End-of-life care in Germany between 2016 and 2020 - A repeated cross-sectional analysis of statutory health insurance data.

BACKGROUND: The Hospice and Palliative Care Act of 2015 aimed at developing and regulating the provision of palliative care (PC) services in Germany. As a result of the legal changes, people with incurable diseases should be enabled to experience their final stage of life including death according to their own wishes. However, it remains unknown whether the act has impacted end-of-life care (EoLC) in Germany. OBJECTIVE: The present study examined trends in EoLC indicators for patients who died between 2016 and 2020, in the context of Lower Saxony, Germany. METHODS: Repeated cross-sectional analysis was conducted on data from the statutory health insurance fund AOK Lower Saxony (AOK-LS), referring to the years 2016-2020. EoLC indicators were: (1) the number of patients receiving any form of outpatient PC, (2) the number of patients receiving generalist outpatient PC and (3) specialist outpatient PC in the last year of life, (4) the onset of generalist outpatient PC and (5) the onset of specialist outpatient PC before death, (6) the number of hospitalisations in the 6 months prior to death and (7) the number of days spent in hospital in the 6 months prior to death. Data for each year were analysed descriptively and a comparison between 2016 and 2020 was carried out using t-tests and chi-square tests. RESULTS: Data from 160,927 deceased AOK-LS members were analysed. The number of patients receiving outpatient PC remained almost consistent over time (2016 vs. 2020 p = .077). The number of patients receiving generalist outpatient PC decreased from 28.4% (2016) to 24.5% (2020; p < .001), whereas the number of patients receiving specialist outpatient PC increased from 8.5% (2016) to 11.2% (2020; p < .001). The onset of generalist outpatient PC moved from 106 (2016) to 93 days (2020; p < .001) before death, on average. The onset of specialist outpatient PC showed the reverse pattern (2016: 55 days before death; 2020: 59 days before death; p = .041). CONCLUSION: Despite growing needs for PC at the end of life, the number of patients receiving outpatient PC did not increase between 2016 and 2020. Furthermore, specialist outpatient PC is being increasingly prescribed over generalist outpatient PC. Although the early initiation of outpatient PC has been proven valuable for the majority of people at the end of life, generalist outpatient PC was not initiated earlier in the disease trajectory over the study period, as was found to be true for specialist outpatient PC. Future studies should seek to determine how existing PC needs can be optimally met within the outpatient sector and identify factors that can support the earlier initiation of especially generalist outpatient PC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study "Optimal Care at the End of Life" was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00015108; 22 January 2019).

[Advancement of an intermediate level of outpatient palliative care - A Delphi study]. / Weiterentwicklung der "Besonders qualifizierten und koordinierten palliativmedizinischen Versorgung" (BQKPMV) ­ Ergebnisse einer Delphi-Befragung.

INTRODUCTION: In the course of the further development of palliative care in Germany, an agreement on an intermediate level of outpatient palliative care, the so-called BQKPMV (specially qualified and coordinated palliative homecare) was realised in 2017. Family physicians play a central role in the BQKPMV; among other things, they are responsible for the coordination of care. There are indications that barriers exist in the practical implementation of the BQKPMV and that an adjustment may be necessary. This work is part of the Polite project (analysis of the implementation of an intermediate level of outpatient palliative care in the reality of care and recommendations for further development) and aims at building consensus on recommendations for the further development of the BQKPMV. METHODS: Between June and October 2022, an online Delphi survey was conducted among experts for outpatient palliative care from all over Germany (providers, professional associations, funders, science, self-government). The content of the recommendations, which were voted on as part of the Delphi survey, was based on the results of both the first project phase and an expert workshop. Participants rated the extent to which they agree with a) the clarity of the wording, and b) the relevance for the further development of the BQKPMV on a four-point Likert scale. Consensus was assumed when 75% of the participants (rather) agreed to a recommendation with regard to both criteria. If no consensus was reached, the recommendations were adjusted using the free text comments and presented again in the next round. Descriptive analyses were applied. RESULTS: Forty-five experts participated in the first Delphi round, 31 in the second, and 30 in the third round (43% female, average age 55). Consensus was obtained for seven recommendations in round 1, for six in round 2 and for three in round 3. These final 16 recommendations relate to four topics: awareness and implementation of the BQKPMV (6 recommendations), framework conditions of the BQKPMV (3), discrimination of forms of care (5), and cooperation at the interfaces of care (2). DISCUSSION: The Delphi method was used to identify concrete recommendations for the further development of the BQKPMV that are relevant to health care practice. In the final set of recommendations, a particular focus lies on increasing awareness and communicating information about the scope of the health care service, added value and framework conditions of the BQKPMV. CONCLUSION: The results provide an empirically sound basis for the further development of the BQKPMV. They show a concrete need for change and highlight that an optimisation of the BQKPMV is necessary.

