Costs of delivering human papillomavirus vaccination using a one- or two-dose strategy in Tanzania.

OBJECTIVE: As part of the Dose Reduction Immunobridging and Safety Study of Two HPV Vaccines in Tanzanian Girls (DoRIS; NCT02834637), the current study is one of the first to evaluate the financial and economic costs of the national rollout of an HPV vaccination program in school-aged girls in sub-Saharan Africa and the potential costs associated with a single dose HPV vaccine program, given recent evidence suggesting that a single dose may be as efficacious as a two-dose regimen. METHODS: The World Health Organization's (WHO) Cervical Cancer Prevention and Control Costing (C4P) micro-costing tool was used to estimate the total financial and economic costs of the national vaccination program from the perspective of the Tanzanian government. Cost data were collected in 2019 via surveys, workshops, and interviews with local stakeholders for vaccines and injection supplies, microplanning, training, sensitization, service delivery, supervision, and cold chain. The cost per two-dose and one-dose fully immunized girl (FIG) was calculated. RESULTS: The total financial and economic costs were US$10,117,455 and US$45,683,204, respectively, at a financial cost of $5.17 per two-dose FIG, and an economic cost of $23.34 per FIG. Vaccine and vaccine-related costs comprised the largest proportion of costs, followed by service delivery. In a one-dose scenario, the cost per FIG reduced to $2.51 (financial) and $12.18 (economic), with the largest reductions in vaccine and injection supply costs, and service delivery. CONCLUSIONS: The overall cost of Tanzania's HPV vaccination program was lower per vaccinee than costs estimated from previous demonstration projects in the region, especially in a single-dose scenario. Given the WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization's recent recommendation to update dosing schedules to either one or two doses of the HPV vaccine, these data provide important baseline data for Tanzania and may serve as a guide for improving coverage going forward. The findings may also aid in the prioritization of funding for countries that have not yet added HPV vaccines to their routine immunizations.

[Patients, Partners, Professionals, Payers and Policy Makers Preferences for Integrated Care for Multimorbidity in Germany: A Discrete Choice Experiment]. / Präferenzen von Patienten, pflegenden Angehörigen, Leistungserbringern, Kostenträgern und politischen Entscheidungsträgern bei der integrierten Versorgung in Deutschland: Ein Discrete Choice Experiment.

AIM OF THE WORK: The aim of this study was to measure and compare the relative importance that patients with multimorbidity, partners and other informal caregivers, professionals, payers and policy makers attribute to different outcome measures of integrated care (IC) programmes in Germany. METHODS: A DCE was conducted, asking respondents to choose between two IC programmes for persons with multimorbidity. Each IC programme was presented by means of attributes or outcomes reflecting the Triple Aim. They were divided into the outcomes health/ wellbeing, experience with care and costs with in total eight attributes and three levels of performance. RESULTS: The results of n=676 questionnaires showed that the attributes "enjoyment of life" and "continuity of care" received the highest ratings across all stakeholder groups. The lowest relative scores remained for the attribute "total costs" for all stakeholders. The preferences of professionals and informal caregivers differed most distinctly from the patients' preferences. The differences mostly concerned "physical functioning", which was rated highest by patients, and "person centeredness" and "continuity of care", which received the highest ratings from professionals. CONCLUSIONS: The preference heterogeneities identified in relation to the outcomes of IC programmes between different stakeholders highlight the importance of informing professionals and policy makers about the different perspectives in order to optimise the design of IC programmes. The results also support the relevance of joint decision-making and coordination processes between professionals, informal caregivers and patients.

Drivers of successful implementation of integrated care for multi-morbidity: Mechanisms identified in 17 case studies from 8 European countries.

This paper provides a deeper understanding of the mechanisms underlying implementation strategies for integrated care. As part of the SELFIE project, 17 integrated care programmes addressing multi-morbidity from eight European countries were selected and studied. Data was extracted from 'thick descriptions' of the 17 programmes and analysed both inductively and deductively using implementation theory. The following ten mechanisms for successful implementation of integrated care were identified. With regards to service delivery, successful implementers (1) commonly adopted an incremental growth model rather than a disruptive innovation approach, and found (2) a balance between flexibility and formal structures of integration. For leadership & governance, they (3) applied collaborative governance by engaging all stakeholders, and (4) distributed leadership throughout all levels of the system. For the workforce, these implementers (5) were able to build a multidisciplinary team culture with mutual recognition of each other's roles, and (6) stimulated the development of new roles and competencies for integrated care. With respect to financing, (7) secured long-term funding and innovative payments were applied as means to overcome fragmented financing of health and social care. Implementers emphasised (8) the implementation of ICT that was specifically developed to support collaboration and communication rather than administrative procedures (technology & medical devices), and (9) created feedback loops and a continuous monitoring system (information & research). The overarching mechanism was that implementers (10) engaged in alignment work across the different components and levels of the health and social care system. These evidence-based mechanisms for implementation are applicable in different local, regional and national contexts.

