[Evaluating the reform of the psychotherapy guideline using a mixed-methods approach: a study protocol]. / Mixed-Methods-Ansatz zur Evaluation der Reform der Psychotherapie-Richtlinie: ein Studienprotokoll.

INTRODUCTION: In Germany, psychotherapy in outpatient statutory health care is regulated by the Psychotherapy Guideline (PT-GL). A discussion on waiting times and inadequate care for patients resulted in a structural reform of the PT-GL in 2017. The reform aims to improve access to psychotherapy and the entire course of care and treatment. The purpose of the present study was the evaluation of the new elements and identification of obstacles and barriers in their implementation. METHODS: Quantitative and qualitative methods were used to evaluate the reform of the PT-GL. In a retrospective cohort-based analysis of anonymized administrative claim data from the statutory health insurances BARMER and AOK, the health care situation before and after the reform were compared. In addition, a cross-sectional questionnaire survey evaluated the implementation of the new care elements from the perspective of psychotherapists, general practitioners and patients. The questionnaires were developed based on focus groups with stakeholders and a literature search. The survey results provided the data basis for the cross-sectional analysis together with the routine data on the care situation after the reform of the PT-GL as well as aggregated, anonymized data from the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians on statutory health insurance care and on the use of the appointment service centers. CONCLUSION: By combining quantitative and qualitative data, the effects of the structural reform of the PT-GL of 2016 can be analyzed at the individual and structural level as well as in relation to the entire care and treatment process. Based on this, proposals for a needs-oriented further development of the PT-GL will be prepared, considering the perspectives of various interest groups.

Strengthening Communication and Collaboration in the Fragmented German Healthcare System: A Mixed-Method Evaluation of an Interdisciplinary Network for Parkinson's Disease.

BACKGROUND: To improve Parkinson's disease (PD) care, interdisciplinary and patient-centered treatment is mandatory. A key problem in many healthcare systems is the limited and unspecific communication among different healthcare professionals. Optimal collaboration between various professionals involved is indispensable. Parkinson's Network Münsterland + (PNM +) is an interdisciplinary network of medical and non-medical experts involved in the treatment of PD patients in Germany. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this evaluation was to analyze the network structures of PNM+ as well as communication and collaboration between PNM + partners. METHODS: A mixed methods approach was applied consisting of a social network analysis, a validated questionnaire on team effectiveness and semi-structured interviews focusing on perceived barriers and supportive aspects of PNM + . RESULTS: Quantitative and qualitative data suggested increased collaboration between professionals within PNM + . The reciprocity of connections was 0.522 in the network of professional contacts. Regular exchanges in terms of interdisciplinary panel meetings and working groups stimulated knowledge transfer, leading to greater specialization of general neurologists and therapists in PD. The progressive density of the network from 0.136 to 0.279 illustrates the growing cooperation of PNM + partners. Interviewed partners requested more patient-specific collaboration but expected this to happen as the network evolved. Overall, PNM + has already improved both diagnosis and therapy thanks to knowledge transfer. Structured treatment recommendations helped to improve communication between healthcare professionals. CONCLUSION: PNM+ stimulated exchange between different healthcare professionals involved in the treatment of PD patients. This overcomes specific barriers within Germany's highly fragmented healthcare system, such as the lack of communication between these disciplines.

Facilitators and barriers of vaccine uptake in patients with autoimune inflammatory rheumatic disease: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIRD) often have lower vaccination coverage rates compared with the general population, despite being disproportionately affected by infectious complications. We aim to systematically review the literature regarding vaccination willingness and hesitancy in AIRD. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library in June 2021. Study selection was performed by two independent reviewers and data were extracted using a standardised form. Risk of bias was assessed using instruments from McMaster University. Identified barriers were categorised into the WHO's measuring behavioural and social drivers (BeSD) of vaccination conceptual model. RESULTS: The search yielded 1644 hits of which 30 publications were included (cross-sectional studies based on interviews (n=27) and intervention studies (n=3)). The majority of studies reported barriers to influenza and pneumococcal vaccination only (n=9) or in combination with another vaccination (n=8) from the patients' perspective. Only one study assessed the view of rheumatologists. Coverage of domains matched to the BeSD model suggests a lack of awareness of infection risk by both patients and physicians. Patients mainly mentioned behavioural and social factors that negatively influenced their willingness to be vaccinated while physicians mentioned organisational deficits as major barriers. CONCLUSIONS: The view on vaccination in patients with AIRD diverges between patients and rheumatologists. Our results show that in-depth counselling on vaccines is important for patients, whereas physicians need support in implementing specific immunisation recommendations. The themes identified provide a starting point for future interventions to improve vaccine rates in patients with AIRD.