[(Expected) Consultation length, mental (co-)morbidity and patient satisfaction in the family practice encounter]. / (Erwartete) Konsultationsdauer, psychische (Ko-)Morbidität und Zufriedenheit mit dem ärztlichen Gespräch in der Hausarztpraxis.

INTRODUCTION: Mental disorders are common in family practice, but their meaning for variables of consultation is rarely considered. Thus, we examined the influence of mental disorders on patients' expectations regarding time, openness and seriousness as well as ratings of satisfaction with the consultation. METHODS: Prior to consultation for 219 patients a screening for anxiety (GAD-7), depression (PHQ-9) and hypochondriasis (WI-7) was performed. Before and after the consultation patient expectations and ratings were recorded. Subgroup analysis was based on Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: Almost half of the sample were screen-positive. Prior the consultation, screen positive patients had higher ratings for expectations compared with screen negative patients, but did not differ in their experiences after the consultation. There was no association between consultation length and ratings for satisfaction. DISCUSSION: Patients screened positive for mental disorders do not necessarily require longer consultation length, if their expectations regarding openness and seriousness are met. This is underlines the importance of communication skills in undergraduate medical education and specialist training for future GPs.

Meta-regression analyses to explain statistical heterogeneity in a systematic review of strategies for guideline implementation in primary health care.

This study is an in-depth-analysis to explain statistical heterogeneity in a systematic review of implementation strategies to improve guideline adherence of primary care physicians in the treatment of patients with cardiovascular diseases. The systematic review included randomized controlled trials from a systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, conference proceedings and registers of ongoing studies. Implementation strategies were shown to be effective with substantial heterogeneity of treatment effects across all investigated strategies. Primary aim of this study was to explain different effects of eligible trials and to identify methodological and clinical effect modifiers. Random effects meta-regression models were used to simultaneously assess the influence of multimodal implementation strategies and effect modifiers on physician adherence. Effect modifiers included the staff responsible for implementation, level of prevention and definition pf the primary outcome, unit of randomization, duration of follow-up and risk of bias. Six clinical and methodological factors were investigated as potential effect modifiers of the efficacy of different implementation strategies on guideline adherence in primary care practices on the basis of information from 75 eligible trials. Five effect modifiers were able to explain a substantial amount of statistical heterogeneity. Physician adherence was improved by 62% (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 29 to 104%) or 29% (95% CI 5 to 60%) in trials where other non-medical professionals or nurses were included in the implementation process. Improvement of physician adherence was more successful in primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular diseases by around 30% (30%; 95% CI -2 to 71% and 31%; 95% CI 9 to 57%, respectively) compared to tertiary prevention. This study aimed to identify effect modifiers of implementation strategies on physician adherence. Especially the cooperation of different health professionals in primary care practices might increase efficacy and guideline implementation seems to be more difficult in tertiary prevention of cardiovascular diseases.

Motives of former interns in general practice for speciality-choice--results of a cross-sectional study among graduates 2007 to 2012.

BACKGROUND: The influence of a final-year elective internship in general practice (IGP) on motives affecting graduates' choice of specialty is the object of great public interest, yet still insufficiently evaluated. Longitudinal studies show the influence of numerous motives (e.g., work-life balance), but not following the IGP experience itself. Thus, we performed a cross-sectional questionnaire study of all graduates who completed the IGP in Saxony-Anhalt during 2007-2012 regarding their motives for choosing a speciality. METHOD: A standardized questionnaire was sent to 109 former interns in general practice. The questionnaire contained 29 items addressing three topics (personal attitudes, concept of personal and professional life, motives for speciality choice) and used single-choice and multiple-choice answers, as well as Likert scales. Correlation analysis was carried out by means of Kendall's tau. RESULTS: The questionnaire reached 97 former interns, of which 45 (46%) responded. In the overall ranking of motives for speciality choice, family (71%), leisure time (66%) and job opportunities (48%) rated as more important than income (36%), mentoring (20%), status or scientific work (20%). Only 29% of the respondents stated that their speciality choice was changed by the IGP. If the speciality choice was already established before the IGP, the influence of the IGP on speciality choice was significantly low (r = -.5; p < .01). However, if the IGP had an influence on speciality choice, it was correlated with a new perception of general practice (r = .36; p<.01). This new perception was associated with a positive influence of the medical teacher during the IGP. CONCLUSION: The final-year IGP is an opportunity to change the perception of general practice in students who are still undecided. This can lead to different speciality choices in a subgroup. Personal attitudes and concepts of personal life and career were also important factors affecting speciality choice. The aspects of the positive influence exerted by medical teachers on those students who are still undecided during the IGP should be carefully evaluated.

Strategies for guideline implementation in primary care focusing on patients with cardiovascular disease: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines should reduce inappropriate practice and improve the efficiency of treatment. Not only methodological quality but also acceptance and successful implementation in daily practice are crucial for the benefit on patients. Focusing on cardiovascular diseases (CVD), it is still unclear which implementation strategy can improve physician adherence to the recommendations of guidelines in primary care. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review on randomized controlled trials about guideline implementation strategies on CVD. Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, conference proceedings and registers of ongoing studies were searched. RESULTS: Eighty-four trials met our predefined inclusion criteria, of them 54 trials compared unimodal strategies and 30 multimodal strategies to usual care. Concerning unimodal strategies, 15 trials investigated provider reminder systems, 3 audit and feedback, 15 provider education, 4 patient education, 5 promotion of self-management and 14 organizational change. The strongest benefit of a unimodal implementation strategy was found due to organizational change (odds ratio 1.96; 95% CI 1.4 to 2.75), followed by patient education, provider education and provider reminder systems. Trials on the efficacy of audit and feedback and patient self-management showed differing results or small advantages in terms of physician adherence. Multimodal interventions showed almost similar effect measures and ranking of strategies. CONCLUSION: The use of implementation strategies for the distribution of guidelines on CVD can be convincingly effective on physician adherence, regardless whether based on a unimodal or multimodal design. Three distinct strategies should be well considered in such an attempt: organizational changes in the primary care team, patient education and provider education.