Resilience of the primary healthcare system: perspectives of German stakeholders at primary care interfaces during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Introduction: Worldwide, the primary care sector played a key role in coping with the challenges of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Methods: The aim of this study was to explore the resilience of the German primary healthcare system during the second wave of the pandemic from the perspective of identified interface stakeholders, i.e., representatives of hospitals, district offices, and medical associations. Qualitative data from interviews and focus groups were analyzed according to a resilience framework. Results: The main findings include a gap in knowledge transfer, unstructured allocation of responsibilities, and a resulting unregulated flow of patients. Social brokers supported care coordination and knowledge transfer. The response to the capacity to cope with uncertainties was slow and chaotic at the system level and heterogeneous at the individual level. Building on previous relationships fostered functioning communication, while competition in primary care was identified as a barrier to resilience. Conclusion: Implications for further research and for strengthening the resilience of primary care can be derived based on this study.

Validation of patient- and GP-reported core sets of quality indicators for older adults with multimorbidity in primary care: results of the cross-sectional observational MULTIqual validation study.

BACKGROUND: Older adults with multimorbidity represent a growing segment of the population. Metrics to assess quality, safety and effectiveness of care can support policy makers and healthcare providers in addressing patient needs. However, there is a lack of valid measures of quality of care for this population. In the MULTIqual project, 24 general practitioner (GP)-reported and 14 patient-reported quality indicators for the healthcare of older adults with multimorbidity were developed in Germany in a systematic approach. This study aimed to select, validate and pilot core sets of these indicators. METHODS: In a cross-sectional observational study, we collected data in general practices (n = 35) and patients aged 65 years and older with three or more chronic conditions (n = 346). One-dimensional core sets for both perspectives were selected by stepwise backward selection based on corrected item-total correlations. We established structural validity, discriminative capacity, feasibility and patient-professional agreement for the selected indicators. Multilevel multivariable linear regression models adjusted for random effects at practice level were calculated to examine construct validity. RESULTS: Twelve GP-reported and seven patient-reported indicators were selected, with item-total correlations ranging from 0.332 to 0.576. Fulfilment rates ranged from 24.6 to 89.0%. Between 0 and 12.7% of the values were missing. Seventeen indicators had agreement rates between patients and professionals of 24.1% to 75.9% and one had 90.7% positive and 5.1% negative agreement. Patients who were born abroad (- 1.04, 95% CI = - 2.00/ - 0.08, p = 0.033) and had higher health-related quality of life (- 1.37, 95% CI = - 2.39/ - 0.36, p = 0.008), fewer contacts with their GP (0.14, 95% CI = 0.04/0.23, p = 0.007) and lower willingness to use their GPs as coordinators of their care (0.13, 95% CI = 0.06/0.20, p < 0.001) were more likely to have lower GP-reported healthcare quality scores. Patients who had fewer GP contacts (0.12, 95% CI = 0.04/0.20, p = 0.002) and were less willing to use their GP to coordinate their care (0.16, 95% CI = 0.10/0.21, p < 0.001) were more likely to have lower patient-reported healthcare quality scores. CONCLUSIONS: The quality indicator core sets are the first brief measurement tools specifically designed to assess quality of care for patients with multimorbidity. The indicators can facilitate implementation of treatment standards and offer viable alternatives to the current practice of combining disease-related metrics with poor applicability to patients with multimorbidity.

Barriers and enabling factors for workplace integration of internationally qualified nurses: A qualitative study of perceptions of German nurses.

AIM: Examine perceptions of nurses who obtained a recognised nursing qualification in Germany about the integration of internationally qualified nurses (IQN) in the German nursing workforce. DESIGN: Qualitative interview study. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with 21 state-qualified nurses who had graduated from a German nursing program were conducted either face-to-face or by telephone. Nurses were selected using the purposive sampling method. Additionally, to reach a sufficient sample size, snowball sampling was applied. Each interview was pseudonymized and transcribed. Transcripts were coded according to Qualitative Content Analysis with data structured into themes and sub-themes. The study was reported according to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Studies (COREQ) checklist for qualitative research. RESULTS: Two main themes including sub-themes were identified: (a) Enabling Factors to Workplace Integration: motivated nursing team, structured orientation program, support by a preceptor, additional practical skills and specific language training and (b) Barriers to Workplace Integration: lack of language proficiency, cultural differences, othering and racism/discrimination. The findings of the study suggest that working in a diverse workplace can be challenging, it is therefore important for successful integration to recognise not only the experiences of IQN but also the perceptions of nurses who work with internationally qualified peers. No patient or public contribution. REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study has been prospectively registered (27 June 2019) at the German Clinical Trial Register (REDACTED).

