Search

Deprescribing of inappropriate long-term proton pump inhibitors (PPI) is challenging and there is a lack of useful methods for general practitioners to tackle this. The objective of this randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of the electronic decision aid tool arriba-PPI on reduction of long-term PPI intake. Participants (64.5 ± 12.9 years; 54.4% women) with a PPI intake of at least 6 months were randomized to receive either consultation with arriba-PPI from their general practitioner (n = 1256) or treatment as usual (n = 1131). PPI prescriptions were monitored 6 months before, 6 and 12 months after study initiation. In 49.2% of the consultations with arriba-PPI, the general practitioners and their patients made the decision to reduce or discontinue PPI intake. At 6 months, there was a significant reduction by 22.3% (95% CI 18.55 to 25.98; p < 0.0001) of defined daily doses (DDD) of PPI. A reduction of 3.3% (95% CI - 7.18 to + 0.62) was observed in the control group. At 12 months, the reduction of DDD-PPI remained stable in intervention patients (+ 3.5%, 95% CI - 0.99 to + 8.03), whereas control patients showed a reduction of DDD-PPI (- 10.2%, 95% CI - 6.01 to - 14.33). Consultation with arriba-PPI led to reduced prescription rates of PPI in primary care practices. Arriba-PPI can be a helpful tool for general practitioners to start a conversation with their patients about risks of long-term PPI intake, reduction or deprescribing unnecessary PPI medication., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a major health problem in the western world. Despite a widespread implementation of integrated care programs there are still patients with poorly controlled T2DM. Shared goal setting within the process of Shared Decision Making (SDM) may increase patient's compliance and adherence to treatment regimen. In our secondary analysis of the cluster-randomized controlled DEBATE trial, we investigated if patients with shared vs. non-shared HbA1c treatment goal, achieve their glycemic goals., Methods: In a German primary care setting, we collected data before intervention at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 months. Patients with T2DM with an HbA1c ≥ 8.0% (64 mmol/mol) at the time of recruitment and complete data at baseline and after 24 months were eligible for the presented analyses. Using a generalized estimating equation analysis, we analysed the association between the achievement of HbA1c goals at 24 months based on their shared vs. non-shared status, age, sex, education, partner status, controlled for baseline HbA1c and insulin therapy., Results: From N = 833 recruited patients at baseline, n = 547 (65.7%) from 105 General Practitioners (GPs) were analysed. 53.4% patients were male, 33.1% without a partner, 64.4% had a low educational level, mean age was 64.6 (SD 10.6), 60.7% took insulin at baseline, mean baseline HbA1c was 9.1 (SD 1.0). For 287 patients (52.5%), the GPs reported to use HbA1c as a shared goal, for 260 patients (47.5%) as a non-shared goal. 235 patients (43.0%) reached the HbA1c goal after two years, 312 patients (57.0%) missed it. Multivariable analysis shows that shared vs. non-shared HbA1c goal setting, age, sex, and education are not associated with the achievement of the HbA1c goal. However, patients living without a partner show a higher risk of missing the goal (p = .003; OR 1.89; 95% CI 1.25-2.86)., Conclusions: Shared goal setting with T2DM patients targeting on HbA1c-levels had no significant impact on goal achievement. It may be assumed, that shared goal setting on patient-related clinical outcomes within the process of SDM has not been fully captured yet., Trial Registration: The trial was registered at ISRCTN registry under the reference ISRCTN70713571., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Importance: For older adults with frailty syndrome, reducing polypharmacy may have utility as a safety-promoting treatment option., Objective: To investigate the effects of family conferences on medication and clinical outcomes in community-dwelling older adults with frailty receiving polypharmacy., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted from April 30, 2019, to June 30, 221, at 110 primary care practices in Germany. The study included community-dwelling adults aged 70 years or older with frailty syndrome, daily use of at least 5 different medications, a life expectancy of at least 6 months, and no moderate or severe dementia., Interventions: General practitioners (GPs) in the intervention group received 3 training sessions on family conferences, a deprescribing guideline, and a toolkit with relevant nonpharmacologic interventions. Three GP-led family conferences for shared decision-making involving the participants and family caregivers and/or nursing services were subsequently held per patient at home over a period of 9 months. Patients in the control group received care as usual., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the number of hospitalizations within 12 months, as assessed by nurses during home visits or telephone interviews. Secondary outcomes included the number of medications, the number of European Union list of the number of potentially inappropriate medication (EU[7]-PIM) for older people, and geriatric assessment parameters. Both per-protocol and intention-to-treat analyses were conducted., Results: The baseline assessment included 521 individuals (356 women [68.3%]; mean [SD] age, 83.5 [6.17] years). The