Resilience of the primary healthcare system: perspectives of German stakeholders at primary care interfaces during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Introduction: Worldwide, the primary care sector played a key role in coping with the challenges of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Methods: The aim of this study was to explore the resilience of the German primary healthcare system during the second wave of the pandemic from the perspective of identified interface stakeholders, i.e., representatives of hospitals, district offices, and medical associations. Qualitative data from interviews and focus groups were analyzed according to a resilience framework. Results: The main findings include a gap in knowledge transfer, unstructured allocation of responsibilities, and a resulting unregulated flow of patients. Social brokers supported care coordination and knowledge transfer. The response to the capacity to cope with uncertainties was slow and chaotic at the system level and heterogeneous at the individual level. Building on previous relationships fostered functioning communication, while competition in primary care was identified as a barrier to resilience. Conclusion: Implications for further research and for strengthening the resilience of primary care can be derived based on this study.

Core values of employed general practitioners in Germany - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: "Core values" help to guide practice of health care delivery. The core values of general practice are described in the European definition of general practice by WONCA, e.g. a holistic, comprehensive and continuous care. They may be associated with the idea that the general practitioner is the owner of the practice rather than an employee. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to examine the core values of employed GPs in their professional setting and their practical manifestation. METHODS: From April to May 2021, we conducted 17 semi-structured telephone-interviews with employed GPs in two districts in Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany. The data were analysed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: We identified twelve core values, including values relevant to patient care and values relevant to the lives of employed GPs. Values with high relevance were job satisfaction, the professional distance from patients, collaboration and collegial exchange, comprehensive care, adequate consultation time and availability to patients. Values with heterogeneous relevance were continuity of care, waiting times and medical autonomy. The value "availability" of employed GPs to patients was associated with both patient care and personal life. The limited availability of employed GPs was accompanied by tensions between these two trends and other values. CONCLUSION: The values of employed GPs are partly consistent with the current WONCA definition of general practice. There were also indications of new values. The increase in the proportion of employed GPs implies a need to reflect on the core values of general practice, taking into account factors on the part of employed GPs, patients, and practice organisation.

Influence of Cooperation Work on Management Continuity of Ambulatory Cardiovascular Care: A Cross-Sectional Exploratory Study in Germany.

Introduction: A wide range of factors influence coordination and continuity of care. The aim of this study was to explore how management continuity of cardiovascular-related ambulatory care is influenced by the following network characteristics: presence of a case coordinator, network reciprocity, network composition and team climate. Methods: This cross-sectional observational study included three written surveys. The primary outcome management continuity of cardiovascular care was measured with the team/cross-boundary scale in the Nijmegen Continuity Questionnaire. The final analysis comprised a multivariate linear multilevel model with the predictors: presence of a case coordinator, network reciprocity, network composition and team climate. Results: Eighteen general practices with 83 health workers and 340 patients participated. The linear multilevel regression analysis showed a positive influence of team climate on cross-boundary continuity of care (b-coefficient 0.44, 95% confidence interval 0.09-0.78, p = 0.02). No statistically significant influence was measured for the other predictors. Discussion: To improve integrated care, therefore, emphasis should also be placed on promoting the team climate within individual practices. Regarding network characteristics, further research is needed, especially in larger practices. Conclusion: This study showed that team climate had an independent, relevant and statistically significant association with cross-boundary continuity of cardiovascular ambulatory care.

Hospital Admission and Discharge: Lessons Learned from a Large Programme in Southwest Germany.

Introduction: In the context of a GP-based care programme, we implemented an admission, discharge and follow-up programme. Description: The VESPEERA programme consists of three sets of components: pre-admission interventions, in-hospital interventions and post-discharge interventions. It was aimed at all patients with a hospital stay participating in the GP-based care programme and was implemented in 7 hospitals and 72 general practices in southwest Germany using a range of strategies. Its' effectiveness was evaluated using readmissions within 90 days after discharge as primary outcome. Questionnaires with staff were used to explore the implementation process. Discussion: A statistically significant effect was not found, but the effect size was similar to other interventions. Intervention fidelity was low and contextual factors affecting the implementation, amongst others, were available resources, external requirements such as legal regulations and networking between care providers. Lessons learned were derived that can aid to inform future political or scientific initiatives. Conclusion: Structured information transfer at hospital admission and discharge makes sense but the added value in the context of a GP-based programme seems modest. Primary care teams should be involved in pre- and post-hospital care.

