Primary care patients' experiences of video consultations for depression and anxiety: a qualitative interview study embedded in a randomized feasibility trial.

BACKGROUND: Integrated mental health care models that provide rapid access to video consultations with mental health specialists for primary care patients are a promising short-term, low-threshold treatment option and may reduce waiting times for specialist care. This qualitative study, nested within a randomized feasibility trial, aimed to explore participants' views on this type of care model, its influence on the lived experience of patients, and barriers and facilitators for its delivery. METHODS: In five primary care practices, 50 adults with depression and/or anxiety were randomly assigned to either an integrated care model (maximum of five video consultations with a mental health specialist) or usual care (primary care or another treatment option). Prior to obtaining the trial results, interviews were held with participants who had received video consultations. Interviews were transcribed and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Twenty of the 23 patients who received video consultations participated in the interviews. Patients engaged well with the care model and reported positive effects on their most pressing needs, while denying safety concerns. Generally, they perceived the usability of video consultations as high, and temporary connectivity failures were not considered a substantial barrier. We identified two key mechanisms of impacts on the patients' lived experience: fast access to specialist mental healthcare and the emerging rapport with the specialist. In particular, patients with no prior mental healthcare experience indicated that familiarity with the primary practice and their physician as a gatekeeper were important facilitators of proactive treatment. CONCLUSIONS: From the patients' perspective, mental health care models integrating video consultations with mental health specialists into primary care are linked to positive lived experiences. Our findings imply that primary care physicians should promote their role as gatekeepers to (1) actively engage patients, (2) apply integrated care models to provide a familiar and safe environment for conducting mental health care video consultations, and (3) be able to regularly assess whether certain patients need in-person services. Scaling up such models may be worthwhile in real-world service settings, where primary care physicians are faced with high workloads and limited specialist services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS00015812.

Prevalence and patient-rated relevance of complexity factors in medication regimens of community-dwelling patients with polypharmacy.

PURPOSE: To describe the prevalence of complexity factors in the medication regimens of community-dwelling patients with more than five drugs and to evaluate the relevance of these factors for individual patients. METHODS: Data were derived from the HIOPP-6 trial, a controlled study conducted in 9 general practices which evaluated an electronic tool to detect and reduce complexity of drug treatment. The prevalence of complexity factors was based on the results of the automated analysis of 139 patients' medication data. The relevance assessment was based on the patients' rating of each factor in an interview (48 patients included for analysis). RESULTS: A median of 5 (range 0-21) complexity factors per medication regimen were detected and at least one factor was observed in 131 of 139 patients. Almost half of these patients found no complexity factor in their medication regimen relevant. CONCLUSION: In most medication regimens, complexity factors could be identified automatically, yet less than 15% of factors were indeed relevant for patients as judged by themselves. When assessing complexity of medication regimens, one should especially consider factors that are both particularly frequent and often challenging for patients, such as use of inhalers or tablet splitting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The HIOPP-6 trial was registered retrospectively on May 17, 2021, in the German Clinical Trials register under DRKS-ID DRKS00025257.

Opinion seeking behaviour of healthcare providers in ambulatory cardiovascular care in Germany: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare providers' inclination to seek or lead other providers' opinions on clinical topics may influence healthcare practices, particularly regarding their alignment across different providers in controversial domains. This study aimed to explore opinion-seeking behaviours of general practitioners and their impacts on clinical opinions in ambulatory cardiovascular care in Germany. METHODS: Between 2019 and 2021, we performed a written survey in two samples of general practitioners and one sample of self-employed cardiologists in three German states. The general practitioners were asked to identify a person they deemed influential on their views on cardiovascular conditions. Their self-perceived opinion leadership and opinion seeking behaviours were then measured, using a validated 12-item-questionnaire. General practitioners and cardiologists were requested to indicate their agreement with three potentially controversial aspects of cardiovascular ambulatory care. Potential impacts on the general practitioners' views, including local cardiologists' opinions, were examined using multi-level linear regression models. RESULTS: A total of 129 general practitioners and 113 cardiologists returned the questionnaire. 68.50% of general practitioners named an opinion leader, mainly cardiologists outside of their practice. General practitioners perceived themselves as opinion seeking and as opinion leading at the same time. Views on the presented controversial topics were mixed among both general practitioners and cardiologists. Self-reported opinion leadership behaviour of general practitioners was associated with their views on one of the three topics. No such associations were found for opinion seeking behaviours and the views of local cardiologists. CONCLUSION: While most general practitioners named a cardiovascular opinion leader and saw themselves as opinion seeking regarding cardiovascular issues, they simultaneously perceived themselves as opinion leading, suggesting that opinion leadership and opinion seeking are not mutually exclusive concepts. The views of local cardiologists were not associated with the general practitioners' view, suggesting that local medical specialists do not necessarily influence the surrounding opinion seekers' views per se. TRIAL REGISTRATION: We registered the study prospectively on 7 November 2019 at the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS, www.drks.de ) under ID no. DRKS00019219.