intention-to-treat analysis with 510 patients showed no significant difference in the adjusted mean (SD) number of hospitalizations between the intervention group (0.98 [1.72]) and the control group (0.99 [1.53]). In the per-protocol analysis including 385 individuals, the mean (SD) number of medications decreased from 8.98 (3.56) to 8.11 (3.21) at 6 months and to 8.49 (3.63) at 12 months in the intervention group and from 9.24 (3.44) to 9.32 (3.59) at 6 months and to 9.16 (3.42) at 12 months in the control group, with a statistically significant difference at 6 months in the mixed-effect Poisson regression model (P = .001). After 6 months, the mean (SD) number of EU(7)-PIMs was significantly lower in the intervention group (1.30 [1.05]) than in the control group (1.71 [1.25]; P = .04). There was no significant difference in the mean number of EU(7)-PIMs after 12 months., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cluster randomized clinical trial with older adults taking 5 or more medications, the intervention consisting of GP-led family conferences did not achieve sustainable effects in reducing the number of hospitalizations or the number of medications and EU(7)-PIMs after 12 months., Trial Registration: German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00015055.

Background: To evaluate patients' perspectives and their experiences with a consultation involving a computer-assisted and patient-centered discontinuation strategy (arriba-PPI tool) as part of a German multicenter study on reducing the prescription of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs)., Methods: Qualitative in-depth telephone interviews on proton pump inhibitors with patients who had received an arriba-PPI tool-based counseling by their general practitioner (GP). A random sample of 30 patients was taken from study participants. Interviews were conducted in 2020 and analyzed using a thematic qualitative text analysis., Results: Although this was meant to be the key to shared decision making with regard to PPI reduction, study participants mostly did not recall the visual features of the tool. However, a few patients remembered them very clearly. Above all, patients appreciated a trustful relationship with the GP as well as comprehensive, individualized counseling., Conclusion: Application of the arriba-PPI tool can support the decision process but can also hinder the consultation process if the tool is not properly embedded in the consultation. GPs using the arriba-PPI tool to support the shared decision-making process should consider the patients' and their own expectations on the benefit of the visual representation of the tool., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Many older adults are affected by multimorbidity and subsequent polypharmacy which is associated with adverse outcomes. This is especially relevant for frail older patients. Polypharmacy may be reduced via deprescribing. As part of the complex intervention in the COFRAIL study, we developed a deprescribing manual to be used by general practitioners (GPs) in family conferences, in which GPs, patients and caregivers jointly discuss treatments., Methods: We selected indications with a high prevalence in older adults in primary care (e.g. diabetes mellitus, hypertension) and conducted a literature search to identify deprescribing criteria for these indications. We additionally reviewed clinical practice guidelines. Based on the extracted information, we created a deprescribing manual which was then piloted in an expert workshop and in family conferences with volunteer patients according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study protocol., Results: Initially, 13 indications/topics were selected. The literature search identified deprescribing guides, reviews and clinical trials as well as lists of potentially inappropriate medication and systematic reviews on the risk and benefits of specific drugs and drug classes in older patients. After piloting and revisions, the deprescribing manual now covers 11 indications/topics. In each chapter, patient- and medication-related deprescribing criteria, monitoring and communication strategies, and information about concerns related to the use of specific drugs in older patients are provided., Discussion: We found varying deprescribing strategies in the literature, which we consolidated in our deprescribing manual. Whether this approach leads to successful deprescribing in family conferences is being investigated in the cluster-randomised controlled COFRAIL study., Plain Language Summary: Development of a manual to help doctors to identify which medications can be withdrawn Many older adults suffer from chronic diseases and take multiple medications concurrently. This can lead to side effects and other undesired events. We developed a manual to help doctors identify which medications can be withdrawn, so that they can discuss this with their patients. This manual was used in the COFRAIL study where doctors, patients and caregivers met in family conferences to discuss their preferences and decide together how future treatments should be handled. The manual contains information on common medications, symptoms and diseases in older patients such as diabetes and high blood pressure. Before the manual was used in the study, it was tested by volunteer patients and their doctors and caregivers to make sure that it is user-friendly., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s), 2022.)

