[General practitioners' perspectives on the perceived effectiveness of the disease management programs for type 2 diabetes and coronary heart disease: Results of a focus group study]. / Die wahrgenommene Effektivität der Disease Management Programme für Diabetes mellitus Typ 2 und Koronare Herzkrankheit aus Sicht von Hausärzt*innen ­ Ergebnisse einer Fokusgruppenstudie.

BACKGROUND: The majority of patients in disease management programs (DMPs) for type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and coronary heart disease (CHD) in Germany are enrolled by their general practitioner (GP). The aim of this study was, in the context of upcoming DMP expansions, to elicit GPs' current experiences and opinions regarding the perceived effectiveness and acceptance of the DMPs T2DM and CHD, as well as to determine beneficial and hindering aspects of the implementation of these programs from a GP's perspective. METHODS: In August and September 2020, 20 GPs of teaching practices of the University Hospital Cologne with experiences in DMPs were interviewed in semi-structured focus group discussions. Their expectations, attitudes and opinions regarding the DMPs T2DM and CHD were evaluated and analyzed according to the content-structuring qualitative content analysis by Kuckartz. RESULTS: The DMP T2DM was rated as generally positive by the respondents due to the structured treatment including regular foot and eye examinations, close patient contacts and perceptions of improved health outcomes. The DMP CHD was rated more negatively by the respondents because of a high and partly unnecessary documentation workload and limited therapeutic freedom, leading to a perceived ineffectiveness for patients' health outcomes. Thus, there was a discrepancy in the perceived effectiveness of the examined DMPs, causing a lower acceptance of the DMP CHD. Therefore, some of the respondents tended to enroll fewer patients into the DMP CHD or to drop out of the DMP CHD. DISCUSSION: In order to increase the acceptance and sustainability of DMPs some elements of the DMP CHD as well as the remuneration and the documentation need to be reconsidered. Additionally, future studies on the acceptance of DMPs should differentiate between different DMPs in order to generate valid results.

Efficacy of a computer based discontinuation strategy to reduce PPI prescriptions: a multicenter cluster-randomized controlled trial.

Deprescribing of inappropriate long-term proton pump inhibitors (PPI) is challenging and there is a lack of useful methods for general practitioners to tackle this. The objective of this randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of the electronic decision aid tool arriba-PPI on reduction of long-term PPI intake. Participants (64.5 ± 12.9 years; 54.4% women) with a PPI intake of at least 6 months were randomized to receive either consultation with arriba-PPI from their general practitioner (n = 1256) or treatment as usual (n = 1131). PPI prescriptions were monitored 6 months before, 6 and 12 months after study initiation. In 49.2% of the consultations with arriba-PPI, the general practitioners and their patients made the decision to reduce or discontinue PPI intake. At 6 months, there was a significant reduction by 22.3% (95% CI 18.55 to 25.98; p < 0.0001) of defined daily doses (DDD) of PPI. A reduction of 3.3% (95% CI - 7.18 to + 0.62) was observed in the control group. At 12 months, the reduction of DDD-PPI remained stable in intervention patients (+ 3.5%, 95% CI - 0.99 to + 8.03), whereas control patients showed a reduction of DDD-PPI (- 10.2%, 95% CI - 6.01 to - 14.33). Consultation with arriba-PPI led to reduced prescription rates of PPI in primary care practices. Arriba-PPI can be a helpful tool for general practitioners to start a conversation with their patients about risks of long-term PPI intake, reduction or deprescribing unnecessary PPI medication.

Exploring stakeholders' perspectives on the adaptation of the Living Lab approach to dementia care: A qualitative study.

Collaborative research can promote knowledge translation and help to link care practice and research. Academic-practice partnerships enable joint research projects in collaboration between care professionals, researchers, patients, and other stakeholders. This qualitative study was conducted during the adaptation phase of the Living Lab Dementia, an academic-practice partnership for collaborative research on long-term dementia care. The aim was to explore stakeholders' perspectives on linking care practice and research in a sustainable, research-focused partnership. Data were collected in fifteen qualitative interviews with representatives from three stakeholder groups: nursing care professionals, people with dementia, and nursing researchers. Thematic Framework Analysis resulted in five themes: (1) Access, (2) Expectations, (3) Shaping the collaboration, (4) Linking Pins, and (5) Participation. The findings suggest that care professionals expect support in implementing research results into practice. Researchers should take the lead in shaping the collaboration and create opportunities for stakeholders to get involved.

