Risk factors for long-term invasive mechanical ventilation: a longitudinal study using German health claims data.

BACKGROUND: Long-term invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) is a major burden for those affected and causes high costs for the health care system. Early risk assessment is a prerequisite for the best possible support of high-risk patients during the weaning process. We aimed to identify risk factors for long-term IMV within 96 h (h) after the onset of IMV. METHODS: The analysis was based on data from one of Germany's largest statutory health insurance funds; patients who received IMV ≥ 96 h and were admitted in January 2015 at the earliest and discharged in December 2017 at the latest were analysed. OPS and ICD codes of IMV patients were considered, including the 365 days before intubation and 30 days after discharge. Long-term IMV was defined as evidence of invasive home mechanical ventilation (HMV), IMV ≥ 500 h, or readmission with (re)prolonged ventilation. RESULTS: In the analysis of 7758 hospitalisations, criteria for long-term IMV were met in 38.3% of cases, of which 13.9% had evidence of HMV, 73.1% received IMV ≥ 500 h and/or 40.3% were re-hospitalised with IMV. Several independent risk factors were identified (p < 0.005 each), including pre-diagnoses such as pneumothorax (OR 2.10), acute pancreatitis (OR 2.64), eating disorders (OR 1.99) or rheumatic mitral valve disease (OR 1.89). Among ICU admissions, previous dependence on an aspirator or respirator (OR 5.13), and previous tracheostomy (OR 2.17) were particularly important, while neurosurgery (OR 2.61), early tracheostomy (OR 3.97) and treatment for severe respiratory failure such as positioning treatment (OR 2.31) and extracorporeal lung support (OR 1.80) were relevant procedures in the first 96 h after intubation. CONCLUSION: This comprehensive analysis of health claims has identified several risk factors for the risk of long-term ventilation. In addition to the known clinical risks, the information obtained may help to identify patients at risk at an early stage. Trial registration The PRiVENT study was retrospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05260853). Registered at March 2, 2022.

Building climate resilience: awareness of climate change adaptation in German outpatient medical practices.

BACKGROUND: Climate change is seen as the biggest health threat of the twenty-first century. Making outpatient medical practices resilient is therefore crucial to protect vulnerable groups and maintain quality of care. Awareness is a precondition for action. This study aims to explore awareness (knowledge, experience and attention) of climate change adaptation among stakeholders of outpatient medical practices. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with stakeholders of outpatient medical practices were conducted. The qualitative data were analysed in a two-step Thematic Analysis process. RESULTS: In total, n = 40 stakeholders participated in two focus groups and 26 interviews. The findings show a mixed degree of awareness in outpatient medical practices. The spectrum ranged from a passive role with curative acting only, handing over responsibility to others and a low perceived self-efficacy to a proactive and responsible implementation of adaptation strategies. Participants who saw the need and responsibility of climate change adaptation in medical practices perceived low additional workload. In general, implementation of climate change adaptation measures and general awareness of climate change adaptation appeared to be depending on a certain tension for change and a higher self-efficacy. CONCLUSION: Medical practices, and specifically primary care, plays a crucial role in climate change adaptation, and awareness needs to be increased further in order to cope with consequences of climate change. To facilitate this, there should be a strong emphasis on climate change adaptation strategies being part of outpatient care provider roles rather than being perceived as an "add-on" to already high workloads.

E-learning-an interventional element of the PRiVENT project to improve weaning expertise.

