Search

Background The World Health Organization recommends vaccination rates of 75% against seasonal influenza for patients over 65 years old. In the 2013/2014 season, the German vaccination rates ranged between 14 and 65%. This study aimed to compare the attitudes, personal characteristics and vaccination behaviours of general practitioners (GPs) in regions with high and low vaccination rates in Germany. Methods In May 2016, a questionnaire was sent to 1594 GPs practising in 16 districts with the highest and the lowest vaccination rates in Western and Eastern Germany as described by the Central Research Institute of Ambulatory Health Care in Germany for the 2013/2014 season. Descriptive statistics and multiple regression analyses were computed to identify potential factors associated with high vaccination rates. Results A total response rate of 32% (515/1594 participants) was observed in the study. GPs reported their attitudes towards vaccination in general and vaccination against influenza as mostly ‘very positive’ (80%, n = 352 and 65%, n = 288, respectively). GPs practising in regions with low vaccination rates reported their attitudes towards vaccinations in general (p = 0.004) and towards influenza vaccination (p = 0.001) more negatively than their colleagues from regions with high vaccination rates. Multiple logistic regression identified an increasing influence of year-dependent changing efficiency on GPs’ influenza rates as the strongest factor for predicting GPs from highly vaccinating regions (OR = 4.31 [1.12–16.60]), followed by the patient’s vaccination refusal despite GP advice due to already receiving a vaccination from another physician (OR = 3.20 [1.89–5.43]) and vaccination information gathering through medical colleagues (OR = 2.26 [1.19–4.29]). Conclusions The results of this study suggest a correlation between GPs’ attitudes and regional vaccination rates. Beneath GPs’ individual attitudes, the regional attitude patterns of patients, colleagues and medical assistants surrounding those GPs seem decisive and should be integrated into future campaigns to increase vaccination rates at a regional level.

Background Due to differences of residency training programs’ emphases – inpatient vs office-based – internal medicine and family medicine residents consistently reported differences in preparedness to care for common adult conditions. Study’s aim was to add knowledge about procedures that a) are performed by general internists working in primary care and b) should be learned during residency in general internists’ appraisal. Methods A cross-sectional postal survey was carried out by using a questionnaire that comprised 90 procedures relevant in primary care. Each procedure implied the two questions “Do you perform this procedure in your own practice?” and “How important do you think it is to learn this procedure during residency?” The final questionnaire was sent to 1002 general internists working in primary care in Germany in May 2015. Data analysis was performed using SPSS Version 24.0 (SPSS inc., IBM). Next to descriptive statistics subgroup analyses were performed using cross tabulation and Chi-square tests for evaluation of differences in the performance of most frequently performed procedures in urban or rural areas as well as by male or female physicians. Results Twenty-eight percent of sent questionnaires (276/1002) could be included in analysis. Mean age of participants was 52 years with 13 years of practice experience; 40% were female. Twenty-nine (32%) of 90 given procedures were performed by at least half of the participants, foremost technical diagnostics, punctures, procedures of the integument and resuscitation. After Bonferroni correction, five of those procedures were performed by more male than female physicians and two procedures by more physicians working in a rural practice than physicians practicing in an urban location. Moreover, 46 (51%) procedures were assessed as important to learn during residency by at least 50% of participants. Conclusions General internists working in German primary care perform a narrow scope of procedures offered by primary care physicians. In order to provide best ambulatory care for patients, residency training programs must ensure training in procedures that are necessary for providing high quality care. Therefore, a consensus aligned with patients’ and health-systems’ needs on procedures required for working as a general internist in primary care is necessary.