Are people interested in receiving advice from their general practitioner on how to protect their health during heatwaves? A survey of the German population.

OBJECTIVE: Climate change increases the frequency, intensity and length of heatwaves, which puts a particular strain on the health of vulnerable population groups. General practitioners (GPs) could reach these people and provide advice on protective health behaviour against heat. Data is lacking on whether and what topic of GP advice people are interested in, and whether specific person characteristics are associated with such interests. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, nationwide, face-to-face household survey, conducted during winter 2022/2023. SETTING: Germany. PARTICIPANTS: Population-based sample of 4212 respondents (aged 14-96 years), selected by using multistratified random sampling (50%) combined with multiquota sampling (50%). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Interest in receiving GP advice on health protection during heatwaves (yes/no), and the topic people find most important (advice on drinking behaviour, nutrition, cooling, cooling rooms, physical activity or medication management). Associations between predefined person characteristics and the likelihood of interest were estimated using adjusted logistic regressions. RESULTS: A total of 4020 respondents had GP contact and provided data on the outcome measure. Of these, 23% (95% CI=22% to 25%) expressed interest in GP advice. The likelihood of expressing interest was positively associated with being female, older age (particularly those aged 75+ years: 38% were interested), having a lower level of educational attainment, having a migration background, living in a more urban area, and living in a single-person household. It was negatively associated with increasing income. Advice on medication management received highest interest (25%). CONCLUSIONS: During winter season 2022/2023, around one quarter of the German population with GP contact-and around 40% of those aged 75+ years-was estimated to have a stated interest in receiving GP advice on protective health behaviour during heatwaves, especially on medication management. Climate change is creating new demands for healthcare provision in general practice. This study provides initial relevant information for research and practice aiming to address these demands.

The influence of patient-centered teaching on medical students' stigmatization of the mentally ill.

Aim: Stigmatization by healthcare workers poses a challenge to providing care to the mentally ill. Bedside teaching during undergraduate medical education offers students an opportunity to directly interact with patients with a range of psychiatric disorders and thereby gather reflective experience. The present study investigates if this supervised contact with mentally ill patients during a one-week clinical course on psychosomatic medicine leads to stigma reduction in medical students. The factors influencing stigmatization were also investigated. Method: This was a prospective, non-randomized, controlled interventional study done in the 2019/20 winter semester involving fourth-year medical students who attended a week-long practical block on psychosomatic medicine (intervention group). This group was compared to students who had attended a week-long practical block with a somatic focus during the same time period (control group). Stigmatization was measured before and immediately upon completion of the week using the MICA-4 scale. Data on age, sex, experience with the mentally ill, interest in psychiatry/psychosomatics, and sense of self-worth were also gathered prior to starting the practical block. Analysis of the sample of 143 students with a complete basic data set was carried out using mixed ANOVA, multiple linear regression and moderator analysis. Results: In the context of clinical teaching with psychiatric patients, the stigmatization of the mentally ill among medical students decreased significantly more in the intervention group compared to the students in the control group who received instruction on somatic topics (p=.019, η2p=.04). In addition, being female, having previous experience with the mentally ill and general interest in the subjects of psychiatry or psychosomatics at T0 associated with lower stigma. In contrast, stigmatization was increased at the beginning of the study in males and those with low self-esteem. A moderating effect of the factors on stigma reduction was not seen. Conclusion: Undergraduate clinical instruction that enables direct contact and reflective experiences with the mentally ill leads to a reduction in the stigmatizing attitudes held by medical students toward the mentally ill. This underscores the need to have practical clinical instruction using patients.

The role of qualification and quality management in the prescription of antipsychotics and potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) in nursing home residents in Germany: results of the HIOPP-3-iTBX study.

BACKGROUND: Nursing home residents (NHR) show high rates of polypharmacy. The HIOPP-3-iTBX study is the first cRCT on medication optimization in nursing homes (NH) in Germany. The intervention did not result in a reduction of PIM and/or antipsychotics. This analysis looks at structure quality in the HIOPP-3-iTBX study participants. AIMS: Evaluation of structure quality as part of a cluster-randomized controlled intervention study. METHODS: Structure quality in multiprofessional teams from n = 44 NH (n = 44 NH directors, n = 91 family doctors (FD), and n = 52 pharmacies with n = 62 pharmacists) was assessed using self-designed questionnaires at baseline. Main aspects of the questionnaires related to the qualification of participants, quality management, the medication process and size of the facilities. All completed questionnaires were included. number of PIM/antipsychotics was drawn from the baseline medication analysis in 692 NHR. Data were analyzed by descriptive statistics and mixed model logistic regression. RESULTS: The presence of a nurse with one of the additional qualifications pain nurse or Zertifiziertes Curriculum (Zercur) Geriatrie in the participating NH was associated with a lower risk for the prescription of PIM/antipsychotics. No association between any characteristic in the other participants at baseline was observed. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION: The results support the known role of nursing qualification in the quality and safety of care. Further studies need to look more closely at how use is made of the additional qualifications within the multiprofessional teams. Perspectively, the results can contribute to the development of quality standards in NH in Germany.