BACKGROUND: PRiVENT (PRevention of invasive VENTilation) is an evaluation of a bundle of interventions aimed at the prevention of long-term invasive mechanical ventilation. One of these elements is an e-learning course for healthcare professionals to improve weaning expertise. The aim of our analysis is to examine the implementation of the course in cooperating intensive care units. METHODS: The course has been developed through a peer review process by pulmonary and critical care physicians in collaboration with respiratory therapists, supported by health services researchers and a professional e-learning agency. The e-learning platform "weLearn" was made available online to participating healthcare professionals. Feedback on the e-learning programme was obtained and discussed in quality circles (QCs). We measured the acceptance and use of the programme through access statistics. RESULTS: The e-learning course "Joint Prevention of Long-Term Ventilation" consists of 7 separate modules with practice-oriented training units as well as a cross-module area and corresponding interactive case studies. Users can receive 23 CME (continuing medical education) credits. The platform was released on July 1, 2021. By June 28, 2023, 214 users from 33 clinics had registered. Most users (77-98%) completed the modules, thus performing well in the test, where 90-100% passed. In the QCs, the users commended the structure and practical relevance of the programme, as well as the opportunity to earn CME credits. CONCLUSION: Especially for medical staff in intensive care units, where continuous training is often a challenge during shift work, e-learning is a useful supplement to existing medical training. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The PRiVENT study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05260853) on 02/03/2022.

A Qualitative Analysis of Cancer Patients' Perceptions of an Interprofessional Counseling Service on Complementary and Integrative Healthcare.

Medical guidelines recommend actively addressing patients' information needs regarding complementary and integrative healthcare (CIH). Within the CCC-Integrativ study, an interprofessional counseling program on CIH was developed and implemented at four comprehensive cancer centers (CCCs) in Germany. As part of the process evaluation, this study examines cancer patients' experiences with interprofessional CIH counseling sessions conducted by a physician and a nurse. Forty problem-centered interviews were conducted using a semi-structured interview guide. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using deductive-inductive content analysis based on Kuckartz and Rädiker's approach. Findings revealed that most participants had prior experience with CIH approaches and were burdened by physiological and psychological symptoms. Counseling sessions focused on cancer- and treatment-related symptoms and appropriate CIH recommendations (e.g., herbal poultice against anxieties and acupressure against nausea). Participants appreciated the mutual exchange and integration of perspectives from different healthcare professions within the interprofessional approach. They noted that the counseling team comprehensively addressed their healthcare and CIH information needs. Suggestions for improvement included the specificity of the CIH recommendations. As the participants only received counseling and no CIH treatments, information about reputable CIH providers was particularly important to many seeking advice. Patients with cancer receiving tailored CIH counseling from two healthcare professionals experienced benefits in CIH counseling for symptom management. The interprofessional teams offered a comprehensive perspective on patients' needs, proposing personalized recommendations for symptom control. These insights may foster collaboration between healthcare professionals interested in CIH counseling, enabling them to expand and consolidate their counseling services.

[Interprofessional weaning boards and weaning consults for long-term ventilated patients: A qualitative study of perceived potential for patient care]. / Interprofessionelle Weaning-Boards und Weaning-Konsile für Langzeitbeatmungspatient*innen: Eine qualitative Studie zum wahrgenommenen Potenzial für die Patientenversorgung.

BACKGROUND: The PRiVENT project aims to improve the care of invasively ventilated patients and to reduce the number of out-of-hospital long-term ventilated patients. PRiVENT offers intensive care units the opportunity to exchange information with experts from specialized weaning centers in interprofessional weaning boards and weaning consults and to exploit the full weaning potential of the patients. In the context of the accompanying process evaluation, the PRiVENT intervention components will be examined for sustainability, scalability and effectiveness, and the interprofessional collaboration between intensive care units and the responsible weaning centers will be investigated in order to identify potentials for the care of invasively managed patients. METHODS: In a qualitative cross-sectional study, semistructured, problem-oriented interviews were conducted with care providers of participating ICUs. The data were digitally recorded, pseudonymized and verbatim transcribed. Data analysis was based on Brown and Clarke's Thematic Analysis and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. MAXQDA 2020 software was used to organize the data. RESULTS: Fourteen interviews were conducted with ICU care providers. The early transfer of patients to a weaning center and the integration of pulmonary expertise into routine care were identified as positively perceived potentials of the weaning boards and weaning consults. Especially in critically ill, multimorbid patients suffering from COVID-19, the expertise of the weaning centers was considered helpful. Due to heavy workloads, nurses were unable to participate in weaning boards and weaning consults. CONCLUSION: Interprofessional collaboration between weaning centers and ICUs in weaning boards and weaning consults can improve the care of invasively ventilated patients. Strategies to promote the involvement of nurses should be discussed and developed.

