Search

Background: According to estimates, between 337,000 and 650,000 people in Germany live without a permanent residence. They are highly deprived in terms of health. Studies on the health situation are rare and methodologically heterogeneous. Previous reviews have focused on mental illness., Objectives: The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of current research on somatic diseases of homeless people in Germany., Methods: Based on a systematic literature review for the years 2009-2019, the methodological approaches, sample access, recruitment, and health aspects reported in the studies are compared., Results: By means of a systematic literature search, eight peer-reviewed journal articles were identified. Often the term "homelessness" was not operationalised. The average age of homeless participants was between 40.9 years and 67 years, and the proportion of women was between 0 and 35.3%. Frequently the sample was taken from accommodation and medical services for homeless people. One recruitment strategy was "respondent-driven sampling" in conjunction with incentives. The respondents most frequently reported cardiovascular diseases (17%-37.2%), musculoskeletal diseases (≥20%), and respiratory diseases (7%-24%). Depending on the recruitment site, infectious diseases were common (tuberculosis, hepatitis B and C)., Conclusion: Somatic health studies of homeless people are often selective. Older men with lower educational backgrounds living in large German cities appear to be overrepresented, and there is no uniform use of the term "homelessness." Compared with representative population data for Germany, increased risks of somatic illness were observed; cohort characteristics can explain these to a limited extent. Biographical and intersectional approaches are needed to capture multiple and cumulative exposure situations in homelessness.

Aim: Evaluation of German-language guidelines for aphasia and dysarthria rehabilitation, and comparison with international guidelines., Methods: The quality of the 6 included guidelines, as found through a comprehensive literature search, was sytematically evaluated using AGREE II. Quality ratings were compared to the results of a systematic review of 19 English-language guidelines., Results: The quality of German-language guidelines was heterogeneous. In 2 out of 6 evaluation domains and in the overall assessment, no German-language guideline reached the cut-off of 66,67% for good guideline quality. Apart from the domain Editorial Independence, results remained behind those of the international reference guidelines., Conclusion: In some cases, quality can be improved by simple means. It is more resource-intensive, but crucial to document search strategies and how evidence was used in guideline development. A harmonization of the German-language guidelines seems desirable., Competing Interests: Die Autoren geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)