HbA1c as a shared treatment goal in type 2 diabetes? A secondary analysis of the DEBATE trial.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a major health problem in the western world. Despite a widespread implementation of integrated care programs there are still patients with poorly controlled T2DM. Shared goal setting within the process of Shared Decision Making (SDM) may increase patient's compliance and adherence to treatment regimen. In our secondary analysis of the cluster-randomized controlled DEBATE trial, we investigated if patients with shared vs. non-shared HbA1c treatment goal, achieve their glycemic goals. METHODS: In a German primary care setting, we collected data before intervention at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 months. Patients with T2DM with an HbA1c ≥ 8.0% (64 mmol/mol) at the time of recruitment and complete data at baseline and after 24 months were eligible for the presented analyses. Using a generalized estimating equation analysis, we analysed the association between the achievement of HbA1c goals at 24 months based on their shared vs. non-shared status, age, sex, education, partner status, controlled for baseline HbA1c and insulin therapy. RESULTS: From N = 833 recruited patients at baseline, n = 547 (65.7%) from 105 General Practitioners (GPs) were analysed. 53.4% patients were male, 33.1% without a partner, 64.4% had a low educational level, mean age was 64.6 (SD 10.6), 60.7% took insulin at baseline, mean baseline HbA1c was 9.1 (SD 1.0). For 287 patients (52.5%), the GPs reported to use HbA1c as a shared goal, for 260 patients (47.5%) as a non-shared goal. 235 patients (43.0%) reached the HbA1c goal after two years, 312 patients (57.0%) missed it. Multivariable analysis shows that shared vs. non-shared HbA1c goal setting, age, sex, and education are not associated with the achievement of the HbA1c goal. However, patients living without a partner show a higher risk of missing the goal (p = .003; OR 1.89; 95% CI 1.25-2.86). CONCLUSIONS: Shared goal setting with T2DM patients targeting on HbA1c-levels had no significant impact on goal achievement. It may be assumed, that shared goal setting on patient-related clinical outcomes within the process of SDM has not been fully captured yet. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered at ISRCTN registry under the reference ISRCTN70713571.

Family Conferences to Facilitate Deprescribing in Older Outpatients With Frailty and With Polypharmacy: The COFRAIL Cluster Randomized Trial.

Importance: For older adults with frailty syndrome, reducing polypharmacy may have utility as a safety-promoting treatment option. Objective: To investigate the effects of family conferences on medication and clinical outcomes in community-dwelling older adults with frailty receiving polypharmacy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted from April 30, 2019, to June 30, 221, at 110 primary care practices in Germany. The study included community-dwelling adults aged 70 years or older with frailty syndrome, daily use of at least 5 different medications, a life expectancy of at least 6 months, and no moderate or severe dementia. Interventions: General practitioners (GPs) in the intervention group received 3 training sessions on family conferences, a deprescribing guideline, and a toolkit with relevant nonpharmacologic interventions. Three GP-led family conferences for shared decision-making involving the participants and family caregivers and/or nursing services were subsequently held per patient at home over a period of 9 months. Patients in the control group received care as usual. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the number of hospitalizations within 12 months, as assessed by nurses during home visits or telephone interviews. Secondary outcomes included the number of medications, the number of European Union list of the number of potentially inappropriate medication (EU[7]-PIM) for older people, and geriatric assessment parameters. Both per-protocol and intention-to-treat analyses were conducted. Results: The baseline assessment included 521 individuals (356 women [68.3%]; mean [SD] age, 83.5 [6.17] years). The intention-to-treat analysis with 510 patients showed no significant difference in the adjusted mean (SD) number of hospitalizations between the intervention group (0.98 [1.72]) and the control group (0.99 [1.53]). In the per-protocol analysis including 385 individuals, the mean (SD) number of medications decreased from 8.98 (3.56) to 8.11 (3.21) at 6 months and to 8.49 (3.63) at 12 months in the intervention group and from 9.24 (3.44) to 9.32 (3.59) at 6 months and to 9.16 (3.42) at 12 months in the control group, with a statistically significant difference at 6 months in the mixed-effect Poisson regression model (P = .001). After 6 months, the mean (SD) number of EU(7)-PIMs was significantly lower in the intervention group (1.30 [1.05]) than in the control group (1.71 [1.25]; P = .04). There was no significant difference in the mean number of EU(7)-PIMs after 12 months. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cluster randomized clinical trial with older adults taking 5 or more medications, the intervention consisting of GP-led family conferences did not achieve sustainable effects in reducing the number of hospitalizations or the number of medications and EU(7)-PIMs after 12 months. Trial Registration: German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00015055.

