[General Practitioners' Experiences with COVID-19: a Survey After the First Wave of the Pandemic in March/April 2020]. / Erfahrungen von HausärztInnen mit COVID-19 und der Pandemie ­ ein Survey nach der ersten Pandemiewelle im März/April 2020.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (Mar-Apr 2020) posed significant challenges for primary care. The goal of this study was to analyse the burden of the crisis situation as experienced by the general practitioners (GPs) at its beginning and over the course of the pandemic and to identify factors predictive of the sense of being overburdened. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, a total of 6300 randomly selected GPs in four federal states of Germany were contacted per post in order to survey changes in health care they provided and their psychological burden in the context of the pandemic between August and October 2020. RESULTS: The response rate was 23%; 46% of the participants were female. At the beginning of the pandemic, 40% of the participants experienced a high or a very high level of being overburdened; later on, it was only 10%. With increasing numbers of COVID patients, the sense of being overburdened increased, as also their perceived capability to care for COVID patients. Predictors of a sense of being overburdened were, among others, a high level of psychological stress, excessive organising efforts, poor capability to care for COVID patients, and scarce supply of protective equipment. CONCLUSION: Despite a sense of being overburdened initially, GPs felt increasingly capable of caring for COVID patients. To help GPs in future crisis situations like this pandemic, organization of care should be simplified to the extent possible so that they can focus on patient care.

Concordance of Patient Expectations Regarding Guideline Recommendations for Management of Psychosocial Factors in Low Back Pain: A Cross-sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for low back pain (LBP) management recommend addressing psychosocial risk factors such as stress and depression, which have been shown to play a prognostic role in nonspecific LBP. LBP management has been found to diverge from published recommendations. The reasons why remain unclear and may be related to patient views and expectations regarding the causes and treatment of LBP. OBJECTIVES: We examined the degree to which patient views regarding psychosocial factors coincided with core recommendations and statements of the German national guideline for nonspecific LBP, as well as factors affecting those views. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Data were gathered from June 2018 through September 2018 in 13 general practices in Mecklenburg-Wets Pomerania, Germany. METHODS: Practice staff approached all patients entering the practice, regardless of the reason for consultation, during 3 consecutive days and offered study participation. After providing informed consent, patients received a questionnaire to complete prior to consultation. Nonresponse bias was addressed by using inverse probability weights. Descriptive analysis and multivariate logistic regression models were performed. RESULTS: A total of 977 patient questionnaires were included in the analysis. One-third to one-half of the patients disagreed and one-third agreed that psychological problems and their treatment play a role in LBP management. A significant proportion (13-25%) was undecided. However, relaxation techniques were well accepted. Patients with higher education levels, poorer health status, and more severe LBP but no pain medication in the last 12 months were more likely to expect psychosocial diagnostics and treatment and regarded relaxation techniques as potentially helpful. More severe pain and lower levels of education were associated with disagreement with guideline recommendations and statements regarding management of psychosocial factors. LIMITATIONS: Recall bias is possible, as patients were asked to recall their LBP history. However, we limited the recall time to the last 12 months. Data on income, employment status and co-morbidities were not collected and may have affected the responses. However, educational status, health status, and age were collected. CONCLUSION: A significant portion of patients did not agree that psychosocial aspects should be addressed in LBP. Pain severity, health status, level of education, and previous treatment experience appear to affect patient views. These results highlight the importance of careful patient counseling regarding psychosocial factors and screening for psychosocial problems in LBP, when indicated. Additionally, educational initiatives may help bring patient expectations into agreement with recommendations.

Concordance of patient beliefs and expectations regarding the management of low back pain with guideline recommendations - a cross-sectional study in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain is a common reason for patients to seek medical care. Physician non-adherence to clinical guidelines has been observed. We investigated the extent to which patient expectations correspond to recommendations of the German national guideline for management of low back pain (G-LBP) and whether patient characteristics, history of LBP and previous treatment experience are associated with expectations. METHODS: A cross-sectional study including patients from 13 general practices was conducted. Data were collected using a questionnaire. Inverse probability weights were used to address non-response bias. Descriptive analysis and multivariate logistic regression models were performed. RESULTS: A total of 977 patients were included in analyses (median age 57 years, 39% male). 75% of patients reported experiencing LBP currently or within the last year. More than 65% indicated they would agree to forgo further examinations if their LBP was judged by their physician to be of no serious concern. This was associated with the highest level of education and no prior imaging, and negatively associated with good-to-poor health status and moderate-to-severe pain intensity. 40% of participants expected imaging. The highest educational level, female gender and no prior imaging were associated with a decreased expectation of imaging. 70% expected prescriptions for massages. Females, participants with good-to-poor health status, current LBP or LBP in the last 12 months had an increased expectation for massages. Expectations for injection therapy (45%) were mainly associated with previous injections. Expectations for physiotherapy (64%) were associated with female gender, lower educational level, good-to-poor health status, current LBP or in the last 12 months. The perspective that daily activities should be continued (66%) was associated with female gender and higher educational level. Participants who agreed to the statement 'There is no effective treatment for LBP' (11%) had a poor health status, current LBP and a severe pain intensity. CONCLUSION: Patient views regarding LBP management are partially concordant with guideline recommendations and are strongly influenced by previous treatment experiences and education level. Exploration of patient expectations and experiences in LBP treatment may help minimize dissatisfaction of patients expecting treatments not endorsed by guidelines and simultaneously increase physician guideline adherence.