Effects and Processes of an mHealth Intervention for the Management of Chronic Diseases: Prospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Mobile health (mHealth) interventions for self-management are a promising way to meet the needs of patients with chronic diseases in primary care practices. Therefore, an mHealth intervention, TelePraCMan, was developed and evaluated for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, high blood pressure, or heart failure in a German primary care setting. TelePraCMan entails a symptom diary, an appointment manager, a manager to document goals, and a warning system. The app should foster the self-management of participating patients. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine the effects of TelePraCMan on patient activation and quality of life and explored the underlying contextual factors, impacts, and degree of implementation. METHODS: In a prospective observational study design, we collected data by using interviews and written questionnaires from participating patients (intervention and control groups) and primary care workers (physicians and practice assistants). The primary outcomes of interest were patient-reported quality of life (12-Item Short Form Survey) and patient activation (patient activation measure). The quantitative analysis focused on differences between patients in the intervention and control groups, as well as before (T0) and after (T1) the intervention. Interviews were analyzed by using qualitative content analysis via MAXQDA (VERBI GmbH). RESULTS: At baseline, 25 patients and 24 primary care workers completed the questionnaire, and 18 patients and 21 primary care workers completed the follow-up survey. The patients were predominantly male and, on average, aged 64 (SD 11) years (T0). The primary care workers were mostly female (62%) and, on average, aged 47 (SD 10) years (T0). No differences were observed in the outcomes before and after the intervention or between the intervention and control groups. In the additional interviews, 4 patients and 11 primary care workers were included. The interviewees perceived that the intervention was useful for some patients. However, contextual factors and problems with implementation activities negatively affected the use of the app with patients. The main reasons for the low participation were the COVID-19 pandemic and the target group, which seemed to have less interest in mHealth; the interviewees attributed this to the older age of patients. However, the respondents felt that the app would be better accepted in 5 or 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: Although the TelePraCMan app was rated as very good and important by the participants, few patients used it. The digital intervention was hardly implemented and had limited impact in the current setting of German primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00017320; https://tinyurl.com/4uwrzu85.

Resilience of the primary health care system - German primary care practitioners' perspectives during the early COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Primary care is a relevant pillar in managing not only individual, but also societal medical crises. The COVID-19 pandemic has demanded a rapid response from primary care with interventions in the health care system. The aim of this paper was to explore the responses of primary care practitioners (PCP) during the early COVID-19 pandemic and to analyze these with a view on the resilience of the primary health care system from the PCPs perspective. METHODS: Shortly after the first COVID-19 wave (July-October 2020) n = 39, semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with PCP in practices and at Corona contact points (CCP) in Baden-Wuerttemberg (Germany). Qualitative content analysis was applied, and the evolved categories were related to in a framework for resilience. RESULTS: Primary care had an overall strong ability to adapt and show resilience, albeit with wide variance in speed and scope of the responses. When coping with uncertainty, the reasons given by PCPs in favor of opening a CCP mainly involved intrinsic motivation and self-initiative; the reasons against doing so were i.e. the lack of personal protective equipment, problems with space, and worries about organizational burden. A strong association existed between the establishment of a CCP and the use of resources (i.e. existing networks, personal protective equipment, exercising an office of professional political function). Our study predominantly found adaptive aspects for measures taken at medical practices and transformative aspects for setting up outpatient infection centers. PCPs played an important role in the coordination process (i.e. actively transferring knowledge, integration in crisis management teams, inclusion in regional strategic efforts) reaching a high level in the dimensions knowledge and legitimacy. The dimension interdependence repeatedly came into focus (i.e. working with stakeholders to open CCP, interacting among different types of primary care facilities, intersectoral interfaces). A need for regional capacity planning was visible at the time of the interviews. CONCLUSIONS: The results can be used for practical and research-based institutional and capacity planning, for developing resilience in primary care and for augmentation by perspectives from other stakeholders in the primary health care system.

