General practitioners' concepts on issuing out-of-pocket prescriptions for hypnotics and sedatives in Germany.

BACKGROUND: In Germany, almost 50% of prescriptions for benzodiazepines and drugs as Zolpidem and Zopiclone are as out-of-pocket (OOP) prescriptions-requiring patients to buy the drug at their own expense-although almost 90% of the population has statutory health insurance covering medication costs. OBJECTIVE: To understand why general practitioners (GPs) choose this prescribing method since needed medications are insurance covered, and unnecessary drugs should not be prescribed at all. METHODS: In this qualitative study, 17 semi-structured interviews with GPs were conducted, audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were analysed with grounded theory to extract a model explaining the described behaviour. RESULTS: Knowing the significant medical risks and insecurity about regulations makes GPs wish to avoid hypnotics and sedatives. They achieve this by 'Creating a barrier' (central phenomenon) and employing the strategy 'Using an out-of-pocket prescription', which not only generates costs for the patient but also reduces the physicians´ legal and financial accountability. The perceived patient type, expected problem duration and diagnosis influence the decision about the prescription form: patients with an alcohol or drug addiction or those with 'uncomplicated' insomnia are more likely to receive an OOP prescription. Patients with any psychiatric diagnosis will likely receive a statutory health insurance prescription. DISCUSSION: Current regulations do not provide guidance to GPs regarding hypnotics and sedatives. A clear regulatory framework and guidelines could possibly reduce physicians' defensive attitudes about these drugs and their use of OOP prescriptions. The approach to use OOP prescriptions as a barrier to reduce patients' medication use lacks evidence regarding effectiveness.

Interprofessional collaboration in nursing homes (interprof): development and piloting of measures to improve interprofessional collaboration and communication: a qualitative multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Given both the increase of nursing home residents forecast and challenges of current interprofessional interactions, we developed and tested measures to improve collaboration and communication between nurses and general practitioners (GPs) in this setting. Our multicentre study has been funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (FK 01GY1124). METHODS: The measures were developed iteratively in a continuous process, which is the focus of this article. In part 1 "exploration of the situation", interviews were conducted with GPs, nurses, nursing home residents and their relatives focusing on interprofessional interactions and medical care. They were analysed qualitatively. Based on these results, in part 2 "development of measures to improve collaboration", ideas for improvement were developed in nine focus groups with GPs and nurses. These ideas were revisited in a final expert workshop. We analysed the focus groups and expert workshop using mind mapping methods, and finally drew up the compilation of measures. In an exploratory pilot study "study part 3" four nursing homes chose the measures they wanted to adopt. These were tested for three months. Feasibility and acceptance of the measures were evaluated via guideline interviews with the stakeholders which were analysed by content analyses. RESULTS: Six measures were generated: meetings to establish common goals, main contact person, standardised pro re nata medication, introduction of name badges, improved availability of nurse/GP and standardised scheduling/ procedure for nursing home visits. In the pilot study, the measures were implemented in four nursing homes. GPs and nurses reviewed five measures as feasible and acceptable, only the designation of a "main contact person" was not considered as an improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Six measures to improve collaboration and communication could be compiled in a multistep qualitative process respecting the perspectives of involved stakeholders. Five of the six measures were positively assessed in an exploratory pilot study. They could easily be transferred into the daily routine of other nursing homes, as no special models have to exist in advance. Impact of the measures on patient oriented outcomes should be examined in further research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

Home visits - central to primary care, tradition or an obligation? A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Home visits are claimed to be a central element of primary care. However, the frequency with which home visits are made is declining both internationally and in Germany despite the increase in the number of chronically ill elderly patients. Given this, the question arises as to how to ensure sufficient primary health care for this vulnerable patient group. The aim of this study was to explore German general practitioners' (GPs) attitudes with regard to the feasibility, burden and outlook of continued home visits in German primary care. METHODS: Qualitative semi-structured interviews were carried out with 24 GPs from the city of Hannover, Germany, and its rural surroundings. Data was analysed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The GPs indicated that they frequently conduct home visits, but not all of them were convinced of their benefit. Most were not really motivated to undertake home visits but some felt obliged to. The basic conditions covering home visits were described as unsatisfactory, in particular with respect to reimbursement and time constraints. House calls for vulnerable, elderly people remained undisputed, whereas visits of a social nature were mostly deleted. Urgent house calls were increasingly delegated to the emergency services. Visits to nursing homes were portrayed as being emotionally distressing. GPs considered good cooperation with nursing staff the key factor to ensure a successful nursing home visit. The GPs wanted to ease their work load while still ensuring quality home care but were unable to suggest how this might be achieved. Better financial compensation was proposed most often. The involvement of specially trained nurses was considered possible, but viewed with resentment. CONCLUSIONS: Home visits are still an integral aspect of primary care in Germany and impose a considerable workload on many practices. Though the existing situation was generally perceived as unsatisfactory, German GPs could not envisage alternatives if asked to consider whether the current arrangements were sustainable in the future. To guarantee an unaltered quality of primary home care, German GPs and health care policy makers should actively initiate a debate on the need for and nature of home visits in the future.