Fairness and objectivity of a multiple scenario objective structured clinical examination.

Introduction: The aim of the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is a standardized and fair assessment of clinical skills. Observing second clinical year medical students during a summative OSCE assessing a General Practice clerkship, we noticed that information exchange with peers led to a progressively faster and overly focused management of simulations. Therefore, we established a Multiple Scenario-OSCE (MS-OSCE) where all students had to manage the same chief complaint at a station but it's underlying scenarios being randomly changed during students' rotation through their parcours. We wanted to ensure they fully explore differential diagnosis instead of managing their task influenced by shared information. We wanted to assess if a MS-OSCE violates the assumption of objectivity and fairness given that students are not tested with the same scenarios. Methods: We developed and piloted five OSCE stations (chest pain, abdominal pain, back pain, fatigue and acute cough) with two or three different underlying scenarios each. At each station these scenarios randomly changed from student to student. Performance was assessed with a checklist and global rating. The effect of scenarios and raters on students' grades was assessed calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient with a fixed effect two level linear model. Results: A total of 169 students and 23 raters participated in the MS-OSCE. The internal consistency over all stations was 0.65 by Cronbach's alpha. The difference of the mean grades between the scenarios of a given chief complaint ranged from 0.03 to 0.4 on a 1 to 5 grading scale. The effect of scenarios on the variance of the final grades at each station ranged from 4% to 9% and of raters from 20% to 50% when adjusted for students' skills. Conclusions: The effect of different scenarios on the grades was relevant but small compared to the effect of raters on grades. Improving rater training is more important to ensure objectivity and fairness of MS-OSCE than providing the same scenario to all students.

[Drug Prescribing for Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease in General Practice: a Cross-Sectional Study]. / Arzneimittelverordnung bei Patienten mit chronischer Niereninsuffizienz in der hausärztlichen Versorgung.

BACKGROUND: Many drugs require dose adjustment or are contraindicated in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) to avoid adverse events. The aims of this study were to assess if medication was appropriately dose adjusted in patients with CKD in primary care, to identify medications that were frequently prescribed inappropriately and to identify factors predicting mal-prescription. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional observational study in 34 general practioners' offices, assessing the medication of patients with CKD stage ≥ 3 according to the corresponding pharmaceutical product information. Additional information was extracted from recommendations of scientific societies and regulatory authorities. Contraindicated and overdosed medications were identified. Predictive factors for inadequate prescribing were analyzed with multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: 589 patients (Ø 78 years, 63 % female) with CKD stage ≥ 3 were included. A total of 5102 medications were extracted from the medication sheets (94,6 % regular, 5,4 % "as needed"). 4,2 % were judged as being inadequate according to pharmaceutical information (2,1 % contraindicated, 2,1 % overdosed). 173 patients (29 %) had ≥ 1 inadequate prescription. The proportion of inadequate prescriptions fell to 3,5 % after adjustment for the most recent recommendations of scientific societies and regulatory authorities. Most frequent inappropriate prescriptions were ACE-inhibitors, diuretics, oral antidiabetic drugs, methotrexate and potassium supplements. Most important predictors for inadequate prescriptions were CKD stage ≥ 3b and number of medications. CONCLUSION: A quarter of all patients had a least one inadequate prescription. The overall proportion of inadequately prescribed drugs was low. Adjustment for recommendations by scientific societies and regulatory authorities further reduced the number of inadequate prescriptions. Valid data on the clinical relevance of inadequate prescriptions is scarce and further research is required. Because of the time and effort needed to assess all medications, future quality improvement projects should focus on CKD stage ≥ 3b, patients with polypharmacy and crucial medication.