[Telematics in ambulatory care: Exploring the nurses' perspective]. / Telematische Anwendungen in der ambulanten Pflege: Die Perspektive von Pflegekräften.

Telematics in ambulatory care: Exploring the nurses' perspective Abstract. BACKGROUND: In the context of demographic change, the use of information and communications technology in home care has the aim of ensuring the quality of nursing care in the future. The acceptance of telematic applications by all users is crucial in this regard. AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the subjective attitudes and intentions of nursing staff on telematic applications in home care. METHODS: Based on the "Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology" (UTAUT), an online survey was conducted in which nursing staff as well as nursing students throughout Germany were surveyed. 371 questionnaires have been included in the analysis. RESULTS: Nursing students as well as nurses stated inadequate information and insufficient technical competence. Referring to performance expectations, both groups hope for improving care process transparency and communication inside and outside sectors. For effort expectancy, higher costs, training efforts and technology dependency were named. CONCLUSIONS: The results show the relevance of the attitudes and demands of users for a successful implementation. In the future, training and further education should increasingly promote the technological competence of nursing staff.

Collaboration between general practitioners and social workers: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: Aim of the study is to present an overview of collaboration structures and processes between general practitioners and social workers, the target groups addressed as well the quality of available scientific literature. DESIGN: A scoping review following the guidelines of the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews). INCLUDED SOURCES AND ARTICLES: According to a pre-published protocol, three databases (PubMed, Web of Science, DZI SoLit) were searched using the participant-concept-context framework. The searches were performed on 21 January 2021 and on 10 August 2021. Literature written in English and German since the year 2000 was included. Two independent researchers screened all abstracts for collaboration between general practitioners and social workers. Articles selected were analysed regarding structures, processes, outcomes, effectiveness and patient target groups. RESULTS: A total of 72 articles from 17 countries were identified. Collaborative structures and their routine differ markedly between healthcare systems: 36 publications present collaboration structures and 33 articles allow an insight into the processual routines. For all quantitative studies, a level of evidence was assigned. Various measurements are used to determine the effectiveness of collaborations, for example, hospital admissions and professionals' job satisfaction. Case management as person-centred care for defined patient groups is a central aspect of all identified collaborations between general practitioners and social workers. CONCLUSION: This scoping review showed evidence for benefits on behalf of patients, professionals and healthcare systems by collaborations between general practitioners and social workers, yet more rigorous research is needed to better understand the impact of these collaborations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: www.osf.io/w673q.

Higher chronic stress and less satisfaction with GP communication in migrants with unemployment experience: data from the representative German DEGS1 and the GPCare-1 study.

BACKGROUND: The impact of unemployment on health is well studied. However, information on associations of unemployment, migration background and general practitioner-patient communication is scarce. METHODS: Data from the representative German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Adults (DEGS1) of individuals in working age (n = 5938) were analysed stratified by unemployment and migration background. Using official weighting factors, the prevalence of chronic stress, having ≥1 chronic disease, having a GP and GP visits in the last 12 months was determined. Multivariate regression models were analysed for associations between unemployment, migration background, and other socio-demographic characteristics with GP visits and chronic stress. Data from the General Practice Care-1 (GPCare-1) study (n = 813 patients) were analysed for differences in patient-physician communication between unemployed with and without migration background. Reverse proportional odds models were estimated for associations of unemployment and migration background with physician-patient communication. RESULTS: In the DEGS1, 21.5% had experienced unemployment (n = 1170). Of these, 31.6% had a migration background (n = 248). Compared to unemployed natives, unemployed with migration background had higher chronic stress (mean: 14.32 vs. 13.13, p = 0.02), while the prevalence of chronic disease was lower (21.7% vs. 30.2%, p = 0.03). They were less likely to have a GP (83.6% vs. 90%, p = 0.02), while GP visits were similar (mean: 3.7 vs. 3.3, p = 0.26). Migration background and unemployment experience were not associated with GP visits, while both factors were significantly associated with higher chronic stress (both: p < 0.01). In GPCare-1, 28.8% had ever experienced unemployment (n = 215). Of these, 60 had a migration background (28.6%). The unemployed with migration background reported less frequently that the GP gives them enough space to describe personal strains (46.5% vs. 58.2%; p = 0.03), and that their problems are taken very seriously by their GP (50.8% vs. 73.8%; p = 0.04). In multivariate analyses, migration background showed a lower probability of having enough space to describe personal strains and feeling that problems were taken very seriously. CONCLUSION: Unemployment experience and migration background were associated with higher chronic stress. Only migration background was associated with less satisfaction regarding physician-patient communication.

More GP contacts and poorer health of informal caregivers with low socioeconomic status in Germany: results from the population-based DEGS1 and the cross-sectional GPCare-1 study.

OBJECTIVES: Informal caregivers are known to have poorer mental health. Risk factors for caregiver burden include low education, female gender, cohabitation with the care recipient and lack of resources. General practitioners (GPs) have an important role in supporting caregivers. Drawing on data from two surveys, associations between caregivers' socioeconomic status (SES), psychophysical health and GP contacts are analysed. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. The study draws on data from two surveys (German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Adults, DEGS1 and General Practice Care-1, GPCare-1). SETTING: Germany. PARTICIPANTS: DEGS1: German general population (18+ years) n=7987. GPCare-1: general practice patients (18+ years) n=813. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Psychophysical health, GP contacts and communication. METHODS: Using representative DEGS1 data, the prevalence of informal caregivers, caregivers' burden, chronic stress, various health conditions and frequency of GP contacts were evaluated stratified by SES. Data from the GPCare-1 study addressed caregivers' experiences and communication preferences with GPs. RESULTS: In the DEGS1, the prevalence of caregivers was 6.5%. Compared with non-caregivers, caregivers scored significantly higher for chronic stress (15.45 vs 11.90), self-reported poor health (37.6% vs 23.7%) and GP visits last year (3.95 vs 3.11), while lifestyle and chronic diseases were similar. Compared with caregivers with medium/high SES, those with low SES had a significantly lower prevalence of high/medium caregiver burden (47.9% vs 67.7%) but poorer self-reported health (56.9% vs 33.0%), while other characteristics did not differ. In the GPCare-1 study, the prevalence of caregivers was 12.6%. The majority of them felt that their GP takes their problems seriously (63.6%) without difference by SES. CONCLUSION: Caregivers with low SES constitute an especially high-risk group for psychological strain, requiring special GP attention to support their needs.