Background Continuity of care is associated with many benefits for patients and health care systems. Therefore measuring care coordination - the deliberate organization of patient care activities between two or more participants - is especially needed to identify entries for improvement. The aim of this study was the translation and cultural adaptation of the Medical Home Care Coordination Survey (MHCCS) into German, and the examination of the psychometric properties of the resulting German versions of the MHCCS-P (patient version) and MHCCS-H (healthcare team version). Methods We conducted a paper-based, cross-sectional survey in primary care practices in three German federal states (Schleswig-Holstein, Hamburg, Baden-Württemberg) with patients and health care team members from May 2018 to April 2019. Descriptive item analysis, factor analysis, internal consistency and convergent, discriminant and predictive validity of the German instrument versions were calculated by using SPSS 25.0 (Inc., IBM). Results Response rates were 43% (n = 350) for patients and 34% (n = 141) for healthcare team members. In total, 300 patient questionnaires and 140 team member questionnaires could be included into further analysis. Exploratory factor analyses resulted in three domains in the MHCCS-D-P and seven domains in the MHCCS-D-H: “link to community resources”, “communication”, “care transitions”, and additionally “self-management”, “accountability”, “information technology for quality assurance”, and “information technology supporting patient care” for the MHCCS-D-H. The domains showed acceptable and good internal consistency (α = 0.838 to α = 0.936 for the MHCCS-D-P and α = 0.680 to α = 0.819 for the MHCCS-D-H). As 77% of patients (n = 232) and 63% of health care team members denied to have or make written care plans, items regarding the “plan of care” of the original MHCCS have been removed from the MHCCS-D. Conclusions The German versions of the Medical Home Care Coordination Survey for patients and healthcare team members are reliable instruments in measuring the care coordination in German primary care practices. Practicability is high since the total number of items is low (9 for patients and 27 for team members).

Background: The external post-mortem examination (EPME) is an important medical, legal and socio-economic task with far-reaching relevance; however, due to discrepancies between findings from EPMEs and actual cause of death, improvements in accuracy and quality are needed. Objectives: To investigate knowledge, competencies and attitudes regarding EPME in general practitioner (GP) post-graduate trainees. Methods: Before four post-graduate training courses on the EPME for general practitioner trainees, organized in 2014 in the German federal state of Baden-Wuerttemberg, a questionnaire on the EPME was distributed by the lecturer, completed by the GP post-graduate trainees and returned to the lecturer. The questionnaire consisted of 19 items related to three main categories: knowledge, competencies and attitudes. Results: Out of 380 GP post-graduate trainees, 128 completed and returned the questionnaire (response rate 33.7%). Less than 18% felt adequately confident in identifying a natural cause of death and less than 5% felt adequately confident in identifying an unnatural cause of death. Only 33% consistently fully uncover the corpse for the EPME. Conclusion: We found an important uncertainty in GP post-graduate trainees regarding their EPME knowledge and competencies.

Background The treatment of upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs) accounts for the majority of antibiotic prescriptions in primary care, although an antibiotic therapy is rarely indicated. Non-clinical factors, such as time pressure and the perceived patient expectations are considered to be reasons for prescribing antibiotics in cases where they are not indicated. The improper use of antibiotics, however, can promote resistance and cause serious side effects. The aim of the study was to clarify whether the antibiotic prescription rate for infections of the upper respiratory tract can be lowered by means of a short (2 x 2.25h) communication training based on the MAAS-Global-D for primary care physicians. Methods In total, 1554 primary care physicians were invited to participate in the study. The control group was formed from observational data. To estimate intervention effects we applied a combination of difference-in-difference (DiD) and statistical matching based on entropy balancing. We estimated a corresponding multi-level logistic regression model for the antibiotic prescribing decision of German primary care physicians for URTIs. Results Univariate estimates detected an 11-percentage-point reduction of prescriptions for the intervention group after the training. For the control group, a reduction of 4.7% was detected. The difference between both groups in the difference between the periods was -6.5% and statistically significant. The estimated effects were nearly identical to the effects estimated for the multi-level logistic regression model with applied matching. Furthermore, for the treatment of young women, the impact of the training on the reduction of antibiotic prescription was significantly stronger. Conclusions Our results suggest that communication skills, implemented through a short communication training with the MAAS-Global-D-training, lead to a more prudent prescribing behavior of antibiotics for URTIs. Thereby, the MAAS-Global-D-training could not only avoid unnecessary side effects but could also help reducing the emergence of drug resistant bacteria. As a consequence of our study we suggest that communication training based on the MAAS-Global-D should be applied in the postgraduate training scheme of primary care physicians.

