[Attitudes of general practitioners and medical practice assistants towards the delegation of medical services: Results of a survey in Berlin, Brandenburg and Thuringia]. / Einstellungen von Hausärzt:innen und Medizinischen Fachangestellten zur Delegation ärztlicher Leistungen ­ Ergebnisse einer Befragung in Berlin, Brandenburg und Thüringen.

INTRODUCTION: The delegation of tasks and responsibilities from general practitioners (GPs) to medical practice assistants (MPAs) can contribute to ensuring primary care in Germany. The aim of the study was to collect and analyze attitudes and procedures of GPs and MPAs regarding the delegation of physician-related tasks and activities. METHODOLOGY: A self-designed, piloted questionnaire was sent to all GPs listed within the regional Associations of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (KV) in Thuringia, Berlin, and Brandenburg (n=5,516) and their MPAs. Participants were asked to indicate which physician-related activities were already delegated and on which occasions further delegations could be considered. RESULTS: 890 GPs (response rate: 16.1%) and 566 MPAs participated in the written survey. The participants were predominantly female and most of them worked in urban areas. Numerous activities, such as medical history taking, triage, Disease Management Program (DMP) controls, vaccinations and home visits, have already been delegated. The willingness to delegate further tasks (e. g., follow-up prescriptions and referrals, independent takeover of simple consultations, assessing the necessity of physician consultation) was high. CONCLUSION: The survey showed a high level of willingness of both occupational groups to delegate physician-related activities to MFAs. An expansion seems possible under certain conditions. Many activities have already been delegated to MPAs in primary care practices. Our survey provides suggestions regarding further tasks suitable for delegation, some of which go beyond the delegation agreement valid in Germany.

[General practices and community care points work hand in hand in the care of multimorbid patients: What are the advantages? - A qualitative study with general practitioners and medical practice assistants]. / Hausarztpraxen und Pflegestützpunkte Hand in Hand in der Versorgung multimorbider Patient*innen: Welche Vorteile kann das bringen? ­ Eine qualitative Studie mit Hausärzt*innen und Medizinischen Fachangestellten.

BACKGROUND: Caring for an increasing number of multimorbid people is a challenge for general practices in Germany. A possible approach to ensure future care could be the cooperation between general practices and community care points, which have so far been a little-known option among general practitioners. The aim of this study was to investigate the benefits or additional burdens that, from the perspective of general practices, a cooperation between general practices and community care points would bring for both the general practitioners themselves and their patients. METHODS: In the mixed-methods study COMPASS II, general practices were able to refer multimorbid patients with social counselling needs to a community care point. Semi-structured guideline-based telephone interviews were conducted with nine general practitioners and nine medical practice assistants regarding the feasibility of cooperation with the community care points. The interviews were analysed using framework analysis. RESULTS: In the qualitative interviews, the general practitioners and medical practice assistants reported that the community care points helped them save time by relieving them of social counselling tasks. The interviewees felt relieved by knowing that the community care points expertly take care of their patients' social concerns. From the perspective of the interviewees, multimorbid patients experienced changes in their care through the counselling in community care points, such as adjusting the level of care they require. Social counsellors provided patients and their relatives with an overview of the support options available. The majority of the interviewees did not feel that cooperating with the community care point put an additional burden on their patients or on themselves. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Cooperation between general practices and community care points has the potential to improve care for multimorbid patients and reduce the workload burden on general practices. Community care points are legally anchored counselling services which general practitioners could increasingly involve in the care of patients with multimorbidity.

Patient perspective on task shifting from general practitioners to medical practice assistants - a quantitative survey in Germany.

