Saxon Epidemiological Study in General Practice-6 (SESAM-6): protocol of a cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: General practitioners (GPs) are mostly the first point of contact for patients with health problems in Germany. There is only a limited epidemiological overview data that describe the GP consultation hours based on other than billing data. Therefore, the aim of Saxon Epidemiological Study in General Practice-6 (SESAM-6) is to examine the frequency of reasons for encounter, prevalence of long-term diagnosed diseases and diagnostic and therapeutic decisions in general practice. This knowledge is fundamental to identify the healthcare needs and to develop strategies to improve the GP care. The results of the study will be incorporated into the undergraduate, postgraduate and continuing medical education for GP. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This cross-sectional study SESAM-6 is conducted in general practices in the state of Saxony, Germany. The study design is based on previous SESAM studies. Participating physicians are assigned to 1 week per quarter (over a survey period of 12 months) in which every fifth doctor-patient contact is recorded for one-half of the day (morning or afternoon). To facilitate valid statements, a minimum of 50 GP is required to document a total of at least 2500 doctor-patient contacts. Univariable, multivariable and subgroup analyses as well as comparisons to the previous SESAM data sets will be conducted. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Technical University of Dresden in March 2023 (SR-EK-7502023). Participation in the study is voluntary and will not be remunerated. The study results will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, preferably with open access. They will also be disseminated at scientific and public symposia, congresses and conferences. A final report will be published to summarise the central results and provided to all study participants and the public.

Insights from end-of-career general practitioners on changing working conditions and generational differences: considerations for future strategies.

The landscape of general practice has experienced notable transformations in recent decades, profoundly influencing the working conditions of general practitioners (GPs). This study aimed to examine the most salient changes affecting GPs' daily practices. Through semi-structured qualitative interviews with 15 end-of-career GPs, the study explored how these changes affected work organization, equipment, working hours, work-life balance, job satisfaction, training, patient relationships, and reputation. The interviews revealed that these changes were perceived as barriers, opportunities, or a complex interplay of both for general practice. While the interviewed GPs valued technological advancements and reported positive developments in working conditions, challenges included a gradual reduction in the range of tasks, growing administrative burdens, and less practical training for young physicians. Other changes, such as new doctor-patient dynamics, the transition from single to group practice, and differing professional expectations of the younger generation, were seen as both challenging and strengthening for general practice. By combining these factors and trade-offs observed by end-of-career GPs in our study over the past few decades with general societal changes, we provide ideas for the design of future framework conditions in general practice that might enhance the attractiveness of the profession. These insights offer key considerations that can guide future strategies for general practice and medical education.

Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination Skepticism, Reasons, and Concerns Between Mass Vaccination Centers and General Practices in Germany 2021.

Introduction: The reluctance to be vaccinated against COVID-19 has significantly curbed vaccine uptake. Unlike mass vaccination centers, general practitioners (GPs) might be able to address some of the patients' concerns through their long-term doctor-patient relationship. This study compared vaccination reasons, concerns and skepticism about vaccination, and perceived importance of the vaccine and its hypothetical value between vaccination centers and GP practices. Methods: A survey was distributed (07/2021-10/2021) among newly vaccinated individuals in ten GP practices (n = 364) and two vaccine centers (n = 474). Results: Participants in vaccine centers stated more prosocial and benefit-oriented reasons for vaccination, whereas participants in GP practices more often stated the GP's recommendation as the reason. Perceived importance of the vaccine in combating the pandemic was rated higher among individuals at vaccine centers and with higher health awareness and self-efficacy. Participants at both types of sites who preferred a GP for vaccination expressed more vaccination skepticism, which was also related to older age, more health risk concerns related to COVID-19 vaccines, and lower perceived importance of the vaccine. Conclusion: Our results indicate opportunities for framing future vaccination campaigns that include vaccination centers. Additionally, a rapid GP involvement in future mass vaccinations might be crucial for overcoming attitudinal barriers and achieving higher vaccine uptake.

E-mental health in Germany - what is the current use and what are experiences of different types of health care providers for patients with mental illnesses?

BACKGROUND: As a new and effective support option, e-mental health interventions can be useful in complementing treatment in mental health care. To date, little is known about how health care providers use these programs to treat patients with mental illnesses in Germany. The present study aims to examine the use of and experiences with e-mental health interventions from the point of view of different types of health care providers for patients with mental illnesses. METHODS: Data from a cross-sectional survey of routine care health care providers in Germany in 2021 were analysed. In this survey, data were collected from n = 107 general practitioners (GPs), n = 114 specialist doctors, n = 102 psychotherapists, and n = 102 inpatient clinicians. Assessments included professional use of digital media, as well as knowledge, use and experiences regarding e-mental health interventions in care of people with mental illness. RESULTS: In the total sample of n = 425, 65.6% (n = 279) were female. The study participants had an average age of 47.7 years (SD = 11.0) and their average work experience was 20.0 years (SD = 11.1). Overall, the majority (83.8%, n = 353) had heard of e-mental health interventions, but few felt well informed. Only 28.5% (n = 121) had already used e-mental health interventions for treatment support. The most commonly recommended e-mental health interventions in the sample were deprexis (39.7%, n = 48), moodgym (24.8%, n = 30), and iFightDepression (22.3%, n = 27). The use was predominantly considered to be helpful and satisfactory. Insufficient knowledge about e-mental health interventions and lack of informational materials for patients were reported as relevant barriers to the use of e-mental health interventions. CONCLUSIONS: E-mental health interventions can be a useful support option, but they are rarely used in the treatment of patients with mental illnesses. There is a need to disseminate information specific to the various types of health care providers. Tailored implementation strategies need to be developed in order to capitalize on the potential of effective e-mental health interventions and to improve health care for patients with mental illnesses.