Validation of patient- and GP-reported core sets of quality indicators for older adults with multimorbidity in primary care: results of the cross-sectional observational MULTIqual validation study.

BACKGROUND: Older adults with multimorbidity represent a growing segment of the population. Metrics to assess quality, safety and effectiveness of care can support policy makers and healthcare providers in addressing patient needs. However, there is a lack of valid measures of quality of care for this population. In the MULTIqual project, 24 general practitioner (GP)-reported and 14 patient-reported quality indicators for the healthcare of older adults with multimorbidity were developed in Germany in a systematic approach. This study aimed to select, validate and pilot core sets of these indicators. METHODS: In a cross-sectional observational study, we collected data in general practices (n = 35) and patients aged 65 years and older with three or more chronic conditions (n = 346). One-dimensional core sets for both perspectives were selected by stepwise backward selection based on corrected item-total correlations. We established structural validity, discriminative capacity, feasibility and patient-professional agreement for the selected indicators. Multilevel multivariable linear regression models adjusted for random effects at practice level were calculated to examine construct validity. RESULTS: Twelve GP-reported and seven patient-reported indicators were selected, with item-total correlations ranging from 0.332 to 0.576. Fulfilment rates ranged from 24.6 to 89.0%. Between 0 and 12.7% of the values were missing. Seventeen indicators had agreement rates between patients and professionals of 24.1% to 75.9% and one had 90.7% positive and 5.1% negative agreement. Patients who were born abroad (- 1.04, 95% CI = - 2.00/ - 0.08, p = 0.033) and had higher health-related quality of life (- 1.37, 95% CI = - 2.39/ - 0.36, p = 0.008), fewer contacts with their GP (0.14, 95% CI = 0.04/0.23, p = 0.007) and lower willingness to use their GPs as coordinators of their care (0.13, 95% CI = 0.06/0.20, p < 0.001) were more likely to have lower GP-reported healthcare quality scores. Patients who had fewer GP contacts (0.12, 95% CI = 0.04/0.20, p = 0.002) and were less willing to use their GP to coordinate their care (0.16, 95% CI = 0.10/0.21, p < 0.001) were more likely to have lower patient-reported healthcare quality scores. CONCLUSIONS: The quality indicator core sets are the first brief measurement tools specifically designed to assess quality of care for patients with multimorbidity. The indicators can facilitate implementation of treatment standards and offer viable alternatives to the current practice of combining disease-related metrics with poor applicability to patients with multimorbidity.

Fall-risk-increasing drugs in older patients: the role of guidelines and GP-centred health care in Germany.

BACKGROUND: fall-risk-increasing drugs (FRIDs) are a ubiquitous issue, especially for older patients. As part of a German guideline for pharmacotherapy, from 2019, a new quality indicator for this patient group was developed to measure the percentage of patients receiving FRIDs. METHODS: patients, aged at least 65 years in 2020, insured by the Allgemeine OrtsKrankenkasse statutory health insurance (Allgemeine Ortskrankenkasse, Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany) with a particular general practitioner (GP) were observed from 1 January to 31 December 2020 cross-sectionally. The intervention group received GP-centred health care. Within GP-centred health care, GPs have the role of gatekeepers for patients within the health system and are-in contrast to regular care GPs in addition to other commitments-obliged to regularly attend training sessions on appropriate pharmacotherapy. The control group received regular GP care. For both groups, we measured the percentage of patients receiving FRIDs as well as the occurrence of (fall-related) fractures as the main outcomes. To test our hypotheses, we performed multivariable regression modelling. RESULTS: a total of 634,317 patients were eligible for analysis. Within the intervention group (n = 422,364), we could observe a significantly reduced odds ratio (OR) for obtaining a FRID (OR = 0.842, confidence interval [CI]: [0.826, 0.859], P < 0.0001) in comparison to the control group (n = 211,953). Moreover, we could observe a significantly reduced chance for (fall-related) fractures in the intervention group (OR: 0.932, CI: [0.889, 0.975], P = 0.0071). CONCLUSIONS: the findings point in the direction that the health care providers' awareness of the potential danger of FRIDs for older patients is higher in the GP-centred care group.