Item does not contain fulltext BACKGROUND: Job satisfaction of practice staff is important for optimal health care delivery and for minimizing the turnover of non-medical professions. OBJECTIVE: To document the job satisfaction of practice assistants in German general practice and to explore associations between job satisfaction, staff characteristics and culture in general practice organizations. METHODS: The study was based on data from the European Practice Assessment accreditation scheme for general practices and used an observational design. The study population consisted of 1158 practice assistants from 345 general practices across Germany. Job satisfaction was measured with the 10-item Warr-Cook-Wall questionnaire. Organizational culture was evaluated with four items. A linear regression analysis was performed in which each of the job satisfaction items was handled as dependent variable. RESULTS: Out of 1716 staff member questionnaires handed out to practice assistants, 1158 questionnaires were completed (response rate: 67.5%). Practice assistants were most satisfied with their colleagues and least satisfied with their income. Higher job satisfaction was associated with issues of organizational culture, particularly a good working atmosphere, opportunities to suggest and influence areas for improvement and clear responsibilities within the practice team. CONCLUSIONS: Prioritizing initiatives to maintain high levels of, or to improve the job satisfaction of practice assistants, is important for recruitment and retention. It will also help to improve working conditions for both practice assistants and GPs and create an environment to provide better quality care.

Primary care physicians account for the majority of antibiotic prescribing in ambulatory care in Germany. Respiratory diseases are, regardless of effectiveness, often treated with antibiotics. Research has found this use without indication to be caused largely by communication problems (e.g. expectations on the patient’s part or false assumptions about them by the physician). The present randomised controlled trial (RCT) study evaluates whether communication training for primary care physicians can reduce the antibiotic prescribing rate for respiratory tract infections. The study consists of three groups: group A will receive communication training; group B will be given the same, plus additional, access to an evidence-based point-of-care tool; and group C will function as the control group. The primary endpoint is the difference between intervention and control groups regarding the antibiotic prescribing rate before and after the intervention assessed through routine data. The communication skills are captured with the help of the communication instrument MAAS-Global-D, as well as individual videos of physician-patient consultations recorded by the primary care physicians. These skills will also be regarded with respect to the antibiotic prescribing rate. A process evaluation using qualitative as well as quantitative methods should provide information about barriers and enablers to implementing the communication training. The trial contributes to an insight into the effectiveness of the different components to reduce antibiotic prescribing, which will also be supported by an extensive evaluation. Communication training could be an effective method of reducing antibiotic prescribing in primary care. DRKS00009566 5 November 2015.

INTRODUCTION The 'Verbundweiterbildung(plus) Baden-Wurttemberg' (Verbundweiterbildung(plus)) - a structured general practice (GP) postgraduate training program - developed a 'rural day' as an intervention to ensure rural health exposure for GP trainees. This project report presents the outcome of the intervention: intention to work in a rural area. METHODS At the time of the study, 500 GP trainees were enrolled in Verbundweiterbildung(plus). Invitations to complete an internet-based questionnaire were distributed by email to the 274 GP trainees who had previously been asked to participate in one of eight rural days. The questionnaire contained 4 generic and 10 specific items for participants in the rural days and 4 items specific to non-participants. Mixed-methods analyses were performed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. RESULTS Of the 274 GP trainees invited to complete the questionnaire, 38 of 80 rural day participants and 72 of 194 non-participants completed the questionnaire (overall response rate 40%). Participants and non-participants did not differ significantly regarding age, sex and origin. Nearly half of the participants claimed the rural day changed their overall attitudes towards rural areas positively. However, there was no significant difference in the intention to work in a rural area for participants before and after the rural day experience. CONCLUSIONS The rural day increased positive attitudes towards rural areas in general but had no influence on intention to work in rural practice. More awareness and responsibility regarding workforce shortages in rural primary health care among political stakeholders, trainers and trainees is needed. Duration of the intervention should be extended and possibly complemented by offering rotations in rural practices to increase the effect. Enabling factors and barriers regarding working in rural areas are already known by political stakeholders, trainers and trainees and need to be more adequately addressed during GP postgraduate training.

Introduction For the effective and safe management of complex care needs for patients in community settings, high quality family medicine (FM) training programmes are needed. In less primary care oriented countries, training standards statements for FM postgraduate training are less commonly found. The aim of this study was to review international training standards statements in FM postgraduate training and to catalogue these statements to be used as a best practice standard guide for FM training programs in Germany. Materials and Methods A structured three-tiered search was performed: a systematic literature search in MEDLINE®; a search of international indicator databases; and a search in grey literature, consisting of a survey of international experts and a search in “Google (Scholar)”. From all identified documents, training standards statements were extracted, translated and summarized into categories referring to the same quality aspect. Results The search strategy revealed 25 relevant documents (MEDLINE® n = 15, databases n = 2, experts n = 7, “Google” n = 1), containing 337 training standards statements. These were summarized into 80 statements. They covered structure quality (n = 35); process quality (n = 43); and two training standards statements referred to outcome quality (n = 2). Conclusion A broad range of internationally sourced training standards statements for FM postgraduate training could be identified from countries with well-established primary care systems. Only few statements internationally referred to outcome quality, expressing the difficulty in assessing outcome. The resulting inventory of training standards statements for FM postgraduate training can serve as a resource for institutions seeking to formalise and systematise FM training at regional or national levels.

