[Diagnosis and admission center : Establishment and evaluation of an integrated translational infrastructure for clinical psychiatric research]. / Diagnose- und Aufnahmezentrum : Etablierung und Evaluation einer integrierten translationalen Infrastruktur für die klinisch-psychiatrische Forschung.

The routine in-depth characterization of patients with methods of clinical and scale-based examination, neuropsychology, based on biomaterials, and sensor-based information opens up transformative possibilities on the way to personalized diagnostics, treatment and prevention in psychiatry, psychotherapy, and psychosomatics. Effective integration of the additional temporal and logistical effort into everyday care as well as the acceptance by patients are critical to the success of such an approach but there is little evidence on this to date. We report here on the establishment of the Diagnosis and Admission Center (DAZ) at the Central Institute of Mental Health (ZI) in Mannheim. The DAZ is an outpatient unit upstream of other care structures for clinical and scientific phenotyping across diagnoses as a starting point for data-driven, individualized pathways to further treatment, diagnostics or research. We describe the functions, goals, and implementation of the newly created clinical scientific translational structure, provide an overview of the patient populations it has reached, and provide data on its acceptance. In this context, the close integration with downstream clinical processes enables a better coordinated and demand-oriented allocation. In addition, DAZ enables a faster start of disorder-specific diagnostics and treatment. Since its launch in April 2021 up to the end of 2022, 1021 patients underwent psychiatric evaluation at DAZ during a pilot phase. The patient sample corresponded to a representative sample from standard care and the newly established processes were regarded as helpful by patients. In summary, the DAZ uniquely combines the interests and needs of patient with the collection of scientifically relevant data.

[Interprofessional weaning boards and weaning consults for long-term ventilated patients: A qualitative study of perceived potential for patient care]. / Interprofessionelle Weaning-Boards und Weaning-Konsile für Langzeitbeatmungspatient*innen: Eine qualitative Studie zum wahrgenommenen Potenzial für die Patientenversorgung.

BACKGROUND: The PRiVENT project aims to improve the care of invasively ventilated patients and to reduce the number of out-of-hospital long-term ventilated patients. PRiVENT offers intensive care units the opportunity to exchange information with experts from specialized weaning centers in interprofessional weaning boards and weaning consults and to exploit the full weaning potential of the patients. In the context of the accompanying process evaluation, the PRiVENT intervention components will be examined for sustainability, scalability and effectiveness, and the interprofessional collaboration between intensive care units and the responsible weaning centers will be investigated in order to identify potentials for the care of invasively managed patients. METHODS: In a qualitative cross-sectional study, semistructured, problem-oriented interviews were conducted with care providers of participating ICUs. The data were digitally recorded, pseudonymized and verbatim transcribed. Data analysis was based on Brown and Clarke's Thematic Analysis and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. MAXQDA 2020 software was used to organize the data. RESULTS: Fourteen interviews were conducted with ICU care providers. The early transfer of patients to a weaning center and the integration of pulmonary expertise into routine care were identified as positively perceived potentials of the weaning boards and weaning consults. Especially in critically ill, multimorbid patients suffering from COVID-19, the expertise of the weaning centers was considered helpful. Due to heavy workloads, nurses were unable to participate in weaning boards and weaning consults. CONCLUSION: Interprofessional collaboration between weaning centers and ICUs in weaning boards and weaning consults can improve the care of invasively ventilated patients. Strategies to promote the involvement of nurses should be discussed and developed.

Prevention of invasive ventilation (PRiVENT)-a prospective, mixed-methods interventional, multicentre study with a parallel comparison group: study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) is a standard therapy for intensive care patients with respiratory failure. With increasing population age and multimorbidity, the number of patients who cannot be weaned from IMV increases, resulting in impaired quality of life and high costs. In addition, human resources are tied up in the care of these patients. METHODS: The PRiVENT intervention is a prospective, mixed-methods interventional, multicentre study with a parallel comparison group selected from insurance claims data of the health insurer Allgemeine Ortskrankenkasse Baden-Württemberg (AOK-BW) conducted in Baden-Württemberg, Germany, over 24 months. Four weaning centres supervise 40 intensive care units (ICUs), that are responsible for patient recruitment. The primary outcome, successful weaning from IMV, will be evaluated using a mixed logistic regression model. Secondary outcomes will be evaluated using mixed regression models. DISCUSSION: The overall objective of the PRiVENT project is the evaluation of strategies to prevent long-term IMV. Additional objectives aim to improve weaning expertise in and cooperation with the adjacent Intensive Care Units. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05260853).