INTRODUCTION: Various developments result in increasing workloads in general practices. New models of care and a restructuring of the division of tasks could provide relief. One approach is to extend the delegation of medical tasks from general practitioners (GPs) to medical practice assistants (MPAs). So far, there has been a lack of information about specific situations in which patients are willing to be treated exclusively by MPAs. METHODS: In three German federal states, patients who visited a general practice were surveyed exploratively and cross-sectionally with a self-designed, paper-based questionnaire. The data were analysed descriptively and multivariate. A mixed binary logistic regression model was calculated to account for cluster effects at practice level (random intercept model). The dependent variable was patients' acceptance of task delegation. RESULTS: A total of 1861 questionnaires from 61 general practices were included in the analysis. Regarding the current problem/request, a total of 30% of respondents could imagine being treated only by MPAs. Regarding theoretical reasons for consultation, more than half of the patients agreed to be treated by MPAs. According to the regression model, MPAs were preferred when patients were younger (10-year OR = 0.84, 95%-CI [0.75, 0.93]) or had a less complicated issue (OR = 0.44, 95%-CI [0.26, 0.8]). For four current problems/requests ("acute complaints" OR = 0.27, 95%-CI [0.17, 0.45], "routine health check" OR = 0.48, 95%-CI [0.3, 0.79], "new problem" OR = 0.13, 95%-CI [0.06, 0.28], "known problem" OR = 0.16, 95%-CI [0.1, 0.27]) patients prefer to be treated by GPs instead of MPAs. DISCUSSION: For the first time, statements could be made on patients' acceptance of task delegation in relation to current and theoretical reasons for treatment in general practices in Germany. The discrepancy in response behaviour on a theoretical and individual level could be explained by different contexts of questions and differences at practice level. Overall, patients seem to be open to increased delegation of medical tasks, depending on the reason for treatment. Selection and response biases should be considered in the interpretation. CONCLUSION: The results are not completely opposed to an extension of task delegation. Further interventional studies could provide information on the possible effects of expansion of delegable tasks.

[Referrals from general practice to community care points. What are the patients' experiences? An interview study]. / Von der Hausarztpraxis zum Pflegestützpunkt überwiesen. Welche Erfahrungen haben die Patient*innen gemacht? Eine Interview-Studie.

INTRODUCTION: Primary care for multimorbid patients does not only include medical but also social counseling. In Germany, community care points represent an institutionalised support offer for counseling for social and care-related issues at district level. METHODS: Within the framework of an intervention study on the cooperation between general practices and community care points in Berlin, 14 telephone interviews were conducted with multimorbid patients with social counseling needs who received advice by a community care point. The aim was to investigate satisfaction with the cooperation process as a whole and with the counseling provided by the community care points. The transcribed interviews were analysed using the framework analysis. RESULTS: Overall, the patients were satisfied with the counseling they received from the community care points. In many cases, even after counseling, patients were not aware of the range of services offered by the community care points, and there was confusion about community care points and locally known mobile care services. Patients felt that it was particularly important to have a friendly, reliable contact person, to be close to their own place of residence and to have a long-term connection to the service. From the point of view of those affected, the general practitioner remains an important contact person who initiates the counseling, if necessary, and coordinates the interventions to be derived from the counseling result. DISCUSSION: The confusion about community care points and mobile care services due to a lack of knowledge about the range of services offered by community care points are central topics in the interviews. This could be due to the heterogeneous supply of the community care points as well as the lack of networking with GP practices. A standardisation of the offer and increased information and networking activities of the community care points at district level could contribute to an increased level of awareness and improve transparency of their services. CONCLUSION: In the long term, cooperation between community care points and general practitioners could help relieve the burden on general practitioners and improve social care for multimorbid patients at district level.