Background: Person-centred care (PCC) has been suggested as the preferred model of dementia care in all settings. The EPCentCare study showed that an adapted PCC approach was difficult to implement and had no effect on prescription of antipsychotics in nursing home residents in Germany. This paper reports the qualitative process evaluation to identify facilitators and barriers of the implementation of PCC in German nursing homes from the perspective of participating practice development champions., Methods: Five individual and 14 group interviews were conducted with 66 participants (staff and managers) from 18 nursing homes. The analysis was based on inductive coding to identify factors influencing the PCC implementation process. Identified factors were systematised and structured by mapping them to the four constructs (coherence, cognitive participation, collective action, reflexive monitoring) of the Normalization Process Theory (NPT) as a framework that explains implementation processes., Results: Facilitating implementation factors included among others broadening of the care perspective (coherence), tolerance development within the care team regarding challenging behaviour (cognitive participation), testing new approaches to solutions as a multi-professional team (collective action), and perception of effects of PCC measures (reflexive monitoring). Among the facilitating factors reported in all the NPT constructs, thus affecting the entire implementation process, were the involvement of relatives, multi-professional teamwork and effective collaboration with physicians. Barriers implied uncertainties about the implementation and expectation of a higher workload (coherence), concerns about the feasibility of PCC implementation in terms of human resources (cognitive participation), lack of a person-centred attitude by colleagues or the institution (collective action), and doubts about the effects of PCC (reflexive monitoring). Barriers influencing the entire implementation process comprised insufficient time resources, lack of support, lack of involvement of the multi-professional team, and difficulties regarding communication with the attending physicians., Conclusions: The findings provide a comprehensive and detailed overview of facilitators and barriers structured along the implementation process. Thus, our findings may assist both researchers and clinicians to develop and reflect more efficiently on PCC implementation processes in nursing homes., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02295462 ; November 20, 2014., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Patients with neck pain demonstrate a variety of sensorimotor impairments, such as decreased cervical joint position sense (CJPS) acuity, which might also be associated with an impaired internal body representation. The present study evaluated the effect of real-time visual feedback of the individual's own neck on CJPS compared to observing a book. Twenty-three patients with neck pain participated in the experiment and received the interventions in randomized order on separate days in a within-subject pretest-posttest design. Before and immediately after each intervention, CJPS was measured by a therapist blinded to the intervention. The results demonstrate a significantly different development of CJPS (p = .04), with increased CJPS acuity after observing one's own neck and decreased acuity after observing a book. Real-time visual feedback of the neck improved CJPS acuity in patients with neck pain without active movements of the neck, indicating the importance of central nervous system processing for CJPS acuity.