Surveillance and care for confirmed and suspected patients with COVID-19 in general practice (CovidCare): study protocol for an observational trial.

BACKGROUND: A SARS-CoV-2 infection can lead from asymptomatic through to critical disease in a dynamic and unpredictable course within a few days. The challenge in outpatient monitoring the highly contagious COVID-19 disease during the ongoing pandemic is to filter severe courses followed by admission to hospital with the aim of preventing an overburdening of clinics. However, little is known of the effect of risk factors on the course of the infection of outpatient patients. To support general practices in managing high risk patients, we designed a COVID-19 surveillance and care tool (CovidCare). It includes an initial assessment of yet known risk factors and symptoms and a continuous telephone monitoring of signs and symptoms. This study aims to investigate the effects of different risk factors on the course of the COVID-19 disease, utilisation of different health care services and to gain insights into the utilisation of CovidCare in general practices. METHODS: We will conduct a multi-centered prospective, longitudinal non-controlled observational trial of COVID-19 patients in general practices. Overall, 700 GPs who participate in general-practice centered care by the AOK Baden-Württemberg (large German sickness fund) are eligible and will be invited for study participation, including adult, outpatient COVID-19 patients (or urgent suspicion and ≥ 50 years) with at least one additional known risk factor, who participate in general-practice centered care. The primary outcome is hospitalisation due to COVID-19. Secondary outcomes are diagnosis of pneumonia, utilisation of palliative care, mortality rate, anxiety and identification of predictive risk factors. Quantitative data analysis will focus on valid descriptive figures and mixed regression models. The accompanying process evaluation is based on interviews and questionnaires from general practice staff and patients. The analysis of the process evaluation is descriptive and explorative. DISCUSSION: The use of the COVID-19 surveillance and care tool is expected to encourage the provision of structured quality of care during the ongoing pandemic. This trial will provide an understanding of the COVID-19-disease and the effect of several risk factors on the course of the disease and health care utilisation. The results can be used for a better management of the COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00022054 .

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.

Cooperation networks of ambulatory health care providers: exploration of mechanisms that influence coordination and uptake of recommended cardiovascular care (ExKoCare): a mixed-methods study protocol.

BACKGROUND: As the number of elderly and multimorbid patients increases, healthcare has become more complex. This requires good coordination of treatment and care given the various  health care professionals involved (e.g. general practitioners, medical specialists, physicians' assistants). Lack of coordination jeopardizes seamless, evidence-based treatment and care, and eventually reduces clinical effectiveness. The aim of the study is a) to describe and explore information transfer and interprofessional collaboration in ambulatory cardiac care, b) to describe and explore the role of provider networks from the perspective of patients and providers, focusing on healthcare coordination and the uptake of recommended practices. METHODS: Two related studies are planned: a) an observational study of healthcare provider networks, involving 600 patients with chronic (atherosclerosis-related) cardiovascular disease from 40 general practices and up to 320 healthcare providers (general practitioners, medical specialist, physicians' assistants), and b) a qualitative interview study with up to 80 healthcare professionals and patients. Furthermore, we will analyse claims data of a large German health insurer to explore provider networks in ambulatory cardiac care. DISCUSSION: The project aims to provide insight into factors, processes and mechanisms of information transfer and interprofessional collaboration, which affect seamless, evidence-based healthcare practice. This will contribute to the design of strategies for improving health care practice and to the development of measures of coordination for future research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: We registered the study prospectively on 7 November 2019 at the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS, www.drks.de) under ID no. DRKS00019219 .