Internationally there is an ongoing debate on diuretics as first-line therapy for most patients with hypertension. In spite of many arguments against them in antihypertensive monotherapy, the authors of the present study perceived them to be regularly prescribed in combination therapy in Germany. The study objective was to look for this discrepancy in prescribing reality as a contribution from clinical practice to an academic debate.A descriptive cross-sectional study in a yearly contact group (YCG; 1.7.2007-31.06.2008) was conducted based on data from a scientific network of 22 general practitioners in Germany. All patients with hypertension as diagnosed by their general practitioner were included. Antihypertensives were grouped according to the ATC classification. To assess for potential design effects by the given two-level setting, 95% confidence intervals (CI) were adjusted for clustering.Hypertension had been diagnosed in 9.3% of the 58 852 patients. Of these, 21.6% received no antihypertensives. Of those who were treated, 30.6% (CI [28.6-32.6]) had monotherapy. In monotherapy, 8.6% (CI [7.1-10.2]) were prescribed some diuretic, 1.5% (CI [0.5-3.0]) received hydrochlorothiazide (HCT). Combination therapy was prescribed to 69.4% (CI [67.2-71.6]). These patients received some diuretic in 79.0% (CI [76.9-81.0]) of the cases, of which 80.8% (CI [78.5-83.1]) had a combination with HCT. HCT was prescribed in 76.2% (CI [73.5-78.9]) in fixed-dose formulations.In spite to the many arguments against them, leading to their almost complete disregard in monotherapy, thiazide-diuretics seem to be standard in combination therapy in Germany. This inconsistency can not be explained by the arguments of the current debate. Key limitations of the present study include the lack of ability to tell whether a given monotherapy is the first-line medication, the small sample size and the possible selection bias.

Katja Goetz,1 Jessica Bungartz,2 Joachim Szecsenyi,1 Jost Steinhaeuser3 1Department of General Practice and Health Services Research, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; 2Praxis Medizin im Zentrum, München, Germany; 3Institute of Family Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany Background: Patients’ evaluation of medical care is an essential dimension of quality of care and an important aspect of the feedback cycle for health care providers. The aim of this study was to document how patients with a Turkish background evaluate primary care in Germany and determine which aspects of care are associated with language abilities.Methods: The study was based on an observational design. Patients with a Turkish background from German primary care practices completed the EUROPEP (European Project on Patient Evaluation of General Practice Care) questionnaire consisting of 23items. Seventeen primary care practices were involved with either German (n=8) or Turkish (n=9) general practitioners (GPs).Results: A convenience sample of 472 patients with a Turkish background from 17 practices participated in the study (response rate 39.9%). Practices with a German GP had a lower response rate (19.6%) than those with a Turkish GP (57.5%). Items evaluated the highest were “keeping data confidential” (73.4%) and “quick services for urgent health problems” (69.9%). Subgroup analysis showed lower evaluation scores from patients with good or excellent German language abilities. Patients who consulted a Turkish GP had higher evaluation scores.Conclusion: The evaluation from patients with a Turkish background living in Germany with either Turkish or German GPs showed lower scores than patients in other studies in Europe using EUROPEP. However, our results had higher evaluation scores than those of Turkish patients evaluating GPs in Turkey. Therefore, different explanation models for these findings should be explored in future studies. Keywords: migrant health, quality of care, primary health care, patient satisfaction, patient evaluations

Background.In 2010 Manual Medicine (MM) was the second most common additional qualification among physicians in Germany, which is recommended to be used in several guidelines. Aim of this analysis was to raise the amount of information on MM related injuries (MMri) experienced by physicians at any point of their career while applying MM.Methods.Data on MMri of a questionnaire that was used to gain first insights into MM in Germany from a health services research perspective was analysed.Results.A total of 301 physicians (20% female) participated in this study. The participants’ mean age was 46. 11% of the participants experienced some kind of MMri during their career as a MM provider. In the three worst cases these MMri were fractures and therefore classified as moderate. Mild MMri were joint dysfunction syndromes (N=30), distortions of fingers (N=7), and shoulder pain (N=3). Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in the rate of MMri when comparing gender, provider organizations for postgraduate MM courses, and medical disciplines.Conclusion.Our analysis shows risks for providers of MM. As this analysis suffers from the risk of recall bias, future studies should be performed to get more insights into this aspect of MM.

