Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Wissenschaftlicher Artikel (16)
- Dissertation (1)
- Preprint (1)
Volltext vorhanden
- ja (18)
Gehört zur Bibliographie
- nein (18) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Oral anticoagulation (4)
- Primary care (4)
- Patients (3)
- Case management (2)
- Depression (2)
- Family practice (2)
- General practice (2)
- Multimorbidity (2)
- Quality of life (2)
- Anticoagulant therapy (1)
Institut
Introduction: In this article three research questions are addressed: (1) Is there an association between socioeconomic status (SES) and patient-reported outcomes in a cohort of multimorbid patients? (2) Does the association vary according to SES indicator used (income, education, occupational position)? (3) Can the association between SES and patient-reported outcomes (self-rated health, health-related quality of life and functional status) be (partly) explained by burden of disease?
Methods: Analyses are based on the MultiCare Cohort Study, a German multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study of multimorbid patients from general practice. We analysed baseline data and data from the first follow-up after 15 months (N = 2,729). To assess burden of disease we used the patients’ morbidity data from standardized general practitioner (GP) interviews based on a list of 46 groups of chronic conditions including the GP’s severity rating of each chronic condition ranging from marginal to very severe.
Results: In the cross-sectional analyses SES was significantly associated with the patient-reported outcomes at baseline. Associations with income were more consistent and stronger than with education and occupational position. Associations were partly explained (17% to 44%) by burden of disease. In the longitudinal analyses only income (but not education and occupational position) was significantly related to the patient-reported outcomes at follow-up. Associations between income and the outcomes were reduced by 18% to 27% after adjustment for burden of disease.
Conclusions: Results indicate social inequalities in self-rated health, functional status and health related quality of life among older multimorbid patients. As associations with education and occupational position were inconsistent, these inequalities were mainly due to income. Inequalities were partly explained by burden of disease. However, even among patients with a similar disease burden, those with a low income were worse off in terms of the three patient-reported outcomes under study.
Background: Expected growth in the demand for health services has generated interest in the more effective deployment of health care assistants. Programs encouraging German general practitioners (GPs) to share responsibility for care with specially qualified health care assistants in the family practice (VERAHs) have existed for several years. But no studies have been conducted on the tasks German GPs are willing to rely on specially qualified personnel to perform, what they are prepared to delegate to all non-physician practice staff and what they prefer to do themselves.
Methods: As part of an evaluation study on the deployment of VERAHs in GP-centered health care, we used a questionnaire to ask about task delegation within the practice team. From a list of tasks that VERAHs are specifically trained to carry out, GPs were asked to indicate which they actually delegate. We also asked GPs why they had employed a VERAH in their practice and for their opinions on the benefits and limitations of assigning tasks to VERAHs. The aim of the study was to find out which tasks GPs delegate to their specially qualified personnel, which they permit all HCAs to carry out, and which tasks they do not delegate at all.
Results: The survey was filled in and returned by 245 GPs (83%). Some tasks were exclusively delegated to VERAHs (e.g. home visits), while others were delegated to all HCAs (e.g. vaccinations). About half the GPs rated the assessment of mental health, as part of the comprehensive assessment of a patient’s condition, as the sole responsibility of a GP.
The possibility to delegate more complex tasks was the main reason given for employing a VERAH. Doctors said the delegation of home visits provided them with the greatest relief.
Conclusions: In Germany, where GPs are solely accountable for the health care provided in their practices, experience with the transfer of responsibility to other non-physician health care personnel is still very limited. When HCAs have undergone special training, GPs seem to be prepared to delegate tasks that demand a substantial degree of know-how, such as home visits and case management. This “new” role allocation within the practice may signal a shift in the provision of health care by family practice teams in Germany.
Background: The health status, health awareness and health behavior of persons with a migration background often differ from the autochthonous population. Little is known about the proportion of patients with a migration background (PMB) that participate in primary care studies on oral antithrombotic treatment (OAT) in Germany, and whether the quality of their antithrombotic care differs from patients without a migration background. The aim of this paper was to use the results of a cluster-randomized controlled trial (PICANT) to determine the proportion of PMB at different stages of recruitment, and to compare the results in terms of sociodemographic characteristics and antithrombotic treatment.