[Between New Responsibility and Daily Routines - The Role of the VERAH in GP Care: A Qualitative Secondary Data Case Study of the Introduction of Software-Based Case Management]. / Zwischen neuer Verantwortung und Routinetätigkeit: Die Rolle der VERAH in der hausärztlichen Versorgung ­ Eine qualitative Sekundärdatenanalyse am Beispiel des softwaregestützten Case Management.

BACKGROUND: The concept of Care Assistant in General Practice (VERAH) was developed in order to integrate non-medical staff more strongly into primary care and thus to meet the increasing demand for care and the simultaneous shortage of medical staff. VERAHs are increasingly responsible for software-supported case management and are thus confronted with new tasks. The aim of this study was therefore to explore the role of the VERAH in primary care practices. METHODS: The present study is a qualitative secondary data analysis; the data collection took place within the projects VESPEERA and TelePraCMan. Twenty individual interviews and two focus group meetings were conducted with a total of 30 physicians, VERAHs and medical assistants from primary care. The data were analysed qualitatively according to Emerson. Contextual and socio-demographic data were collected with an accompanying questionnaire. RESULTS: The VERAHs of all primary care practices from which interview partners participated performed tasks within software-supported case management. Concerning the role of the VERAH, three themes were identified in the interviews: a) concrete tasks of the VERAH in software-supported case management within the practice team, b) relevance of software-supported case management within the activities of the VERAHS and c) relationship between VERAHs and patients. CONCLUSION: Taking over tasks in software-supported case management can contribute to strengthening and expanding the role of the VERAH. In the future, more attention should be paid to a clear description of the new role, and the conditions of the VERAHs' task fulfilment should be considered.

How to fall into a new routine: factors influencing the implementation of an admission and discharge programme in hospitals and general practices.

INTRODUCTION: The VESPEERA programme is a multifaceted programme to enhance information transfer between general practice and hospital across the process of hospital admission, stay and discharge. It was implemented in 7 hospitals and 72 general practices in Southern Germany. Uptake was heterogeneous and overall low. A process evaluation aimed at identifying factors associated with the implementation of the VESPEERA programme. METHODS: This was a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews in a purposeful sample of health workers in hospitals and general practices in the VESPEERA programme. Qualitative framework analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was performed and revealed the topic of previous and new routines to be protruding. Inductive content analysis was used for in-depth examination of stages in the process of staying in a previous or falling into a new routines. RESULTS: Thirty-six interviews were conducted with 17 participants from general practices and 19 participants from hospitals. The interviewees were in different stages of the implementation process at the time of the interviews. Four stages were identified: Stage 1,'Previous routine and tension for change', describes the situation in which VESPEERA was to be implemented and the factors leading to the decision to participate. In stage 2,'Adoption of the VESPEERA programme', factors that influenced whether individuals decided to employ the innovation are relevant. Stage 3 comprises 'Determinants for falling into and staying in the new VESPEERA-routine' relates to actual implementation and finally, in stage 4, the participants reflect on the success of the implementation. CONCLUSIONS: The individuals and organisations participating in the VESPEERA programme were in different stages of a process from the previous to the new routine, which were characterised by different determinants of implementation. In all stages, organisational factors were main determinants of implementation, but different factors emerged in different implementation stages. A low distinction between decision-making power and executive, as well as available resources, were beneficial for the implementation of the innovation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS00015183 on DRKS / Universal Trial Number (UTN): U1111-1218-0992.