Background: We investigate whether an educational intervention of GPs increases patient-centeredness and perceived shared decision making in the treatment of patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus?, Methods: We performed a cluster-randomized controlled trial in German primary care. Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus defined as HbA1c levels ≥ 8.0% (64 mmol/mol) at the time of recruitment (n = 833) from general practitioners (n = 108) were included. Outcome measures included subjective shared decision making (SDM-Q-9; scale from 0 to 45 (high)) and patient-centeredness (PACIC-D; scale from 1 to 5 (high)) as secondary outcomes. Data collection was performed before intervention (baseline, T0), at 6 months (T1), at 12 months (T2), at 18 months (T3), and at 24 months (T4) after baseline., Results: Subjective shared decision making decreased in both groups during the course of the study (intervention group: -3.17 between T0 and T4 (95% CI: -4.66, -1.69; p < 0.0001) control group: -2.80 (95% CI: -4.30, -1.30; p = 0.0003)). There were no significant differences between the two groups (-0.37; 95% CI: -2.20, 1.45; p = 0.6847). The intervention's impact on patient-centeredness was minor. Values increased in both groups, but the increase was not statistically significant, nor was the difference between the groups., Conclusions: The intervention did not increase patient perceived subjective shared decision making and patient-centeredness in the intervention group as compared to the control group. Effects in both groups might be partially attributed to the Hawthorne-effect. Future trials should focus on patient-based intervention elements to investigate effects on shared decision making and patient-centeredness., Trial Registration: The trial was registered on March 10 th , 2011 at ISRCTN registry under the reference ISRCTN70713571 .

Background: Frailty in elderly patients is associated with an increased risk of poor health outcomes, including falls, delirium, malnutrition, hospitalisation, and mortality. Because polypharmacy is recognised as a possible major contributor to the pathogenesis of geriatric frailty, reducing inappropriate medication exposure is supposed to be a promising approach to improve health-related quality of life and prevent adverse outcomes. A major challenge for the process of deprescribing of inappropriate polypharmacy is to improve the communication between general practitioner (GPs), patient and family carer. This study investigates the effects of a complex intervention in frail elderly patients with polypharmacy living at home., Methods: This is a cluster randomised controlled trial including 136 GPs and 676 patients. Patients with a positive clinical screening for frailty are eligible if they are aged 70 years or older, receiving family or professional nursing care at home, and taking in five or more drugs per day. Exclusion criteria are higher grade of dementia and life expectancy of 6 months or less. The GPs of the intervention group receive an educational training promoting a deprescribing guideline and providing information on how to conduct a family conference focussing on prioritisation of treatment goals concerning drug therapy. During the 1-year intervention, GPs are expected to perform a total of three family conferences, each including a structured medication review with patients and their family carers. GPs of the control group will receive no training and will deliver care as usual. Geriatric assessment of all patients will be performed by study nurses during home visits at baseline and after 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome is the hospitalisation rate during the observation period of 12 months. Secondary outcomes are number and appropriateness of medications, mobility, weakness, cognition, depressive disorder, health-related quality of life, activities of daily living, weight, and costs of health care use., Discussion: This study will provide evidence for a pragmatic co-operative and patient-centred educational intervention using family conferences to improve patient safety in frail elderly patients with polypharmacy., Trial Registration: German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00015055 (WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform [ICTRP]). Registered on 6 February 2019.

Background: Does an intervention designed to foster patient-centered communication and shared decision making among GPs and their patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus reduce the level of HbA1c., Methods: The DEBATE trial is a cluster-randomized controlled trial conducted in German primary care and including patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus having an HbA1c level of 8.0% (64 mmol/mol) or above at the time of recruitment. Data was measured before intervention (baseline, T0), 6-8 months (T1), 12-14 months (T2), 18-20 months (T3), and 24-26 months (T4) after baseline. Main outcome measure is the level of HbA1c., Results: In both, the intervention and the control group the decline of the HbA1c level from T0 to T4 was statistically significant (- 0.67% (95% CI: - 0.80,-0.54%; p < 0.0001) and - 0.64% (95% CI: - 0.78, - 0.51%; p < 0.0001), respectively). However, there was no statistically significant difference between both groups., Conclusions: Although the DEBATE trial was not able to confirm effectiveness of the intervention tested compared to care as usual, the results suggest that patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes are able to improve their blood glucose levels. This finding may encourage physicians to stay on task to regularly approach this cohort of patients., Trial Registration: The trial was registered at ISRCTN registry under the reference ISRCTN70713571 .