[Medical care in GP practices during the Covid-19 pandemic: A questionnaire-based survey among general practitioners and medical practice assistants asking for their opinion about changes, needs and burdens]. / Die hausärztliche Versorgung während der COVID-19-Pandemie: eine Fragebogenerhebung unter Hausärzt*innen und Medizinischen Fachangestellten zu ihrer Perspektive auf Veränderungen, Bedarfe und Belastungen.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus pandemic did not only result in changes in the provision and utilization of health care services in general practice but also in an increased workload for physicians and medical practice assistants. The VeCo practice study retrospectively explores the experiences of both professional groups two years after the start of the pandemic. METHODS: In March and April 2022, general practitioners and medical practice assistants in the three German federal states of Berlin, Brandenburg and Thuringia were asked to complete a paper-based questionnaire. RESULTS: 657 general practitioners and 762 medical practice assistants completed the questionnaire. Both professional groups agreed to statements indicating a reduction in regular health care provisions. Nevertheless, 74% of the physicians and 82.9% of the medical practice assistants considered the health care provided to their patients during the pandemic as good. This was only possible through considerable additional effort and stress. While more than half of both groups reported that work was still enjoyable, three quarters of both groups stated that the challenges arising from the pandemic outstripped their capacity. Both groups would like to receive more recognition from society (medical practice assistants 93.2%, general practitioners 85.3%) and from their patients (87.7% and 69.9%, respectively). DISCUSSION: General practitioners and medical practice assistants reduced regular health care provision but were still able to maintain a good quality of care for their patients during the pandemic. It became clear that more appreciation and adequate financial compensation are necessary to ensure long-term sustainability of GP care. CONCLUSION: The subjective view of general practitioners and medical practice assistants on their health care provision shows that appreciation and adequate financial renumeration, particularly when working under most difficult conditions, are necessary to increase the attractiveness of a career in general practice, for both physicians and medical practice assistants.

[Do General Practitioners have Experience with Social Care Points? A Berlin-Wide Survey]. / Haben Hausärzt*innen Erfahrungen mit Pflegestützpunkten? Eine berlinweite Fragebogenerhebung.

Primary care for multimorbid patients involves social counseling in addition to medical care. Community care points are established institutions for social counseling at district level in Berlin. A Berlin-wide questionnaire survey examined primary care physicians' knowledge of and experience with community care points. 700 questionnaires were analysed exploratively and descriptively. General practitioners were only partially familiar with the services of community care points (60% barely or not at all). 57% of the general practitioners stated that they already had contact with community care points. General practitioners who had not yet had contact with a community care point recommended other advice centers for social (76%) and care-related advice (79%) to their patients. A majority of general practitioners expressed a wish to get more information about community care points.

COMPASS II-Coordination of Medical Professions Aiming at Sustainable Support Protocol for a feasibility study of cooperation between general practitioner practices and community care points.

INTRODUCTION: General practitioners (GP) increasingly face the challenge of meeting the complex care needs of multi-morbid patients. Previous studies show that GP practices would like support from other institutions in advising on social aspects of care for multi-morbid patients. Already existing counselling services, like community care points, are not sufficiently known by both GPs and patients. The aim of COMPASS II is to investigate the feasibility of cooperation between GP practices and community care points. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: During the intervention, GPs send eligible multi-morbid patients with social care needs to a community care point. The community care points report the consultation results back to the GPs. In preparation for the intervention, in a moderated process, GP practices meet with the community care points to agree on information exchange. The primary outcome is the feasibility of the cooperation: Questionnaires will be sent to GPs, medical practice assistances and community care point personnel (focus: practicality, acceptability). Data will be collected on frequency and reasons for GP-initiated consultations at community care points (focus: demand). Qualitative interviews will be conducted with all participating groups (focus: acceptability, satisfaction). The secondary outcome is the assessment of changes in health-related quality of life, social support and satisfaction with care: participating patients complete a questionnaire before and three to six months after their counselling. The results of the study will be incorporated into a manual in which the experiences of the cooperation will be made available to other GP practices and community care points. DISCUSSION: In COMPASS II, GP practices establish cooperation with community care points. The latter are already existing institutions that provide independent and free advice on social matters. By using an existing institution, the established cooperation and experiences from the study can be used beyond the end of the study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered with DRKS-ID: DRKS00023798, Coordination of Medical Professions Aiming at Sustainable Support II.