Introduction. Medication lists and structured medication counselling (SMC) including “brown bag reviews” (BBR) are important instruments for medication safety. The aim of this study was to explore whether patients’ use of a medication list is associated with their beliefs about their medicine and their memory of SMC. Methods. Baseline data of 344 patients enrolled into the “Polypharmacy in Multimorbid Patients study” were analysed. Linear regression models were calculated for the “specific necessity subscale” (SNS) and the “specific concerns subscale” (SCS) of the German “Beliefs About Medicine Questionnaire,” including self-developed variables assessing patients’ use of a medication list, their memory of SMC, and sociodemographic data. Results. 62.8% (n=216) remembered an appointment for SMC and 32.0% (n=110) BBR. The SNS correlated positively with regular receipt of a medication list (β=0.286, p<0.01) and negatively with memory of a BBR (β=-0.268; p<0.01). The SCS correlated positively with memory of a BBR (β=0.160, p=0.02) and negatively with the comprehensiveness of the mediation list (β=-0.224; p<0.01). Conclusions. A comprehensive medication list may reduce patients’ concerns and increase the perceived necessity of their medication. A potential negative impact of BBR on patients’ beliefs about their medicine should be considered and quality standards for SMC developed.

Background The tailoring of implementation interventions includes the identification of the determinants of, or barriers to, healthcare practice. Different methods for identifying determinants have been used in implementation projects, but which methods are most appropriate to use is unknown. Methods The study was undertaken in five European countries, recommendations for a different chronic condition being addressed in each country: Germany (polypharmacy in multimorbid patients); the Netherlands (cardiovascular risk management); Norway (depression in the elderly); Poland (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease—COPD); and the United Kingdom (UK) (obesity). Using samples of professionals and patients in each country, three methods were compared directly: brainstorming amongst health professionals, interviews of health professionals, and interviews of patients. The additional value of discussion structured through reference to a checklist of determinants in addition to brainstorming, and determinants identified by open questions in a questionnaire survey, were investigated separately. The questionnaire, which included closed questions derived from a checklist of determinants, was administered to samples of health professionals in each country. Determinants were classified according to whether it was likely that they would inform the design of an implementation intervention (defined as plausibly important determinants). Results A total of 601 determinants judged to be plausibly important were identified. An additional 609 determinants were judged to be unlikely to inform an implementation intervention, and were classified as not plausibly important. Brainstorming identified 194 of the plausibly important determinants, health professional interviews 152, patient interviews 63, and open questions 48. Structured group discussion identified 144 plausibly important determinants in addition to those already identified by brainstorming. Conclusions Systematic methods can lead to the identification of large numbers of determinants. Tailoring will usually include a process to decide, from all the determinants that are identified, those to be addressed by implementation interventions. There is no best buy of methods to identify determinants, and a combination should be used, depending on the topic and setting. Brainstorming is a simple, low cost method that could be relevant to many tailored implementation projects. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-014-0102-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Improving postgraduate medical training is one important step to attract more medical students into general practice. Keeping pace with international developments moving to competence-based curricula for general practice training, the aim of this project was to develop and implement such a curriculum in Germany. Methods A five-step, peer-based method was used for the curriculum development process including panel testing and a “test version” of the curriculum for the pilot implementation phase. The CanMEDS framework served as a basis for a new German competence-based curriculum in general practice training. Four curricula from European countries and Canada were reviewed and, following required cultural adaptions, key strengths from these were integrated. For the CanMEDS “medical expertise” element of the curriculum, the WONCA ICPC-2 classification of patient’s “reason for encounters” was also integrated. Results Altogether, 37 participants were involved in the development process representing 12 different federal states in Germany, and including an expert advisor from Denmark. An official “test version” of the curriculum consisting of three parts: medical expertise, additional competencies and medical procedures was established. A system of self-assessment for trainees was integrated into the curriculum using a traffic light scale. Since March 2012, the curriculum has been made freely available online as a “test version”. In 2014, an evaluation is planned using feedback from users of the test model as a further stage of the implementation process. Conclusions The first German competence-based curriculum for general practice training has been developed using a pragmatic peer controlled approach and implementation is being trialed with a “test version” of the curriculum. This model project and its peer-based methodology may support competence-based curriculum development for other medical specialties both inside and outside Germany.

