[17 years of the critical incident reporting and learning system "jeder-fehler-zaehlt.de" for primary care: Analysis of reports]. / 17 Jahre hausärztliches Fehlerberichts- und Lernsystem "jeder-fehler-zaehlt.de" ­ Analyse des Berichtsbestandes.

BACKGROUND: The topic of patient safety has been a subject of much discussion since the end of the last millennium. Ensuring patient safety is a central challenge in health care. An important tool to raise awareness for and learn from adverse events and thus promote patient safety are error-reporting and learning systems (Critical Incident Reporting System = CIRS). METHODS: More than 17 years after its establishment, the CIRS "jeder-fehler-zaehlt.de" (JFZ) for German primary care has undergone a revision in terms of content and technology. The revised web-based system can be used for reporting as well as for classifying and analyzing incident reports. During this process, a descriptive analysis of the current report inventory was carried out, with a focus on serious medication errors. This included all 781 valid incident reports received between September 2004 and December 2021. RESULTS: In 576 of the 781 reports (73.8%), the GP practice was directly involved in the critical incident. Among error types, process errors predominated (79.8% of the classifications, 99.1% of the reports) compared with knowledge and skills errors (20.2% of the classifications, 39.7% of the reports). Communication errors (63.0%) were the most common contributing factor to critical incidents, followed by flaws in tasks and measures (39.7%). Serious and permanent patient harm was rarely reported (8.3% of the reports), whereas temporary patient harm was more common (40.3% of the reports). Incident reports about medication errors with at least serious patient harm included, in particular, substances that affected blood clotting, corticosteroids, and opiates. DISCUSSION: Our results complement the rates that are reported internationally for error types, patient harm, and contributing factors. Serious but preventable adverse events, so-called never events, are frequently associated with the medication process in both JFZ reports and the literature. CONCLUSION: Critical incident reporting systems cannot provide accurate information about the frequency of errors in health care, but they can offer important insights into, for example, serious medication errors. Therefore, they offer both employees and healthcare institutions an opportunity for individual and institutional learning.

Initial User-Centred Design of an AI-Based Clinical Decision Support System for Primary Care.

A clinical decision support system based on different methods of artificial intelligence (AI) can support the diagnosis of patients with unclear diseases by providing tentative diagnoses as well as proposals for further steps. In a user-centred-design process, we aim to find out how general practitioners envision the user interface of an AI-based clinical decision support system for primary care. A first user-interface prototype was developed using the task model based on user requirements from preliminary work. Five general practitioners evaluated the prototype in two workshops. The discussion of the prototype resulted in categorized suggestions with key messages for further development of the AI-based clinical decision support system, such as the integration of intelligent parameter requests. The early inclusion of different user feedback facilitated the implementation of a user interface for a user-friendly decision support system.

Requirements analysis for an AI-based clinical decision support system for general practitioners: a user-centered design process.

BACKGROUND: As the first point of contact for patients with health issues, general practitioners (GPs) are frequently confronted with patients presenting with non-specific symptoms of unclear origin. This can result in delayed, prolonged or false diagnoses. To accelerate and improve the diagnosis of diseases, clinical decision support systems would appear to be an appropriate tool. The objective of the project 'Smart physician portal for patients with unclear disease' (SATURN) is to employ a user-centered design process based on the requirements analysis presented in this paper to develop an artificial Intelligence (AI)-based diagnosis support system that specifically addresses the needs of German GPs. METHODS: Requirements analysis for a GP-specific diagnosis support system was conducted in an iterative process with five GPs. First, interviews were conducted to analyze current workflows and the use of digital applications in cases of diagnostic uncertainty (as-is situation). Second, we focused on collecting and prioritizing tasks to be performed by an ideal smart physician portal (to-be situation) in a workshop. We then developed a task model with corresponding user requirements. RESULTS: Numerous GP-specific user requirements were identified concerning the tasks and subtasks: performing data entry (open system, enter patient data), reviewing results (receiving and evaluating results), discussing results (with patients and colleagues), scheduling further diagnostic procedures, referring to specialists (select, contact, make appointments), and case closure. Suggested features particularly concerned the process of screening and assessing results: e.g., the system should focus more on atypical patterns of common diseases than on rare diseases only, display probabilities of differential diagnoses, ensure sources and results are transparent, and mark diagnoses that have already been ruled out. Moreover, establishing a means of using the platform to communicate with colleagues and transferring patient data directly from electronic patient records to the system was strongly recommended. CONCLUSIONS: Essential user requirements to be considered in the development and design of a diagnosis system for primary care could be derived from the analysis. They form the basis for mockup-development and system engineering.