Perceived need for treatment and non-utilization of outpatient psychotherapy in old age: two cohorts of a nationwide survey.

BEACKGROUND: Older adults with mental health problems may benefit from psychotherapy; however, their perceived need for treatment in relation to rates of non-utilization of outpatient psychotherapy as well as the predisposing, enabling, and need factors proposed by Andersen's Model of Health Care Utilization that account for these differences warrant further investigation. METHODS: We used two separate cohorts (2014 and 2019) of a weighted nationwide telephone survey in Germany of German-speaking adults with N = 12,197 participants. Across the two cohorts, 12.9% (weighted) reported a perceived need for treatment for mental health problems and were selected for further analyses. Logistic Generalized Estimation Equations (GEE) was applied to model the associations between disposing (age, gender, single habiting, rural residency, general health status), enabling (education, general practitioner visit) non-utilization of psychotherapy (outcome) across cohorts in those with a need for treatment (need factor). RESULTS: In 2014, 11.8% of 6087 participants reported a perceived need for treatment due to mental health problems. In 2016, the prevalence increased significantly to 14.0% of 6110 participants. Of those who reported a perceived need for treatment, 36.4% in 2014 and 36.9%in 2019 did not see a psychotherapist - where rates of non-utilization of psychotherapy were vastly higher in the oldest age category (59.3/52.5%; 75+) than in the youngest (29.1/10.7%; aged 18-25). Concerning factors associated with non-utilization, multivariate findings indicated participation in the cohort of 2014 (OR 0.94), older age (55-64 OR 1.02, 65-74 OR 1.47, 75+ OR 4.76), male gender (OR 0.83), lower educational status (OR 0.84), rural residency (OR 1.38), single habiting (OR 1.37), and seeing a GP (OR 1.39) to be related with non-utilization of psychotherapy; general health status was not significantly associated with non-utilization when GP contact was included in the model. CONCLUSION: There is a strong age effect in terms of non-utilization of outpatient psychotherapy. Individual characteristics of both healthcare professionals and patients and structural barriers may add to this picture. Effective strategies to increase psychotherapy rates in those older adults with unmet treatment needs are required.

Recruiting general practitioners and patients with dementia into a cluster randomised controlled trial: strategies, barriers and facilitators.

BACKGROUND: Recruitment of general practitioners (GPs) and their patients is reported as one of the most challenging steps when undertaking primary care research. The present paper describes the recruitment process of a cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) aiming to improve dementia care in the primary care setting. METHODS: Recruitment data was analysed descriptively using frequency tables to investigate comparisons of recruitment rates and results of different recruitment strategies as well as reasons for participation and non-participation of GPs, patients with dementia (PwD) and their caregivers. RESULTS: Over a period of 23 months, N = 28 GPs were successfully included in the cRCT. This represents an overall recruitment rate of 4.6%. The most efficient strategy in terms of high response and low labour-intensity involved the dissemination of calls for participation in a GP research network. Most frequently reported reasons for GP's participation were Improvement of patient's well-being (n = 22, 79%) followed by Interest in dementia research (n = 18, 64%). The most common reasons for non-participation were Lack of time (n = 71, 34%) followed by Not interested in participation (n = 63, 30%). On a patient level, N = 102 PwD were successfully recruited. On average, each GP referred about n = 7 PwD (range: 1-17; mdn = 6; IQR = 3.5) and successfully recruited about n = 4 PwD (range: 1-11; mdn = 3; IQR = 3.5). CONCLUSION: First, our findings propose GP research networks as a promising strategy to promote recruitment and participation of GPs and their patients in research. Second, present findings highlight the importance of including GPs and their interests in specific research topics in early stages of research in order to ensure a successful recruitment. Finally, results do not support cold calls as a successful strategy in the recruitment of GPs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was prospectively registered with the ISRCTN registry (Trial registration number: ISRCTN15854413 ). Registered 01 April 2019.