The patient at the centre: evidence from 17 European integrated care programmes for persons with complex needs.

BACKGROUND: As the prevalence of multi-morbidity increases in ageing societies, health and social care systems face the challenge of providing adequate care to persons with complex needs. Approaches that integrate care across sectors and disciplines have been increasingly developed and implemented in European countries in order to tackle this challenge. The aim of the article is to identify success factors and crucial elements in the process of integrated care delivery for persons with complex needs as seen from the practical perspective of the involved stakeholders (patients, professionals, informal caregivers, managers, initiators, payers). METHODS: Seventeen integrated care programmes for persons with complex needs in 8 European countries were investigated using a qualitative approach, namely thick description, based on semi-structured interviews and document analysis. In total, 233 face-to-face interviews were conducted with stakeholders of the programmes between March and September 2016. Meta-analysis of the individual thick description reports was performed with a focus on the process of care delivery. RESULTS: Four categories that emerged from the overarching analysis are discussed in the article: (1) a holistic view of the patient, considering both mental health and the social situation in addition to physical health, (2) continuity of care in the form of single contact points, alignment of services and good relationships between patients and professionals, (3) relationships between professionals built on trust and facilitated by continuous communication, and (4) patient involvement in goal-setting and decision-making, allowing patients to adapt to reorganised service delivery. CONCLUSIONS: We were able to identify several key aspects for a well-functioning integrated care process for complex patients and how these are put into actual practice. The article sets itself apart from the existing literature by specifically focussing on the growing share of the population with complex care needs and by providing an analysis of actual processes and interpersonal relationships that shape integrated care in practice, incorporating evidence from a variety of programmes in several countries.

Comparing patients' and other stakeholders' preferences for outcomes of integrated care for multimorbidity: a discrete choice experiment in eight European countries.

OBJECTIVES: To measure relative preferences for outcomes of integrated care of patients with multimorbidity from eight European countries and compare them to the preferences of other stakeholders within these countries. DESIGN: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted in each country, asking respondents to choose between two integrated care programmes for persons with multimorbidity. SETTING: Preference data collected in Austria (AT), Croatia (HR), Germany (DE), Hungary (HU), the Netherlands (NL), Norway (NO), Spain (ES), and UK. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with multimorbidity, partners and other informal caregivers, professionals, payers and policymakers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Preferences of participants regarding outcomes of integrated care described as health/well-being, experience with care and cost outcomes, that is, physical functioning, psychological well-being, social relationships and participation, enjoyment of life, resilience, person-centredness, continuity of care and total costs. Each outcome had three levels of performance. RESULTS: 5122 respondents completed the DCE. In all countries, patients with multimorbidity, as well as most other stakeholder groups, assigned the (second) highest preference to enjoyment of life. The patients top-three most frequently included physical functioning, psychological well-being and continuity of care. Continuity of care also entered the top-three of professionals, payers and policymakers in four countries (AT, DE, HR and HU). Of the five stakeholder groups, preferences of professionals differed most often from preferences of patients. Professionals assigned lower weights to physical functioning in AT, DE, ES, NL and NO and higher weights to person-centredness in AT, DE, ES and HU. Payers and policymakers assigned higher weights than patients to costs, but these weights were relatively low. CONCLUSION: The well-being outcome enjoyment of life is the most important outcome of integrated care in multimorbidity. This calls for a greater involvement of social and mental care providers. The difference in opinion between patients and professionals calls for shared decision-making, whereby efforts to improve well-being and person-centredness should not divert attention from improving physical functioning.

Digital Health Transformation of Integrated Care in Europe: Overarching Analysis of 17 Integrated Care Programs.