From niche topic to inclusion in the curriculum - design and evaluation of the elective course "climate change and health".

Objective: At the Medical Faculty of the Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, the elective course "climate change and health" was offered to students in the clinical phase of their medical studies for the first time in the winter semester 2021/22 (any unfilled places were made available to interested students studying other subjects). Despite attracting considerable attention, this topic has not yet been incorporated into the curriculum of medical studies. Our aim was therefore to teach students about climate change and discuss its effects on human health. The students evaluated the elective in terms of various factors relating to knowledge, attitudes and behavior. Project description: The elective focused on the concept of Planetary Health, with an emphasis on the health consequences of climate change, as well as possibilities for action and adaptation in clinical and practical settings. The course took place in three live, online sessions (with inputs, discussion, case studies and work in small groups), as well as online preparation and a final written assignment for which students were asked to reflect on the subject. The standardized teaching evaluation questionnaire (=didactic dimension) of Goethe University was used online to evaluate the elective, whereby the questionnaire was extended to include the measurement of changes in students' agreement with items (dimensions) relating to knowledge, attitudes and behavior (personal behavior and behavior as physicians) before and after the course (pre/post comparison). Results: Students expressed high levels of satisfaction with the course content, the presentation of the course, and the organization of the elective. This was reflected in very good to good overall ratings. The pre/post comparisons further showed a significant, positive shift in agreement ratings in almost all dimensions. The majority of respondents also wanted the topic to be firmly embedded in the medical curriculum. Conclusion: The evaluation shows that with respect to the impact of climate change on human health, the elective course had a clear influence on the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of the students. In view of the relevance of the topic, it is therefore important that this subject is included in medical curricula in the future.

Long-term effects on the quality of life following cochlear implant treatment in older patients.

PURPOSE: Even in older patients, hearing rehabilitation with a cochlear implant has become an established method for deafened or severely hearing-impaired patients. In addition to the hearing improvement, numerous other effects of CI treatment can be observed in clinical routine. In the literature, there is multiple evidence for a rapid and significant improvement in quality of life with CI treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term effects of hearing rehabilitation using CI on the quality of life in older patients (≥ 65 years). METHODS: This prospective cross-sectional study examined 84 patients between the age of 65 and 101 years who received unilateral CI treatment for the first time between one and 10 years ago. The World Health Organization Quality-of-Life Scale-Old (WHOQL-OLD) was used to determine the quality of life. The study cohort was divided into three groups to compare the quality of life over time: group I (1-3 years after CI treatment), group II (4-6 years after CI treatment), and group III (7-10 years after CI treatment). In addition, the data from this study were compared with the results of our previous study (Issing et al. 2020) in which we focused on the first 6 months after CI treatment. RESULTS: In all three groups, there was a significant improvement in monosyllabic discrimination within 1 year after CI fitting (p > 0.001). No significant differences were found between the three groups. There were no significant differences between the three groups in the WHOQOL-OLD total score (p = 0.487) or any of the other six facets. Moreover, no significant differences were found compared to the study group of our previous study 6 months after CI treatment. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the long-term stability of the improved quality of life following unilateral CI treatment in patients aged 65 years or older.

Implementation and use of mHealth home telemonitoring in adults with acute COVID-19 infection: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: mHealth refers to digital technologies that, via smartphones, mobile apps and specialised digital sensors, yield real-time assessments of patient's health status. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, these technologies enable remote patient monitoring, with the benefit of timely recognition of disease progression to convalescence, deterioration or postacute sequelae. This should enable appropriate medical interventions and facilitate recovery. Various barriers, both at patient and technology levels, have been reported, hindering implementation and use of mHealth telemonitoring. As systematised and synthesised evidence in this area is lacking, we developed this protocol for a scoping review on mHealth home telemonitoring of acute COVID-19. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We compiled a search strategy following the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome) and PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommendation for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science will be searched from 1 March 2020 to 31 August 2021. Following the title and abstract screening, we will identify, systematise and synthesise the available knowledge. Based on pilot searches, we preview three themes for descriptive evidence synthesis. The first theme relates to implementation and use of mHealth telemonitoring, including reported barriers. The second theme covers the interactions of the telemonitoring team within and between different levels of the healthcare system. The third theme addresses how this telemonitoring warrants the continuity of care, also during disease transition into deterioration or postacute sequelae. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The studied evidence is in the public domain, therefore, no specific ethics approval is required. Evidence dissemination will be via peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and reports to the policy makers.