Public Perceptions of Climate Change and Health-A Cross-Sectional Survey Study.

Climate change is inseparably linked to human health. Although there is growing awareness of the threats to human health caused by climate change, it remains unclear how the German population perceives the relevance of climate change and its health consequences. Between May and September 2022, German residents were invited to participate in a cross-sectional online survey that explored three content areas: (1) the relevance of climate change, (2) health risks in connection with climate change and (3) collective and individual options for action against climate change. A total of 697 full data sets were collected for analysis (72% female, 51% ≥55 years old). The majority of participants agreed that human-induced climate change exists (85%), and that it has an impact on human health (83%). They also perceived the global population to be more strongly impacted by climate change than themselves (89% versus 68%). Most participants (76%) claimed to personally contribute to climate protection and 23% felt that their city or council contributed to climate protection. Although the majority of participants saw climate change as a threat to human health, they perceived other population groups to be most strongly affected. Cognitive dissonance might explain this lack of individual concern and one approach to addressing such distorted perceptions might be the dissemination of appropriate risk communication with health professionals involved in the communication.

Structured implementation of the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool in general practice - A prospective interventional study with follow-up.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) play a key role in the provision of primary palliative care (PC). The identification of patients who might benefit from PC and the timely initiation of patient-centred PC measures at the end of life are essential, yet challenging. Although different tools exist to support these key tasks, a structured approach is often missing. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed at implementing the German version of the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT-DE™) in general practices, following a structured and regional approach, in order to evaluate the effects of this tool on the identification of patients with potential PC needs and the initiation of patient-centred PC measures. METHODS: The intervention of this mixed-methods study comprised a standardised training of 52 GPs from 34 general practices in two counties in Lower Saxony, Germany, on the use of the SPICT-DE™. The SPICT-DE™ is a clinical tool which supports the identification of patients with potential PC needs. Subsequently, over a period of 12 months, GPs applied the SPICT-DE™ in daily practice with adult patients with chronic, progressive diseases, and completed a follow-up survey 6 months after the initial patient assessment. The outcome parameters were alterations in the patient's clinical situation, and the type and number of initiated patient-centred PC measures during the follow-up interval. Additionally, 12 months after the standardised training, GPs provided feedback on their application of the SPICT-DE™. RESULTS: A total of 43 GPs (n = 15 female, median age 53 years) out of an initial sample of 52 trained GPs assessed 580 patients (n = 345 female, median age 84 years) with mainly cardiovascular (47%) and cancer (33%) diseases. Follow-up of 412 patients revealed that 231 (56%) experienced at least one critical incident in their disease progression (e.g. acute crisis), 151 (37%) had at least one hospital admission, and 141 (34%) died. A review of current treatment/medication (76%) and a clarification of treatment goals (53%) were the most frequently initiated patient-centred PC measures. The majority of GPs deemed the SPICT-DE™ practical (85%) and stated an intention to continue applying the tool in daily practice (66%). CONCLUSIONS: The SPICT-DE™ is a practical tool that supports the identification of patients at risk of deterioration or dying and promotes the initiation of patient-centred PC measures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (N° DRKS00015108; 22/01/2019).

[Implementing an intermediate level of outpatient palliative care in Germany: Experiences and views of specialised outpatient palliative care teams]. / Implementierung der "Besonders qualifizierten und koordinierten palliativmedizinischen Versorgung" (BQKPMV) ­ Erfahrungen und Sichtweisen von SAPV-Teams.