Methods: This study used screening and baseline data from the PICANT trial on oral anticoagulation management in GP practices. For this analysis, we determined the proportion of PMB during the recruitment period at stage 1 (screening of potentially eligible patients), stage 2 (eligible patients invited to participate in the trial), and stage 3 (assessment of baseline characteristics of patients participating in the PICANT trial). In addition, we compared patients in terms of sociodemographic characteristics and quality of anticoagulant treatment. Statistical analysis comprised descriptive and bivariate analyses.
Results: The proportion of PMB at each recruitment stage declined from 9.1% at stage 1 to 7.9% at stage 2 and 7.3% at stage 3). A lack of German language skills led to the exclusion of half the otherwise eligible PMB. At stages 1 and 3, PMB were younger (stage 1: 70.7 vs. 75.0 years, p<0.001; stage 3: 70.2 vs. 73.5 years, p = 0.013), but did not differ in terms of gender. The quality of their anticoagulant care was comparable (100.0% vs. 99.1% were receiving appropriate OAT, 94.4% vs. 95.7% took phenprocoumon, or warfarin, and the most recent INR measurement of 60.8% vs. 69.3% was within their individual INR range).
Conclusions: In the potentially eligible population and among participants at baseline, the quality of anticoagulant care was high in all groups of patients, which is reassuring. To enable the inclusion of more PMB, future primary care research on OAT in Germany should address how best to overcome language barriers. This will be challenging, particularly because the heterogeneity of PMB means the resulting sample sizes for each specific language group are small.
Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN41847489.
Purpose: To examine whether applying case management in general practices reduces thromboembolic events requiring hospitalization and major bleeding events (combined primary outcome). Secondary endpoints were mortality, frequency and duration of hospitalization, severe treatment interactions, adverse events, quality of anticoagulation, health-related quality of life and intervention costs, patients’ assessment of chronic illness care, self-reported adherence to medication, GP and HCA knowledge, patient knowledge and satisfaction with shared decision-making.
Methods: Cluster-randomized controlled trial undertaken at 52 general practices in Germany with adult patients with a long-term indication for oral anticoagulation. The complex intervention included training for healthcare assistants, information and quality circles for general practitioners and 24 months of case management for patients. Assessment was after 12 and 24 months. The intention-to-treat population included all randomized practices and patients, while the per-protocol analysis included only those that received treatment without major protocol violations.
Results: The mean (SD) age of the 736 patients was 73.5 (9.4) years and 597 (81.1%) had atrial fibrillation. After 24 months, the primary endpoint had occurred in 40 (11.0%) intervention and 48 (12.9%) control patients (hazard ratio 0.83, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.25; P = .37). Patients’ perceived quality of care, their knowledge, and HCAs’ knowledge, had improved significantly at 24 months. The other secondary endpoints did not differ between groups. In the intervention group, hospital admissions were significantly reduced in patients that received treatment without major protocol deviations.
Conclusions: Even though the main outcomes did not differ significantly, the intervention appears to have positively influenced several process parameters under "real-world conditions".
Background: Antithrombotic treatment is a continuous therapy that is often performed in general practice and requires careful safety management. The aim of this study is to investigate whether a best practice model that applies major elements of case management, including patient education, can improve antithrombotic management in primary health care in terms of reducing major thromboembolic and bleeding events.
Methods: This 24-month cluster-randomized trial will be performed in 690 adult patients from 46 practices. The trial intervention will be a complex intervention involving general practitioners, health care assistants and patients with an indication for oral anticoagulation. To assess adherence to medication and symptoms in patients, as well as to detect complications early, health care assistants will be trained in case management and will use the Coagulation-Monitoring-List (Co-MoL) to regularly monitor patients. Patients will receive information (leaflets and a video), treatment monitoring via the Co-MoL and be motivated to perform self-management. Patients in the control group will continue to receive treatment-as-usual from their general practitioners. The primary endpoint is the combined endpoint of all thromboembolic events requiring hospitalization, and all major bleeding complications. Secondary endpoints are mortality, hospitalization, strokes, major bleeding and thromboembolic complications, severe treatment interactions, the number of adverse events, quality of anticoagulation, health-related quality of life and costs. Further secondary objectives will be investigated to explain the mechanism by which the intervention is effective: patients' assessment of chronic illness care, self-reported adherence to medication, general practitioners' and health care assistants' knowledge, patients' knowledge and satisfaction with shared decision making. Practice recruitment is expected to take place between July and December 2012. Recruitment of eligible patients will start in July 2012. Assessment will occur at three time points: baseline (T0), follow-up after 12 (T1) and after 24 months (T2).