BACKGROUND: Digital health tools comprise a wide range of technologies to support health processes. The potential of these technologies to effectively support health care transformation is widely accepted. However, wide scale implementation is uneven among countries and regions. Identification of common factors facilitating and hampering the implementation process may be useful for future policy recommendations. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze the implementation of digital health tools to support health care and social care services, as well as to facilitate the longitudinal assessment of these services, in 17 selected integrated chronic care (ICC) programs from 8 European countries. METHODS: A program analysis based on thick descriptions-including document examinations and semistructured interviews with relevant stakeholders-of ICC programs in Austria, Croatia, Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, and the United Kingdom was performed. A total of 233 stakeholders (ie, professionals, providers, patients, carers, and policymakers) were interviewed from November 2014 to September 2016. The overarching analysis focused on the use of digital health tools and program assessment strategies. RESULTS: Supporting digital health tools are implemented in all countries, but different levels of maturity were observed among the programs. Only few ICC programs have well-established strategies for a comprehensive longitudinal assessment. There is a strong relationship between maturity of digital health and proper evaluation strategies of integrated care. CONCLUSIONS: Notwithstanding the heterogeneity of the results across countries, most programs aim to evolve toward a digital transformation of integrated care, including implementation of comprehensive assessment strategies. It is widely accepted that the evolution of digital health tools alongside clear policies toward their adoption will facilitate regional uptake and scale-up of services with embedded digital health tools.

Exploring the training and scope of practice of GPs in England, Germany and Spain / Análisis de la formación y el ámbito de práctica de los médicos de atención primaria en Inglaterra, Alemania y España

Objective: To explore general practitioner (GP) training, continuing professional development, scope of practice, ethical issues and challenges in the working environment in three European countries. Method: Qualitative study of 35 GPs from England, Germany and Spain working in urban primary care practices. Participants were recruited using convenience and snowball sampling techniques. Semi-structured interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed by four independent researchers adopting a thematic approach. Results: Entrance to and length of GP training differ between the three countries, while continuing professional development is required in all three, although with different characteristics. Key variations in the scope of practice include whether there is a gatekeeping role, whether GPs work in multidisciplinary teams or singlehandedly, the existence of appraisal processes, and the balance between administrative and clinical tasks. However, similar challenges, including the need to adapt to an ageing population, end-of-life care, ethical dilemmas, the impact of austerity measures, limited time for patients and gaps in coordination between primary and secondary care are experienced by GPs in all three countries. Conclusion: Primary health care variations have strong historical roots, derived from the different national experiences and the range of clinical services delivered by GPs. There is a need for an accessible source of information for GPs themselves and those responsible for safety and quality standards of the healthcare workforce. This paper maps out the current situation before Brexit is being implemented in the UK which could see many of the current EU arrangements and legislation to assure professional mobility between the UK and the rest of Europe dismantled

Objetivo: Analizar la formación, el desarrollo profesional continuado, el ámbito de práctica, las cuestiones éticas y los retos en el entorno laboral de los médicos de atención primaria en tres países europeos. Método: Estudio cualitativo de 35 médicos de atención primaria de Inglaterra, Alemania y España que trabajan en centros urbanos de atención primaria. Se reclutó a los participantes utilizando técnicas de muestreo de oportunidad y con efecto multiplicador. Se registraron, transcribieron y analizaron entrevistas semiestructuradas realizadas por cuatro investigadores independientes, quienes adoptaron un enfoque temático. Resultados: El acceso y la duración de la formación del médico de atención primaria difieren entre los tres países, mientras que se requiere desarrollo profesional continuado en los tres, aunque con características diferentes. Las variaciones clave en el ámbito de la práctica incluyen la existencia de un papel curativo, si el trabajo de médico de atención primaria se realiza en equipos multidisciplinarios o de manera individual, la existencia de procesos de valoración, y el equilibrio entre las tareas administrativas y clínicas. Sin embargo, los médicos de atención primaria en los tres países se enfrentan a retos similares, que incluyen la necesidad de adaptarse al envejecimiento de la población, la atención al final de la vida, el impacto de las medidas de austeridad, la limitación del tiempo de dedicación al paciente, y las brechas en cuanto a coordinación entre la atención primaria y secundaria. Conclusión: Las variaciones de la atención primaria tienen fuertes raíces históricas, que se derivan de las diferentes experiencias nacionales y el rango de los servicios clínicos proporcionados por los médicos de atención primaria. Existe una necesidad de fuentes de información accesibles para dichos médicos, y aquellos responsables de los estándares de seguridad y calidad del personal sanitario. Este trabajo esboza la situación actual que está siendo implementada en el Reino Unido con anterioridad al Brexit, que podría vislumbrar muchos de los acuerdos y legislaciones actuales de la UE para garantizar la movilidad profesional entre el Reino Unido y el resto de la Europa desmantelada

Exploring the training and scope of practice of GPs in England, Germany and Spain.

