Regional differences in the patient population of general practices in northern Germany: results of a mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study was to explore patient types in general practitioner (GP) practices and to quantify the regional differences of the frequencies of these patient types in northern Germany. DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a mixed-methods study based on focus groups and standardised interviews with GPs. All counties and independent cities within a radius of 120 km around Hamburg were assigned one of three regional categories (urban areas, environs, rural areas). The focus groups were analysed using qualitative content analysis. Relative frequencies of consultations by patient types and differences between the regions were calculated. Logistic regression analyses were used to identify differences among regions. PARTICIPANTS: Nine focus groups with 65 GPs (67.7% male). From the 280 initially recruited GPs 211 (65.4% male) could be personally interviewed. RESULTS: Four themes with 27 patient types were derived from the focus groups: patients classified by morbidity, sociodemographic characteristics, special care needs and patient behaviour. Five patient characteristics were significantly more prevalent in urban areas than rural areas: patients with migration background and culturally different disease concepts (OR 1.23; 95% CI 1.06 to 1.42), privately insured patients (OR 1.17; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.31), educationally disadvantaged patients with low health literacy (OR 1.11; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.19), patients with psychiatric disorders (OR 1.07; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.12) and senior citizens living on their own without caregivers (OR 1.05; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.31). Three patient types were significantly less prevalent in urban areas: minors accompanied by their parents (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.61 to 0.83), patients with poor therapy adherence (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.95) and patients with dementia (OR 0.90; 95% CI 0.82 to 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: GPs could compensate the specific needs of their patients with medical training aligned with the requirements of their region. Urban GPs need skills treating patients with psychiatric, social and cultural problems, rural GPs regarding the care for children or noncompliant patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02558322.

Regional and patient-related factors influencing the willingness to use general practitioners as coordinators of the treatment in northern Germany - results of a cross-sectional observational study.

BACKGROUND: In most countries, the general practitioner (GP) is the first point of contact in the healthcare system and coordinator of healthcare. However, in Germany it is possible to consult an outpatient specialist even without referral. Coordination by a GP might thus reduce health expenditures and inequalities in the healthcare system. The study describes the patients' willingness/commitment to use the GP as coordinator of healthcare and identifies regional and patient-related factors associated with the aforementioned commitment to the GP. METHODS: Cross-sectional observational study using a standardised telephone patient survey in northern Germany. All counties and independent cities within a radius of 120 km around Hamburg were divided into three regional categories (urban areas, environs, rural areas) and stratified proportionally to the population size. Patients who had consulted the GP within the previous three months, and had been patients of the practice for at least three years were randomly selected from medical records of primary care practices in these districts and recruited for the study. Multivariate linear regression models adjusted for random effects at the level of federal states, administrative districts and practices were used as statistical analysis methods. RESULTS: Eight hundred eleven patients (25.1%) from 186 practices and 34 administrative districts were interviewed. The patient commitment to a GP attained an average of 20 out of 24 possible points. Significant differences were found by sex (male vs. female: + 1.14 points, p < 0.001), morbidity (+ 0.10 per disease, p = 0.043), education (high vs. low: - 1.74, p < 0.001), logarithmised household net adjusted disposable income (- 0.93 per step on the logarithmic scale, p = 0.004), regional category (urban areas: - 0.85, p = 0.022; environs: - 0.80, p = 0.045) and healthcare utilisation (each GP contact: + 0.30, p < 0.001; each contact to a medical specialist: - 0.75, p = 0.018). Professional situation and age were not significantly associated with the GP commitment. CONCLUSION: On average, the patients' commitment to their GP was relatively strong, but there were large differences between patient groups. An increase in the patient commitment to the GP could be achieved through better patient information and targeted interventions, e.g. to women or patients from regions of higher urban density. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02558322).

Regional differences in reasons for consultation and general practitioners' spectrum of services in northern Germany - results of a cross-sectional observational study.

BACKGROUND: Among other factors, the patients' consultation reasons and GPs' spectrum of services determine the process and outcome of the medical treatment. So far, however, there has been little information on differences in reasons for consultation and GPs' services between urban and rural areas. Our study's goal was thus to investigate these factors in relation to the regional location of GPs' practices. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional observational study based on standardised GP interviews in a quota sampling design. All counties and independent cities within a radius of 120 km around Hamburg were divided into three regional categories (urban area, environs, rural area) and stratified proportionally to the population size. Differences in the number of reasons for consultation and services were analysed by multivariate linear regressions in mixed models adjusted for random effects on the levels of the German federal states and administrative districts. Differences in individual consultation reasons and services were identified by logistic regression via stepwise forward and backward selection. RESULTS: Primary care practices in 34 of the 37 selected administrative districts (91.9%) were represented in the dataset. In total, 211 GPs were personally interviewed. On average, GPs saw 344 patients per month with a slightly higher number of patients in rural areas. They reported 59.1 ± 15.4 different reasons for consultation and 30.3 ± 3.9 different services. There was no statistically significant regional variation in the number of different consultation reasons, but there was a broader service spectrum by rural GPs (ß = - 1.42; 95% confidence interval - 2.75/- 0.08; p = 0.038) which was statistically explained by a higher level of medical training. Additionally, there were differences in the frequency of individual consultation reasons and services between rural and urban areas. CONCLUSION: GPs in rural areas performed more frequently services usually provided by medical specialists in urban areas. This might be caused by a low availability of specialists in rural areas. The association between medical training and service spectrum might imply that GPs compensate the specific needs of their patients by completing advanced medical training before or after setting up a medical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02558322).