Patients' perspectives on a patient-oriented electronic decision support tool to reduce overuse of proton pump inhibitors (arriba-PPI): a qualitative study in primary care.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate patients' perspectives and their experiences with a consultation involving a computer-assisted and patient-centered discontinuation strategy (arriba-PPI tool) as part of a German multicenter study on reducing the prescription of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). METHODS: Qualitative in-depth telephone interviews on proton pump inhibitors with patients who had received an arriba-PPI tool-based counseling by their general practitioner (GP). A random sample of 30 patients was taken from study participants. Interviews were conducted in 2020 and analyzed using a thematic qualitative text analysis. RESULTS: Although this was meant to be the key to shared decision making with regard to PPI reduction, study participants mostly did not recall the visual features of the tool. However, a few patients remembered them very clearly. Above all, patients appreciated a trustful relationship with the GP as well as comprehensive, individualized counseling. CONCLUSION: Application of the arriba-PPI tool can support the decision process but can also hinder the consultation process if the tool is not properly embedded in the consultation. GPs using the arriba-PPI tool to support the shared decision-making process should consider the patients' and their own expectations on the benefit of the visual representation of the tool.

Diabetes-related research priorities of people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes: a cross-sectional study in Germany.

To investigate (i) the importance and priorities of research objectives for people with type 1 (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes (T2DM); (ii) subgroups with specific research priorities; (iii) associated factors (e.g., sociodemographic characteristics) of the subgroups. The cross-sectional survey was conducted in 2018 using data from 869 respondents (29.0% response, 31.2% female, mean age 61.3 years, 62.7% T2DM) from a German statutory health insurance population. Diabetes-related research priorities were assessed with a questionnaire. Subgroups and associated factors were identified using latent class analysis. Three subgroups were found in T1DM: (1) high priority for the research topic 'healing diabetes' and moderate priority for the research topic 'prevention of long-term complications', (2) priorities for simplifying handling (high) and stress reduction (moderate), (3) priorities for healing diabetes (high) and simplifying handling (high). Three subgroups were found in T2DM: (1) priorities for simplifying handling (moderate), diabetes prevention (moderate) and prevention of long-term complications (moderate), (2) priorities for stress reduction (high) and diabetes prevention (moderate), (3) priorities for simplifying handling (high) and stress reduction (high). Classes differed in age and HbA1c. Knowledge about research priorities enables researchers to align their work with the needs of people with diabetes.

Development of a deprescribing manual for frail older people for use in the COFRAIL study and in primary care.

Introduction: Many older adults are affected by multimorbidity and subsequent polypharmacy which is associated with adverse outcomes. This is especially relevant for frail older patients. Polypharmacy may be reduced via deprescribing. As part of the complex intervention in the COFRAIL study, we developed a deprescribing manual to be used by general practitioners (GPs) in family conferences, in which GPs, patients and caregivers jointly discuss treatments. Methods: We selected indications with a high prevalence in older adults in primary care (e.g. diabetes mellitus, hypertension) and conducted a literature search to identify deprescribing criteria for these indications. We additionally reviewed clinical practice guidelines. Based on the extracted information, we created a deprescribing manual which was then piloted in an expert workshop and in family conferences with volunteer patients according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study protocol. Results: Initially, 13 indications/topics were selected. The literature search identified deprescribing guides, reviews and clinical trials as well as lists of potentially inappropriate medication and systematic reviews on the risk and benefits of specific drugs and drug classes in older patients. After piloting and revisions, the deprescribing manual now covers 11 indications/topics. In each chapter, patient- and medication-related deprescribing criteria, monitoring and communication strategies, and information about concerns related to the use of specific drugs in older patients are provided. Discussion: We found varying deprescribing strategies in the literature, which we consolidated in our deprescribing manual. Whether this approach leads to successful deprescribing in family conferences is being investigated in the cluster-randomised controlled COFRAIL study. Plain Language Summary: Development of a manual to help doctors to identify which medications can be withdrawn Many older adults suffer from chronic diseases and take multiple medications concurrently. This can lead to side effects and other undesired events. We developed a manual to help doctors identify which medications can be withdrawn, so that they can discuss this with their patients. This manual was used in the COFRAIL study where doctors, patients and caregivers met in family conferences to discuss their preferences and decide together how future treatments should be handled. The manual contains information on common medications, symptoms and diseases in older patients such as diabetes and high blood pressure. Before the manual was used in the study, it was tested by volunteer patients and their doctors and caregivers to make sure that it is user-friendly.