Primary care patients' experiences of video consultations for depression and anxiety: a qualitative interview study embedded in a randomized feasibility trial.

BACKGROUND: Integrated mental health care models that provide rapid access to video consultations with mental health specialists for primary care patients are a promising short-term, low-threshold treatment option and may reduce waiting times for specialist care. This qualitative study, nested within a randomized feasibility trial, aimed to explore participants' views on this type of care model, its influence on the lived experience of patients, and barriers and facilitators for its delivery. METHODS: In five primary care practices, 50 adults with depression and/or anxiety were randomly assigned to either an integrated care model (maximum of five video consultations with a mental health specialist) or usual care (primary care or another treatment option). Prior to obtaining the trial results, interviews were held with participants who had received video consultations. Interviews were transcribed and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Twenty of the 23 patients who received video consultations participated in the interviews. Patients engaged well with the care model and reported positive effects on their most pressing needs, while denying safety concerns. Generally, they perceived the usability of video consultations as high, and temporary connectivity failures were not considered a substantial barrier. We identified two key mechanisms of impacts on the patients' lived experience: fast access to specialist mental healthcare and the emerging rapport with the specialist. In particular, patients with no prior mental healthcare experience indicated that familiarity with the primary practice and their physician as a gatekeeper were important facilitators of proactive treatment. CONCLUSIONS: From the patients' perspective, mental health care models integrating video consultations with mental health specialists into primary care are linked to positive lived experiences. Our findings imply that primary care physicians should promote their role as gatekeepers to (1) actively engage patients, (2) apply integrated care models to provide a familiar and safe environment for conducting mental health care video consultations, and (3) be able to regularly assess whether certain patients need in-person services. Scaling up such models may be worthwhile in real-world service settings, where primary care physicians are faced with high workloads and limited specialist services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS00015812.

Opinion seeking behaviour of healthcare providers in ambulatory cardiovascular care in Germany: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare providers' inclination to seek or lead other providers' opinions on clinical topics may influence healthcare practices, particularly regarding their alignment across different providers in controversial domains. This study aimed to explore opinion-seeking behaviours of general practitioners and their impacts on clinical opinions in ambulatory cardiovascular care in Germany. METHODS: Between 2019 and 2021, we performed a written survey in two samples of general practitioners and one sample of self-employed cardiologists in three German states. The general practitioners were asked to identify a person they deemed influential on their views on cardiovascular conditions. Their self-perceived opinion leadership and opinion seeking behaviours were then measured, using a validated 12-item-questionnaire. General practitioners and cardiologists were requested to indicate their agreement with three potentially controversial aspects of cardiovascular ambulatory care. Potential impacts on the general practitioners' views, including local cardiologists' opinions, were examined using multi-level linear regression models. RESULTS: A total of 129 general practitioners and 113 cardiologists returned the questionnaire. 68.50% of general practitioners named an opinion leader, mainly cardiologists outside of their practice. General practitioners perceived themselves as opinion seeking and as opinion leading at the same time. Views on the presented controversial topics were mixed among both general practitioners and cardiologists. Self-reported opinion leadership behaviour of general practitioners was associated with their views on one of the three topics. No such associations were found for opinion seeking behaviours and the views of local cardiologists. CONCLUSION: While most general practitioners named a cardiovascular opinion leader and saw themselves as opinion seeking regarding cardiovascular issues, they simultaneously perceived themselves as opinion leading, suggesting that opinion leadership and opinion seeking are not mutually exclusive concepts. The views of local cardiologists were not associated with the general practitioners' view, suggesting that local medical specialists do not necessarily influence the surrounding opinion seekers' views per se. TRIAL REGISTRATION: We registered the study prospectively on 7 November 2019 at the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS, www.drks.de ) under ID no. DRKS00019219.