Background: antipsychotic drugs are regularly prescribed as first-line treatment for neuropsychiatric symptoms in persons with dementia although guidelines clearly prioritise non-pharmacological interventions., Objective: we investigated a person-centred care approach, which has been successfully evaluated in nursing homes in the UK, and adapted it to German conditions., Design: a 2-armed 12-month cluster-randomised controlled trial., Setting: nursing homes in East, North and West Germany., Methods: all prescribing physicians from both study arms received medication reviews for individual patients and were offered access to 2 h of continuing medical education. Nursing homes in the intervention group received educational interventions on person-centred care and a continuous supervision programme. Primary outcome: proportion of residents receiving at least one antipsychotic prescription after 12 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes: quality of life, agitated behaviour, falls and fall-related medical attention, a health economics evaluation and a process evaluation., Results: the study was conducted in 37 nursing homes with n = 1,153 residents (intervention group: n = 493; control group: n = 660). The proportion of residents with at least one antipsychotic medication changed after 12 months from 44.6% to 44.8% in the intervention group and from 39.8 to 33.3% in the control group. After 12 months, the difference in the prevalence was 11.4% between the intervention and control groups (95% confidence interval: 0.9-21.9; P = 0.033); odds ratio: 1.621 (95% confidence interval: 1.038-2.532)., Conclusions: the implementation of a proven person-centred care approach adapted to national conditions did not reduce antipsychotic prescriptions in German nursing homes., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02295462., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society.)

Objective: In the last 20 years, patient involvement in clinical decision-making has continuously gained traction in scientific and clinical (including general practice, GP) discussions. Patients with chronic conditions in particular may benefit from active involvement. Referring to existing studies on shared decision making and regional differences; patients with poorly controlled diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2) were used as an example to investigate the perceived involvement during clinical decision making in general practice. Differences in treatment options based on the patients' place of residence (East- and West Germany) were compared., Methods: 501 West- (North-Rhine-Westphalia, NRW) and 338 East-German (Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, MWP) patients with DM2 and HbA 1c levels≥8.0 were assessed during the cluster-randomised controlled trial DEBATE, which was conducted between 2011 and 2012. The questionnaire to measure participatory decision making (Q-PDM) was used in order to provide an estimate of their involvement in clinical decision making processes, and baseline data was analysed before intervention. The standardised Q-PDM summed value was compared among the different subgroups (i. e., place of residence, age, sex) using bivariate group analyses (t tests), and a multivariate regression analysis was conducted., Results: Patients living in the MWP region perceived a higher level of involvement in GP decision making than NRW residents. Younger patients with DM2 showed higher Q-PDM summed values than older patients. When all variables, including 'GP practice' (number of patients per GP/cluster), were considered together in the multivariate regression analysis, the place of residence would no longer show an independent effect on perceived decision making. The expected difference between MWP and NRW (i. e. East/West Germany) could not be confirmed, while a significant difference remained with regard to age. Education, population density, sex and marital status did not show any relevant differences., Conclusion: Patient age remains an important factor influencing the perceived involvement in joint decision making and should be taken into account while implementing clinical decision making processes in the future. It is possible that patients of different age and with different chronic diseases may need different decision support offerings (e. g., educational videos, booklets or computer-based decision aids). Trainings in communication skills or in the implementation of patient-centred communication might be effective on the GP level to reduce possible barriers to shared decision making., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier GmbH.)

Background: The majority of nursing home residents with dementia experience behavioural and psychological symptoms like apathy, agitation, and anxiety. According to analyses of prescription prevalence in Germany, antipsychotic drugs are regularly prescribed as first-line treatment of neuropsychiatric symptoms in persons with dementia, although guidelines clearly prioritise non-pharmacological interventions. Frequently, antipsychotic drugs are prescribed for inappropriate reasons and for too long without regular reviewing. The use of antipsychotics is associated with adverse events like increased risk of falling, stroke, and mortality. The aim of the study is to investigate whether a person-centred care approach, successfully evaluated in nursing homes in the United Kingdom, can be implemented in German nursing homes and, in comparison with a control group, can result in a clinically relevant reduction of the proportion of residents with antipsychotic prescriptions., Methods/design: The study is a cluster-randomised controlled trial comparing an intervention group (two-day initial training on person-centred care and ongoing training and support programme) with a control group. Both study groups will receive, as optimised usual care, a medication review by an experienced psychiatrist/geriatrician providing feedback to the prescribing physician. Overall, 36 nursing homes in East, North, and West Germany will be randomised. The primary outcome is the proportion of residents receiving at least one antipsychotic prescription (long-term medication) after 12 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes are residents' quality of life, agitated behaviour, as well as safety parameters like falls and fall-related medical attention. A health economic evaluation and a process evaluation will be performed alongside the study., Discussion: To improve care, a reduction of the current high prescription rate of antipsychotics in nursing homes by the intervention programme is expected., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02295462.