Prevalence and characteristics of hazardous and harmful drinkers receiving general practitioners' brief advice on and support with alcohol consumption in Germany: results of a population survey.

OBJECTIVE: The German treatment guideline on alcohol-related disorders recommends that general practitioners (GPs) offer brief advice on, and support with, reducing alcohol consumption to hazardous (at risk for health events) and harmful (exhibit health events) drinking patients. We aimed to estimate the implementation of this recommendation using general population data. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of data (2021/2022) of a nationwide, population-based household survey. SETTING: Germany. PARTICIPANTS: Population-based sample of 2247 adult respondents who reported hazardous or harmful drinking according to the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C; score women: 4-12 and men: 5-12). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Ever receipt of 'brief GP advice on, or support with, reducing alcohol consumption'. Differences in the likelihood of ever receiving advice and/or support (yes/no) relative to respondents' sociodemographic, smoking and alcohol consumption characteristics were estimated using logistic regressions. RESULTS: Ever receipt of GP advice on/support with reducing drinking was reported among 6.3% (95% CI=5.3% to 7.4%), and the offer of support among 1.5% (95% CI=1.1% to 2.1%) of the hazardous and harmful drinking respondents. The likelihood of having ever received advice/support was positively associated with being older (OR=1.03 per year, 95% CI=1.01 to 1.04), a current or former (vs never) smoker (OR=2.36, 95% CI=1.46 to 3.80; OR=2.17, 95% CI=1.23 to 3.81) and with increasing alcohol consumption (OR=1.76 per score, 95% CI=1.59 to 1.95). One in two harmful drinking respondents (AUDIT-C score 10-12) reported appropriate advice/support. The likelihood was negatively associated with being woman (eg, OR=0.32, 95% CI=0.21 to 0.48), having a medium or high (vs low) education and with increasing household income. CONCLUSIONS: A small proportion of hazardous and harmful drinking people in Germany report having ever received GP advice on, or support with, reducing alcohol consumption. The implementation of advice/support seems to be linked to specific socio-demographic characteristics, tobacco smoking and alcohol consumption level. Health policy measures should aim to increase alcohol screening, brief intervention rates and awareness for at-risk populations in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00011322, DRKS00017157.

Development of indicators to assess quality and patient pathways in interdisciplinary care for patients with 14 ambulatory-care-sensitive conditions in Germany.

BACKGROUND: In settings like the ambulatory care sector in Germany, where data on the outcomes of interdisciplinary health services provided by multiple office-based physicians are not always readily available, our study aims to develop a set of indicators of health care quality and utilization for 14 groups of ambulatory-care-sensitive conditions based on routine data. These may improve the provision of health care by informing discussions in quality circles and other meetings of networks of physicians who share the same patients. METHODS: Our set of indicators was developed as part of the larger Accountable Care in Deutschland (ACD) project using a pragmatic consensus approach. The six stages of the approach drew upon a review of the literature; the expertise of physicians, health services researchers, and representatives of physician associations and statutory health insurers; and the results of a pilot study with six informal network meetings of office-based physicians who share the same patients. RESULTS: The process resulted in a set of 248 general and disease specific indicators for 14 disease groups. The set provides information on the quality of care provided and on patient pathways, covering patient characteristics, physician visits, ambulatory care processes, pharmaceutical prescriptions and outcome indicators. The disease groups with the most indicators were ischemic heart diseases, diabetes and heart failure. CONCLUSION: Our set of indicators provides useful information on patients' health care use, health care processes and health outcomes for 14 commonly treated groups of ambulatory-care-sensitive conditions. This information can inform discussions in interdisciplinary quality circles in the ambulatory sector and foster patient-centered care.