Health care professionals' perspectives on the utilisation of a remote surveillance and care tool for patients with COVID-19 in general practice: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Most COVID-19 patients with severe symptoms are treated in hospitals. General practices are responsible for assessing most ambulatory patients. However, they face several challenges managing COVID-19 patients, and those with non-COVID-19 conditions. In April of 2020, we designed a software tool for the structured surveillance of high-risk home-quarantined COVID-19 patients in general practice (CovidCare) including several telephone monitorings, in order to support general practices and early identification of severe courses. This study presents the qualitative results of a mixed-methods process evaluation study on CovidCare. METHODS: In a qualitative process evaluation study conducted between March and May 2021, we explored the perspectives of seven general practitioners (GPs) and twelve VERAHs (medical care assistants with special training) on CovidCare using semi-structured interviews based on the RE-AIM framework (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance). We used deductive qualitative content analysis employing the RE-AIM framework to assess the utilisation and implementation of CovidCare. RESULTS: Overall, most health care professionals were satisfied with CovidCare. They highlighted 1) a good orientation for the management of COVID-19 patients, especially due to a high level of uncertainty at the beginning of the pandemic, 2) the possibility to gain new knowledge, and 3) the structured data collection as facilitators for the implementation of CovidCare. Moreover, CovidCare reduced the workload for GPs while some VERAHs perceived a higher workload as they were responsible for large parts of the CovidCare management. However, CovidCare positively affected the VERAHs' job satisfaction as most patients provided positive feedback and felt less anxious about coping with their disease. Previous experience with the software and an easy integration into daily practice were considered to be crucial utilisation drivers. Time and personnel resources were identified as major barriers. To further improve CovidCare, participants suggested a less comprehensive version of CovidCare, the expansion of inclusion criteria as well as an app for the patients' self-management. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 surveillance and care tool for COVID-19 patients with increased risk was perceived as useful by GPs and VERAHs. Supportive remote health care tools such as CovidCare are a viable means to maintain comprehensive and continuous health care during a pandemic and may strengthen the primary care system. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00022054 ; date of registration: 02/06/2020.

Resilience of the primary health care system - German primary care practitioners' perspectives during the early COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Primary care is a relevant pillar in managing not only individual, but also societal medical crises. The COVID-19 pandemic has demanded a rapid response from primary care with interventions in the health care system. The aim of this paper was to explore the responses of primary care practitioners (PCP) during the early COVID-19 pandemic and to analyze these with a view on the resilience of the primary health care system from the PCPs perspective. METHODS: Shortly after the first COVID-19 wave (July-October 2020) n = 39, semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with PCP in practices and at Corona contact points (CCP) in Baden-Wuerttemberg (Germany). Qualitative content analysis was applied, and the evolved categories were related to in a framework for resilience. RESULTS: Primary care had an overall strong ability to adapt and show resilience, albeit with wide variance in speed and scope of the responses. When coping with uncertainty, the reasons given by PCPs in favor of opening a CCP mainly involved intrinsic motivation and self-initiative; the reasons against doing so were i.e. the lack of personal protective equipment, problems with space, and worries about organizational burden. A strong association existed between the establishment of a CCP and the use of resources (i.e. existing networks, personal protective equipment, exercising an office of professional political function). Our study predominantly found adaptive aspects for measures taken at medical practices and transformative aspects for setting up outpatient infection centers. PCPs played an important role in the coordination process (i.e. actively transferring knowledge, integration in crisis management teams, inclusion in regional strategic efforts) reaching a high level in the dimensions knowledge and legitimacy. The dimension interdependence repeatedly came into focus (i.e. working with stakeholders to open CCP, interacting among different types of primary care facilities, intersectoral interfaces). A need for regional capacity planning was visible at the time of the interviews. CONCLUSIONS: The results can be used for practical and research-based institutional and capacity planning, for developing resilience in primary care and for augmentation by perspectives from other stakeholders in the primary health care system.