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.

Prevention of invasive ventilation (PRiVENT)-a prospective, mixed-methods interventional, multicentre study with a parallel comparison group: study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) is a standard therapy for intensive care patients with respiratory failure. With increasing population age and multimorbidity, the number of patients who cannot be weaned from IMV increases, resulting in impaired quality of life and high costs. In addition, human resources are tied up in the care of these patients. METHODS: The PRiVENT intervention is a prospective, mixed-methods interventional, multicentre study with a parallel comparison group selected from insurance claims data of the health insurer Allgemeine Ortskrankenkasse Baden-Württemberg (AOK-BW) conducted in Baden-Württemberg, Germany, over 24 months. Four weaning centres supervise 40 intensive care units (ICUs), that are responsible for patient recruitment. The primary outcome, successful weaning from IMV, will be evaluated using a mixed logistic regression model. Secondary outcomes will be evaluated using mixed regression models. DISCUSSION: The overall objective of the PRiVENT project is the evaluation of strategies to prevent long-term IMV. Additional objectives aim to improve weaning expertise in and cooperation with the adjacent Intensive Care Units. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05260853).

[Between New Responsibility and Daily Routines - The Role of the VERAH in GP Care: A Qualitative Secondary Data Case Study of the Introduction of Software-Based Case Management]. / Zwischen neuer Verantwortung und Routinetätigkeit: Die Rolle der VERAH in der hausärztlichen Versorgung ­ Eine qualitative Sekundärdatenanalyse am Beispiel des softwaregestützten Case Management.

BACKGROUND: The concept of Care Assistant in General Practice (VERAH) was developed in order to integrate non-medical staff more strongly into primary care and thus to meet the increasing demand for care and the simultaneous shortage of medical staff. VERAHs are increasingly responsible for software-supported case management and are thus confronted with new tasks. The aim of this study was therefore to explore the role of the VERAH in primary care practices. METHODS: The present study is a qualitative secondary data analysis; the data collection took place within the projects VESPEERA and TelePraCMan. Twenty individual interviews and two focus group meetings were conducted with a total of 30 physicians, VERAHs and medical assistants from primary care. The data were analysed qualitatively according to Emerson. Contextual and socio-demographic data were collected with an accompanying questionnaire. RESULTS: The VERAHs of all primary care practices from which interview partners participated performed tasks within software-supported case management. Concerning the role of the VERAH, three themes were identified in the interviews: a) concrete tasks of the VERAH in software-supported case management within the practice team, b) relevance of software-supported case management within the activities of the VERAHS and c) relationship between VERAHs and patients. CONCLUSION: Taking over tasks in software-supported case management can contribute to strengthening and expanding the role of the VERAH. In the future, more attention should be paid to a clear description of the new role, and the conditions of the VERAHs' task fulfilment should be considered.

[Integrated Care for Patients with Somatic Symptom Disorder in Primary Care - A Qualitative Participatory Evaluation of a Randomised Feasibility Trial]. / Integrierte Behandlung von Patient*innen mit somatischer Belastungsstörung in Hausarztpraxen ­ Eine qualitative, patient*innenbeteiligende Evaluation einer randomisierten Machbarkeitsstudie.