Perspectives of Psychotherapists and Psychiatrists on Mental Health Care Integration Within Primary Care Via Video Consultations: Qualitative Preimplementation Study.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with mental disorders remain untreated. Video-based mental health care demonstrates comparable effectiveness to face-to-face treatments and is a promising mode for delivering specialized care within primary care. Nevertheless, professionals struggle with implementing video consultations in their daily practice. Specifically, little is known about mental health specialists' acceptance of mental health video consultations in routine practice. The PROVIDE (ImPROving cross-sectoral collaboration between primary and psychosocial care: An implementation study on VIDEo consultations) project aims to improve cross-sectoral collaboration between primary and psychosocial care through implementing video consultations in primary care. To increase the uptake of video consultations, it is crucial to account for necessary prerequisites and to tailor interventions to the needs of the target group prior to implementation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the acceptance of video consultations embedded in primary care from the perspectives of mental health specialists in Germany. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative, exploratory, preimplementation study in urban and rural counties. We conducted three semistructured focus groups with 11 mental health specialists. We used qualitative content analysis combining an inductive-deductive approach, applying the Tailored Implementation in Chronic Diseases (TICD) framework to the text material, which comprises individual health professional factors; patient factors; professional interactions; incentives and resources; capacity for organizational change; social, political, and legal factors; and guideline factors. RESULTS: Against the background of long waiting times and a shortage of mental health specialists, especially in rural areas, participants valued video consultations as a potential means to improve access to mental health care. With respect to the TICD framework domains, the participants most often discussed individual health professional factors, followed by patient factors. All participants highlighted the importance of a trusting relationship between the patient and the therapist and doubted whether such a relationship could be established through video consultations (11/11, 100%). However, participants considered mental health specialist video consultations to be particularly suited for patients in rural areas, those with impaired mobility, and those who may otherwise remain untreated (6/11, 55%). Most participants expected video consultations to help the aforementioned patient groups avoid tedious searching for an available therapist and save on travel time and, therefore, improve access to specialized care for patients (7/11, 64%). Moreover, the participants expected video consultations to improve collaboration with the family physician (6/11, 55%). Finally, participants identified organizational aspects, such as reliable scheduling, the duration of the individual consultation (9/11, 82%), and reimbursement conditions (7/11, 67%), as key drivers for the acceptance and adoption of the model. CONCLUSIONS: While mental health specialists expect video consultations to improve access to specialized care for some patients, they consistently wonder whether such consultations can establish a trusting patient-therapist relationship. When implementing video consultations, these concerns should be addressed by training providers in managing technology-based treatment settings, with extra consideration for fostering the patients' and therapists' engagement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00012487; https://tinyurl.com/uhg2one.

Development of an algorithm to detect and reduce complexity of drug treatment and its technical realisation.

BACKGROUND: The increasing complexity of current drug therapies jeopardizes patient adherence. While individual needs to simplify a medication regimen vary from patient to patient, a straightforward approach to integrate the patients' perspective into decision making for complexity reduction is still lacking. We therefore aimed to develop an electronic, algorithm-based tool that analyses complexity of drug treatment and supports the assessment and consideration of patient preferences and needs regarding the reduction of complexity of drug treatment. METHODS: Complexity factors were selected based on literature and expert rating and specified for integration in the automated assessment. Subsequently, distinct key questions were phrased and allocated to each complexity factor to guide conversation with the patient and personalize the results of the automated assessment. Furthermore, each complexity factor was complemented with a potential optimisation measure to facilitate drug treatment (e.g. a patient leaflet). Complexity factors, key questions, and optimisation strategies were technically realized as tablet computer-based application, tested, and adapted iteratively until no further technical or content-related errors occurred. RESULTS: In total, 61 complexity factors referring to the dosage form, the dosage scheme, additional instructions, the patient, the product, and the process were considered relevant for inclusion in the tool; 38 of them allowed for automated detection. In total, 52 complexity factors were complemented with at least one key question for preference assessment and at least one optimisation measure. These measures included 29 recommendations for action for the health care provider (e.g. to suggest a dosage aid), 27 training videos, 44 patient leaflets, and 5 algorithms to select and suggest alternative drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Both the set-up of an algorithm and its technical realisation as computer-based app was successful. The electronic tool covers a wide range of different factors that potentially increase the complexity of drug treatment. For the majority of factors, simple key questions could be phrased to include the patients' perspective, and, even more important, for each complexity factor, specific measures to mitigate or reduce complexity could be defined.

Improving continuity of patient care across sectors: study protocol of a quasi-experimental multi-centre study regarding an admission and discharge model in Germany (VESPEERA).

