Illness behaviour and influencing aspects of general practitioners in Germany and their use of the health care system: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore aspects that play a role when general practitioners (GPs) become ill and thus gain a more comprehensive understanding of the overall illness behaviour of GPs and their use of the healthcare system. SETTING: Primary care practices in Thuringia, Germany. PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of 16 GPs. DESIGN: Qualitative study design with semistructured interviews and content analysis. RESULTS: Using our approach of having participants report their own episodes of illness, we found that self-treatment was practised and accepted by all 16 participants. The widespread use of naturopathy and complementary methods seems to be a special feature of German GPs. Formal use of the healthcare system mainly took place through direct consultation with specialists.Our study revealed various aspects influencing the illness behaviour of the GPs and their use of the healthcare system. Some aspects also apply to lay patients, but it became clear how strongly illness behaviour is influenced by participants' activities as physicians. Noteworthy and less described aspects are especially the influence of patients and practice staff, the influence of biographical and professional imprint and the attitudes and values of the physicians.Complex inter-relationships were found between illness behaviour and influencing aspects; these are subjected to a dynamic and recursive process. CONCLUSIONS: The illness behaviour of German GPs seems to be comprehensively influenced by their activities as responsible healthcare providers. The ability to perceive and reflect in this regards should already be actively promoted in studies and further education. Further research is needed for a better understanding of the inter-relationships.

Intersectoral care management for older people with cognitive impairment during and after hospital stays [intersec-CM]: study protocol for a process evaluation within a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In the healthcare system in Germany, different institutions and actors play specific roles in the discharge and transition of patients from hospitals into primary care (Sachverständigenrat zur Begutachtung der Entwicklung im Gesundheitswesen, Wettbewerb an der Schnittstelle zwischen ambulanter und stationärer Gesundheitsversorgung, 2012). However, there are shortcomings in these intersectoral transitions. Especially in older people with cognitive impairment (PCI), discharge management often lacks coordination and cooperation between healthcare providers. This frequently results in higher rates of unscheduled readmission. The project intersec-CM is a randomised controlled trial (RCT) that aims to explore up to what extent an intersectoral care management (ICM) can improve this transition. This ICM is delivered by nurses with special training in care management. The objective of this paper is to describe a mixed-methods process evaluation of the intersectoral care management intervention and the factors that facilitate and inhibit its implementation. METHODS: Different study designs for process evaluations from previous literature were collected and analysed according to the dimension implementation fidelity, satisfaction with the intervention, feasible transfer into routine care, optimum point of time, frequency and execution of the intervention, and context factors. RESULTS: The actor-network theory was chosen as the theoretic framework for the process evaluation. Based on this theory, a mixed-methods design was developed to combine and integrate qualitative and quantitative evaluation methods. The qualitative part includes semi-structured interviews using topic guides (phase 1) and later in-depth interviews with narrative portions (phase 3), which will be analysed by using the qualitative content analysis according to Kuckartz. The quantitative survey (phase 2) is conducted with standardised questionnaires. DISCUSSION: Challenges in data collection include the development of interview guidelines, which require different terminologies depending on every specific actor targeted in the intervention. Conducting the interviews, there is a risk of misunderstanding the older PCI by the interviewer and vice versa. However, the combination of qualitative and quantitative approaches as different techniques of process evaluation may help to capture, integrate and analyse data on different dimensions of the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our process evaluation may serve as an implementation guideline for intersectoral care management in the German healthcare system. Furthermore, the approach to evaluate the process of a complex intervention in health care for older PCI may serve as a stimulus to broaden the evidence base also of other complex intervention studies to improve health care for this vulnerable group. The study was ethically approved by the Ethics Committee of the Ernst-Moritz-Arndt University of Greifswald. The study has been registered at the U.S. National Library of Medicine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03359408 . Registered on 2 December 2017. The approximate date when recruitment to the process evaluation of the study will be completed is 31 May 2021.

Supporting elderly people with cognitive impairment during and after hospital stays with intersectoral care management: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The sectorization of health-care systems leads to inefficient treatment, especially for elderly people with cognitive impairment. The transition from hospital care to primary care is insufficiently coordinated, and communication between health-care providers is often lacking. Consequences include a further deterioration of health, higher rates of hospital readmissions, and institutionalization. Models of collaborative care have shown their efficacy in primary care by improving patient-related outcomes. The main goal of this trial is to compare the effectiveness of a collaborative care model with usual care for people with cognitive impairment who have been admitted to a hospital for treatment due to a somatic illness. The aim of the intervention is to improve the continuity of treatment and care across the transition between the in-hospital and adjoining primary care sectors. METHODS/DESIGN: The trial is a longitudinal multisite randomized controlled trial with two arms (care as usual and intersectoral care management). Inclusion criteria at the time of hospital admission due to a somatic illness are age 70+ years, cognitive impairment (Mini Mental State Examination, MMSE ≤26), living at home, and written informed consent. Each participant will have a baseline assessment at the hospital and two follow-up assessments at home (3 and 12 months after discharge). The estimated sample size is n = 398 people with cognitive inmpairement plus their respective informal caregivers (where available). In the intersectoral care management group, specialized care managers will develop, implement, and monitor individualized treatment and care based on comprehensive assessments of the unmet needs of the patients and their informal caregivers. These assessments will occur at the hospital and in participants' homes. Primary outcomes are (1) activities of daily living, (2) readmission to the hospital, and (3) institutionalization. Secondary outcomes include (a) frailty, (b) delirium, (c) quality of life, (d) cognitive status, (e) behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia, (f) utilization of services, and (g) informal caregiver burden. DISCUSSION: In the event of proving efficacy, this trial will deliver a proof of concept for implementation into routine care. The cost-effectiveness analyses as well as an independent process evaluation will increase the likelihood of meeting this goal. The trial will enable an in-depth analysis of mediating and moderating effects for different health outcomes at the interface between hospital care and primary care. By highlighting treatment and care, the study will provide insights into unmet needs at the time of hospital admission, and the opportunities and barriers to meeting those needs during the hospital stay and after discharge. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03359408 ; December 2, 2017.

[Panic disorder and agoraphobia in general practice: Advantages and pitfalls of a practice team-supported exposure training from the general practitioner's perspective - a qualitative study]. / Panikstörung und Agoraphobie hausärztlich behandelt: Vorzüge und Fallstricke eines Praxisteam-unterstützten Expositionstrainings aus Sicht von Hausärztinnen und Hausärzten ­ eine qualitative Studie.

INTRODUCTION: For the treatment of anxiety disorders behavior therapy-oriented methods are recommended for primary care as well. Within the trial "Jena-PARADISE" a primary care practice team-supported exposure training for patients with panic disorder with or without agoraphobia was developed and evaluated. The present paper gives an overview of general practitioners' subjective views on the practicability, feasibility and effectiveness of this new intervention for both patients and GP teams. METHODS: Questions were operationalized based on Bellg's intervention fidelity framework. Fourteen GPs of the intervention group were sampled purposefully and interviewed in a semi-structured way. Generated data were analyzed following Mayring's content analysis approach. RESULTS: The treatment program was positively assessed among the GPs and seen as a useful therapeutic option for inadequately treated patients. The therapy elements 'psycho-education' and 'interoceptive exposure exercises' were described as feasible, while situational exercises and relapse prevention got a less positive rating. The active participation of the nurse in the treatment program was seen as supportive. CONCLUSION: From the GP perspective, the treatment program for patients with panic disorder and/or agoraphobia seems to be a viable therapeutic option in primary care.