Purpose: The purpose of this work is to investigate the feasibility of grating-based, differential phase-contrast, full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in terms of the requirements for field-of-view (FOV), mechanical stability, and scan time., Methods: A rigid, actuator-free Talbot interferometric unit was designed and integrated into a state-of-the-art x-ray slit-scanning mammography system, namely, the Philips MicroDose L30 FFDM system. A dedicated phase-acquisition and phase retrieval method was developed and implemented that exploits the redundancy of the data acquisition inherent to the slit-scanning approach to image generation of the system. No modifications to the scan arm motion control were implemented., Results: The authors achieve a FOV of 160 × 196 mm consisting of two disjoint areas measuring 77 × 196 mm with a gap of 6 mm between them. Typical scanning times vary between 10 and 15 s and dose levels are lower than typical FFDM doses for conventional scans with identical acquisition parameters due to the presence of the source-grating G0. Only minor to moderate artifacts are observed in the three reconstructed images, indicating that mechanical vibrations induced by other system components do not prevent the use of the platform for phase contrast imaging., Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first attempt to integrate x-ray gratings hardware into a clinical mammography unit. The results demonstrate that a scanning differential phase contrast FFDM system that meets the requirements of FOV, stability, scan time, and dose can be build.

Background: In spite of a decline in mortality due to asthma in Germany various studies point towards deficits in asthma care. Our investigation should collect data about ambulatory care from the view of statutory health insured patients (SHI), who participate in the disease management program asthma (DMP-P) or do not (NP). Primary question was, if there is a difference between asthma control. Secondary questions referred to process parameters., Methods: The postal inquiry was conducted in 2010 with 8000 randomly selected members of a SHI company with asthma (4000 DMP-P and 4000 NP). The descriptive evaluation of categorical items was performed with cross-tables. The absolute risk reduction (ARR) and 97.5 %-confidence interval (CI; multiple level 5 %) was used to evaluate the primary question. Secondary questions were analysed by ARR and 95 %-CI., Results: The response rate of the questionnaire accounted for 31.1 % (2565). 49.2 % of all respondents lived with an uncontrolled asthma with no differences between DMP-P and NP (ARR -2.7 %, 97.5 %-CI -7.9 -2.4 %). Results did not alter after adjustment for sex and age. The secondary questions revealed significant differences (DMP-P vs. NP) in participation in asthma trainings 50.6 vs. 32.3 %, use of a peak-flow-meter 49.3 vs. 25.3 % and asthma action plan within reach 21.7 vs. 11.0 %., Conclusion: Half of all respondents lives selfreported - even in the DMP-group - with an uncontrolled asthma. Process parameters showed better results in the DMP-group. It can be considered, that the DMP has its desired effect on patient-centered care, but does not lead to a better therapeutic outcome. Explanations can only be assumed: insufficient impact of the process parameters on the outcome, patient behavior, that minimizes a possible effect, or selection effects, if patients, who were more sick and at the same time more motivated, were mainly included in the DMP. These aspects should be addressed in studies with a prospective design., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Aim: Remote follow-up (FU) of implantable cardiac defibrillators (ICDs) allows for fewer in-office visits in combination with earlier detection of relevant findings. Its implementation requires investment and reorganization of care. Providers (physicians or hospitals) are unsure about the financial impact. The primary end-point of this randomized prospective multicentre health economic trial was the total FU-related cost for providers, comparing Home Monitoring facilitated FU (HM ON) to regular in-office FU (HM OFF) during the first 2 years after ICD implantation. Also the net financial impact on providers (taking national reimbursement into account) and costs from a healthcare payer perspective were evaluated., Methods and Results: A total of 312 patients with VVI- or DDD-ICD implants from 17 centres in six EU