OBJECTIVE: To explore general practitioner (GP) training, continuing professional development, scope of practice, ethical issues and challenges in the working environment in three European countries. METHOD: Qualitative study of 35 GPs from England, Germany and Spain working in urban primary care practices. Participants were recruited using convenience and snowball sampling techniques. Semi-structured interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed by four independent researchers adopting a thematic approach. RESULTS: Entrance to and length of GP training differ between the three countries, while continuing professional development is required in all three, although with different characteristics. Key variations in the scope of practice include whether there is a gatekeeping role, whether GPs work in multidisciplinary teams or singlehandedly, the existence of appraisal processes, and the balance between administrative and clinical tasks. However, similar challenges, including the need to adapt to an ageing population, end-of-life care, ethical dilemmas, the impact of austerity measures, limited time for patients and gaps in coordination between primary and secondary care are experienced by GPs in all three countries. CONCLUSION: Primary health care variations have strong historical roots, derived from the different national experiences and the range of clinical services delivered by GPs. There is a need for an accessible source of information for GPs themselves and those responsible for safety and quality standards of the healthcare workforce. This paper maps out the current situation before Brexit is being implemented in the UK which could see many of the current EU arrangements and legislation to assure professional mobility between the UK and the rest of Europe dismantled.

Defining good health and care from the perspective of persons with multimorbidity: results from a qualitative study of focus groups in eight European countries.

OBJECTIVES: The prevalence of multimorbidity is increasing in many Western countries. Persons with multimorbidity often experience a lack of alignment in the care that multiple health and social care organisations provide. As a response, integrated care programmes are appearing. It is a challenge to evaluate these and to choose appropriate outcome measures. Focus groups were held with persons with multimorbidity in eight European countries to better understand what good health and a good care process mean to them and to identify what they find most important in each. METHODS: In 2016, eight focus groups were organised with persons with multimorbidity in: Austria, Croatia, Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain and the UK (total n=58). Each focus group followed the same two-part procedure: (1) defining (A) good health and well-being and (B) a good care process, and (2) group discussion on prioritising the most important concepts derived from part one and from a list extracted from the literature. Inductive and deductive analyses were done. RESULTS: Overall, the participants in all focus groups concentrated more on the care process than on health. Persons with multimorbidity defined good health as being able to conduct and plan normal daily activities, having meaningful social relationships and accepting the current situation. Absence of shame, fear and/or stigma, being able to enjoy life and overall psychological well-being were also important facets of good health. Being approached holistically by care professionals was said to be vital to a good care process. Continuity of care and trusting professionals were also described as important. Across countries, little variation in health definitions were found, but variation in defining a good care process was seen. CONCLUSION: A variety of health outcomes that entail well-being, social and psychological facets and especially experience with care outcomes should be included when evaluating integrated care programmes for persons with multimorbidity.

Towards incentivising integration: A typology of payments for integrated care.

Traditional provider payment mechanisms may not create appropriate incentives for integrating care. Alternative payment mechanisms, such as bundled payments, have been introduced without uniform definitions, and existing payment typologies are not suitable for describing them. We use a systematic review combined with example integrated care programmes identified from practice in the Horizon2020 SELFIE project to inform a new typology of payment mechanisms for integrated care. The typology describes payments in terms of the scope of payment (Target population, Time, Sectors), the participation of providers (Provider coverage, Financial pooling/sharing), and the single provider/patient involvement (Income, Multiple disease/needs focus, and Quality measurement). There is a gap between rhetoric on the need for new payment mechanisms and those implemented in practice. Current payments for integrated care are mostly sector- and disease-specific, with questionable impact on those with the most need for integrated care. The typology provides a basis to improve financial incentives supporting more effective and efficient integrated care systems.

The SELFIE framework for integrated care for multi-morbidity: Development and description.