The role of personalised professional relations across care sectors in achieving high continuity of care.

BACKGROUND: High continuity of care has a positive impact on health outcomes, but insight into the mechanisms underlying this impact is limited. Information continuity, on which our study focuses, is especially important when relational continuity is not given, which is often the case at hospital admission or hospital discharge. The aim of this study is to provide insight into the information flows between general practices and hospitals in Germany, and to identify factors associated with these flows of information. METHODS: This is a qualitative interview study in a purposeful sample of staff from hospitals and general practices (general practitioners, care assistants in general practice, hospital management, hospital physicians, and nursing staff). Interviews were conducted via telephone or face-to-face using a self-developed semi-structured interview guide. Stepwise systematic content analysis was used to structure collected material into themes and sub-themes that related to the study aim. Data was analysed by two researchers in several cycles, alternating between inductive and deductive approaches. RESULTS: A total of 49 interviews were conducted. Duration of the interviews varies between 21 and 78 min (mean duration 43 min). Across all groups, more than two thirds of participants were female (n = 34, 69%). The analysis highlighted six interdependent main themes regarding factors that affect information flows between hospitals and general practices: organisational, legal, financial, patient factors, individual characteristics, and emotional & social factors. The latter theme emerged as particularly rich and was therefore divided into four subthemes: appreciation and understanding of the respective other, (intrinsic) motivation, socialisation, and relationships. Organised meetings and events were mentioned as strategies to address emotional and social factors. CONCLUSIONS: Digitalisation can facilitate information flows between care providers. However, knowing each other and good personal relations remain important for effective collaboration. Cooperation between all stakeholders is needed to aim to achieve continuity of care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS00015183 on DRKS/ Universal Trial Number (UTN): U1111-1218-0992. Date of registration 23/08/2018.

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 .

Claims data-based analysis of the influence of individual and regional characteristics on the utilisation of long-term care by people with dementia in Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany.

BACKGROUND: Challenges of future dementia care include increasing shortage of qualified healthcare providers and decreasing potential of informal care by relatives. In order to meet those challenges, changes in dementia care are needed. These changes should be based on data of both care utilisation and care supply. The aim of this study was to provide insight into individual and regional characteristics that influence the utilisation of long-term care by people with dementia. METHODS: The study was a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of claims-based data and other available data referring to one index year. All data were aggregated for small geographic districts. The study population comprised people with a dementia diagnosis, 65 years and older in Baden-Wuerttemberg and insured by the largest health insurer. Utilisation of nursing home care, informal care, and respite care was analysed using binary coded logistic multilevel analyses. RESULTS: Seventy nine thousand three hundred forty-nine people with dementia were included in the analyses. Nursing home care was used by 20.4%, informal care by 30.6%, and respite care by 3.5% of people with dementia. Individual characteristics that influence care utilisation included age, sex and the level of care dependency. The utilisation of informal care (OR = 1.713) and respite care (OR = 2.036) was higher in rural districts than in city districts. Respite care supply had an effect on the utilisation of respite care (OR = 1.173). CONCLUSIONS: The study found differences between districts in the utilisation of long-term care for dementia. These differences were largely explained by the composition of the population within the districts. An exception was the utilisation of respite care, which was higher in districts which have higher supply. Individual characteristics that influenced care utilisation are age, sex, level of care dependency and, with regard to informal care, comorbidity. Further research should be conducted on a small-area level, include further individual characteristics as well as other care and living forms.

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.

The Influence of Provider Connectedness on Continuity of Care and Hospital Readmissions in Patients With COPD: A Claims Data Based Social Network Study.

