Preventive and health-promoting activities in general practices in Germany: A scoping review

General practices are rooted in the local community and considered to be particularly well-positioned for engaging in preventive and health-promoting activities. The overall aim of the scoping review is to identify priorities and gaps in research published in the past 20 years on preventive and health-promoting activities provided by general practitioners or their teams in general practices in Germany. MEDLINE and Embase databases were systematically searched in November 2020. Papers were selected in dual-review mode and extracted in single-review mode. Data analysis was finished by May 2021. In total, 530 papers were included in the synthesis. Little research has been carried out into collaboration opportunities both within the general practice team and in communities as a whole, with specialists (18%), hospitals (9%), and health insurance companies (6%) being the most frequent cooperation partners of GPs. 15%–20% of papers each dealt with ‘early detection’, ‘information provision’ and ‘cardiovascular prevention’. Secondary (53%) and tertiary prevention (43%) was more often the subject of research than primary (39%) and quaternary prevention (15%). Healthy subjects (26%) were less often studied than people with pre-existing conditions (42%) and risk factors (48%). Little information was available on preventive activities in terms of gender, young people, migration background, housing conditions or educational background. Personal counselling (15%) was the most frequently described approach to health promotion in general practices, along with printed information materials (10%). This scoping review provides information on which to base targeted interventions and future research that can contribute towards transforming general practices into promoters of health within the community

Specialized outpatient palliative care for children, adolescents, and their families—the special needs of the target group. Results of the ELSAH study

Hintergrund und Ziel: Lebenslimitierend erkrankte Kinder und Jugendliche mit komplexem Symptomgeschehen haben Anspruch auf eine spezialisierte ambulante Palliativversorgung (SAPV). In der Richtlinie zur SAPV heißt es lediglich: „Den besonderen Belangen von Kindern und Jugendlichen ist Rechnung zu tragen.“ Das Ziel der Studie ist es deshalb, diese besonderen Belange zu identifizieren und Empfehlungen zur Überarbeitung der SAPV-Richtlinie zu formulieren. Methoden: Sequenzielles Mixed-Methods-Design mit Fragebogenerhebungen, qualitativen Interviews, teilnehmenden Beobachtungen und Fokusgruppendiskussionen mit Angehörigen, Patient*innen und Leistungserbringer*innen der SAPV in Hessen sowie der Auswertung von Dokumentationsdaten der hessischen SAPV-Teams. Ergebnisse: Kinder und Jugendliche in der SAPV leiden an komplexen, oftmals seltenen Erkrankungen und bedürfen einer besonders aufwendigen Palliativversorgung durch ein Team mit pädiatrischer Expertise. Die SAPV muss die gesamte Familie einbeziehen und oftmals überregional verteilte Versorger*innen koordinieren. Zudem ist eine besonders aufwendige psychosoziale Versorgung von Patient*innen und Angehörigen notwendig. Die SAPV für Kinder und Jugendliche ist weniger bekannt als die SAPV für Erwachsene und der Zugang für die Familien deshalb oft schwierig. Für lebenslimitierend erkrankte Kinder und Jugendliche, die zwar einer aufsuchenden Palliativversorgung bedürfen, jedoch keinen Bedarf an einer so intensiven Betreuung wie in der SAPV haben, besteht eine Versorgungslücke. Fazit: Die SAPV von Kindern und Jugendlichen sowie von volljährigen Patient*innen, die seit dem Kindes- und Jugendalter erkrankt sind, bedarf einer eigenständigen Versorgungsform mit Vergütungsmodalitäten, die den besonderen Versorgungsbedarf und -aufwand abbilden.Background and aim: Children and adolescents with life-limiting conditions and complex symptoms are eligible for specialized outpatient palliative care (SOPC). The SOPC guideline in Germany solely states: “The special needs of children and adolescents shall be considered.” This study aims to identify these special needs and to develop recommendations for a revision of the SOPC guideline. Methods: We used a sequential mixed-methods design including surveys, qualitative interviews, participant observations, and focus group discussions with relatives, patients, and team members of the SOPC in Hesse, Germany. Furthermore, we analyzed documentation data of the Hessian SOPC teams. Results: Children and adolescents in SOPC suffer from complex and often rare diseases. They need elaborate palliative care delivered by a team with pediatric expertise. SOPC must include the whole family and coordinate healthcare providers that are stretched regionally. Furthermore, patients and relatives need elaborate psychosocial care. SOPC for children and adolescents is less well-known than SOPC for adults, and access for families is often difficult. There is a healthcare gap for children and adolescents with life-limiting diseases who need palliative care at home but not of the intensive kind provided by SOPC. Conclusions: SOPC for children, adolescents, and adults who have been diseased since their childhood and adolescence must be delivered within an independent structure, including a reimbursement scheme that takes the special care efforts for this patient group into consideration

State-wide implementation of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in specialized outpatient palliative care teams (ELSAH): A mixed-methods evaluation and implications for their sustainable use

