Refine
Document Type
- Article (39)
Language
- English (39)
Has Fulltext
- yes (39)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (39)
Keywords
- - (16)
- dementia (6)
- Telemedicine (3)
- pandemic (3)
- Blood supply (2)
- COVID-19 (2)
- Dementia (2)
- Demographic change (2)
- Developmental screening (2)
- Patient preferences (2)
Institute
- Institut für Community Medicine (30)
- Institut für Diagnostische Radiologie und Neuroradiologie (2)
- Institut für Klinische Chemie und Laboratoriumsmedizin (2)
- Institut für Psychologie (2)
- Klinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie (2)
- Institut für Epidemiologie u. Sozialmedizin (1)
- Institut für Hygiene und Umweltmedizin (1)
- Institut für Immunologie u. Transfusionsmedizin - Abteilung Immunologie (1)
- Institut für Immunologie u. Transfusionsmedizin - Abteilung Transfusionsmedizin (1)
- Institut für Pharmakologie (1)
Publisher
- MDPI (11)
- BioMed Central (BMC) (7)
- Frontiers Media S.A. (4)
- Public Library of Science (PLoS) (4)
- S. Karger AG (3)
- Springer Nature (3)
- Nature Publishing Group (2)
- Wiley (2)
- Elsevier (1)
- JMIR Publications (1)
Background
In the German health care system, parents with an acutely ill child can visit an emergency room (ER) 24 hours a day, seven days a week. At the ER, the patient receives a medical consultation. Many parents use these facilities as they do not know how urgently their child requires medical attention. In recent years, paediatric departments in smaller hospitals have been closed, particularly in rural regions. As a result of this, the distances that patients must travel to paediatric care facilities in these regions are increasing, causing more children to visit an ER for adults. However, paediatric expertise is often required in order to assess how quickly the patient requires treatment and select an adequate treatment. This decision is made by a doctor in German ERs. We have examined whether remote paediatricians can perform a standardised urgency assessment (triage) using a video conferencing system.
Methods
Only acutely ill patients who were brought to a paediatric emergency room (paedER) by their parents or carers, without prior medical consultation, have been included in this study. First, an on-site paediatrician assessed the urgency of each case using a standardised triage. In order to do this, the Paediatric Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (PaedCTAS) was translated into German and adapted for use in a standardised IT-based data collection tool. After the initial on-site triage, a telemedicine paediatrician, based in a different hospital, repeated the triage using a video conferencing system. Both paediatricians used the same triage procedure. The primary outcome was the degree of concordance and interobserver agreement, measured using Cohen’s kappa, between the two paediatricians. We have also included patient and assessor demographics.
Results
A total of 266 patients were included in the study. Of these, 227 cases were eligible for the concordance analysis. In n = 154 cases (68%), there was concordance between the on-site paediatrician’s and telemedicine paediatrician’s urgency assessments. In n = 50 cases (22%), the telemedicine paediatrician rated the urgency of the patient’s condition higher (overtriage); in 23 cases (10%), the assessment indicated a lower urgency (undertriage). Nineteen medical doctors were included in the study, mostly trained paediatric specialists. Some of them acted as an on-site doctor and telemedicine doctor. Cohen’s weighted kappa was 0.64 (95% CI: 0.49–0.79), indicating a substantial agreement between the specialists.
Conclusions
Telemedical triage can assist in providing acute paediatric care in regions with a low density of paediatric care facilities. The next steps are further developing the triage tool and implementing telemedicine urgency assessment in a larger network of hospitals in order to improve the integration of telemedicine into hospitals’ organisational processes. The processes should include intensive training for the doctors involved in telemedical triage.
Aims
To examine whether inactive nurses are willing to return to nursing during the COVID-19 pandemic, the reasons for or against their decision and further, possibly relevant factors.
Design
Cross-sectional online survey.
Methods
We developed a questionnaire, addressing registration, professional experiences, anticipations, and internal and external factors that might affect the decision of inactive nurses to return to nursing during the pandemic. Between 27 April and 15 June 2020, we recruited participants in Germany via social networks, organizations and institutions and asked them to forward the link to wherever other inactive nurses might be reached.
Results
Three hundred and thirty-two participants (73% female) could be included in the analysis. The majority of the participants (n = 262, 79%) were general nurses. The main reason for registering was ‘want to do my bit to manage the crisis’ (n = 73, 22.8%). More than two thirds of the participants (n = 230, 69%) were not or not yet registered. One hundred and twelve (49%) out of 220 participants, who gave reasons why they did not register, selected they ‘could not see a necessity at that time’. The few inactive nurses who were deployed reported a variety of experiences.
Conclusions
Different factors influence the nurses’ decision to register or not. A critical factor for their decision was previous experiences that had made them leave the job and prevented a return—even for a limited time in a special situation.
Impact
From the responses of the participants in this study, it can be deduced that: negative experiences made while working in nursing influence the willingness to volunteer for a deployment; only one-third of the inactive nurses would be willing to return to the nursing profession to help manage the Corona pandemic; policymakers and nursing leaders should not rely on the availability of inactive nurses in a crisis.