BACKGROUND: The rise of multi-morbidity constitutes a serious challenge in health and social care organisation that requires a shift from disease- towards person-centred integrated care. The aim of the current study was to develop a conceptual framework that can aid the development, implementation, description, and evaluation of integrated care programmes for multi-morbidity. METHODS: A scoping review and expert discussions were used to identify and structure concepts for integrated care for multi-morbidity. A search of scientific and grey literature was conducted. DISCUSSION: meetings were organised within the SELFIE research project with representatives of five stakeholder groups (5Ps): patients, partners, professionals, payers, and policy makers. RESULTS: In the scientific literature 11,641 publications were identified, 92 were included for data extraction. A draft framework was constructed that was adapted after discussion with SELFIE partners from 8 EU countries and 5P representatives. The core of the framework is the holistic understanding of the person with multi-morbidity in his or her environment. Around the core, concepts were grouped into adapted WHO components of health systems: service delivery, leadership & governance, workforce, financing, technologies & medical products, and information & research. Within each component micro, meso, and macro levels are distinguished. CONCLUSION: The framework structures relevant concepts in integrated care for multi-morbidity and can be applied by different stakeholders to guide development, implementation, description, and evaluation.

Patient-centeredness of integrated care programs for people with multimorbidity. Results from the European ICARE4EU project.

INTRODUCTION: This paper aims to support the implementation of patient-centered care for people with multimorbidity in Europe, by providing insight into ways in which patient-centeredness is currently shaped in integrated care programs for people with multimorbidity in European countries. METHODS: In 2014, expert organizations in 31 European countries identified 200 integrated care practices ('programs') in 25 countries of which 123 were included in our study. Managers of 112 programs from 24 countries completed a questionnaire about characteristics and results of the program, including questions on elements of patient-centeredness. Eight programs that were considered especially innovative or promising were analyzed in depth. RESULTS: Programs used various methodologies to involve people with multimorbidity in decision-making, such as motivational interviewing and narrative counseling techniques. In 79 programs individual care plans were developed together with patients. Few programs had already been systematically evaluated, but in one program it was shown that working with individual care plans based on patients' goals and resources resulted in increased patient satisfaction with care. Various barriers to deliver patient-centered care were reported, including inadequate knowledge and skills of both patients and professionals. CONCLUSION: In many European countries innovative approaches are applied to increase patient-centeredness of care for people with multimorbidity. To assess their potential benefits and conditions for implementation, thorough process and outcome evaluations of programs are urgently needed.

Relevant models and elements of integrated care for multi-morbidity: Results of a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: In order to provide adequate care for the growing group of persons with multi-morbidity, innovative integrated care programmes are appearing. The aims of the current scoping review were to i) identify relevant models and elements of integrated care for multi-morbidity and ii) to subsequently identify which of these models and elements are applied in integrated care programmes for multi-morbidity. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted in the following scientific databases: Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, PsycInfo, Scopus, Sociological Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, and Web of Science. A search strategy encompassing a) models, elements and programmes, b) integrated care, and c) multi-morbidity was used to identify both models and elements (aim 1) and implemented programmes of integrated care for multi-morbidity (aim 2). Data extraction was done by two independent reviewers. Besides general information on publications (e.g. publication year, geographical region, study design, and target group), data was extracted on models and elements that publications refer to, as well as which models and elements are applied in recently implemented programmes in the EU and US. RESULTS: In the review 11,641 articles were identified. After title and abstract screening, 272 articles remained. Full text screening resulted in the inclusion of 92 articles on models and elements, and 50 articles on programmes, of which 16 were unique programmes in the EU (n=11) and US (n=5). Wagner's Chronic Care Model (CCM) and the Guided Care Model (GCM) were most often referred to (CCM n=31; GCM n=6); the majority of the other models found were only referred to once (aim 1). Both the CCM and GCM focus on integrated care in general and do not explicitly focus on multi-morbidity. Identified elements of integrated care were clustered according to the WHO health system building blocks. Most elements pertained to 'service delivery'. Across all components, the five elements referred to most often are person-centred care, holistic or needs assessment, integration and coordination of care services and/or professionals, collaboration, and self-management (aim 1). Most (n=10) of the 16 identified implemented programmes for multi-morbidity referred to the CCM (aim 2). Of all identified programmes, the elements most often included were self-management, comprehensive assessment, interdisciplinary care or collaboration, person-centred care and electronic information system (aim 2). CONCLUSION: Most models and elements found in the literature focus on integrated care in general and do not explicitly focus on multi-morbidity. In line with this, most programmes identified in the literature build on the CCM. A comprehensive framework that better accounts for the complexities resulting from multi-morbidity is needed.