OBJECTIVE: The VISION intervention is a manualized short-term treatment for people with somatic symptom disorder, integrated into the primary care and delivered by psychotherapists via video consultations. As an innovative technology-based approach, the intervention was most recently piloted in a randomized feasibility trial. During the qualitative accompanying study presented here, the intervention was evaluated and optimised from the user perspective of patients who participated in the feasibility study. METHODS: We interviewed a total of N=10 patients included in the intervention group in three semi structured focus group discussions focusing on how they (1) assess the intervention in terms of acceptance and individual benefit and (2) which adjustments are necessary from the user perspective for further optimization of the intervention. We performed a qualitative content analysis using MAXQDA Plus 2022. RESULTS: Respondents reported initial reservations on their part regarding care via video consultation. After a brief period of habituation, the intervention was universally accepted. Main suggestions for improvement included a stronger focus on supporting patients find follow-up psychotherapy (if indicated) more flexible settings (e. g., location of video consultation), and a stronger integration of treatment into primary care. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The study provides systematically elaborated comprehensive findings on participants' practical experiences with the intervention. The model is appropriate for treating people with somatic symptom disorder. Before implementation, important suggestions for improvement should be thoroughly considered with continued patient and public involvement.

Effect of educational interventions on wound healing in patients with venous leg ulceration: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Educational interventions for patients with venous leg ulceration (VLU) may promote adherence and self-management, however, their effect on wound healing is unclear. A systematic literature search was performed and randomised controlled trials with a focus on educational interventions were included. Wound healing was analysed by assessing wound healing rate, ulcer size, and the PUSH Score. Additional outcomes comprised pain, quality of life, and functional ability. The study protocol for this work is registered at PROSPERO 2020 (ID: CRD42021286152). Nine studies were included in this meta-analysis. The odds ratio for wound healing was 1.91 (95% CI, 0.99-3.67, P = .053) in favour of educational interventions compared to usual care. Ulcer size reduction was higher (MD: -7.22; 95% CI, -11.91 to -2.53, P = .003) in patients following educational interventions. Included studies also showed significant effects on pain, quality of life, and functional analysis, though no quantitative synthesis was feasible. The overall risk of bias showed some concerns. Educational interventions aim to actively involve patients in their treatment, thereby appearing to be able to have a positive impact on wound healing within 12 weeks. Consequently, integrating educational approaches to routine wound care may be a promising strategy to improve treatment of VLU.

Implementation fidelity in a multifaceted program to foster rational antibiotics use in primary care: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: The ARena study (Sustainable Reduction of Antimicrobial Resistance in German Ambulatory Care) is a three-arm, cluster randomized trial to evaluate a multifaceted implementation program in a German primary care setting. In the context of a prospective process evaluation conducted alongside ARena, this study aimed to document and explore fidelity of the implementation program. METHODS: This observational study is based on data generated in a three-wave survey of 312 participating physicians in the ARena program and attendance documentation. Measures concerned persistence of participation in the ARena program and adherence to intervention components (thematic quality circles, e-learning, basic expenditure reimbursements, additional bonus payments and a computerized decision support system). Participants' views on five domains of the implementation were also measured. Binary logistic and multiple linear regression analyses were used to explore which views on the implementation were associated with participants' adherence to quality circles and use of additional bonus compensation. RESULTS: The analysis of fidelity showed overall high persistence of participation in the intervention components across the three intervention arms (90,1%; 97,9%; 92,9%). 96.4% of planned quality circles were delivered to study participants and, across waves, 30.4% to 93% of practices participated; 56.1% of physicians attended the maximum of four quality circles. 84% of the practices (n = 158) with a minimum of one index patient received a performance-based additional bonus payment at least once. In total, bonus compensation was triggered for 51.8% of affected patients. Participation rate for e-learning (a prerequisite for reimbursement of project-related expenditure) covered 90.8% of practices across all intervention arms, with the highest rate in arm II (96.5%). Uptake of expenditure reimbursement was heterogeneous across study arms, with a mean rate of 86.5% (89.1% in arm I, 96.4% in arm II and 74.1% in arm III). Participants' views regarding participant responsiveness (OR = 2.298) 95% CI [1.598, 3.305] and Context (OR = 2.146) 95% CI [1.135, 4.055] affected additional bonus payment. Participants' views on participant responsiveness (Beta = 0.718) 95% CI [0.479, 0.957], Context (Beta = 0.323) 95% CI [0.055, 0.590] and Culture of shared decision-making (Beta = -0.334) 95% CI [-0.614, -0.053] affected quality circle attendance. CONCLUSION: This study showed an overall high fidelity to the implementation program. Participants' views on the implementation were associated with degree of intervention fidelity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN58150046.