Background
The COVID-19 pandemic and the imposed lockdowns severely affected routine care in general and specialized physician practices.
Objective
To describe the long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the physician services provision and disease recognition in German physician practices and perceived causes for the observed changes.
Design
Observational study based on medical record data and survey data of general practitioners and specialists' practices.
Participants
996 general practitioners (GPs) and 798 specialist practices, who documented 6.1 million treatment cases for medical record data analyses and 645 physicians for survey data analyses.
Main measures
Within the medical record data, consultations, specialist referrals, hospital admissions, and documented diagnoses were extracted for the pandemic (March 2020–September 2021) and compared to corresponding pre-pandemic months in 2019. The additional online survey was used to assess changes in practice management during the COVID-19 pandemic and physicians' perceived main causes of affected primary and specialized care provision.
Main results
Hospital admissions (GPs: −22% vs. specialists: −16%), specialist referrals (−6 vs. −3%) and recognized diseases (−9 vs. −8%) significantly decreased over the pandemic. GPs consultations initially decreased (2020: −7%) but compensated at the end of 2021 (+3%), while specialists' consultation did not (−2%). Physicians saw changes in patient behavior, like appointment cancellation, as the main cause of the decrease. Contrary to this, they also mentioned substantial modifications of practice management, like reduced (nursing) home visits (41%) and opening hours (40%), suspended checkups (43%), and delayed consultations for high-risk patients (71%).
Conclusion
The pandemic left its mark on primary and specialized healthcare provision and its utilization. Both patient behavior and organizational changes in practice management may have caused decreased and non-compensation of services. Evaluating the long-term effect on patient outcomes and identifying potential improvements are vital to better prepare for future pandemic waves.
The German Centre for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK) is one of the German Centres for Health Research and aims to conduct early and guideline-relevant studies to develop new therapies and diagnostics that impact the lives of people with cardiovascular disease. Therefore, DZHK members designed a collaboratively organised and integrated research platform connecting all sites and partners. The overarching objectives of the research platform are the standardisation of prospective data and biological sample collections among all studies and the development of a sustainable centrally standardised storage in compliance with general legal regulations and the FAIR principles. The main elements of the DZHK infrastructure are web-based and central units for data management, LIMS, IDMS, and transfer office, embedded in a framework consisting of the DZHK Use and Access Policy, and the Ethics and Data Protection Concept. This framework is characterised by a modular design allowing a high standardisation across all studies. For studies that require even tighter criteria additional quality levels are defined. In addition, the Public Open Data strategy is an important focus of DZHK. The DZHK operates as one legal entity holding all rights of data and biological sample usage, according to the DZHK Use and Access Policy. All DZHK studies collect a basic set of data and biosamples, accompanied by specific clinical and imaging data and biobanking. The DZHK infrastructure was constructed by scientists with the focus on the needs of scientists conducting clinical studies. Through this, the DZHK enables the interdisciplinary and multiple use of data and biological samples by scientists inside and outside the DZHK. So far, 27 DZHK studies recruited well over 11,200 participants suffering from major cardiovascular disorders such as myocardial infarction or heart failure. Currently, data and samples of five DZHK studies of the DZHK Heart Bank can be applied for.
Introduction
In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, a general lockdown was enacted across Germany in March 2020. As a consequence, patients with mental health conditions received limited or no treatment in day hospitals and outpatient settings. To ensure continuity of care, the necessary technological preparations were made to enable the implementation of telemedical care via telephone or video conferencing, and this option was then used as much as possible. The aim of this study was to investigate the satisfaction and acceptance with telemedical care in a heterogeneous patient group of psychiatric outpatients in Germany during the first COVID-19 lockdown.
Methods
In this observational study, patients in ongoing or newly initiated outpatient psychiatric therapy as well as those who had to be discharged from the day clinic ahead of schedule received telemedical treatment via telephone. Data collection to assess the patients’ and therapists’ satisfaction with and acceptance of the telemedical care was adjusted to the treatment setting.
Results
Of 60 recruited patients, 57 could be included in the analysis. 51.6% of the patients and 52.3% of their therapists reported that the discussion of problems and needs worked just as well over the phone as in face-to-face consultations. In the subgroup of patients who were new to therapy due to being discharged from hospital early, acceptance was higher and telemedicine was rated as equally good in 87.5% of contacts. Both patients and therapists felt that telemedicine care during lockdown was an alternative for usual therapy in the outpatient clinic and that the option of telemedicine care should continue for the duration of the coronavirus pandemic.
Discussion
The results show a clear trend towards satisfaction with and acceptance of telemedicine care in a heterogeneous group of unselected psychiatric patients. Although the number of patients is small, the results indicate that the mostly positive results of telemedicine concepts in research projects can probably be transferred to real healthcare settings.
Conclusions
Telemedicine can be employed in healthcare for psychiatric patients either an alternative treatment option to maintain continuity of care or as a potential addition to regular care.