[Support for General Practitioners in the Care of Patients with Complex Needs: A Questionnaire Survey of General Practitioners in Berlin]. / Unterstützungsbedarf und -möglichkeiten für Hausärzte in der Versorgung von Patienten mit komplexem Bedarf: Eine Fragebogenerhebung Berliner Hausärzte.

OBJECTIVES: Because of demographic changes, new models of care are important for supporting general practitioners in the care of patients with complex needs. This study addresses the question of the type of support that is requested by general practitioners working in Berlin. METHODS: All general practitioners working in Berlin (n=2354) were asked between August and September 2018 to return a questionnaire by post which has been developed for this study. Questions addressed support needs as well as support models within the practice (delegation, substitution) and outside the practice (social worker, navigator, community care points). Data were analysed descriptively and by exploratory multivariate analysis to show the influence of practice and doctor characteristics on the preference of support models (age, gender, location of the practice, type of practice, working hours). RESULTS: A total of 557 questionnaires (response rate 23.7%) were included in the analysis. Need for support was seen particularly for administrative, coordinative and organisational tasks and for advice on social issues. The majority of the study participants approved delegation and substitution. In their view, it was conceivable to get support from professionals or institutions outside their practice, such as mobile care services, community care points, social workers or navigators. Particularly younger and female doctors working in group practices were open for cooperative care models integrating other health professions. CONCLUSIONS: There is unused potential for delegation and cooperation within existing structures. Further research should investigate the acceptance and feasibility of different support models.

The Acceptability of Task-Shifting from Doctors to Allied Health Professionals.

BACKGROUND: The shifting of medical tasks (MT) to Qualified Medical Practice Assistants (MPA) is an option that can be pursued to ensure adequate health care in Germany despite the increasing scarcity of physicians. The goal of this study was to determine the acceptability of medical task-shifting to MPA among the general population. METHODS: In a nationwide, representative telephone survey, 6105 persons aged 18 or older were asked whether they would be willing to receive care from a specially trained MPA at a physician's office. Their responses were tested for correlations with sociodemographic characteristics by means of bivariate (chi-squared test, Mann-Whitney U test) and multivariable statistics (logistic regression). RESULTS: Of the respondents, 67.2% expressed willingness to accept the shifting of MT to an MPA for the treatment of a minor illness, and 51.8% for a chronic illness. Rejection of task-shifting was associated with old age, residence in western Germany, and citizenship of a country other than Germany. For example, non-Germans rejected task-shifting more commonly than Germans, for both minor illnesses (odds ratio [OR] 2.96; 95% confidence interval [2.28; 3.85]) and chronic illnesses (OR 1.61; [1.24; 2.10]). CONCLUSION: Further studies are needed to investigate the motives for rejection of medical task-shifting to MPA in order to assess the likelihood of successful nationwide introduction of a uniform delegation model.

[Non-medical aspects in the care for multimorbid patients in general practice. What kind of support and cooperation is desired? Focus groups with general practitioners in Berlin]. / Nichtmedizinische Aspekte der Versorgung multimorbider Patient*innen in der Hausarztpraxis. Welche Unterstützung und Kooperationen werden gewünscht? Fokusgruppen mit Berliner Hausärzt*innen.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) are the first point of contact and they coordinate the care for multimorbid patients. This article discusses possible solutions for GPs' needs and wishes regarding the support for non-medical issues, in particular social and legal tasks as well as the cooperation with already existing institutions. METHODS: In the third study phase of a mixed-methods approach, two focus groups with eleven GPs from Berlin were carried out. The project is part of the NAVICARE project, funded by the federal Ministry of Education and Research. The focus groups were analyzed using the framework analysis. RESULTS: GPs caring for multimorbid patients are often faced with non-medical patient needs and social consultation issues. They would like to receive support in these areas and want more cooperative care structures. They are largely unaware of existing offers by social institutions in their city districts. The designation of a fixed contact person in social institutions could improve communication and thus enable low-threshold access. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The GPs agree that there is a need for support with social and legal matters in general practice. The focus groups discussed already existing offers that GPs could use more frequently and how a cooperation with providers of social care could succeed. GPs in Berlin think that support and relief measures, in particular in the form of cooperation with institutions in the district that provide social and legal support, are both desirable and conceivable.