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.

Risk Factors for Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation and Weaning Failure: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV) and weaning failure are factors associated with prolonged hospital length of stay and increased morbidity and mortality. In addition to the burden these places on patients and their families, it also imposes high costs on the public health system. The aim of this systematic review was to identify risk factors for PMV and weaning failure. METHODS: The study was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. After a comprehensive search of the COCHRANE Library, CINHAL, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and the LILACS Database a PubMed request was made on June 8, 2020. Studies that examined risk factors for PMV, defined as mechanical ventilation ≥96 h, weaning failure, and prolonged weaning in German and English were considered eligible; reviews, meta-analyses, and studies in very specific patient populations whose results are not necessarily applicable to the majority of ICU patients as well as pediatric studies were excluded from the analysis. This systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO register under the number CRD42021271038. RESULTS: Of 532 articles identified, 23 studies with a total of 23,418 patients met the inclusion criteria. Fourteen studies investigated risk factors of PMV including prolonged weaning, 9 studies analyzed risk factors of weaning failure. The concrete definitions of these outcomes varied considerably between studies. For PMV, a variety of risk factors were identified, including comorbidities, site of intubation, various laboratory or blood gas parameters, ventilator settings, functional parameters, and critical care scoring systems. The risk of weaning failure was mainly related to age, previous home mechanical ventilation (HMV), cause of ventilation, and preexisting underlying diseases. Elevated PaCO2 values during spontaneous breathing trials were indicative of prolonged weaning and weaning failure. CONCLUSION: A direct comparison of risk factors was not possible because of the heterogeneity of the studies. The large number of different definitions and relevant parameters reflects the heterogeneity of patients undergoing PMV and those discharged to HMV after unsuccessful weaning. Multidimensional scores are more likely to reflect the full spectrum of patients ventilated in different ICUs than single risk factors.

Need for nursing care after laparoscopic and open colorectal cancer surgery: a claims data analysis in German primary care.

PURPOSE: Our study analyzes the influence of minimally invasive vs. open surgery on the postoperative need for nursing care in patients with colorectal carcinoma. Colorectal cancer is an age-related disease, and oncologic surgery is increasingly performed in elderly patients. Long-term effects of the procedural choice on patients' self-sufficiency and autonomy have not been scientifically addressed so far. METHODS: Multivariable logistic regression models based on claims data from a statutory health insurer (AOK, Baden-Württemberg, Germany) were applied to assess potential risk factors for assignment patients to a nursing care level, a German scale to categorize individual need for nursing care, at 12 and 36 months after colorectal cancer surgery. RESULTS: A total of 3996 patients were eligible to be included in the analysis. At 36 months postoperatively, 44 of 427 (10.3%) patients after minimally invasive colon cancer surgery and 231 of 1287 (17.9%) patients after open procedure were newly graded into a nursing care level (OR = 0.62, 95%CI = 0.44-0.90, p = 0.010). Thirty-four of 251 (13.5%) patients receiving minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery compared to 142 of 602 (23.6%) patients after open approach were newly assigned to a nursing care level (OR = 0.53, 95%CI = 0.34-0.81, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopically assisted resection of colorectal cancer seems to be superior in preserving physical autonomy of elderly patients with colorectal cancer.