INTRODUCTION: In the course of the implementation of the German Hospice and Palliative Care Act of 2015, an agreement was reached to establish an intermediate level of outpatient palliative care (BQKPMV) in Germany. By its degree of specialization, this form of care is located between generalist and specialist outpatient palliative care (AAPV/SAPV). It is still unclear which experiences the SAPV teams have gained with the approach of BQKPMV and how it affects their care routines. METHODS: Between May and August 2021, the project team developed and tested a questionnaire for SAPV teams about their experiences with and views on BQKPMV as a care approach at the interface to SAPV. In September 2021, all 58 teams providing SAPV in Lower Saxony were invited to participate. The information provided by the participants was analyzed using descriptive statistics and frequency analyses. RESULTS: With 52 participants (78% female; mean age of 50 years), a participation rate of 89.7 % was achieved. Twenty-eight participants indicated that they were aware of BQKPMV and its content, and 10 had received a request for cooperation under the BQKPMV program. Fifty percent of these 10 requests (n = 5) led to a cooperation agreement. The following questions were answered only by participants who were familiar with the content of BQKPMV (N = 28). For a majority of 15 participants, the BQKPMV has (rather) no part in day-to-day care in SAPV. From the participants' point of view, BQKPMV largely fails to supplement the existing regulations of SAPV in a meaningful way (n = 14 is not [likely] true), to promote smooth transition between the forms of outpatient palliative care (n = 13 is not [likely] true) and to facilitate communication among the professionals involved (n = 13 is not [likely] true). DISCUSSION: These results show that the participating SAPV teams know little about BQKPMV and that there has been little cooperation at the interface between SAPV and BQKPMV. In day-to-day care, there is a clear separation between SAPV and BQKPMV provided by general practitioners, which corresponds with the proposition of the legislator by excluding simultaneous provision of both forms of care. The close cooperation between general practitioners and SAPV teams, which is also required under the agreement regarding BQKPMV, leads to challenges in day-to-day care. CONCLUSION: It remains unclear whether and to what extent the close cooperation envisaged in the framework of BQKPMV can be put into practice at the interface between general practitioners and SAPV teams in their daily routines. Practical recommendations for advancing BQKPMV are needed, which, for example, address the exclusion of the simultaneous provision of both forms of care. Further developments of BQKPMV should aim at establishing a framework in which the tasks and duties of health care provision are distributed and remunerated in accordance with the competencies and resources of health care providers.

Quality of end-of-life care in general practice - a pre-post comparison of a two-tiered intervention.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) play a crucial role in the provision of end-of-life care (EoLC). The present study aimed at comparing the quality of GPs' EoLC before and after an intervention involving a clinical decision aid and a public campaign. METHODS: The study was part of the larger interventional study 'Optimal care at the end of life' (OPAL) (Innovation Fund, Grant No. 01VSF17028). The intervention lasted 12 months and comprised two components: (1) implementation of the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT-DE™) in general practice and (2) a public campaign in two German counties to inform and connect regional health care providers and stakeholders in EoLC. Participating GPs completed the General Practice End of Life Care Index (GP-EoLC-I) pre- (t0) and post- (t1) intervention. The GP-EoLC-I (25 items, score range: 14-40) is a self-assessment questionnaire that measures the quality of GPs' EoLC. It includes two subscales: practice organisation and clinical practice. Data were analysed descriptively, and a paired t-test was applied for the pre-post comparison. RESULTS: Forty-five GPs (female: 29%, median age: 57 years) from 33 general practices participated in the intervention and took part in the survey at both times of measurement (t0 and t1). The mean GP-EoLC-I score (t0 = 27.9; t1 = 29.8) increased significantly by 1.9 points between t0 and t1 (t(44) = - 3.0; p = 0.005). Scores on the practice organisation subscale (t0 = 6.9; t1 = 7.6) remained almost similar (t(44) = -2.0; p = 0.057), whereas those of the clinical practice subscale (t0 = 21.0; t1 = 22.2) changed significantly between t0 and t1 (t(44) = -2.6; p = 0.011). In particular, items regarding the record of care plans, patients' preferred place of care at the end of life and patients' preferred place of death, as well as the routine documentation of impending death, changed positively. CONCLUSIONS: GPs' self-assessed quality of EoLC seemed to improve after a regional intervention that involved both the implementation of the SPICT-DE™ in daily practice and a public campaign. In particular, improvement related to the domains of care planning and documentation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register ( DRKS00015108 ; 22/01/2019).