Developing a novel tool to assess the ability to self-administer medication in non-demented in-hospital patients: ABLYMED study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Older people often suffer from multimorbidity resulting in polypharmacy. The correct administration of medication is a crucial factor influencing treatment efficacy. However, tools for evaluating the ability to self-administer different dosage forms of medications are lacking. The objectives of the ABLYMED study are to 1) assess the ability to self-administer different dosage forms of medication in older non-demented in-hospital patients who report autonomous management of medication, 2) identify factors influencing the ability to self-administer medication, and 3) develop a standardized tool to validly assess the ability to self-administer different dosage forms of medications based on the final study results. METHODS: One hundred in-patients from the department of orthopedics and trauma surgery of the University Hospital Düsseldorf  ≥ 70 years of age and regularly taking ≥ 5 different drugs autonomously will be prospectively recruited into the observational cross-sectional single-center ABLYMED study. Patients undergo an interview addressing demographic and clinical information, medication history (which medications are taken since when, in which dose and dosage form, and subjective proficiency of taking these medications), medication adherence, and factors possibly influencing adherence including personality traits and perceived quality of the medication regimen. Quality of the medication regimen is also rated by clinicians according to validated lists. Further, patients receive a comprehensive geriatric assessment including measures of cognition, mobility, and functional status. The ability to self-administer medication is assessed by having patients perform different tasks related to medication self-administration, which are video recorded and rated by different experts. The patients' self-reported ability will be correlated with the observed performance in the self-administration tasks. Further, factors correlating with the reported and observed ability to self-administer medication will be evaluated using correlation and regression models. Based on the final study results, a novel tool to assess the ability of older patients to self-administer medication will be developed. DISCUSSION: In addition to guideline-based pharmacotherapy, correct intake of prescribed medication is crucial for optimal therapy of multimorbidity in older people. Tools to validly assess the ability of older patients to self-administer different dosage forms of medications are lacking, but should be included in comprehensive geriatric assessments to secure functional health. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Development of an assessment instrument to evaluate the ability to manage various dosage forms, DRKS-ID: DRKS00025788 , (date of registration: 07/09/2021).

HIOPP-6 - a pilot study on the evaluation of an electronic tool to assess and reduce the complexity of drug treatment considering patients' views.

BACKGROUND: A complex drug treatment might pose a barrier to safe and reliable drug administration for patients. Therefore, a novel tool automatically analyzes structured medication data for factors possibly contributing to complexity and subsequently personalizes the results by evaluating the relevance of each identified factor for the patient by means of key questions. Hence, tailor-made optimization measures can be proposed. METHODS: In this controlled, prospective, exploratory trial the tool was evaluated with nine general practitioners (GP) in three study groups: In the two intervention groups the tool was applied in a version with (GI_with) and a version without (GI_without) integrated key questions for the personalization of the analysis, while the control group (GC) did not use any tools (routine care). Four to eight weeks after application of the tool, the benefits of the optimization measures to reduce or mitigate complexity of drug treatment were evaluated from the patient perspective. RESULTS: A total of 126 patients regularly using more than five drugs could be included for analysis. GP suggested 117 optimization measures in GI_with, 83 in GI_without, and 2 in GC. Patients in GI_with were more likely to rate an optimization measure as helpful than patients in GI_without (IRR: 3.5; 95% CI: 1.2-10.3). Thereby, the number of optimization measures recommended by the GP had no significant influence (P = 0.167). CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that an automated analysis considering patient perspectives results in more helpful optimization measures than an automated analysis alone - a result which should be further assessed in confirmatory studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered retrospectively at the German Clinical Trials register under DRKS-ID DRKS00025257 (17/05/2021).

Striving for Health Equity: The Importance of Social Determinants of Health and Ethical Considerations in Pandemic Preparedness Planning.

Since the WHO's "Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Plan" in 1999, pandemic preparedness plans at the international and national level have been constantly adapted with the common goal to respond early to outbreaks, identify risks, and outline promising interventions for pandemic containment. Two years into the COVID-19 pandemic, public health experts have started to reflect on the extent to which previous preparations have been helpful as well as on the gaps in pandemic preparedness planning. In the present commentary, we advocate for the inclusion of social and ethical factors in future pandemic planning-factors that have been insufficiently considered so far, although social determinants of infection risk and infectious disease severity contribute to aggravated social inequalities in health.