[Long COVID: Care and support needs from the perspective of "long-haul" patients and primary care practitioners - a mixed-methods study from Baden-Wuerttemberg]. / Versorgungsbedarfe zu Long-COVID aus Sicht von Betroffenen und Hausärzt*innen ­ eine Mixed-Methods-Studie aus Baden-Württemberg.

INTRODUCTION: The approaches to cope with the challenges of providing medical care to patients with symptoms of long COVID are multidisciplinary and involve primary care worldwide. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences and ideas for continued development of medical care of long COVID from the patients' (PAT) and primary care practitioners' (PCP) perspective. METHODS: Between the third and fourth COVID-19 wave in Germany (July to September 2021), a mixed methods study was conducted by inviting patients and PCPs in two neighboring districts (urban and rural) in Baden-Wuerttemberg to a paper-based questionnaire with both closed and open questions. On the part of the PCPs a written, anonymized, complete survey was conducted, on the part of symptomatic COVID long-haulers an anonymized online survey with announcement of the study by multiple recruiting processes. Qualitative content analysis was applied to free text entries. The quantitative results were analyzed mainly descriptively. RESULTS: The responses of n = 72 PCPs (response rate 12%) and n = 126 PAT showed a heterogeneous assessment regarding the satisfaction with medical care for long COVID as well as the perception of the attitude towards patients and their disease in both groups. Uncertainty and dealing with it played a relevant role in both groups as well. The professional medical knowledge was assessed by 3,1 (self-assessment PCPs) and 3,2 (PAT) on average using a five-point Likert scale (1 = not applicable; 5 = applicable). The request for a structured overall concept with competent contact points and coordination of medical care for long COVID patients emerged out of the statements of both groups. CONCLUSION: The results support an interdisciplinary, intersectoral and interprofessional stepped-care concept for long COVID in Germany with PCPs as the first contact persons, integration of specialized contact points and knowledge transfer. Therefore, it appears to be both reasonable and appropriate to establish regional networks with links between regional outpatient medical care structures and the university medical sector.

HIOPP-6 - a pilot study on the evaluation of an electronic tool to assess and reduce the complexity of drug treatment considering patients' views.

BACKGROUND: A complex drug treatment might pose a barrier to safe and reliable drug administration for patients. Therefore, a novel tool automatically analyzes structured medication data for factors possibly contributing to complexity and subsequently personalizes the results by evaluating the relevance of each identified factor for the patient by means of key questions. Hence, tailor-made optimization measures can be proposed. METHODS: In this controlled, prospective, exploratory trial the tool was evaluated with nine general practitioners (GP) in three study groups: In the two intervention groups the tool was applied in a version with (GI_with) and a version without (GI_without) integrated key questions for the personalization of the analysis, while the control group (GC) did not use any tools (routine care). Four to eight weeks after application of the tool, the benefits of the optimization measures to reduce or mitigate complexity of drug treatment were evaluated from the patient perspective. RESULTS: A total of 126 patients regularly using more than five drugs could be included for analysis. GP suggested 117 optimization measures in GI_with, 83 in GI_without, and 2 in GC. Patients in GI_with were more likely to rate an optimization measure as helpful than patients in GI_without (IRR: 3.5; 95% CI: 1.2-10.3). Thereby, the number of optimization measures recommended by the GP had no significant influence (P = 0.167). CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that an automated analysis considering patient perspectives results in more helpful optimization measures than an automated analysis alone - a result which should be further assessed in confirmatory studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered retrospectively at the German Clinical Trials register under DRKS-ID DRKS00025257 (17/05/2021).

Prevalence and patient-rated relevance of complexity factors in medication regimens of community-dwelling patients with polypharmacy.