[End-of-life care in a rural small-town region in Lower Saxony: a retrospective cross-sectional analysis based on routinely collected general practice data]. / Versorgung von Menschen am Lebensende in einer ländlich-kleinstädtischen Region Niedersachsens: eine retrospektive Querschnittsanalyse auf Basis hausärztlicher Routinedaten.

INTRODUCTION: Up to 90% of people at the end of life are in need of palliative care. The majority can be cared for within general outpatient palliative care (AAPV) by general practitioners. Previous studies have described outpatient palliative care to fall short behind the estimated needs and to be initiated rather late in the health care process. Yet, little is known about the development of outpatient palliative care in recent years and about the parameters influencing its utilisation. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the number and time of initiation for AAPV and specialised outpatient palliative care (SAPV) in a rural and small-town region in Lower Saxony on the basis of routinely collected general practice data. Furthermore, this study sought to estimate the influence of various parameters related to patients, practices and physicians on the provision of AAPV and SAPV. METHODS: All general practitioners (n=190) in two counties in Lower Saxony were invited to take part in the project "Optimal care at the end of life - OPAL" (Innovation Fund, 01VSF17028) between autumn 2018 and spring 2019. In the participating practices, clinical data pertaining to patients with statutory health insurance, who had died in the second or third quarter of 2018, were collected in pseudonymised form and analysed using selected indicators for end-of-life care. The number of hospital stays and the provision of AAPV and SAPV were the subject of the descriptive analyses. In order to take the cluster effect of the practices into account, mixed-model analyses were carried out. RESULTS: The data of 279 deceased patients (48% female; median age 82 years) from 31 general practices were analysed. In the last year of life, AAPV was provided for 78 deceased patients (28.0%) with a median onset of 20 days before death. 52 deceased patients (18.6%) received SAPV with a median onset of 28 days before death, respectively. In the last six months of life, 207 deceased patients (74.2%) were hospitalised at least once. The mixed-model analyses showed a greater probability of receiving AAPV (odds ratio (OR)=3.3) or SAPV (OR=3.2) in the last year of life for patients with oncological diseases. It was also shown that GPs with a higher value on the subscale practice organisation billed more AAPV (OR=1.4). DISCUSSION: The number of patients with SAPV is at least equivalent to the estimated needs known from the literature in both selected regions. In contrast, AAPV seems to be provided relatively rarely and rather late in the health care process. Relevant reasons for this may be the lack of concrete criteria for AAPV (e. g., ambiguities and competing codes for billing) as well as prognostic uncertainties of health care providers especially for patients with non-oncological diseases. CONCLUSION: Strategies to further develop end-of-life care should especially strengthen the AAPV provided by general practitioners and focus on patients with non-oncological diseases.

Analysing the administration of an intermediate level of outpatient palliative care in Germany and developing recommendations for improvement (Polite): A study protocol for a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: To date, there has been no systematic research on the intermediate level service (level 2) in outpatient palliative care that was introduced in Germany in 2017. Accordingly, the Polite research project aims at: (1) investigating the current state of level 2 palliative care and (2) developing recommendations for its optimisation. METHODS: The multi-perspective, observational study will follow a mixed-methods approach across two study phases. In phase 1a, quantitative routinely collected data from a statutory general local health insurance provider will be used to identify patients who received level 2 or other outpatient palliative care in the years 2017-2019. In phase 1b, a questionnaire will be sent to all registered general practitioners (GPs) in Lower Saxony to collect information on the number and characteristics of physicians offering level 2 palliative care. In phase 1c, a quantitative, standardised online questionnaire for teams providing specialised outpatient palliative care will be administered to assess the interfaces of level 2 palliative care. In phase 2a, the results from phases 1a-c will be discussed in an expert workshop with the aim of developing ideas to adapt and optimise level 2 outpatient palliative care. Finally, in phase 2b, the empirically derived recommendations from phases 1 and 2a will be agreed upon via a multi-round Delphi survey involving experts with sufficient influence to promote the project results and recommendations nationally. DISCUSSION: The results of the project will facilitate the optimisation of outpatient palliative care, as well as its administration, nationwide. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien) (Registration N° DRKS00024785); date of registration: 06th May 2021) and is searchable under the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal of the World Health Organization, under the German Clinical Trials Register number.