Background: Hospital readmission rates are very high in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Continuity of care (CoC) with general practitioners (GPs) and ambulatory specialists can impact readmission rates. This study aimed to identify shared patient networks of ambulatory care physicians and to examine the effect of provider connectedness on CoC and hospital readmissions. Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted in claims data from the years 2016 to 2018 in patients with COPD (aged 40 years or older; hospital stay in 2017). Linkages between GPs, pneumologists, and cardiologists were determined on the basis of shared patients. Multilevel regression models were used to analyze the impact of provider connectedness, operationalized by several social network characteristics, on continuity of care (sequential continuity [SECON] index) and hospital readmission rates. Results: A total of 7294 patients linked to 3673 GPs were available for analysis. Closeness centrality (ß=- 0.029) and the external-internal (EI)-index (ß =0.037) impacted on the SECON index. The EI-index (odds ratio [OR]=1.25) and degree centrality (OR=1.257) impacted 30-day readmission. Network density (OR=0.811) and the SECON index (OR=1.121) affected the likelihood of a 90-day readmission. None of the predictors had a significant impact on 180-day and 365-day readmissions. Conclusions: Ambulatory care providers' connectedness showed some effects on hospital readmissions and CoC in patients with COPD up to 90 days after hospital discharge, but the additional predictive power is limited.

Hospital Admission and Discharge: Lessons Learned from a Large Programme in Southwest Germany.

Introduction: In the context of a GP-based care programme, we implemented an admission, discharge and follow-up programme. Description: The VESPEERA programme consists of three sets of components: pre-admission interventions, in-hospital interventions and post-discharge interventions. It was aimed at all patients with a hospital stay participating in the GP-based care programme and was implemented in 7 hospitals and 72 general practices in southwest Germany using a range of strategies. Its' effectiveness was evaluated using readmissions within 90 days after discharge as primary outcome. Questionnaires with staff were used to explore the implementation process. Discussion: A statistically significant effect was not found, but the effect size was similar to other interventions. Intervention fidelity was low and contextual factors affecting the implementation, amongst others, were available resources, external requirements such as legal regulations and networking between care providers. Lessons learned were derived that can aid to inform future political or scientific initiatives. Conclusion: Structured information transfer at hospital admission and discharge makes sense but the added value in the context of a GP-based programme seems modest. Primary care teams should be involved in pre- and post-hospital care.

Influence of physician networks on prescribing a new ingredient combination in heart failure: a longitudinal claim data-based study.

BACKGROUND: Since 2016, the combination of sacubitril/valsartan, which combines an angiotensin receptor and neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), has been recommended in the guidelines for the treatment of heart failure. The adoption of new drugs may be influenced by collaboration and exchange between physicians. We aimed to determine whether characteristics of the professional networks of prescribing physicians were associated with the prescribing of ARNI in Germany. METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal analysis based on claims data in 2016-2018 in Germany. The characteristics of ambulatory care physicians' networks were determined in the analysis of the patient-sharing networks of physicians in 2017. Binary logistic regression analysis with the outcome 'prescribes ARNI in 2018' (present or absent) was carried out, using network characteristics as predictors, adjusted for specialty and sociodemographic characteristics of physicians. RESULTS: The network analysis included 8370 physicians, who had 144,636 connections. Prescribers had more connections to other physicians compared to non-prescribers (median 31 vs. 23). Regression analysis showed that the numbers of linkages to prescribers of ARNI were positively associated with prescribing ARNI. For 6-10 connections, the average marginal effect (AME) was 0.04 (confidence interval [CI] 95% 0.01-0.06) and for > 10 links the AME 0.07 (CI 95% 0.05-0.10) compared to 0-5 connections to prescriber. CONCLUSION: Physicians who shared patients with many other physicians were more likely to prescribe ARNI, independent of physicians' specialty. This suggested that collaboration and exchange on the basis of patient-sharing with other physicians influenced their medication prescribing decisions.

[Scoping review of the effectiveness of screen-to-screen-therapy compared to face-to-face-therapy on naming performance for patients with aphasia]. / Scoping Review über die Wirksamkeit einer Screen-to-Screen-Therapie im Vergleich zu einer Face-to-Face-Therapie bei Patient*innen mit Aphasie auf die Benennleistungen.