[Patients with chronic diseases in emergency rooms in Germany : Cross-sectional analysis of consultations, reasons for use, and discharge diagnosis]. / Chronisch Kranke in deutschen Notaufnahmen : Querschnittsanalysen zu Konsultationsanlässen, Gründen für die Inanspruchnahme und Entlassungsdiagnosen.

BACKGROUND: The number of patients in emergency rooms without a medical emergency is increasing. Outpatient services for mutual support and relief between the in-patient and out-patient sector are not yet fully established. AIM OF THE WORK: The aim was to determine the extent to which patients in emergency rooms have real medical emergencies by comparing patients with at least two and those with a maximum of one chronic illness. An additional aim was to identify factors influencing the previous use of outpatient structures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study participants included emergency room patients from the cross-sectional study "PiNo-Nord." All persons in five emergency rooms in northern Germany between October 2015 and July 2016 who were not treated as "immediate" or "very urgent" were interviewed. An exploratory data analysis and multivariate logistic regression were performed. RESULTS: The 293 patients with ≥2 chronic diseases were just as often a medical emergency compared to the 847 patients with a maximum of 1 chronic disease. The most frequent occasions for consultation were musculoskeletal trauma (33%, n = 293 vs. 42%, n = 847) or trauma of the skin (11%, n = 293 vs. 13%, n = 847). In both groups, the general practitioner or specialist caregiver, as well as diagnostic or treatment options, rarely played a role in visiting the emergency department. The strongest predictors of previous outpatient treatment were the duration of the appeal in the last six months, a high subjective treatment urgency, the presence of at least two chronic conditions, and a consultation event concerning the musculoskeletal injuries. CONCLUSIONS: In both patient groups, no evidence of unnecessary visits to the emergency room was found. For the most part, outpatient structures are used in advance and the emergency department is only visited in the event of an actual medical emergency.

Patients Attending Emergency Departments.

BACKGROUND: The number of patients in emergency departments has risen steadily in recent years, with a particular increase in patients not requiring urgent treatment. The aim of this study is to characterize this group of patients with respect to their sociodemographic features, health status, and reasons for attending an emergency department. METHODS: PiNo Nord is a cross-sectional observational study representing two full working weeks in five different hospitals. Patients were questioned in personal interviews, and medical diagnoses were documented. The data were analyzed with multivariate logistic regressions in mixed multilevel models. Predictors for the subjectively perceived treatment urgency were identified by stepwise backward selection. RESULTS: The 1175 patients questioned had an average age of 41.8 years and 52.9% were male. 54.7% said the degree of their treatment urgency was low. 41.3% had visited the emergency department on their own initiative, 17.0% on the advice or referral of their primary care physician, and 8.0% on the advice or referral of a specialist. The strongest predictors for low subjective treatment urgency were musculoskeletal trauma (odds ratio [OR] 2.18), skin conditions (OR 2.15), and the momentary unavailability of a primary care physician (OR 1.70). CONCLUSION: More than half of the patients do not think their condition requires urgent treatment and thus do not meet the definition of a medical emergency. Patients' reasons for visiting the emergency department are varied; aside from the treatment urgency of the health condition itself, the reason may lie in perceived structural circumstances and individual preferences.

Factors associated with general practitioners' awareness of depression in primary care patients with heart failure: baseline-results from the observational RECODE-HF study.

BACKGROUND: Depression is more prevalent in patients with heart failure (HF) than in those without, but its detection is complicated by the symptom overlap between the two diseases. General practitioners (GPs) are the first point of contact for patients with HF. Therefore, this study aims to investigate GPs' awareness of depression in their HF patients and factors associated with this awareness. METHODS: In this cross-sectional, observational study 3224 primary care patients with HF were screened for depressive symptomatology using an algorithm based on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the 9-item subscale on Depression of the Patient Health Questionnaire, and selected items from the PROMIS Depression and Anxiety scales. The 272 GPs of all patients involved in the study were interviewed by telephone regarding their patients' somatic and psychological comorbidities. The awareness rates of depressive symptomatology by the patients' GPs are analyzed using descriptive statistics. Logistic regression analyses are applied to investigate the patient- and GP-based factors associated with the GPs' awareness of depressive symptomatology. RESULTS: GPs were aware of their patients' depressive symptomatology in 35% of all cases. Factors associated with the awareness of depressive symptomatology were: higher patient education levels, a history of depression known to the GP, GP-consultations due to emotional distress within the last 6 months, a higher frequency of GP-contacts within the last 6 months, a higher New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification and more severe depressive symptomatology. The GPs' characteristics, including further education in psychology/psychiatry, were not associated with GP awareness. CONCLUSIONS: Many aspects, including the definition of awareness and the practical issues in primary care, may contribute to the unexpectedly low awareness rates of depressive symptomatology in HF patients in primary care. Awareness rates might increase, if GPs encouraged their patients to talk about emotional distress, held detailed medical interviews including a patient's history of depression and payed special attention to HF patients with low education levels. However, it remains to be investigated whether GPs' judgement of depressive symptomatology is a better or worse indicator for the future prognosis and quality of life of HF patients than psychiatry based diagnostic criteria.