countries were randomised to HM ON or OFF, of which 303 were eligible for data analysis. For all contacts (in-office, calendar- or alert-triggered web-based review, discussions, calls) time-expenditure was tracked. Country-specific cost parameters were used to convert resource use into monetary values. Remote FU equipment itself was not included in the cost calculations. Given only two patients from Finland (one in each group) a monetary valuation analysis was not performed for Finland. Average age was 62.4 ± 13.1 years, 81% were male, 39% received a DDD system, and 51% had a prophylactic ICD. Resource use with HM ON was clearly different: less FU visits (3.79 ± 1.67 vs. 5.53 ± 2.32; P < 0.001) despite a small increase of unscheduled visits (0.95 ± 1.50 vs. 0.62 ± 1.25; P < 0.005), more non-office-based contacts (1.95 ± 3.29 vs. 1.01 ± 2.64; P < 0.001), more Internet sessions (11.02 ± 15.28 vs. 0.06 ± 0.31; P < 0.001) and more in-clinic discussions (1.84 ± 4.20 vs. 1.28 ± 2.92; P < 0.03), but with numerically fewer hospitalizations (0.67 ± 1.18 vs. 0.85 ± 1.43, P = 0.23) and shorter length-of-stay (6.31 ± 15.5 vs. 8.26 ± 18.6; P = 0.27), although not significant. For the whole study population, the total FU cost for providers was not different for HM ON vs. OFF [mean (95% CI): €204 (169-238) vs. €213 (182-243); range for difference (€-36 to 54), NS]. From a payer perspective, FU-related costs were similar while the total cost per patient (including other physician visits, examinations, and hospitalizations) was numerically (but not significantly) lower. There was no difference in the net financial impact on providers [profit of €408 (327-489) vs. €400 (345-455); range for difference (€-104 to 88), NS], but there was heterogeneity among countries, with less profit for providers in the absence of specific remote FU reimbursement (Belgium, Spain, and the Netherlands) and maintained or increased profit in cases where such reimbursement exists (Germany and UK). Quality of life (SF-36) was not different., Conclusion: For all the patients as a whole, FU-related costs for providers are not different for remote FU vs. purely in-office FU, despite reorganized care. However, disparity in the impact on provider budget among different countries illustrates the need for proper reimbursement to ensure effective remote FU implementation., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Objective: Knowledge transfer from theory to practice in healthcare systems poses a challenge worldwide. Typical examples include national disease management guidelines. The present study contributes towards improving implementation strategies for an asthma guideline., Methods: A guideline implementation strategy was examined in a four-armed, non-randomised, controlled intervention study with an additional control group. The study participants were general practitioners and paediatricians recruited from primary care quality circles. All study participants attended an interactive seminar on the evidence-based recommendations for patients with asthma. In addition, the participants were asked to choose among the following options: no further intervention, additional e-learning, training of their practice nurses, or e-learning and training of their practice nurses. The success of the intervention was measured by questionnaire (and the success rate expressed as a percentage)., Results: About one third of all participants (n=313) opted for the combination of an interactive seminar and a training of practice nurses; two third preferred the classic way of continuing medical education with an interactive seminar without a further intervention. Just 10 % of the physicians participated in e-learning. Independently of their choice for continuing medical education, all participants demonstrated an increase in knowledge about asthma and an improvement in the management of asthma. The physicians exhibited an average increase in both categories of about 10 % of the percentage values, compared to an increase of about 28 % among the practice nurses without continuing medical education., Conclusions: The physicians' free choice of the educative modules might be an integral part of successful implementation strategies. However, this will require a change of focus from general continuing medical education packages to a more individualised culture of continuing professional development in Germany., (Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier GmbH.)