Discussion: The efficacy and effectiveness of individual elements of the intervention, such as antithrombotic interventions, self-management concepts in orally anticoagulated patients and the methodological tool, case-management, have already been extensively demonstrated. This project foresees the combination of several proven instruments, as a result of which we expect to profit from a reduction in the major complications associated with antithrombotic treatment.
Hintergrund: Die Delegation ärztlicher Leistungen an nichtärztliches medizinisches Fachpersonal wird in Deutschland vor dem Hintergrund eines absehbaren Hausärztemangels bei gleichzeitig wachsendem Bedarf an hausärztlichen Betreuungsleistungen seit einiger Zeit diskutiert. Inzwischen wurden unterschiedliche Qualifikationsmodelle für Medizinische Fachangestellte (MFA) (z.B. die Versorgungs-assistentin in der Hausarztpraxis, VERAH) konzipiert und implementiert, die für eine Delegation von Leistungen qualifizieren. VERAH sind v.a. in Baden-Württemberg in Hausarztpraxen tätig, da deren Einsatz dort im Rahmen der Hausarztzentrierten Versorgung (HzV) seit 2008 finanziell honoriert wird. Dabei ist es den Praxen freigestellt, wie sie das VERAH-Konzept und damit auch die Delegation umsetzen. Auch gesetzliche Vorgaben zur Delegation lassen erheblichen Spielraum bei der Umsetzung. Erschwerend kommt hinzu, dass weiterhin Unklarheit darüber besteht, welche Leistungsübertragung als „Delegation“ und welche eher als „Substitution“ zu verstehen ist.
Zielrichtung der Arbeit: Ziel dieser publikationsbasierten Dissertation ist eine Darstellung der Formen und Graduierungen von Delegation, d.h. der tatsächlichen Umsetzung von Leistungsübertragung in der Hausarztpraxis am Beispiel der VERAH in Baden-Württemberg. Es können Empfehlungen für das Gelingen der Delegation aus der Analyse von Ergebnissen auf Patienten-, Praxis- und Teamebene abgeleitet werden.
Resultate: Diese Dissertation basiert auf sechs Publikationen, die im Rahmen von zwei Projekten zur Evaluation des VERAH-Einsatzes in der HzV in Baden-Württemberg entstanden. Die Evaluationen basieren auf einem Mixed Methods-Design, d.h. auf der Analyse von querschnittlich erhobenen quantitativen Daten sowie qualitativen Daten zu verschiedenen Fragen des VERAH-Einsatzes.
Es existiert ein breites Spektrum an Formen und Graduierungen der Delegation in Hausarztpraxen, die am HzV-Modell teilnehmen. VERAH übernehmen einerseits supplementäre (zusätzliche) ärztliche Tätigkeiten, wie z.B. Geriatrisches Assessment oder Impfberatungen, aber auch komplementäre (ergänzende) Tätigkeiten wie z.B. die Beratung der Angehörigen zu Hilfeleistungen im Gesundheitssystem. Vor allem im Rahmen von Hausbesuchen üben VERAH auch substituierende (ersetzende) Funktionen
aus. Auf Patientenseite sind gerade ältere, multimorbide und pflegebedürftige Patienten Empfänger delegierter Leistungen. Sie erhalten eine umfassende Betreuung und werden beim Erhalt ihrer häuslichen Selbständigkeit unterstützt. Die Patienten sehen in der VERAH eine zusätzliche Vertrauensperson in der Praxis und akzeptieren sie als kompetente Ansprechpartnerin. Die Hausärzte profitieren durch die Delegation von Tätigkeiten an VERAH, indem sie entlastet werden und Zeit für wichtige medizinische Aufgaben gewinnen. Für VERAH stellt die Delegation eine Erweiterung ihrer Tätigkeits- und Kompetenzbereiche dar und kann insofern als ein Schritt zur Professionalisierung des nichtärztlichen Personals einer Hausarztpraxis gelten.
Viele Faktoren, die zum Gelingen einer Umsetzung der Delegation beitragen, können vom hausärztlichen Team selbst beeinflusst werden. Darunter fallen das Engagement der MFA, die Qualifikation, zeitliche Flexibilität, ausreichend Gestaltungsspielraum, Grad der Autonomie, Abgrenzung des Verantwortungsbereiches und auch adäquates Equipment. Entsprechend richten sich die hier formulierten Empfehlungen meist an die Praxis, aber auch an den Gesetzgeber.