How to fall into a new routine: factors influencing the implementation of an admission and discharge programme in hospitals and general practices.

INTRODUCTION: The VESPEERA programme is a multifaceted programme to enhance information transfer between general practice and hospital across the process of hospital admission, stay and discharge. It was implemented in 7 hospitals and 72 general practices in Southern Germany. Uptake was heterogeneous and overall low. A process evaluation aimed at identifying factors associated with the implementation of the VESPEERA programme. METHODS: This was a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews in a purposeful sample of health workers in hospitals and general practices in the VESPEERA programme. Qualitative framework analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was performed and revealed the topic of previous and new routines to be protruding. Inductive content analysis was used for in-depth examination of stages in the process of staying in a previous or falling into a new routines. RESULTS: Thirty-six interviews were conducted with 17 participants from general practices and 19 participants from hospitals. The interviewees were in different stages of the implementation process at the time of the interviews. Four stages were identified: Stage 1,'Previous routine and tension for change', describes the situation in which VESPEERA was to be implemented and the factors leading to the decision to participate. In stage 2,'Adoption of the VESPEERA programme', factors that influenced whether individuals decided to employ the innovation are relevant. Stage 3 comprises 'Determinants for falling into and staying in the new VESPEERA-routine' relates to actual implementation and finally, in stage 4, the participants reflect on the success of the implementation. CONCLUSIONS: The individuals and organisations participating in the VESPEERA programme were in different stages of a process from the previous to the new routine, which were characterised by different determinants of implementation. In all stages, organisational factors were main determinants of implementation, but different factors emerged in different implementation stages. A low distinction between decision-making power and executive, as well as available resources, were beneficial for the implementation of the innovation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS00015183 on DRKS / Universal Trial Number (UTN): U1111-1218-0992.

Antibiotic prescribing for acute, non-complicated infections in primary care in Germany: baseline assessment in the cluster randomized trial ARena.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial resistance is fueled by inappropriate use of antibiotics. Global and national strategies support rational use of antibiotics to retain treatment options and reduce resistance. In Germany, the ARena project (Sustainable reduction of antibiotic-induced antimicrobial resistance) intended to promote rational use of antibiotics for acute non-complicated infections by addressing network-affiliated physicians, primary care teams and patients through multiple interacting interventions. The present study documented patterns of antibiotic prescribing for patients with acute non-complicated infections who consulted a physician in these networks at the start of the ARena project. It explored variation across subgroups of patients and draws comparisons to prescribing patterns of non-targeted physicians. METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional analysis used mixed logistic regression models to explore factors associated with the primary outcome, which was the percentage of patient cases with acute non-complicated respiratory tract infections consulting primary care practices who were treated with antibiotics. Secondary outcomes concerned the prescribing of different types of antibiotics. Descriptive methods were used to summarize the data referring to targeted physicians in primary care networks, non-targeted physicians (reference group), and patient subgroups. RESULTS: Overall, antibiotic prescribing rates were 32.0% in primary care networks and 31.7% in the reference group. General practitioners prescribed antibiotics more frequently than other medical specialist groups (otolaryngologists vs. General practitioners OR = 0.465 CI = [0.302; 0.719], p < 0.001, pediatricians vs. General practitioners: OR = 0.369 CI = [0.135; 1.011], p = 0.053). Quinolone prescribing rates were 9.9% in primary care networks and 8.1% in reference group. Patients with comorbidities had a higher likelihood of receiving an antibiotic and quinolone prescription and were less likely to receive a guideline-recommended substance. Younger patients were less likely to receive antibiotics (OR = 0.771 CI = [0.636; 0.933], p = 0.008). Female gender was more likely to receive an antibiotic prescription (OR = 1.293 CI = [1.201, 1.392], p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study provided an overview of observed antibiotic prescribing for acute non-complicated respiratory tract infections in German primary care at the start of the ARena project. Findings indicate potential for improvement and will serve as comparator for the post-interventional outcome evaluation to facilitate describing of potential changes.