Abstract Background Such patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-centered outcome measures as the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale (IPOS), Phase of Illness, and IPOS Views on Care (IPOS VoC), facilitate patient-centered care and help improve quality. To ensure sustainability, implementation and usage should be adapted according to setting. When settings involve several distinct teams that differ in terms of views and working practices, it is more difficult to integrate outcome measures into daily care. The ELSAH study aimed to learn how health professionals working in specialized outpatient palliative care (SOPC) viewed the use of these outcome measures in daily care, and what they express is needed for successful sustainable, state-wide application. Methods We used a parallel mixed-methods design involving three focus groups (n = 14) and an online-survey based on normalization process theory (n = 76). Most participants were nurses and physicians from 19 SOPC-teams in Hesse, Germany. We used a triangulation protocol including convergence coding matrices to triangulate findings. Results The majority of health professionals were able to integrate the outcome measures into their working lives and said that it had become a normal part of their day-to-day work. To ensure their sustainable integration into daily care, the motivation and concerns of health professionals should be taken into consideration. Health professionals must clearly recognize how the measures help improve daily care and quality evaluation. Conclusions To implement the outcome measures in a number of teams, it will be necessary to take individual team characteristics into account, because they influence motivation and concerncs. Further, it will be necessary to offer opportunities for them to engage in peer support and share information with other teams. The sustainable use of outcome measures in SOPC will require continuous support within each team as well as across teams. When several distinct teams are working in the same setting, a cross-team coordination unit can help to coordinate their work efficiently. Trial registration German Clinical Trials Register DRKS-ID: DRKS00012421; www.germanctr.de/DRKS0001242

Supporting Error Management and Safety Climate in Ambulatory Care Practices: The CIRSforte Study.

BACKGROUND To improve patient safety, it is important that healthcare facilities learn from critical incidents. Tools such as reporting and learning systems and team meetings structure error management and promote learning from incidents. To enhance error management in ambulatory care practices, it is important to promote a climate of safety and ensure personnel share views on safety policies and procedures. In contrast to the hospital sector, little research has been dedicated to developing feasible approaches to supporting error management and safety climate in ambulatory care. In this study, we developed, implemented, and evaluated a multicomponent intervention to address how error management and safety climate can be improved in ambulatory care practices. METHODS In a prospective 1-group pretest-posttest implementation study, we sought to encourage teams in German ambulatory practices to use proven methods such as guidelines, workshops, e-learning, (online) meetings, and e-mail newsletters. A pretest-posttest questionnaire was used to evaluate level and strength of safety climate and psychological behavioral determinants for systematic error management. Using 3 short surveys, we also assessed the state of error management in the participating practices. In semistructured interviews, we asked participants for their views on our intervention measures. RESULTS Overall, 184 ambulatory care practices nationwide agreed to participate. Level of safety climate and safety climate strength (rwg) improved significantly. Of psychological behavioral determinants, significant improvements could be seen in "action/coping planning" and "action control." Seventy-six percent of practices implemented a new reporting and learning system or modified their existing system. The exchange of information between practices also increased over time. Interviews showed that the introductory workshop and provided materials such as report forms or instructions for team meetings were regarded as helpful. CONCLUSIONS A significant improvement in safety climate level and strength, as well as participants' knowledge of how to analyze critical incidents, derive preventive measures and develop concrete plans suggest that it is important to train practice teams, to provide practical tips and tools, and to facilitate the exchange of information between practices. Future randomized and controlled intervention trials should confirm the effectiveness of our multicomponent intervention.Trial registration: Retrospectively registered on 18. November 2019 in German Clinical Trials Register No. DRKS00019053

How can we ensure the success of specialised palliative home-care? A qualitative study (ELSAH) identifying key issues from the perspective of patients, relatives and health professionals

Background: Specialised palliative home-care supports patients with life-limiting diseases in their familiar surroundings. The number of palliative care teams and patients being cared for is increasing worldwide. To assess and improve quality, it is needed to understand, how specialised palliative home-care can be provided successfully. For this purpose we examined the views of all involved stakeholders. Aim: To identify the issues that patients, their relatives and involved health professionals view as important in ensuring the success of specialised palliative home-care. Design: We used a qualitative design based on participant observations, interviews and focus groups following the principles of a Grounded Theory approach. Setting/participants: All specialised palliative home-care teams (n = 22) caring for adults in Hesse, Germany, participated. We conducted participant observations (n = 5), and interviewed patients (n = 14), relatives (n = 14) and health professionals working in or collaborating with specialised palliative home-care (n = 30). We also conducted focus groups (n = 4) with health professionals including a member check. Results: Successful specialised palliative home-care needs to treat complex symptoms, and provide comprehensive care including organisation of care, involving relatives and addressing issues of death and dying. Sense of security for patients and relatives is key to enable care at home. Care delivery preferences include a focus on the quality of relationships, respect for individuality and the facilitation of self-determination. Conclusions: Consideration of the identified key issues can help to ensure successful specialised palliative home-care. Knowledge of these should also be considered when researching and assessing quality of care. Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS-ID: DRKS00012421; http://www.germanctr.de