COVID-19 Continues to Burden General Practitioners: Impact on Workload, Provision of Care, and Intention to Leave.

General practitioners (GPs), already in a profession with a high workload, have been at the frontline of providing COVID-19-related healthcare in addition to routine care. Our study examined the impact of pandemic-related consultations and changes in practice organization on GPs' current workload and provision of healthcare in summer 2021 (May 2021-July 2021) and early 2022 (January 2022-February 2022). In total, 143 German GPs participated in an online survey in the summer of 2021. Of these, 51 GPs participated in the follow-up survey in 2022. Most GPs perceived an increase in consultation frequency, consultation times, and workload since the pandemic outbreak. Increased consultation times were related to the reduced provision of medical care to other patients with chronic diseases. More SARS-CoV-2 vaccination consultations were associated with reduced home visits, acute consultation times, and cancer screenings. A quarter of GPs considered leaving their job. Pandemic-related bureaucracy, restricted access to therapy and rehabilitation services specialized on COVID-19, unreliable vaccine deliveries, mandatory telematics-infrastructure implementation, and frequent changes in official regulations were the main reasons reported for dissatisfaction. Our results provide insights into how the pandemic continues to burden GPs' work routines and how better working conditions in times of high demand could be achieved in future pandemics.

[Primary care of Ukrainian refugees]. / Hausärztliche Versorgung ukrainischer Geflüchteter: Evaluation von Herausforderungen und Informationsbedarfen (RefUGe-Studie).

Background: Since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, more than 7.6 million people from Ukraine have been registered as refugees in European countries. In Germany, the number is estimated to be more than 1 million. These refugees may have different health needs than German patients due to differences in the health care system, disease prevalence, preventive measures, health behavior, and experiences of flight. However, general practitioners (GPs) have hardly been prepared for the contact. Objectives: For the first time, challenges in the treatment of Ukrainian refugees and support needs of German GPs were determined. Materials and methods: In July and August 2022, a cross-sectional study among GPs in Germany was conducted using an online survey. Results: A total of 82 GPs participated with a response rate of 16.0%; 52 of the participating GPs had treated Ukrainian refugees in the previous 2 weeks. In all, 75.0% of them reported difficulties or peculiarities in care, especially in communication (61.5%), due to lack of information about previous illnesses (34.6%), and expectations of services to be provided (30.8%). Of the 82 participants, 59.8% reported a need for multilingual information for patients, especially about the German health care system, help with mental health problems, contact points, and differences in the use of medications. Information for the practice team is needed in 37.8% of cases, especially on possibilities in case of language barriers, vaccination coverage in Ukraine, and dealing with missing vaccination records as well as drug lists. Conclusions: Due to the new situation of Ukrainian refugees in Germany and the mentioned barriers, GPs should be supported in care. Information for practice teams as well as their networking with psychotherapeutic offers, contact points, drug databases, and regional interpreter services are urgently needed. However, multilingual information for Ukrainian patients should be disseminated in order to relieve the burden on practices, which have been under great strain, and to ensure continuity and quality of care.

[Changes in Prescription Patterns of Oral Anticoagulants in Family Practices after Marketing Approval of Direct Oral Anticoagulants]. / Änderungen bei der Verordnung oraler Antikoagulation in Hausarztpraxen nach Einführung der direkten oralen Antikoagulanzien.

AIM OF THE STUDY: Since 2011, non-vitamin-K-dependent oral anticoagulants (NOAC) have extended the spectrum of anticoagulation therapy. Initially, the approval of NOAC was limited to the prophylaxis of postoperative thrombosis, but in the course of time the spectrum was extended to the therapy of thrombosis and embolism as well as anticoagulation in non-valvular atrial fibrillation. The study was designed to examine how the approval of NOAC had affected the prescribing behaviour of general practitioners in the first years of their approval. METHODS: In a retrospective longitudinal study, the prescriptions of anticoagulants between 2012 and 2017 were analysed in 3 general practitioners' practices in the Bonn area. The study included all patients for whom at least one prescription from a NOAC or a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) was documented in the administrative system of the practices during this period. RESULTS: A total of n=579 patient files were evaluated (47% female; median age 75 years). Of these, 47% received a VKA, and 40% a NOAC (59% rivaroxaban, 29% apixaban, 9% dabigatran and 3% edoxaban). During the period under examination, the share of VKA prescriptions decreased from 45% to 14% and the share of NOAC increased from 28% to 87%. Anti-coagulation was changed in 12%. The most frequent change was from a VKA to a NOAC (70%). CONCLUSION: After marketing approval, the use of NOAC in the initial prescriptions increased steadily. This trend can also be seen in other European studies. VKA are mainly prescribed to patients with stable oral anticoagulation. As recommended in the guidelines, anticoagulation is changed mainly when problems occur during therapy. If the trend in the prescription of anticoagulants continues, in the medium term, VKA will only be prescribed for patients who have been stable for many years and for patients with artificial heart valves.