Experiences of patients with multimorbidity with primary care and the association with patient activation: a cross-sectional study in Germany.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to explore the association between patient activation and patients' experience of care among an elderly multimorbid population in Germany. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Primary care practices in two German settings. PARTICIPANTS: 346 patients with 3 or more chronic conditions aged 65 years and over from 36 primary care practices. OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient activation was measured with the patient activation measure (PAM). To assess patient experiences with primary care, a set of questions concerning domains of primary care were included. Multilevel regression analyses were performed to examine which domains of care were associated with patient activation. RESULTS: Out of 1243 invited patients, a total of 346 took part in the study (participation rate 27.8 %). Mean PAM score was 76.1. Across all patients, 3.8% achieved PAM level 1, 7.5% level 2, 27.2% level 3% and 60.7% level 4. PAM scores suggest a highly activated patient group. In the regression analysis, three out ten domains of patients' experiences showed an association with patient activation. The domains 'being involved in decision as much as desired' (B=-8.56, p=0.012) and 'receiving a self-management plan' (B=6.51, p=0.051) were associated with higher patient activation scores. Patients with an up-to-date medication plan had lower patient activation scores (B=-12.01, p=0.041). CONCLUSION: Specific domains of primary care were found to be associated with patient activation. To enhance patient activation, primary care physicians may increase involvement of patients in decisions. Future research should examine the causality of these associations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00015718.

Adaptation and validation of a German version of the Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Patients with multiple long-term conditions often face a variety of challenges arising from the requirements of their health care. Knowledge of perceived treatment burden is crucial for optimizing treatment. In this study, we aimed to create a German version of the Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire (MTBQ) and to evaluate its validity. METHODS: The steps to translate the MTBQ included forward/back translation, cognitive interviews (n = 6) and a pilot test (n = 7). Psychometric properties of the scale were assessed in a cross-sectional survey with primary care patients aged 65 and older with at least 3 long-term conditions (n = 344). We examined the distribution of responses, dimensionality, internal reliability and construct validity. RESULTS: Cognitive interviewing and piloting led to minor modifications and showed overall good face validity and acceptability. As expected, we observed a positively skewed response distribution for all items. Reliability was acceptable with McDonald's omega = 0.71. Factor analysis suggested one common factor while model fit indices were inconclusive. Predefined hypotheses regarding the construct validity were supported by negative associations between treatment burden and health-related quality of life, self-rated health, social support, patient activation and medication adherence, and positive associations between treatment burden and number of comorbidities. Treatment burden was found to be higher in female participants (Mdn1 = 6.82, Mdn2 = 4.55; U = 11,729, p = 0.001) and participants with mental health diagnoses (Mdn1 = 9.10, Mdn2 = 4.55; U = 3172, p = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: The German MTBQ exhibited good psychometric properties and can be used to assess the perceived treatment burden of patients with multimorbidity.

Keeping nurses in nursing: a qualitative study of German nurses' perceptions of push and pull factors to leave or stay in the profession.

BACKGROUND: The increasing nursing shortages worldwide has focused attention on the need to find more effective ways to recruit and retain nurses. The aim of this study was to gain understanding of factors that keep German nurses in nursing and explore their perceptions of factors that contribute to nurses leaving or staying in the profession. METHODS: An explorative qualitative study was undertaken at four different hospitals (two university hospitals and two public hospitals) in Baden-Wuerttemberg, a state in South Germany. Semi-structured face-to-face or telephone interviews were conducted with 21 state-qualified nurses who had graduated from a German nursing program. Each interview was pseudonymized and transcribed. Transcripts were coded according to Qualitative Content Analysis with data structured into themes and subthemes. The study was reported according to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Studies (COREQ) checklist for qualitative research. RESULTS: Two themes emerged from the analysis and each theme had several subthemes: a) PUSH FACTORS i.e. factors that may push nurses to consider leaving the profession included limited career prospects, generational barriers, poor public image of nursing, and workplace pressures; b) PULL FACTORS i.e. factors that nurses wished for and could keep them in the profession included professional pride, improved remuneration, recognition of nursing, professionalisation, and improving the image of nursing as a profession. CONCLUSION: The decision to leave or stay in nursing is influenced by a complex range of dynamic push and pull factors. Nurse Managers responsible for stabilizing the workforce and maintaining their health system will continue to have to navigate challenges until working conditions, appropriate wages and career development opportunities are addressed. A key to tackling nursing shortages may be focusing on pull factors and nurse managers listening in particular to the perspectives of junior nurses directly involved in patient care, as giving them opportunity to further develop professionally, reinforcing a strong and supportive workplace relationships, paying an appropriate salary, and improving the public image of nursing profession. REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study has been prospectively registered (27 June 2019) at the German Clinical Trial Register ( DRKS00017465 ).