Bedeutung für die übergeordnete Fragestellung: Die Ergebnisse dieser Arbeit zeigen, dass mit dem VERAH-Konzept erste Ansätze einer teambasierten Versorgung vorhanden sind, und dass sich die Analyse dieses Konzeptes eignet, um Desiderata für die Zukunft von Delegation (haus-)ärztlicher Leistungen an nichtärztliches Personal formulieren zu können. Teambasierte Ansätze bedürfen, wie auch internationale Beispiele verdeutlichen, einer Weiterentwicklung der bestehenden Delegationskonzepte in deutschen Hausarztpraxen. Idealerweise mündet eine mit Delegation einhergehende Aufgaben- und Rollenneuverteilung in einer Betreuungsform, in der alle Teammitglieder entsprechend ihrer Qualifikation an der Versorgung der Patienten in der Hausarztpraxis beteiligt sind. Daher kommt die Einbindung von Pflegekräften in die hausärztliche Versorgung genauso in Frage, wie auch speziell ausgebildete VERAH/MFA. In jedem Fall sollte über Schritte der Professionalisierung nichtärztlicher Berufsgruppen nachgedacht werden. Ob sich in Deutschland, wie in den USA und in Kanada, aus diesen Delegationskonzepten im Laufe der Zeit Substitution (im Sinne der Verantwortungsübertragung an nichtärztliche Berufsgruppen) entwickelt, bleibt abzuwarten. Die Ergebnisse der Dissertation zeigen, dass es mit der gegenwärtigen Umsetzung der Delegation an VERAH zu einer Erweiterung des Leistungsspektrums in den Hausarztpraxen kommen kann; eine Ausweitung der Delegation sollte jedoch zeitnah vorangetrieben werden.
Background: In primary care, patients with multiple chronic conditions are the rule rather than the exception. The Chronic Care Model (CCM) is an evidence-based framework for improving chronic illness care, but little is known about the extent to which it has been implemented in routine primary care. The aim of this study was to describe how multimorbid older patients assess the routine chronic care they receive in primary care practices in Germany, and to explore the extent to which factors at both the practice and patient level determine their views.
Methods: This cross-sectional study used baseline data from an observational cohort study involving 158 general practitioners (GP) and 3189 multimorbid patients. Standardized questionnaires were employed to collect data, and the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) questionnaire used to assess the quality of care received. Multilevel hierarchical modeling was used to identify any existing association between the dependent variable, PACIC, and independent variables at the patient level (socio-economic factors, weighted count of chronic conditions, instrumental activities of daily living, health-related quality of life, graded chronic pain, no. of contacts with GP, existence of a disease management program (DMP) disease, self-efficacy, and social support) and the practice level (age and sex of GP, years in current practice, size and type of practice).
Results: The overall mean PACIC score was 2.4 (SD 0.8), with the mean subscale scores ranging from 2.0 (SD 1.0, subscale goal setting/tailoring) to 3.5 (SD 0.7, delivery system design). At the patient level, higher PACIC scores were associated with a DMP disease, more frequent GP contacts, higher social support, and higher autonomy of past occupation. At the practice level, solo practices were associated with higher PACIC values than other types of practice.
Conclusions: This study shows that from the perspective of multimorbid patients receiving care in German primary care practices, the implementation of structured care and counseling could be improved, particularly by helping patients set specific goals, coordinating care, and arranging follow-up contacts. Studies evaluating chronic care should take into consideration that a patient’s assessment is associated not only with practice-level factors, but also with individual, patient-level factors.
Objective: The objective of this study was to describe and analyze the effects of depression on health care utilization and costs in a sample of multimorbid elderly patients.
Method: This cross-sectional analysis used data of a prospective cohort study, consisting of 1,050 randomly selected multimorbid primary care patients aged 65 to 85 years. Depression was defined as a score of six points or more on the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15). Subjects passed a geriatric assessment, including a questionnaire for health care utilization. The impact of depression on health care costs was analyzed using multiple linear regression models. A societal perspective was adopted.
Results: Prevalence of depression was 10.7%. Mean total costs per six-month period were €8,144 (95% CI: €6,199-€10,090) in patients with depression as compared to €3,137 (95% CI: €2,735-€3,538; p<0.001) in patients without depression. The positive association between depression and total costs persisted after controlling for socio-economic variables, functional status and level of multimorbidity. In particular, multiple regression analyses showed a significant positive association between depression and pharmaceutical costs.