Effects of a movement control and tactile acuity training in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain and control impairment - a randomised controlled pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Nonspecific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) is a heterogeneous condition that is associated with complex neuromuscular adaptations. Exercise is a widely administered treatment, but its effects are small to moderate. Tailoring patient-specific exercise treatments based on subgroup classification may improve patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: In this randomised controlled pilot study, our objective was to compare the feasibility and possible effects of a specific sensorimotor treatment (SMT) with those of a general exercise (GE) programme on patients with NSCLBP and control impairment (CI). METHODS: Patients with NSCLBP and CI were randomised into an SMT or a GE programme spanning 6 sessions each. The feasibility criteria included the study design, assessments, interventions and magnitudes of effects, and costs. Adverse events were documented. Primary (pain, physical function, and quality of life) and secondary outcomes were assessed three times: twice at baseline (t1a and t1b) to estimate parameter stability and once after the intervention (t2). RESULTS: Two-hundred and twenty-seven patients were screened to include 34 participants with NSCLBP and CI. Both treatment programmes and the assessments seemed feasible because their durations and contents were perceived as adequate. The total cost per participant was €321. Two adverse events occurred (one not likely related to the SMT, one likely related to the GE intervention). The SMT showed a tendency for superior effects in terms of pain severity (SMT t1a 3.5, t2 1.1; GE t1a 3.0, t2 2.0), pain interference (SMT t1a 1.9, t2 0.4; GE t1a 1.5, t2 0.9), physical component of quality of life (SMT t1a 39, t2 46; GE t1a 45, t2 48), and movement control. CONCLUSIONS: The SMT approach proposed in this study is feasible and should be tested thoroughly in future studies, possibly as an addition to GE. To ensure the detection of differences in pain severity between SMT and GE in patients with NSCLBP with 80% power, future studies should include 110 patients. If the current results are confirmed, SMT should be considered in interventions for patients with NSCLBP and CI. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered in the German Register for Clinical Trials (Trial registration date: November 11, 2016; Trial registration number: DRKS00011063 ; URL of trial registry record); retrospectively registered.

GPs' perspective on End-of-Life Care - an evaluation based on the German version of the General Practice End of Life Care Index.

Objective: General practitioners (GPs) play a key role in the provision of general outpatient palliative care (AAPV) for the majority of patients at the end of life. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of End-of-Life Care (EoLC) from a GPs' perspective using the German version of the General Practice End of Life Care Index (GP-EoLC-I). Methods: Between autumn 2018 and spring 2019, all registered and eligible GPs in two counties in Lower Saxony (n=190) were asked to participate in a survey on EoLC using the German version of the self-assessment questionnaire GP-EoLC-I. The index comprises two subscales: clinical care (13 items) and practice organisation (12 items). The summated index of both subscales measures the quality of EoLC by GPs (25 items; range 14-40). The questionnaire was supplemented by questions on sociodemographic data, indicators for good palliative care (PC) and requirements to improve PC. Quantitative data were analysed by descriptive statistics and free text answers by conventional content analysis according to Hsieh and Shannon. Results: 52 GPs (females: n=16) of 34 practices (single practices: n=26) participated in the study. The mean GP-EoLC-I was 27.5 (SD 4.5). The items revealed potential for improvement: systematic identification of patients with potential PC needs, multidisciplinary case conferences to discuss PC patients, application of care protocols and symptom assessment tools, documentation of patients' wishes and beliefs as well as inclusion of family and carers. Regarding the indicators for good PC, the most relevant indicators from the GPs' perspective were collaboration and coordination, integration of relatives, advance care planning and documentation. As requirements to improve PC, GPs highlighted further training and the use of standardised tools such as instruments to support the systematic identification of PC patients. Conclusions: To our knowledge for the first time in Germany, an internationally tested self-assessment questionnaire measuring the quality of EoLC by GPs was applied. The GP-EoLC-I in this study was slightly lower than the index of GPs in the United Kingdom. Including relatives and family carers, implementing tools to support early identification of PC patients and strengthening cooperation between GPs and other stakeholders in PC may be promising approaches to improve general PC and EoLC in Germany.