Measuring the Quality of Care for Older Adults With Multimorbidity: Results of the MULTIqual Project.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Providing health care for older adults with multimorbidity is often complex, challenging, and prone to fragmentation. Although clinical decision making should take into account treatment interactions, individual burden, and resources, current approaches to assessing quality of care mostly rely on indicators for single conditions. The aim of this project was to develop a set of generic quality indicators for the management of patients aged 65 and older with multimorbidity that can be used in both health care research and clinical practice. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Based on the findings of a systematic literature review and eight focus groups with patients with multimorbidity and their family members, we developed candidate indicators. Identified aspects of quality were mapped to core domains of health care to obtain a guiding framework for quality-of-care assessment. Using nominal group technique, indicators were rated by a multidisciplinary expert panel (n = 23) following standardized criteria. RESULTS: We derived 47 candidate quality indicators from the literature and 4 additional indicators from the results of the focus groups. The expert panel selected a set of 25 indicators, which can be assigned to the levels of patient factors, patient-provider communication, and context and organizational structures of the conceptual framework. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: We developed a comprehensive indicator set for the management of multimorbidity that can help to highlight areas with potential for improving the quality of care and support application of multimorbidity guidelines. Furthermore, this study may serve as a blueprint for participatory designs in the development of quality indicators.

Enhancing implementation of a standardized initial assessment for demand management in outpatient emergency care in Germany: a quantitative process evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Inadequate assessment of the severity and urgency of health problems is one of the factors contributing to unnecessary emergency department visits. A software-based instrument for standardized initial assessment (SmED) aims to support healthcare professionals and steer patients to the appropriate source of care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation process of SmED based on the point of view of users in order to facilitate sustainable implementation. METHODS: A quantitative process evaluation on the basis of a paper-based questionnaire was carried out alongside the implementation of SmED in 26 outpatient emergency care services within 11 federal states in Germany. Healthcare professionals who worked with SmED either at the joint contact points of the outpatient emergency care service and the emergency departments of hospitals ("Joint Counter", German "Gemeinsamer Tresen") or at the initial telephone contact points of the outpatient emergency care service (116117) were invited to participate in the survey. RESULTS: 200 users of SmED completed the questionnaire comprising the five scales: Intervention effectiveness/efficacy, Interprofessional context/occupational Interest, Individual Context, Organisational Framework Conditions, and Medical Context. Several individual characteristics were related to the implementation process of SmED. Female and younger healthcare professionals and participants with less than five years of professional experience tended to evaluate the implementation process as more positive. Factors related to the Individual Context and to the Medical Context were associated with the reported use of SmED (p = 0.004 and 0.041, respectively). CONCLUSION: The involvement of healthcare professionals, particularly more experienced professionals, in the implementation of SmED may help to facilitate sustainable implementation. In addition, training of potential user prior and during the implementation process and the adaption of Organisational Context factors are crucial. Trial registration The study was registered at the German Clinical Trials Register prior to the start of the study (DRKS00017014).

Self-management perspectives of elderly patients with multimorbidity and practitioners - status, challenges and further support needed?

BACKGROUND: Patients with multimorbidity (here defined as three or more chronic conditions) require constant treatment and care. Furthermore, they have to manage their health and diseases in daily life. Offering support to patients' medical self-management is an important task of primary care. The aim of this study was to explore, what further support is needed from the perspective of patients' and primary care practitioners. METHODS: A qualitative study using individual semi-structed interviews with 17 patients with multimorbidity and 7 practitioners (4 primary care physicians and 3 practice assistants) was conducted in Germany. Data were audio-recorded, pseudonymised and transcribed verbatim. Data analysis was performed using qualitative content analysis to structure data into themes and subthemes. All data were managed and organised in MAXQDA. RESULTS: The three broad themes: current status, challenges and further support emerged. Patients reported on unfulfilled needs regarding role or emotional management, like coping with loneliness, loss of independence and, changing habits. The importance of social contact was highlighted by patients and practitioners. Patients articulated further support from their primary care practitioners on coping with the disease. Practitioners' wished for further support in aspects of social participation, public transport, and community resources. CONCLUSION: Challenges regarding self-management of elderly patients with multimorbidity may be addressed by harnessing social support and community initiatives.

Quality of care for people with multimorbidity: a focus group study with patients and their relatives.

