Search

Abstract Background Populations have varying needs and expectations concerning health care that result from diversity characteristics such as a migrant background, gender identity, disability, and age. These needs and expectations must be considered to ensure adequate utilization and quality of health services. Approaches to address diversity do exist, however, little is known about the extent to which they are implemented by health care facilities. The present study aims to examine, which measures and structures hospitals in Germany employ to address diversity, as well as which barriers they encounter in doing so. Methods A mixed-mode survey among administration managers of all registered German hospitals (excluding rehabilitation hospitals; n = 1125) was conducted between May and October 2019 using pen-and-paper and online questionnaires. Results were analyzed descriptively. Results Data from n = 112 hospitals were available. While 57.1% of hospitals addressed diversity in their mission statement and 59.9% included diversity considerations in quality management, dedicated working groups and diversity commissioners were less prevalent (15.2% each). The majority of hospitals offered multi-lingual admission and exit interviews (59.8%), treatments or therapies (57.1%), but only few had multi-lingual meal plans (12.5%) and seminars or presentations (11.6%). While 41.1% of the hospitals offered treatment and/or nursing exclusively by staff of the same sex, only 17.0% offered group therapies for both sexes separately. According to the managers, the main barriers were a lack of financial resources (54.5%), a lack of incentives from the funding providers (49.1%), and organizational difficulties (45.5%). Other reported barriers were a lack of conviction of the necessity among decision makers (28.6%) and a lack of motivation among staff members (19.6%). Conclusions Administration managers from only a small proportion of hospitals participated in our survey on diversity sensitivity. Even hospitals of those who did are currently not adequately addressing the diversity of staff members and patients. Most hospitals address diversity on an ideational level, practical measures are not widely implemented. Existing measures suggest that most hospitals have no overarching concept to address diversity in a broader sense. The main reported barriers relate to economic aspects, a lack of support in organizing and implementing corresponding measures and a lack of awareness or motivation.

Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic, as well as efforts to prevent its spread, have had a strong impact on the delivery of rehabilitative services in Germany. While several studies have addressed the impact of these developments on health service providers and COVID-19 patients, little is known about its impact on patients in need of rehabilitative treatment because of other conditions. This study aims to identify expectations, concerns and experiences of rehabilitation patients related to service delivery in this situation. Methods Using a qualitative study design, user posts from six German online forums between March and Mid-November 2020 were systematically searched with respect to experiences, concerns and expectations of health care users toward receiving rehabilitative treatment. We used qualitative content analysis with inductive coding as our methodological approach. Results Users fearing physical or psychological impairment were concerned about not receiving timely or effective treatment due to closed hospitals, reduced treatments and limited admissions. In contrast, patients more concerned about getting infected with COVID-19 worried about the effectiveness of protective measures and being denied postponement of treatment by the funding bodies. During their stay, some patients reported feeling isolated due to contact restrictions and did not feel their treatment was effective, while others reported being satisfied and praised hospitals for their efforts to ensure the safety of the patients. Many patients reported communication problems before and during their treatment, including concerns about the safety and effectiveness of their treatment, as well as financial concerns and worries about future treatments. Several users felt that their concerns were disregarded by the hospitals and the funding bodies, leaving them feeling distressed, insecure and dissatisfied. Conclusions While some users report only minor concerns related to the pandemic and its impact on rehabilitation, others report strong concerns relating not only to their own health and safety, but also to financial aspects and their ability to work. Many users feel ignored and disregarded, showing a strong need for more coordinated strategies and improved communication specifically with funding bodies like health insurance companies and the German pension funds.

Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic has a significant impact on health care processes. Precautions such as restrictions imposed on visitors and social distancing have led to multiple challenges, particularly in terms of communication. Using the case of nursing, palliative and hospice care facilities in Germany and drawing on agenda-setting theory, the present study aims to shed light on how health care facilities use their websites to inform (potential) health care users about changes in regulations, new protective measures implemented and about recommendations in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods The websites of nursing, palliative and hospice care facilities in Germany were examined using qualitative document analysis and qualitative content analysis. A total of 138 websites was analysed in the study. The data gathered includes all information about COVID-19 on these websites published from the beginning of March until August 15, 2020. Results Facilities show similarities in adhering to the measures taken by the authorities to restrict the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and to protect vulnerable patients and employees. All facilities urged the public to avoid paying visits to patients in facilities unless there was an emergency; however, visiting procedures in practice varied by types of facilities. For optimal communication, telephone and especially video calls were the options preferred by health care providers and health care users. Facilities made great efforts to prevent emotional stress and to strengthen resilience among all stakeholders. Transparency was adopted by many facilities in order to build the public’s trust. Conclusions The agenda of health care facilities has been seriously affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. The study sheds light on the strategies developed by facilities, their efforts to increase emotional resilience among health care staff and health care users, the ethical guidelines they have adopted regarding privacy policies as well as how these themes are communicated via the facilities’ websites. The results can inform other health care facilities about how websites can be used as essential communication tools in times of public health crises.