Teaching is amongst the six professions with the highest stress levels and lowest job satisfaction, leading to a high turnover rate and teacher shortages. During the pandemic, teachers and school principals were confronted with new regulations and teaching methods. This study aims to examine post-pandemic stress levels, as well as resilience factors to proactively cope with stress and thoughts of leaving the profession among teachers and school principals. We used a cross-sectional online survey. The validated instruments Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) and Proactive Coping Subscale (PCI) were used. We included 471 teachers and 113 school principals in the analysis. Overall, respondents had a moderate stress level. During the pandemic, every fourth teacher (27.2%) and every third principal (32.7%) had serious thoughts of leaving the profession. More perceived helplessness (OR = 1.2, p < 0.001), less self-efficacy (OR = 0.8, p = 0.002), and poorer coping skills (OR = 0.96, p = 0.044) were associated with a higher likelihood of thoughts of leaving the profession for teachers, whereas for school principals, only higher perceived helplessness (OR = 1.2, p = 0.008) contributed significantly. To prevent further teacher attrition, teachers and school principals need support to decrease stress and increase their ability to cope.
This study aims to describe social network and social participation and to assess associations with depressive symptoms in older persons with increased risk for dementia in Germany. We conducted a cross-sectional observational study in primary care patients (aged 60–77) as part of a multicenter cluster-randomized controlled trial (AgeWell.de). We present descriptive and multivariate analyses for social networks (Lubben Social Network Scale and subscales) and social participation (item list of social activities) and analyze associations of these variables with depressive symptoms (Geriatric Depression Scale). Of 1030 included patients, 17.2% were at risk for social isolation (Lubben Social Network Scale < 12). Looking at the subscales, a reduced non-family network was found almost twice as often as a reduced family network. Patients with depressive symptoms had significantly smaller social networks than patients without depression (p < 0.001). They rather engaged in social activities of low involvement level or no weekly social activity at all (p < 0.001). The study shows associations of depressive symptoms with a decreased social network and less social participation in elderly participants. Sufficient non-family contacts and weekly social activities seem to play an important role in mental health and should be encouraged in elderly primary care patients.
The Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP), a population-based study from a rural state in northeastern Germany with a relatively poor life expectancy, supplemented its comprehensive examination program in 2008 with whole-body MR imaging at 1.5 T (SHIP-MR). We reviewed more than 100 publications that used the SHIP-MR data and analyzed which sequences already produced fruitful scientific outputs and which manuscripts have been referenced frequently. Upon reviewing the publications about imaging sequences, those that used T1-weighted structured imaging of the brain and a gradient-echo sequence for R2* mapping obtained the highest scientific output; regarding specific body parts examined, most scientific publications focused on MR sequences involving the brain and the (upper) abdomen. We conclude that population-based MR imaging in cohort studies should define more precise goals when allocating imaging time. In addition, quality control measures might include recording the number and impact of published work, preferably on a bi-annual basis and starting 2 years after initiation of the study. Structured teaching courses may enhance the desired output in areas that appear underrepresented.
Quality of life (QoL) is a core patient-reported outcome in healthcare research, alongside primary clinical outcomes. A conceptual, operational, and psychometric elaboration of QoL in the context of TM is needed, because standardized instruments to assess QoL do not sufficiently represent essential aspects of intended outcomes of telemedical applications (TM). The overall aim is to develop an instrument that can adequately capture QoL in TM. For that purpose, an extended working model of QoL will be derived. Subsequently, an instrument will be developed and validated that captures those aspects of QoL that are influenced by TM. The initial exploratory study section includes (a) a systematic literature review, (b) a qualitative survey for concept elicitation, and (c) pre-testings using cognitive debriefings with patients and an expert workshop. The second quantitative section consists of an online expert survey and two patient surveys for piloting and validation of the newly developed instrument. The resulting questionnaire will assess central experiences of patients regarding telemedical applications and its impact on QoL more sensitively. Its use as adjunct instrument will lead to a more appropriate evaluation of TM and contribute to the improvement of care tailored to patients’ individual needs.
Quality of life (QoL) is a core patient-reported outcome in healthcare research, alongside primary clinical outcomes. A conceptual, operational, and psychometric elaboration of QoL in the context of TM is needed, because standardized instruments to assess QoL do not sufficiently represent essential aspects of intended outcomes of telemedical applications (TM). The overall aim is to develop an instrument that can adequately capture QoL in TM. For that purpose, an extended working model of QoL will be derived. Subsequently, an instrument will be developed and validated that captures those aspects of QoL that are influenced by TM. The initial exploratory study section includes (a) a systematic literature review, (b) a qualitative survey for concept elicitation, and (c) pre-testings using cognitive debriefings with patients and an expert workshop. The second quantitative section consists of an online expert survey and two patient surveys for piloting and validation of the newly developed instrument. The resulting questionnaire will assess central experiences of patients regarding telemedical applications and its impact on QoL more sensitively. Its use as adjunct instrument will lead to a more appropriate evaluation of TM and contribute to the improvement of care tailored to patients’ individual needs.