Train the trainer course for general practice trainers in ambulatory care: the Berlin model.

Objective: Demands for a stronger competence orientation of specialty postgraduate medical training require the expansion of the didactic qualifications of those responsible for postgraduate medical training. In the context of the foundation of the Berlin competence center for postgraduate general practice training, a train the trainer basic seminar was designed together with the Berlin chamber of physicians. The seminar aims to convey formal-legal aspects in close connection with the development of didactic competences of the general practice trainers. This article presents the didactic concept, focal points and the schedule of the one-and-a-half-day seminar to be able to adapt it to one's own context. Methodology: After the seminars, participants filled out an evaluation form. The questionnaire included the subjective experiences of increased competence, the relevance of the contents, and the satisfaction with the structure and methods of the seminar. The data were analyzed descriptively. Results: Since June 2018, 46 general practice trainers have participated in one of three train the trainer seminars. 97.6% of the participants were very satisfied or satisfied with the overall seminar and felt that the timeframe was right, 92.7% would recommend the seminar to colleagues. 68.3% fully agreed that by attending the seminar they were able to improve their didactic skills, 90% were confident that they could integrate what they had learned into their work as general practice trainers. 85.4% stated that they had reflected on their role as trainers. In particular, the atmosphere, the high degree of interactivity and the protected framework for collegial exchange were positively emphasized. Conclusion: Together with the Berlin chamber of physicians, we succeeded in designing a train the trainer seminar which, on the one hand, met the needs of the general practice trainers for clarification of formal-legal questions of their further training activities and, on the other hand, allowed the further development of didactic skills. At the moment, a modular program is being planned in order to give general practice trainers the opportunity to expand their didactic competence and regularly exchange ideas with colleagues.

Coordination of care for multimorbid patients from the perspective of general practitioners - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: In Germany, a decreasing number of general practitioners (GPs) face a growing number of patients with multimorbidity. Whilst care for patients with multimorbidity involves various healthcare providers, the coordination of this care is one of the many responsibilities of GPs. The aims of this study are to identify the barriers to the successful coordination of multimorbid patient care and these patients' complex needs, and to explore the support needed by GPs in the care of multimorbid patients. Interviewees were asked for their opinion on concepts which involve the support by additional employees within the practice or, alternatively, external health care professionals, providing patient navigation. METHODS: Thirty-two semi-structured, qualitative interviews were conducted with 16 GPs and 16 medical practice assistants (MPAs) from 16 different practices in Berlin. A MPA is a qualified non-physician practice employee. He or she undergoes a three years vocational training which qualifies him or her to provide administrative and clinical support. The interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed and analysed using the framework analysis methodology. RESULTS: The results of this paper predominantly focus on GPs' perspectives of coordination within and external to general practice. Coordination in the context of care for multimorbid patients consists of a wide range of different tasks. Organisational and administrative obstacles under the regulatory framework of the German healthcare system, and insufficient communication with other healthcare providers constitute barriers described by the interviewed GPs and MPAs. In order to ensure optimal care for patients with multimorbidity, GPs may have to delegate responsibilities associated with coordinating tasks. GPs consider the deployment of an additional specifically qualified employee inside the general practice to take on coordinative and social and legal duties to be a viable option. CONCLUSIONS: The cross-sectoral cooperation between all involved key players working within the healthcare system, as well as the coordination of the whole care process, is seemingly challenging for GPs within the complex care system of multimorbid patients. GPs are generally open to the assignment of a person to support them in coordination tasks, preferably situated within the practice team.

Willingness to commute among future physicians: a multicenter cross-sectional survey of German medical students.