Integrated Diabetes Care Delivered by Patients - A Case Study from Bulgaria.

INTRODUCTION: Increasing numbers of persons are living with multiple chronic diseases and unmet medical needs in Bulgaria. The Bulgarian 'Diabetic care' non-profit (DCNPO) programme aims to provide comprehensive integrated care focusing on people with diabetes and their co-morbidities. METHODS: The DCNPO programme was selected as one of eight 'high potential' programmes in the Innovating Care for People with Multiple Chronic Conditions (ICARE4EU) project, covering 31 European countries. Data was first gathered with a questionnaire after which semi-structured interviews with project staff and participants were conducted during a site visit. RESULTS: The programme trains diabetic patients to act as carers, case managers, self-management trainers and health system navigators for diabetic patients and their family. The programme improved care coordination and patient-centered care by offering free care delivered by a multidisciplinary team. It facilitates the collaboration between patients, volunteers, health providers and the community. Internal evaluations demonstrate reduced hospital admissions and avoidable amputations, with consequent cost savings for the health care system. CONCLUSION: Integrated care provided by volunteering patients can empower people suffering from diabetes and their co-morbidities and address health and social inequalities in resource-poor settings. It can also contribute to an increased trust and improved satisfaction among vulnerable patients with complex care needs.

Deciding when physicians are unfit to practise: an analysis of responsibilities, policy and practice in 11 European Union member states.

In 1974, the European Economic Community established mutual recognition of medical qualifications obtained in any of its member states. Subsequently, a series of directives has elaborated on the initial provisions, with the most recent enacted in 2013. However, greater movement of physicians across borders and some high-profile scandals have raised questions about how to prevent a physician sanctioned in one country from simply moving to another, without undermining the principle of free movement. A survey of key informants in 11 European Union (EU) member states was supplemented by a review of peer-reviewed and grey literature, with the results validated by independent reviewers. It examined processes, adjudicative and disciplinary measures that are in place to evaluate physicians about whom concerns arise, and related sanctions, along with other aspects of professional standards and regulation. Overall, responses varied greatly between participating countries, with respect to the institutions responsible for the regulation of medical professions, the investigation processes in place, and the terminology used in each member state. While the types of sanction (removal from the register of medical professionals and/or licence revocation, suspension, dismissal, reprimand, warnings, fines, as well as additional education and training) applied are similar, both the roles of the individuals involved and the level of public disclosure of information vary considerably. However, some key features, such as the involvement of professional peers in disciplinary panels and the involvement of courts in criminal cases, are similar in most member states studied. Given the variation in the regulatory context, individuals and processes involved that is illustrated by our findings, a common understanding of definitions of what constitutes competence to practise, its impairment and its potential impact on patient safety becomes particularly important. Public disclosure of disciplinary outcomes is already applied by some member states, but additional measures should be considered to protect medical professionals from undue consequences.

Informed consumer or unlucky visitor? A profile of German patients who received dental services abroad.

OBJECTIVES: A common characteristic of sending countries in cross-border dental care is that of high costs and/or high copayments for dental services. This study aims to provide an insight into the characteristics of German patients receiving planned and emergency (unplanned) dental care abroad and their satisfaction with received services. METHODS: The Europabefragung is a postal survey carried out by Techniker Krankenkasse for patients who are treated in EU/EEA countries. This study uses data from the Europabefragung 2012. The survey was sent to 45 189 individuals; descriptive statistics for the subset of respondents who received emergency (unplanned) or planned dental treatment are presented. RESULTS: There were 18 339 responses to the questionnaire, out of which 17 543 were deemed valid; 1416 respondents had received emergency (unplanned) (78%) or planned (22%) dental care and were included in the analysis. There were clear differences between unplanned and planned treatments regarding country and type of treatment as well as satisfaction with different aspects of treatment and the need for follow-up care. Overall, satisfaction with treatment was high for both groups; individuals who had received planned treatment were more satisfied on all aspects of care and reported a need for follow-up care less frequently. CONCLUSIONS: While German patients who received both emergency (unplanned) and planned services abroad are mostly satisfied with their experience, some concerns arise with regard to continuity of care. Types of information provided to patients seeking care abroad and dissemination modalities should be carefully planned.