Healthcare planning across healthcare sectors in Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany: a stakeholder online survey to identify indicators.

BACKGROUND: Stakeholders in the German state of Baden-Wuerttemberg agreed upon the central aims for healthcare planning. These include a focus on geographical districts; a comprehensive, cross-sectoral perspective on healthcare needs and services; and use of regional data for healthcare planning. Therefore, healthcare data at district level is needed. Nevertheless, decision makers face the challenge to make a selection from numerous indicators and frameworks, which all have limitations or do not well apply to the targeted setting. The aim of this study was to identify district level indicators to be used in Baden-Wuerttemberg for the purpose of cross-sectoral and needs-based healthcare planning involving stakeholders of the health system. METHODS: A conceptual framework for indicators was developed. A structured search for indicators identified 374 potential indicators in indicator sets of German and international institutions and agencies (n = 211), clinical practice guidelines (n = 50), data bases (n = 35), indicator databases (n = 25), published literature (n = 35), and other sources (n = 18). These indicators were categorised according to the developed framework dimensions. In an online survey, institutions of various stakeholders were invited to assess the relevance of these indicators from December 2016 until January 2017. Indicators were selected in terms of a median value of the assessed relevance. RESULTS: 22 institutions selected 212 indicators for the five dimensions non-medical determinants of health (20 indicators), health status (25), utilisation of the health system (34), health system performance (87), and healthcare provision (46). CONCLUSIONS: Stakeholders assessed a large number of indicators as relevant for use in healthcare planning on district level. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

Evaluating the structural reform of outpatient psychotherapy in Germany (ES-RiP trial) - a qualitative study of provider perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Access to outpatient mental healthcare can be challenging for patients. In Germany, a national structural reform was implemented in 2017 to accelerate and enhance access to outpatient psychotherapy and reduce waiting times. During the first phase of the study 'Evaluation of a structural reform of the outpatient psychotherapy guideline (ES-RiP)' and embedded into a process evaluation, the implementation was to be evaluated through assessing general practitioners' (GPs) and psychotherapists' (PTs) perspectives regarding utilization of provided new measures, and perceived potential for optimization. Particular focus was on patients with a comorbidity of mental disorders and chronic physical conditions (cMPs). METHODS: This exploratory cross-sectional qualitative study used on-site and online focus group discussions and semi-structured telephone interviews with GPs and outpatient PTs. Generated data were analyzed using thematic framework analysis. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze participant characteristics collected via a socio-demographic questionnaire. RESULTS: Perspectives on the structural reform were heterogenous. GPs and PTs considered the component of timely initial psychotherapeutic assessment consultations beneficial. GPs disapproved of their deficits in detailed information about the structural reform and exchange with outpatient PTs. Improvement suggestions included structured short information exchange and joint quality circles. The overall number of available outpatient PTs in rural areas was perceived as insufficient. For patients with cMPs, GPs saw patient barriers for therapy access and continuity in low intrinsic motivation, physical impediments and older age. PTs also saw patient challenges regarding low intrinsic motivation and keeping scheduled appointments. They considered post-reform administrative efforts to be high and reported that the regulations (conformity) lead to planning difficulties and financial losses. Reform elements were tailored to fit in with PTs key therapy areas. Stronger networking and joint lectures were suggested as remedy for the currently still limited exchange with GPs. Unlike the GPs, PTs emphasized that accepting patients into psychotherapeutic treatment was independent of a possibly present chronic physical disease. CONCLUSIONS: The findings contribute to understanding the integration of the delivered structural reform into daily care processes and provide an indication about reached targets and potential improvements. Further phases of the ES-RiP study can build on the findings and broaden insights. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration-ID DRKS00020344 (DRKS German Register of Clinical Trials.