BACKGROUND: Many countries are faced with a decrease in physicians in non-urban areas. Especially for regions with decreasing populations, temporary solutions like commuting models might be a suitable option. So far, little is known about the willingness to commute among future physicians. METHODS: In this multicenter, cross-sectional survey, five years of medical students (8th to 10th semester) from three German universities (Charité Berlin, Halle, Leipzig) were questioned about their willingness to commute to work, the maximum acceptable commute time, and how several job-related factors might enhance the attractiveness of commuting. RESULTS: Altogether 1108 of 1203 (92.1%) students completed the questionnaire. For 55.9% of the participants it was imaginable to commute to a non-urban area in the future. The most important job-related factors that would increase the attractiveness of such a commuting model were remuneration of the commuting time, higher remuneration in general, working self-employed in a joint practice with 2-3 physicians, existence of a specifically qualified "supply assistant", provision of a home office, good public transport connection, and a driver service. The maximum acceptable commute time was on average 39.0 min (one-way). If the way to work would be a salaried integral part of the normal working time, the participants stated they would accept traveling 51.2 min (one-way). CONCLUSIONS: Most future physicians are open-minded regarding models of commuting. The attractiveness of such models can be increased mainly through higher remuneration, reduction of the physicians' burden, and comfortable modes of transport.

Online Platform as a Tool to Support Postgraduate Training in General Practice - A Case Report.

Objective: Physicians in postgraduate training (PPT) in General Practice (GP) typically have very little interaction with their peers, as there is usually only one resident physician working in their respective department or GP office at a given time. Therefore, the online platform KOLEGEA, presented here, aims to support postgraduate training in general practice (PT in GP) in Germany through virtual interaction. Methodology: In 2012, the interdisciplinary research project KOLEGEA set up an online platform that any physicians in PT in GP can use for free after registration with their unitary continuous education number (Einheitliche Fortbildungsnummer, EFN). It offers problem-based learning and allows to discuss self-published anonymized patient cases with the community that can be classified and discussed with experienced mentors (specialists in general practice - GPs) in small virtual groups. Results: An anonymous online survey carried out as part of the 2014 project evaluation showed a good acceptance of the platform, even though shortage of time was mentioned as a limiting factor for its use. Data analysis showed that KOLEGEA was used by PPT in GP in all federal states. Patterns of passive use were predominant (90%). This report also describes the further development of the platform (in 2015 and 2016) that integrates an activity monitor as part of a gamification concept. Conclusions: Due to a low response rate of the 2014 online survey and the preliminary evaluations of usage patterns we could identify only initial trends regarding the role of KOLEGEA in supporting PPT. The platform was perceived as a helpful supplement to better structure PT in GP.

Lithium augmentation therapy in refractory depression-update 2002.

Lithium has been used to augment the efficacy of antidepressant medications for more than 20 years. The present study examines whether evidence exists to support the clinical efficacy of lithium augmentation in refractory, treatment resistant depression. Studies were identified by searching Medline (1980 to August 2002) and by scanning the references of published reviews and standard textbooks. Studies were selected if they were open-labeled or double-blind, placebo-controlled or comparator trials that involved patients who had not responded to conventional antidepressants. 27 prospective studies were identified that included a total of 803 depressed patients displaying the following designs: 10 double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, 2 randomized, double-blind comparator trials, 2 randomized, open comparator trials, and 13 open-label trials. The majority of randomized controlled trials has demonstrated substantial efficacy of lithium augmentation in partial and non responders to antidepressant treatment. In the placebo-controlled trials, the response rate in the lithium group was 45% and in the placebo group 18% (p<0.001). Summarizing all open and controlled studies, approximately 50% of patients responded to lithium augmentation within 4 weeks. In conclusion, lithium is the foremost and most well-documented augmentation strategy in refractory depression.Therefore, it should be considered a first-line treatment strategy in patients with major depression who do not adequately respond to standard antidepressants.