PURPOSE: To describe the prevalence of complexity factors in the medication regimens of community-dwelling patients with more than five drugs and to evaluate the relevance of these factors for individual patients. METHODS: Data were derived from the HIOPP-6 trial, a controlled study conducted in 9 general practices which evaluated an electronic tool to detect and reduce complexity of drug treatment. The prevalence of complexity factors was based on the results of the automated analysis of 139 patients' medication data. The relevance assessment was based on the patients' rating of each factor in an interview (48 patients included for analysis). RESULTS: A median of 5 (range 0-21) complexity factors per medication regimen were detected and at least one factor was observed in 131 of 139 patients. Almost half of these patients found no complexity factor in their medication regimen relevant. CONCLUSION: In most medication regimens, complexity factors could be identified automatically, yet less than 15% of factors were indeed relevant for patients as judged by themselves. When assessing complexity of medication regimens, one should especially consider factors that are both particularly frequent and often challenging for patients, such as use of inhalers or tablet splitting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The HIOPP-6 trial was registered retrospectively on May 17, 2021, in the German Clinical Trials register under DRKS-ID DRKS00025257.

Health providers' experiences with mental health specialist video consultations in primary care: a qualitative study nested within a randomised feasibility trial.

OBJECTIVE: Despite available effective treatments for mental health disorders, few patients in need receive even the most basic care. Integrated telepsychiatry services may be a viable option to increase access to mental healthcare. The aim of this qualitative process evaluation embedded in a randomised controlled feasibility trial was to explore health providers' experiences with a mental healthcare model integrating mental health specialist video consultations (MHSVC) and primary care. METHODS: A qualitative process evaluation focusing on MHSVC in primary care was conducted. In 13 semistructured interviews, we assessed the experience of all mental health specialists, primary care physicians and medical assistants who participated in the trial. A thematic analysis, focusing on the implementation, mechanisms of impact and context, was applied to investigate the data. RESULTS: Considering (1) the implementation, participants evaluated the consultations as feasible, easy to use and time saving. Concerning (2) the mechanisms of impact, the consultations were regarded as effective for patients. Providers attributed the patients' improvements to two key aspects: the familiarity of the primary care practice and the fast access to specialist mental healthcare. Mental health specialists observed trustful therapeutic alliances emerging and described their experience as comparable to same-room care. However, compared with same-room care, specialists perceived the video consultations as more challenging and sometimes more exhausting due to the additional effort required for establishing therapeutic alliances. Regarding (3) the intervention's context, shorter travel distances for patients positively affected the implementation, while technical failures, that is, poor Internet connectivity, emerged as the main barrier. CONCLUSIONS: MHSVCs in primary care are feasible and successful in improving access to mental healthcare for patients. To optimise engagement and comfort of both patients and health providers, future work should focus on empirical determinants for establishing robust therapeutic alliances with patients receiving MHSVC (eg, leveraging non-verbal cues for therapeutic purposes). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00015812; Results.

Surveillance and care for confirmed and suspected patients with COVID-19 in general practice (CovidCare): study protocol for an observational trial.

BACKGROUND: A SARS-CoV-2 infection can lead from asymptomatic through to critical disease in a dynamic and unpredictable course within a few days. The challenge in outpatient monitoring the highly contagious COVID-19 disease during the ongoing pandemic is to filter severe courses followed by admission to hospital with the aim of preventing an overburdening of clinics. However, little is known of the effect of risk factors on the course of the infection of outpatient patients. To support general practices in managing high risk patients, we designed a COVID-19 surveillance and care tool (CovidCare). It includes an initial assessment of yet known risk factors and symptoms and a continuous telephone monitoring of signs and symptoms. This study aims to investigate the effects of different risk factors on the course of the COVID-19 disease, utilisation of different health care services and to gain insights into the utilisation of CovidCare in general practices. METHODS: We will conduct a multi-centered prospective, longitudinal non-controlled observational trial of COVID-19 patients in general practices. Overall, 700 GPs who participate in general-practice centered care by the AOK Baden-Württemberg (large German sickness fund) are eligible and will be invited for study participation, including adult, outpatient COVID-19 patients (or urgent suspicion and ≥ 50 years) with at least one additional known risk factor, who participate in general-practice centered care. The primary outcome is hospitalisation due to COVID-19. Secondary outcomes are diagnosis of pneumonia, utilisation of palliative care, mortality rate, anxiety and identification of predictive risk factors. Quantitative data analysis will focus on valid descriptive figures and mixed regression models. The accompanying process evaluation is based on interviews and questionnaires from general practice staff and patients. The analysis of the process evaluation is descriptive and explorative. DISCUSSION: The use of the COVID-19 surveillance and care tool is expected to encourage the provision of structured quality of care during the ongoing pandemic. This trial will provide an understanding of the COVID-19-disease and the effect of several risk factors on the course of the disease and health care utilisation. The results can be used for a better management of the COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00022054 .