Conclusion: Among multimorbid elderly patients, depression was associated with significantly higher health care utilization and costs. The effect of depression on costs was even greater than reported by previous studies conducted in less morbid patients.
Background: Oral anticoagulation therapy (OAT) is a challenge in general practice, especially for high-risk groups such as the elderly. Insufficient patient knowledge about safety-relevant aspects of OAT is considered to be one of the main reasons for complications. The research question addressed in this manuscript is whether a complex intervention that includes practice-based case management, self-management of OAT and additional patient and practice team education improves patient knowledge about anticoagulation therapy compared to a control group of patients receiving usual care (as a secondary objective of the Primary Care Management for Optimised Antithrombotic Treatment (PICANT) trial).
Methods: The cluster-randomised controlled PICANT trial was conducted in 52 general practices in Germany, between 2012 and 2015. Trial participants were patients with a long-term indication for oral anticoagulation. A questionnaire was used to assess knowledge at baseline, after 12, and after 24 months. The questionnaire consists of 13 items (with a range of 0 to 13 sum-score points) covering topics related to intervention. Differences in the development of patient knowledge between intervention and control groups compared to baseline were assessed for each follow-up by means of linear mixed-effects models.
Results: Seven hundred thirty-six patients were included at baseline, of whom 95.4% continued to participate after 12 months, and 89.3% after 24 months. The average age of patients was 73.5 years (SD 9.4), and they mainly suffered from atrial fibrillation (81.1%). Patients in the intervention and control groups had similar knowledge about oral anticoagulation at baseline (5.6 (SD 2.3) in both groups). After 12 months, the improvement in the level of knowledge (compared to baseline) was significantly larger in the intervention group than in the control group (0.78 (SD 2.5) vs. 0.04 (SD 2.3); p = 0.0009). After 24 months, the difference between both groups was still statistically significant (0.6 (SD 2.6) vs. -0.3 (SD 2.3); p = 0.0001).
Conclusion: Since this intervention was effective, it should be established in general practice as a means of improving patient knowledge about oral anticoagulation.
Trial registration: Current controlled trials ISRCTN41847489; Date of registration: 13/04/2012
Background: In Germany, patients receiving oral anticoagulation (OAC) are often treated by general practitioners (GPs), and large proportions of patients receive vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). The quality of OAC in German GP practices, differences between various practices, and improvement potential through implementation of case management, have not yet been investigated satisfactorily.
Based on results of a cluster-randomized controlled trial, we aimed to assess whether OAC quality can be improved, any variations between practices exist and determine practice- and patient-level factors.
Methods: The PICANT trial (2012–2015) was performed in 52 GP practices in Hesse, Germany. Adult patients with long-term indication for OAC received best practice case management in the intervention group. International normalized ratio (INR) values were recorded from anticoagulation passes. The Rosendaal method was used to calculate Time in Therapeutic Range (TTR) at patient level, and mean pooling to obtain center-specific TTR (cTTR) at practice level. The quality of OAC was assessed by TTR and cTTR. Linear model analyses were used to investigate associations between practice−/ patient-level factors and TTR.
Results: Inclusion of 736 patients (49.6% intervention and 50.4% control patients); 690 (93.8%) received phenprocoumon. Within 24 months, the TTR was 75.1% (SD 17.6) in the intervention versus 74.3% (SD 17.8) in the control group (p = 0.670). The cTTR averaged 75.1% (SD 6.5, range: 60.4 to 86.7%) in the intervention versus 74.3% (SD 7.2, range: 52.7 to 85.7%) in the control group (p = 0.668). At practice level, the TTR was significantly lower in practices with a male physician and certification in quality management. At patient level, the TTR was significantly higher in patients with moderate to high compliance, in men, and in patients that performed self-management. The TTR was significantly lower in patients with certain comorbidities, and who were hospitalized.
Conclusions: The intervention did not effectively improve OAC quality compared to routine care. Quality of INR control was generally good, but considerable variation existed between GP practices. The variability indicates optimization potential in some practices. The demonstrated association between patient-level factors and TTR highlights the importance of considering patient characteristics that may impede achieving high quality therapeutic outcomes.
Trial registration: ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN41847489, registered 27 February 2012.