone LUS were 91.4% (95% CI 84.4 to 96.0), 83.5% (95% CI 74.6 to 90.3) and 90.0% (95% CI 82.7 to 94.4). For 8-zone and 6-zone protocols, these results were 79.7 (95% CI 69.9 to 87.6), 69.0% (95% CI 59.6 to 77.4) and 81.3% (95% CI 73.8 to 87.0) versus 89.9% (95% CI 81.7 to 95.3), 57.5% (95% CI 47.9 to 66.8) and 87.8% (95% CI 79.2 to 93.2). Negative likelihood ratios for 12, 8 and 6 zones were 0.1, 0.3 and 0.2, respectively. Compared with the final diagnosis specificity increased to 83.5% (95% CI 74.6 to 90.3), 78.4% (95% CI 68.8 to 86.1) and 65.0% (95% CI 54.6 to 74.4), respectively, while the negative likelihood ratios were 0.1, 0.2 and 0.16.Conclusion Identifying COVID-19 pneumonia at the ED can be aided by bedside LUS. The more efficient 6-zone protocol is an excellent screening tool, while the 12-zone protocol is more specific and gives a general impression on lung involvement.Trial registration number NL8497.