BACKGROUND: Hospitalisations are a critical event in the care process. Insufficient communication and uncoordinated follow-up care often impede the recovery process of the patient resulting in a high number of rehospitalisations and increased health care costs. The overall aim of this study is the development, implementation and evaluation of a structured programme (VESPEERA) to improve the admission and discharge process. METHODS: We will conduct an open quasi-experimental multi-centre study with four intervention arms. A cohort selected from insurance claims data will serve as a control group reflecting usual care. The intervention will be implemented in 25 hospital departments and 115 general practices in 9 districts in Baden-Wurttemberg. Eligibility criteria for patients are: age > 18 years, hospital admission or hospitalisation, insurance at the sickness fund "AOK Baden-Wurttemberg", enrolment in general practice-centred care contract. Each study arm will receive different intervention components based on the point of study enrolment and the patient's medical need. The interventions comprise a) a structured assessment in the general practice prior to admission resulting in an admission letter b) a discharge conversation by phone between hospital and general practice, c) a structured assessment and care plan post-discharge and d) telephone monitoring for patients with a high risk of rehospitalisation. The assessments are supported by a software tool ("CareCockpit"), originally developed for structured case management programmes. The primary outcome (rehospitalisation due to the same indication within 90 days) and a range of secondary outcomes (rehospitalisation due to the same indication within 30 days; hospitalisations due to ambulatory care-sensitive conditions; delayed prescription of medication and medical products/ devices and referral to other health practitioner/s after discharge; utilisation of emergency or rescue services within 3 months; average care cost per year and patient participating in the VESPEERA programme) and quality indicators will be determined based on insurance claims data and CareCockpit data. Additionally, a patient survey on satisfaction with cross-sectoral care and health related quality of life will be conducted. DISCUSSION: Based on the results, area-wide implementation in usual care is well sought. This study will contribute to an improvement of cross-sectoral care during the admission and discharge process. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS00014294 on DRKS / Universal Trial Number (UTN): U1111-1210-9657, Date of registration 12/06/2018.

[Psychosomatic Specialist Consultation in the General Practitioner's Office - A New Model of Integrated Care]. / Psychosomatische Sprechstunde in der Hausarztpraxis ­ ein neues Kooperationsmodell von Psychosomatik und Allgemeinmedizin.

A high number of patients with mental health disorders currently do not receive minimally adequate treatment, but remain solely in general practice. This is often due to long waiting times for psychotherapy, patient related barriers or diagnostic insecurity. For this reason, we have developed a care model that is applied directly in the general practitioner's (GP) office and is open to any form of psychosomatic disorder. The cornerstone of the model consists of a psychosomatic specialist consultation in the GP's office. Preliminary results concerning utilization and the target population show a high level of acceptance among patients, GPs, and psychosomatic specialists.

Novel oral anticoagulants in primary care in patients with atrial fibrillation: a cross-sectional comparison before and after their introduction.

BACKGROUND: Novel oral anticoagulation (NOAC) has been introduced in recent years, but data on use in atrial fibrillation (AF) in primary care setting is scarce. In Germany, General Practitioners are free to choose type of oral anticoagulation (OAC) in AF. Our aim was to explore changes in prescription-rates of OAC in German primary care before and after introduction of NOAC on the market. METHODS: Data of a representative morbidity registration project in primary care in Germany (CONTENT) were analysed. Patients with AF in 2011 or 2014 were included (before and after broad market authorization of NOAC, respectively). We defined three independent groups: patients from 2011 without follow-up (group A), patients from 2014 but without previous record in 2011 (group B) and patients with AF and records in 2011 and 2014 (group C). RESULTS: 2642 patients were included. Group A (n = 804) and B (n = 755) were comparable regarding patient characteristics. 87.3% of group A and 84.8% of group B had CHA2DS2-VASc-Score ≥ 2, indicating a need for oral anticoagulation (OAC). Prescription of OAC increased from 23.1% (n = 186) to 42.8% (n = 323, p < .01) with stable use of vitamin-k-antagonist (22.6-24.9%). NOAC increased from 0.6 to 19.2% (p < .01). Monotherapy with Acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) decreased from 15.3% (n = 123) to 8.2% (n = 62, p < .01). In group C (n = 1083), OAC increased from 35.3 to 55.4% (p < .01), with stable prescription rate of vitamin-k-antagonist (34.4-35.7%). NOAC increased from 0.9 to 21.5% (p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: In summary, our study showed a significant increase of OAC over time, which is fostered by the use of NOAC but with a stable rate of VKA and a sharp decrease of ASA. Patients on VKA are rarely switched to NOAC, but new patients with AF are more likely to receive NOAC.

Challenges in supporting lay carers of patients at the end of life: results from focus group discussions with primary healthcare providers.