BACKGROUND: Prevalence of people with multimorbidity rises. Multimorbidity constitutes a challenge to the healthcare system, and treatment of patients with multimorbidity is prone to high-quality variations. Currently, no set of quality indicators (QIs) exists to assess quality of care, let alone incorporating the patient perspective. We therefore aim to identify aspects of quality of care relevant to the patients' perspective and match them to a literature-based set of QIs. METHODS: We conducted eight focus groups with patients with multimorbidity and three focus groups with patients' relatives using a semistructured guide. Data were analysed using Kuckartz's qualitative content analysis. We derived deductive categories from the literature, added inductive categories (new quality aspects) and translated them into QI. RESULTS: We created four new QIs based on the quality aspects relevant to patients/relatives. Two QIs (patient education/self-management, regular updates of medication plans) were consented by an expert panel, while two others were not (periodical check-ups, general practitioner-coordinated care). Half of the literature-based QIs, for example, assessment of biopsychosocial support needs, were supported by participants' accounts, while more technical domains regarding assessment and treatment regimens were not addressed in the focus groups. CONCLUSION: We show that focus groups with patients and relatives adding relevant aspects in QI development should be incorporated by default in QI development processes and constitute a reasonable addition to traditional QI development. Our QI set constitutes a framework for assessing the quality of care in the German healthcare system. It will facilitate implementation of treatment standards and increase the use of existing guidelines, hereby helping to reduce overuse, underuse and misuse of healthcare resources in the treatment of patients with multimorbidity. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: German clinical trials registry (DRKS00015718), Pre-Results.

Beliefs and practices among primary care physicians during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Baden-Wuerttemberg (Germany): an observational study.

BACKGROUND: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic various ambulatory health care models (SARS-CoV-2 contact points: Subspecialised Primary Care Practices, Fever Clinics, and Special Places for Corona-Testing) were organised in a short period in Baden-Wuerttemberg, a region in Southern Germany. The aim of these SARS-CoV-2 contact points was to ensure medical treatment for patients with (suspected) and without SARS-CoV-2 infection. The present study aimed to assess the beliefs and practices of primary care physicians who either led a Subspecialised Primary Care Practice or a Primary Care Practice providing care as usual in Baden-Wuerttemberg during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was based on a paper-based questionnaire in primary care physicians during the first wave of the pandemic. Participants were identified via the web page of the Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians Baden-Wuerttemberg. The questionnaire was distributed in June and July 2020. It measured knowledge, practices, self-efficacy and fears towards SARS-CoV-2, using newly developed questions. Data was descriptively analysed. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-five participants (92 leads of SARS-CoV-2 contact points/ 63 leads of primary care practices) completed the questionnaire. Out of 92 leads of SARS-CoV-2 contact points 74 stated to lead n Subspecialised Primary Care Practices. About half participants of both groups did not fear an own infection with the novel virus (between 50.8% and 62.2%), however about 75% feared financial loss. Knowledge was gained using various sources; main sources were the Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (between 82.5% and 83.8%) and the German Society for Hygiene and Microbiology (RKI) (between 88.9% and 95.9%). Leads of Subspecialised Primary Care Practice felt more confident to perform anamnestic/diagnostic procedures (p < 0.001). The same was found for the confidence level regarding decision-making concerning the further treatment (p < 0.001). Several prevention measures to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2 were adopted. Subspecialised Primary Care Practice had treated on average more patients with (suspected) COVID-19 (mean 408.12) than primary care practices (mean 83.8) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that the Subspecialised Primary Care Practice that were implemented during the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic contributed containment of the pandemic. Leads of Subspecialised Primary Care Practice indicated that physical separation of patients with potential SARS-CoV-2 infection was easier compared to those who continued working in their own practice. Additionally, leads of Subspecialised Primary Care Practice felt more confident in dealing with patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study has been prospectively registered at the German Clinical Trial Register (DRKS00022224).