Influence of physician networks on prescribing a new ingredient combination in heart failure: a longitudinal claim data-based study.

BACKGROUND: Since 2016, the combination of sacubitril/valsartan, which combines an angiotensin receptor and neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), has been recommended in the guidelines for the treatment of heart failure. The adoption of new drugs may be influenced by collaboration and exchange between physicians. We aimed to determine whether characteristics of the professional networks of prescribing physicians were associated with the prescribing of ARNI in Germany. METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal analysis based on claims data in 2016-2018 in Germany. The characteristics of ambulatory care physicians' networks were determined in the analysis of the patient-sharing networks of physicians in 2017. Binary logistic regression analysis with the outcome 'prescribes ARNI in 2018' (present or absent) was carried out, using network characteristics as predictors, adjusted for specialty and sociodemographic characteristics of physicians. RESULTS: The network analysis included 8370 physicians, who had 144,636 connections. Prescribers had more connections to other physicians compared to non-prescribers (median 31 vs. 23). Regression analysis showed that the numbers of linkages to prescribers of ARNI were positively associated with prescribing ARNI. For 6-10 connections, the average marginal effect (AME) was 0.04 (confidence interval [CI] 95% 0.01-0.06) and for > 10 links the AME 0.07 (CI 95% 0.05-0.10) compared to 0-5 connections to prescriber. CONCLUSION: Physicians who shared patients with many other physicians were more likely to prescribe ARNI, independent of physicians' specialty. This suggested that collaboration and exchange on the basis of patient-sharing with other physicians influenced their medication prescribing decisions.

Beliefs and practices among primary care physicians during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Baden-Wuerttemberg (Germany): an observational study.

BACKGROUND: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic various ambulatory health care models (SARS-CoV-2 contact points: Subspecialised Primary Care Practices, Fever Clinics, and Special Places for Corona-Testing) were organised in a short period in Baden-Wuerttemberg, a region in Southern Germany. The aim of these SARS-CoV-2 contact points was to ensure medical treatment for patients with (suspected) and without SARS-CoV-2 infection. The present study aimed to assess the beliefs and practices of primary care physicians who either led a Subspecialised Primary Care Practice or a Primary Care Practice providing care as usual in Baden-Wuerttemberg during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was based on a paper-based questionnaire in primary care physicians during the first wave of the pandemic. Participants were identified via the web page of the Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians Baden-Wuerttemberg. The questionnaire was distributed in June and July 2020. It measured knowledge, practices, self-efficacy and fears towards SARS-CoV-2, using newly developed questions. Data was descriptively analysed. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-five participants (92 leads of SARS-CoV-2 contact points/ 63 leads of primary care practices) completed the questionnaire. Out of 92 leads of SARS-CoV-2 contact points 74 stated to lead n Subspecialised Primary Care Practices. About half participants of both groups did not fear an own infection with the novel virus (between 50.8% and 62.2%), however about 75% feared financial loss. Knowledge was gained using various sources; main sources were the Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (between 82.5% and 83.8%) and the German Society for Hygiene and Microbiology (RKI) (between 88.9% and 95.9%). Leads of Subspecialised Primary Care Practice felt more confident to perform anamnestic/diagnostic procedures (p < 0.001). The same was found for the confidence level regarding decision-making concerning the further treatment (p < 0.001). Several prevention measures to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2 were adopted. Subspecialised Primary Care Practice had treated on average more patients with (suspected) COVID-19 (mean 408.12) than primary care practices (mean 83.8) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that the Subspecialised Primary Care Practice that were implemented during the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic contributed containment of the pandemic. Leads of Subspecialised Primary Care Practice indicated that physical separation of patients with potential SARS-CoV-2 infection was easier compared to those who continued working in their own practice. Additionally, leads of Subspecialised Primary Care Practice felt more confident in dealing with patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study has been prospectively registered at the German Clinical Trial Register (DRKS00022224).