BACKGROUND: Family caregivers (FCGs) of patients at the end of life (EoL) cared for at home receive support from professional and non-professional care providers. Healthcare providers in general practice play an important role as they coordinate care and establish contacts between the parties concerned. To identify potential intervention targets, this study deals with the challenges healthcare providers in general practice face in EoL care situations including patients, caregivers and networks. METHODS: Focus group discussions with general practice teams in Germany were conducted to identify barriers to and enablers of an optimal support for family caregivers. Focus group discussions were analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: Nineteen providers from 11 general practices took part in 4 focus group discussions. Participants identified challenges in communication with patients, caregivers and within the professional network. Communication with patients and caregivers focused on non-verbal messages, communicating at an appropriate time and perceiving patient and caregiver as a unit of care. Practice teams perceive themselves as an important part of the healthcare network, but also report difficulties in communication and cooperation with other healthcare providers. CONCLUSION: Healthcare providers in general practice identified relational challenges in daily primary palliative care with potential implications for EoL care. Communication and collaboration with patients, caregivers and among healthcare providers give opportunities for improving palliative care with a focus on the patient-caregiver dyad. It is insufficient to demand a (professional) support network; existing structures need to be recognized and included into the care.

Do Self-Management Interventions Work in Patients With Heart Failure? An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Self-management interventions are widely implemented in the care for patients with heart failure (HF). However, trials show inconsistent results, and whether specific patient groups respond differently is unknown. This individual patient data meta-analysis assessed the effectiveness of self-management interventions in patients with HF and whether subgroups of patients respond differently. METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic literature search identified randomized trials of self-management interventions. Data from 20 studies, representing 5624 patients, were included and analyzed with the use of mixed-effects models and Cox proportional-hazard models, including interaction terms. Self-management interventions reduced the risk of time to the combined end point of HF-related hospitalization or all-cause death (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-0.89), time to HF-related hospitalization (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.69-0.92), and improved 12-month HF-related quality of life (standardized mean difference, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.00-0.30). Subgroup analysis revealed a protective effect of self-management on the number of HF-related hospital days in patients <65 years of age (mean, 0.70 versus 5.35 days; interaction P=0.03). Patients without depression did not show an effect of self-management on survival (hazard ratio for all-cause mortality, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.69-1.06), whereas in patients with moderate/severe depression, self-management reduced survival (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.06-1.83, interaction P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that self-management interventions had a beneficial effect on time to HF-related hospitalization or all-cause death and HF-related hospitalization alone and elicited a small increase in HF-related quality of life. The findings do not endorse limiting self-management interventions to subgroups of patients with HF, but increased mortality in depressed patients warrants caution in applying self-management strategies in these patients.

Medical Assistant-Based Care Management for High-Risk Patients in Small Primary Care Practices: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with multiple chronic conditions are at high risk for potentially avoidable hospitalizations, which may be reduced by care coordination and self-management support. Medical assistants are an increasingly available resource for patient care in primary care practices. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether protocol-based care management delivered by medical assistants improves care in patients at high risk for future hospitalization in primary care. DESIGN: Two-year cluster randomized clinical trial. (Current Controlled Trials: ISRCTN56104508). SETTING: 115 primary care practices in Germany. PATIENTS: 2076 patients with type 2 diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or chronic heart failure and a likelihood of hospitalization in the upper quartile of the population, as predicted by an analysis of insurance data. INTERVENTION: Protocol-based care management, including structured assessment, action planning, and monitoring delivered by medical assistants, compared with usual care. MEASUREMENTS: All-cause hospitalizations at 12 months (primary outcome) and quality-of-life scores (12-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-12] and EuroQol instrument [EQ-5D]). RESULTS: Included patients had an average of 4 co-occurring chronic conditions. All-cause hospitalizations did not differ between groups at 12 months (risk ratio [RR], 1.01 [95% CI, 0.87 to 1.18]) and 24 months (RR, 0.98 [CI, 0.85 to 1.12]). Quality of life (differences, 1.16 [CI, 0.24 to 2.08] on SF-12 physical component and 1.68 [CI, 0.60 to 2.77] on SF-12 mental component) and general health (difference on EQ-5D, 0.03 [CI, 0.00 to 0.05]) improved significantly at 24 months. Intervention costs totaled $10 per patient per month. LIMITATION: Small number of primary care practices and low intensity of intervention. CONCLUSION: This low-intensity intervention did not reduce all-cause hospitalizations but showed positive effects on quality of life at reasonable costs in high-risk multimorbid patients. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: AOK Baden-Württemberg and AOK Bundesverband.