INTRODUCTION: About 35,000 people in Germany suffered from stroke-related aphasia in 2019. One of the most frequent manifestations of aphasia are word finding disorders. In times of the COVID-19 pandemic, the temporary approval of video therapy enables the maintenance of speech therapy treatment. This leads to the necessity to investigate the effectiveness of screen-to-screen therapy via a video conferencing system compared to conventional face-to-face therapy of adult aphasia patients. METHODS: For this scoping review, a literature search in the databases Cochrane, Pubmed and Web of Science was conducted for the period February 2010 to 2020. We included German- and English-language studies comparing the effectiveness of a classic face-to-face therapy with a screen-to-screen therapy of adults with aphasia. The studies were selected using the PRISMA flowchart. RESULTS: A total of five studies were identified. Both face-to-face therapy and screen-to-screen therapy showed significant improvements in naming performance in an Italian crossover study, a Canadian randomized study and a quasi-randomized study conducted in the UK. No improvements were found for both forms of intervention in an Israeli crossover study. In a German comparative study, significant improvements in naming performance were found for face-to-face therapy, but the results did not differ significantly from the screen-to-screen therapy intervention group. DISCUSSION: In all included studies, screen-to-screen therapy and face-to-face therapy had a comparable effectiveness on naming performance. The results demonstrate the feasibility of a screen-to-screen therapy under everyday conditions. However, it is possible that this form of therapy cannot always be implemented. Barriers to screen-to-screen therapy can be the use of technologies and restrictions in the visual field due to a neglect. One limitation of the scoping review was that only the naming performance was considered as an outcome, another was the small number of studies included. CONCLUSION: For many patients screen-to-screen therapy is currently the only possibility to receive speech therapy treatment. Therefore it is a positive aspect that screen-to-screen therapy is as effective as face-to-face therapy. Screen-to-screen therapy can provide expanded access to health care and professional expertise in health services. In this way, speech therapy care during the COVID-19 pandemic can be largely maintained. Further research is needed on evidence-based treatment methods and user-oriented apps for video therapy.

Interventions to Improve Hospital Admission and Discharge Management: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this umbrella review was to summarize the research evidence on programs to improve the transition between ambulatory and hospital care. METHODS: The MEDLINE database and the Cochrane library were searched. Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials published between January 2000 and September 2018 in English or German were included. Studies were eligible if an assessment or coordination intervention had been evaluated and if patients had been transferred between hospital (defined as internal medicine, surgery, or unspecified hospital setting) and home (defined as any permanent residence). Risk of bias was assessed using the AMSTAR criteria. Results are presented descriptively and in table format. RESULTS: Thirty-nine systematic reviews comprising 492 different studies were included. More than half of these studies were conducted in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia. All studies evaluated strategies to improve discharge management (introduced after patients' arrival at the hospital); no study assessed strategies to improve admission management (initiated in primary care before patients' transition to hospital). The reviews included focused on a specific patient group, a specific intervention type, or a specific outcome. Overall, interventions focusing on elderly patients and high-intensity interventions seemed to be most effective. An overview of classifications of care transition strategies is provided. CONCLUSIONS: Future research should focus on hospital admission management programs.

What patients with lung cancer with comorbidity tell us about interprofessional collaborative care across healthcare sectors: qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with lung cancer with comorbidity often require treatment and care by different health professionals, in different settings and at different points in time during the course of the disease. In order to organise and coordinate healthcare efficiently, effective information exchange and collaboration between all involved care providers are required. The aim of this study was to assess the views of patients with advanced lung cancer with comorbidity regarding coordination of treatment and care across healthcare sectors. METHODS: This qualitative study, as part of the main study, The Heidelberg Milestones Communication Approach, used face-to-face guide-based semistructured interviews with patients with advanced lung cancer and their informal caregivers to explore cross-sectoral information exchange and collaboration in Germany. All generated data were audio-recorded, pseudonymised and transcribed verbatim. Data analysis was performed using qualitative content analysis to structure data into themes and subthemes. All data were managed and organised in MAXQDA. RESULTS: In 15 interviews, participants reported that cross-sectoral collaboration functioned well, if treatments occurred as planned. However, treatment gaps were experienced, especially regarding medication and regimen. As a result, participants felt insecure and obliged to take responsibility for the coordination of healthcare. Patients reported to be in favour of an active patient role but felt that healthcare coordination should still be a responsibility of a care provider. A more intensive information exchange, potentially by using an electronic platform, was expected to strengthen cross-sectoral collaboration. CONCLUSION: Patients with lung cancer are uncertain about their role in the coordination of treatment and care across healthcare sectors. Healthcare providers should be more aware of care recipients' willingness of taking on a more active role in healthcare coordination. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00013469.