[Primary Care Strategies and Cooperation During the First Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany]. / Primärärztliche Strategien und Zusammenarbeit während der ersten Phase der COVID-19-Pandemie in Baden-Württemberg, Deutschland.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to give an early snapshot of primary care strategies that were implemented to cope with the early period of the COVID-19 pandemic in Baden-Wuerttemberg (Germany). METHODS: In June 2020, all 271 outpatient SARS-CoV-2 contact points, established by the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (16 centers for testing, 204 specialized family practices, 51 Outpatients Corona Centers), and a randomly generated sample of 400 primary care practices of Baden-Wuerttemberg were invited to take part in a paper-based questionnaire. The data were gathered anonymously and analysed descriptively. RESULTS: Out of those invited, n=63 (15.8%) primary care practices and n=92 (33.9%) SARS-CoV-2 contact points participated; 78.7% of the primary care practices cooperated with SARS-CoV-2 contact points (n=48). In all, 92.1% had implemented a compulsory registration by phone for patients with (suspected) COVID-19 (n=58) and 81% offered consultation exclusively by phone or video in case of a mild courses (n=51). The new outpatient SARS-CoV-2 contact points were established in collaboration with several stakeholders, mainly led by primary care physicians (n=76, 82.6%) and almost 50% of these were established in March 2020 (n=42, 48.3%). The most commonly reported method of registration was regulated mainly by primary care practices (n=88, 95.7%) and public health departments (n=74, 80.4%). In 92.4% (n=85) of cases, it was possible to register by phone. The consultation response was most commonly given in the form of oral information to the patient (n=65, 77.4%). Less then 50% of the SARS-CoV-2 contact points used standardized sheets for registration, documentation and consultation. The assessment of future primary care structures for (suspected) COVID-19 patients were heterogeneous. CONCLUSIONS: Effort, improvisation and collaboration were required for a successful and rapid implementation of measures for primary care during the initial period of the COVID-19 pandemic. Impulses for ongoing development of primary care strategies during a pandemic can be derived out of these results.

Implementation of a Standardized Initial Assessment for Demand Management in Outpatient Emergency Care in Germany: Early Qualitative Process Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Inadequate assessment of the severity and urgency of medical problems is one of the factors contributing to unnecessary emergency department (ED) visits. The implementation of a software-based instrument for standardized initial assessment-Standardisierte medizinische Ersteinschätzung in Deutschland (SmED) (Standardized medical Initial Assessment in Germany in English)-aims to support health care professionals and steer patients toward the right health care provider. This study aimed to explore the implementation process of SmED from a user perspective. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the overall perception of SmED by health care professionals using the software, to examine to what extent SmED influences the workload and work routines of health care professionals, and to determine which factors are associated with the use of SmED. METHODS: An early qualitative process evaluation on the basis of interviews was carried out alongside the implementation of SmED in 26 outpatient emergency care services within 11 federal states in Germany. Participants were 30 health care professionals who work with SmED either at the joint central contact points of the outpatient emergency care service and the EDs of hospitals (ie, the Joint Counter; Gemeinsamer Tresen in German) or at the initial telephone contact points of the outpatient emergency care service (phone number 116117). Matrix-based framework analysis was applied to analyze the interview data. RESULTS: Health care professionals perceived that workload increased initially, due to additional time needed per patient. When using SmED more frequently and over a longer time period, its use became more routine and the time needed per call, per patient, decreased. SmED was perceived to support decision making regarding urgency for medical treatment, but not all types of patients were eligible. Technical problems, lack of integration with other software, and lack of practicability during peak times affected the implementation of SmED. CONCLUSIONS: Initial experiences with SmED were positive, in general, but also highlighted organizational issues that need to be addressed to enhance sustainability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00017014; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00017014.

[Quo vadis 116117? Nationwide Overview of the Status Quo and Current Changes]. / Quo vadis 116117? Bundesweiter Überblick über den Status quo und aktuelle Veränderungen.

BACKGROUND: The on-call service (emergency service) has been reachable under 116117 in Germany since 2012. Nevertheless, this number is almost unknown to most Germans. A literature review of emergency service has shown that information which can be found is often incomplete and unclear. Thus, the aim of this study was to cover the status quo regarding 116117 at the federal level in Germany. METHODS: In February 2019 all physicians working with a statutory health insurance were asked to fill in an online survey. The survey was based on a literature review regarding emergency service and on-call service at the federal level in Germany. The questionnaire covered different areas. In this paper only results regarding 116117 will be reported. Data were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: The organization and range of services as well as the qualifications of the staff are structured differently at the federal level. Services provided by 116117 are arrangements for home visits, out-of-hours service appointments, consulting, and forwarding to 112. Staff includes physician assistants, nurses, and physicians. CONCLUSION: Standardized regulations at the federal level might improve transparency. The planned extension of 116117 to include a standardized initial medical assessment as well as 24/7 accessibility could facilitate patient access to adequate medical treatment.