Mental Health Specialist Video Consultations Versus Treatment-as-Usual for Patients With Depression or Anxiety Disorders in Primary Care: Randomized Controlled Feasibility Trial.

BACKGROUND: Most people affected by depression or anxiety disorders are treated solely by their primary care physician. Access to specialized mental health care is impeded by patients' comorbidity and immobility in aging societies and long waiting times at the providers' end. Video-based integrated care models may leverage limited resources more efficiently and provide timely specialized care in primary care settings. OBJECTIVE: The study aims to evaluate the feasibility of mental health specialist video consultations with primary care patients with depression or anxiety disorders. METHODS: Participants were recruited by their primary care physicians during regular practice visits. Patients who had experienced at least moderate symptoms of depression and/or anxiety disorders were considered eligible for the study. Patients were randomized into 2 groups receiving either treatment-as-usual as provided by their general practitioner or up to 5 video consultations conducted by a mental health specialist. Video consultations focused on systematic diagnosis and proactive monitoring using validated clinical rating scales, the establishment of an effective working alliance, and a stepped-care algorithm within integrated care adjusting treatments based on clinical outcomes. Feasibility outcomes were recruitment, rate of loss to follow-up, acceptability of treatment, and attendance at sessions. Effectiveness outcomes included depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), burden of specific somatic complaints (Somatic Symptom Disorder-B Criteria Scale-12), recovery (Recovery Assessment Scale-German [RAS-G]), and perception of chronic illness care (Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care), which were measured at baseline and 16 weeks postallocation by assessors blinded to the group allocation. RESULTS: A total of 50 patients with depression and/or anxiety disorders were randomized, 23 in the intervention group and 27 in the treatment-as-usual group. The recruitment yield (number randomized per number screened) and the consent rate (number randomized per number eligible) were 69% (50/73) and 86% (50/58), respectively. Regarding acceptability, 87% (20/23) of the participants in the intervention group completed the intervention. Of the 108 planned video consultations, 102 (94.4%) were delivered. Follow-up rates were 96% (22/23) and 85% (23/27) for the intervention and control groups, respectively. The change from baseline scores at postmeasurement for the No Domination by Symptoms domain of recovery (RAS-G) was somewhat higher in the intervention group than in the control group (Mann-Whitney U test: rank-biserial r=0.19; 95% CI -0.09 to 0.46; P=.18). We did not detect any notable differences between the intervention and control groups in terms of other effectiveness outcomes. We did not observe any serious adverse events related to the trial. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention and study procedures were found to be feasible for patients, primary care practice staff, and mental health specialists. A sufficiently powered pragmatic trial on mental health specialist video consultations should be conducted to investigate their effectiveness in routine care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00015812; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00015812.