What Are Effective Program Characteristics of Self-Management Interventions in Patients With Heart Failure? An Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: To identify those characteristics of self-management interventions in patients with heart failure (HF) that are effective in influencing health-related quality of life, mortality, and hospitalizations. METHODS AND RESULTS: Randomized trials on self-management interventions conducted between January 1985 and June 2013 were identified and individual patient data were requested for meta-analysis. Generalized mixed effects models and Cox proportional hazard models including frailty terms were used to assess the relation between characteristics of interventions and health-related outcomes. Twenty randomized trials (5624 patients) were included. Longer intervention duration reduced mortality risk (hazard ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97-0.999 per month increase in duration), risk of HF-related hospitalization (hazard ratio 0.98, 95% CI 0.96-0.99), and HF-related hospitalization at 6 months (risk ratio 0.96, 95% CI 0.92-0.995). Although results were not consistent across outcomes, interventions comprising standardized training of interventionists, peer contact, log keeping, or goal-setting skills appeared less effective than interventions without these characteristics. CONCLUSION: No specific program characteristics were consistently associated with better effects of self-management interventions, but longer duration seemed to improve the effect of self-management interventions on several outcomes. Future research using factorial trial designs and process evaluations is needed to understand the working mechanism of specific program characteristics of self-management interventions in HF patients.

Correlation between patient quality of life in palliative care and burden of their family caregivers: a prospective observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Family caregivers play a key role in palliative care at home, and understanding the interdependencies in the constellation of patient, family caregivers and service providers is important. As few longitudinal studies have examined the influence of patient quality of life (QoL) in palliative care on burden of family caregivers, the aim of this study was to identify correlations between changing patient QoL and changing burden of family caregivers that need consideration in patient management. METHODS: Palliative patients with cancer in primary care evaluated their QoL (Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 15 Palliative Care, QLQ-C15-PAL). They were assessed monthly for an interval of 6 months or until death of the patient. Family caregivers reported the burden they perceived while supporting the patient (Short form of the Burden Scale for Family Caregivers, BSFC). Longitudinal data were analysed for all patients with at least 3 available assessments, considering the most recent data for participants with more than 3 assessments. Changes in patient QoL were analysed using the Friedman test. In a stepwise regression analysis, influences of change in patient QoL on changing caregiver burden were investigated. RESULTS: One hundred patients (63 men, 37 women; average age: 68 years) were enrolled in the study. The most common primary diagnoses were colon, lung or breast cancer. In 58 cases, assessments were available from both patients and caregivers. Patients reported overall quality of life increasing towards end of life, although reporting that physical functioning deteriorated. Symptoms of pain and fatigue bothered patients most. Caregiver burden was moderate and on average did not change over time. In a stepwise regression model, the difference in emotional functioning and the difference in dyspnoea showed an influence on the development of caregiver burden (explained variance of 19.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients' dyspnoea, feelings of depression and anxiety impacted on the perceived burden of family caregivers, but are manageable symptoms. Our results corroborate the need of regular assessment of patients' needs taking into account caregiver burden. In this way, general practice teams can intervene early and may more likely meet patients' needs in the end of life care process. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN78021852, assigned on 04/04/2007.

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.

Core values of employed general practitioners in Germany - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: "Core values" help to guide practice of health care delivery. The core values of general practice are described in the European definition of general practice by WONCA, e.g. a holistic, comprehensive and continuous care. They may be associated with the idea that the general practitioner is the owner of the practice rather than an employee. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to examine the core values of employed GPs in their professional setting and their practical manifestation. METHODS: From April to May 2021, we conducted 17 semi-structured telephone-interviews with employed GPs in two districts in Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany. The data were analysed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: We identified twelve core values, including values relevant to patient care and values relevant to the lives of employed GPs. Values with high relevance were job satisfaction, the professional distance from patients, collaboration and collegial exchange, comprehensive care, adequate consultation time and availability to patients. Values with heterogeneous relevance were continuity of care, waiting times and medical autonomy. The value "availability" of employed GPs to patients was associated with both patient care and personal life. The limited availability of employed GPs was accompanied by tensions between these two trends and other values. CONCLUSION: The values of employed GPs are partly consistent with the current WONCA definition of general practice. There were also indications of new values. The increase in the proportion of employed GPs implies a need to reflect on the core values of general practice, taking into account factors on the part of employed GPs, patients, and practice organisation.