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

INTRODUCTION: Hospital stays are critical events as they often disrupt continuity of care. This process evaluation aims to describe and explore the implementation of the VESPEERA programme (Improving continuity of patient care across sectors: An admission and discharge model in general practices and hospitals, Versorgungskontinuitaet sichern: Patientenorientiertes Einweisungs- und Entlassmanagement in Hausarztpraxen und Krankenhauesern). The evaluation concerns the intervention fidelity, reach in targeted populations, perceived effects, working mechanisms, feasibility, determinants for implementation, including contextual factors, and associations with the outcomes evaluation. The aim of the VESPEERA programme is the development, implementation and evaluation of a structured admission and discharge programme in general practices and hospitals. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The process evaluation is linked to the VESPEERA outcomes evaluation, which has a quasi-experimental multi-centre design with four study arms and is conducted in hospitals and general practices in Germany. The VESPEERA programme comprises several components: an assessment before admission, an admission letter, a telephonic discharge conversation between hospital and general practice before discharge, discharge information for patients, structured planning of follow-up care after discharge in the general practice and a telephone monitoring for patients with a risk of rehospitalisation. The process evaluation has a mixed-methods design, incorporating interviews (patients, both care providers who do and do not participate in the VESPEERA programme, total n=75), questionnaires (patients and care providers who participate in the VESPEERA programme, total n=475), implementation plans of hospitals, data documented in general practices, claims-based data and hospital process data. Data analysis is descriptive and explorative. Qualitative data will be transcribed and analysed using framework analysis based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Associations between the outcomes of the program and measures in the process evaluation will be explored in regression models. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been obtained by the ethics committee of the Medical Faculty Heidelberg prior to the start of the study (S-352/2018). Results will be disseminated through a final report to the funding agency, articles in peer-reviewed journals and conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: http://www.drks.de/DRKS00015183. TRIAL STATUS: The study protocol on hand is the protocol V.1.1 from 18 June 2018. Recruitment for interviews started on 3 September 2018 and will approximately be completed by the end of May 2019.

Teaching implementation science in a new Master of Science Program in Germany: a survey of stakeholder expectations.

BACKGROUND: Implementation science in healthcare is an evolving discipline in German-speaking countries. In 2015, the Medical Faculty of the University of Heidelberg, Germany, implemented a two-year full-time Master of Science program Health Services Research and Implementation Science. The curriculum introduces implementation science in the context of a broader program that also covers health services research, healthcare systems, research methods, and generic academic skills. Our aim was to assess the expectations of different stakeholder groups regarding the master's program. METHODS: An online survey listing desired competencies of prospective graduates was developed and administered to four groups: national experts in the field (including potential employers of graduates), teaching staff, enrolled students, and prospective students (N = 169). Competencies were extracted from the curriculum's module handbook. A five-point Likert scale was used for the assessment of 42 specific items. Data were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: A total of 83 people participated in the survey (response rate 49%). The online survey showed a strong agreement across the groups concerning the desired competencies of graduates. About two-thirds of the listed competencies (27 items) were felt to be crucial or very important by 80% or more of participants, with little difference between stakeholder groups. Of the eight items specifically related to implementation in practice, six were in this category. Knowledge of implementation strategies (90% very important), knowledge of barriers and enablers of implementation (89%), and knowledge of evidence-based practice (89%) were the top priorities. CONCLUSIONS: The master's program is largely orientated towards the desired competencies of graduates according to students, teaching staff, and national experts.