[Primary Care Strategies and Cooperation During the First Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany]. / Primärärztliche Strategien und Zusammenarbeit während der ersten Phase der COVID-19-Pandemie in Baden-Württemberg, Deutschland.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to give an early snapshot of primary care strategies that were implemented to cope with the early period of the COVID-19 pandemic in Baden-Wuerttemberg (Germany). METHODS: In June 2020, all 271 outpatient SARS-CoV-2 contact points, established by the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (16 centers for testing, 204 specialized family practices, 51 Outpatients Corona Centers), and a randomly generated sample of 400 primary care practices of Baden-Wuerttemberg were invited to take part in a paper-based questionnaire. The data were gathered anonymously and analysed descriptively. RESULTS: Out of those invited, n=63 (15.8%) primary care practices and n=92 (33.9%) SARS-CoV-2 contact points participated; 78.7% of the primary care practices cooperated with SARS-CoV-2 contact points (n=48). In all, 92.1% had implemented a compulsory registration by phone for patients with (suspected) COVID-19 (n=58) and 81% offered consultation exclusively by phone or video in case of a mild courses (n=51). The new outpatient SARS-CoV-2 contact points were established in collaboration with several stakeholders, mainly led by primary care physicians (n=76, 82.6%) and almost 50% of these were established in March 2020 (n=42, 48.3%). The most commonly reported method of registration was regulated mainly by primary care practices (n=88, 95.7%) and public health departments (n=74, 80.4%). In 92.4% (n=85) of cases, it was possible to register by phone. The consultation response was most commonly given in the form of oral information to the patient (n=65, 77.4%). Less then 50% of the SARS-CoV-2 contact points used standardized sheets for registration, documentation and consultation. The assessment of future primary care structures for (suspected) COVID-19 patients were heterogeneous. CONCLUSIONS: Effort, improvisation and collaboration were required for a successful and rapid implementation of measures for primary care during the initial period of the COVID-19 pandemic. Impulses for ongoing development of primary care strategies during a pandemic can be derived out of these results.

Associations between NT-proBNP and psychosocial factors in patients with chronic systolic heart failure.

OBJECTIVE: B-type natriuretic peptides (BNPs) and their biologically inactive N-terminal parts, namely, NT-proBNPs, are used for diagnostic and prognostic purposes in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). Associations of BNPs and NT-proBNPs with emotional factors may exist. As depressive and anxious comorbidities and decreases in quality of life (QoL) are common in CHF patients, we explored the associations between NT-proBNP and depression, anxiety, and QoL in patients with CHF using cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. METHODS: We used baseline and one-year follow-up NT-proBNP measurements and sociodemographic and clinical data from 180 patients with systolic CHF from a case management study. Depression was assessed with the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9), anxiety was assessed with the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale 7 (GAD-7), and QoL was determined using the Short Form 36 (SF-36) health survey. RESULTS: Univariate correlation analyses showed significant negative associations between NT-proBNP and the scores of four out of eight QoL domains (range: r = -0.159 to -0.285, p = .042 to 0.001) of the SF-36 but not between NT-proBNP and depression and anxiety scores. In cross-sectional and longitudinal multivariate regression analyses, no significant associations between NT-proBNP and psychometric variables were found. CONCLUSION: In patients with stable, chronic systolic heart failure, only weak relations between NT-proBNP and QoL exist, but no relations between NT-proBNP and depression and anxiety were found. These findings are placed in the current research context of this topic. Implications for future experimental studies are discussed.

Cooperation networks of ambulatory health care providers: exploration of mechanisms that influence coordination and uptake of recommended cardiovascular care (ExKoCare): a mixed-methods study protocol.

BACKGROUND: As the number of elderly and multimorbid patients increases, healthcare has become more complex. This requires good coordination of treatment and care given the various  health care professionals involved (e.g. general practitioners, medical specialists, physicians' assistants). Lack of coordination jeopardizes seamless, evidence-based treatment and care, and eventually reduces clinical effectiveness. The aim of the study is a) to describe and explore information transfer and interprofessional collaboration in ambulatory cardiac care, b) to describe and explore the role of provider networks from the perspective of patients and providers, focusing on healthcare coordination and the uptake of recommended practices. METHODS: Two related studies are planned: a) an observational study of healthcare provider networks, involving 600 patients with chronic (atherosclerosis-related) cardiovascular disease from 40 general practices and up to 320 healthcare providers (general practitioners, medical specialist, physicians' assistants), and b) a qualitative interview study with up to 80 healthcare professionals and patients. Furthermore, we will analyse claims data of a large German health insurer to explore provider networks in ambulatory cardiac care. DISCUSSION: The project aims to provide insight into factors, processes and mechanisms of information transfer and interprofessional collaboration, which affect seamless, evidence-based healthcare practice. This will contribute to the design of strategies for improving health care practice and to the development of measures of coordination for future research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: We registered the study prospectively on 7 November 2019 at the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS, www.drks.de) under ID no. DRKS00019219 .