Quality indicators for the evaluation of end-of-life care in Germany - a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of statutory health insurance data.

BACKGROUND: The provision and quality of end-of-life care (EoLC) in Germany is inconsistent. Therefore, an evaluation of current EoLC based on quality indicators is needed. This study aims to evaluate EoLC in Germany on the basis of quality indicators pertaining to curative overtreatment, palliative undertreatment and delayed palliative care (PC). Results were compared with previous findings. METHODS: Data from a statutory health insurance provider (AOK Lower Saxony) pertaining to deceased members in the years 2016 and 2017 were used to evaluate EoLC. The main indicators were: chemotherapy for cancer patients in the last month of life, first-time percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) for patients with dementia in the last 3 months of life, number of hospitalisations and days spent in inpatient treatment in the last 6 months of life, and provision of generalist and specialist outpatient PC in the last year of life. Data were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: Data for 64,275 deceased members (54.3% female; 35.1% cancer patients) were analysed. With respect to curative overtreatment, 10.4% of the deceased with cancer underwent chemotherapy in the last month and 0.9% with dementia had a new PEG insertion in the last 3 months of life. The mean number of hospitalisations and inpatient treatment days per deceased member was 1.6 and 16.5, respectively, in the last 6 months of life. Concerning palliative undertreatment, generalist outpatient PC was provided for 28.0% and specialist outpatient PC was provided for 9.0% of the deceased. Regarding indicators for delayed PC, the median onset of generalist and specialist outpatient PC was 47.0 and 24.0 days before death, respectively. CONCLUSION: Compared to data from 2010 to 2014, the data analysed in the present study suggest an ongoing curative overtreatment in terms of chemotherapy and hospitalisation, a reduction in new PEG insertions and an increase in specialist PC. The number of patients receiving generalist PC remained low, with delayed onset. Greater awareness of generalist PC and the early integration of PC are recommended. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register ( DRKS00015108 ; 22 January 2019).

Optimal care at the end of life (OPAL): study protocol of a prospective interventional mixed-methods study with pretest-posttest-design in a primary health care setting considering the view of general practitioners, relatives of deceased patients and health care stakeholders.

BACKGROUND: At the end of life, about 85-90% of patients can be treated within primary palliative care (PC) provided by general practitioners (GPs). In Germany, there is no structured approach for the provision of PC by GPs including a systematic as well as timely identification of patients who might benefit from PC, yet. The project "Optimal care at the end of life" (OPAL) focusses on an improvement of primary PC for patients with both oncological and non-oncological chronic progressive diseases in their last phase of life provided by GPs and health care services. METHODS: OPAL will take place in Hameln-Pyrmont, a rural region in Lower Saxony, Germany. Target groups are (a) GPs, (b) relatives of deceased patients and (c) health care providers. The study follows a three-phase approach in a mixed-methods and pre-post design. In phase I (baseline, t0) we explore the usual practice of providing PC for patients with chronic progressive diseases by GPs and the collaboration with other health care providers. In phase II (intervention) the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT) for the timely identification of patients who might benefit from PC will be implemented and tested in general practices. Furthermore, a public campaign will be started to inform stakeholders, to connect health care providers and to train change agents. In phase III (follow-up, t1) we investigate the potential effect of the intervention to evaluate differences in the provision of PC by GPs and to convey factors for the implementation of SPICT in general practices. DISCUSSION: The project OPAL is the first study to implement the SPICT-DE regionwide in general practices in Germany. The project OPAL may contribute to an overall optimisation of primary PC for patients in Germany by reducing GPs' uncertainty in initiating PC, by consolidating their skills and competencies in identifying patients who might benefit from PC, and by improving the cooperation between GPs and different health care stakeholders. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was retrospectively registered at the German Clinical Trials Register (Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien; trial registration number: DRKS00015108 ; date of registration: 22th of January 2019).