Background Primary care teams' job satisfaction is an important issue in quality of care. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the job satisfaction of general practitioners (GPs) and non-physician staff and to explore the elements that may impact on overall job satisfaction for GPs and non-physician staff separately. Methods The study was based on data from the European Practice Assessment and used an observational design. Job satisfaction was measured with the 10-items Warr-Cook-Wall questionnaire with 7-point-Likert scales. Job satisfaction of GPs and non-physician staff was compared and impact on overall job satisfaction was analysed with stepwise linear regression analyses for both samples separately. Results The study population consisted of 2878 non-physician staff (mean age: 38 years) and 676 GPs (mean age: 50 years). The actual mean working time per week of GPs was 50.0 hours and of practice staff 26.0 hours. Both were satisfied with colleagues and fellow workers (mean = 5.99 and mean = 6.18 respectively) and mostly dissatisfied with their income (mean = 4.40 and mean = 4.79 respectively). For GPs the opportunity to use their abilities (β = 0.638) and for non-physician staff recognition for their work (β = 0.691) showed the highest scores of explained variance (R2 = 0.406 and R2 = 0.477 respectively) regarding overall job satisfaction. Conclusions Non-physician staff evaluate their job satisfaction higher than GPs except recognition for work. Job satisfaction of members of primary care teams is important because poor satisfaction is associated with suboptimal healthcare delivery, poor clinical outcomes and higher turnover of staff.

Background The Chronic Care Model (CCM) is an evidence based, population based approach to improve care for people with chronic conditions. The Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (ACIC) instrument is widely used to measure to what extent within a healthcare system the CCM is implemented. The aim of this study was to translate and culturally adapt the ACIC Instrument for the German healthcare system. Methods For translating the ACIC instrument, principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process by the ISPOR Task Force were followed. Focus groups were additionally conducted with general practitioners to adapt the items culturally. Results The ACIC instrument can not be used in the German healthcare system easily due to a multifaceted understanding of words, different levels of knowledge of the CCM and fundamental differences between health systems. Conclusions As following the CCM leads to benefits for patients with chronic illnesses, measuring to which extent it is implemented is of major interest. A new questionnaire using the CCM as its theoretical basis, sensitive to the healthcare systems of the host country has to be created. Knowledge transfer between countries by using an instrument from a different healthcare system can lead to a completely new questionnaire.

Background In many countries, rural areas are facing a shortage of general practitioners (GPs). Appropriate strategies to address this challenge are needed. From a health care delivery point of view, the term rural area is often poorly defined. However rural areas have to be adequately defined to ensure specific strategies are tailored to these environments. The aims of this study were to translate the New Zealand 6-item Rural Ranking Scale (RRS), to culturally adapt it and to implement it to identify rural areas from a health care delivery perspective. Therefore we aimed to validate the RRS by defining cut-off scores for urban, semi-rural and rural areas in Germany. Methods After receiving permission, two researchers independently translated the RRS. In a consensus meeting, four items were identified that had to be culturally adapted. The modified RRS-Germany (mRRS-G) was sent to 724 GPs located in urban, semi-rural and rural areas to validate the “rurality” scoring system for conditions in Germany. Results Four items, “travelling time to next major hospital”, “on-call duty”, “regular peripheral clinic” and “on-call for major traumas” had to be adapted due to differences in the health care system. The survey had a response rate of 33.7%. A factor analysis showed a three dimensional structure of the mRRS-G scale with a poor internal consistency. Nevertheless, the three items regarding “on-call duty”, “next major hospital” and “most distant boundary covered by your practice” were identified as significant predictors for rurality. The adapted cut-off point for rurality in Germany was 16. From this study’s participants, 9 met the RRS cut-off point for rurality (a score of 35 or more). Conclusion Compared with New Zealand rurality scores based on this tool, German scores are far less rural from a health care delivery point of view. We consider that the construct of rurality has more aspects than those assessed by the mRRS-G. Nevertheless, rural areas from a health care delivery viewpoint can be effectively defined using mRRS-G and therefore it can support tailored strategies against GPs shortage.

Background The Chronic Care Model (CCM) is an evidence-based approach to improving the structure of care for chronically ill patients with multimorbidity. The Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (ACIC), an instrument commonly used in international research, includes all aspects of the CCM, but cannot be easily extended to the German context. A new instrument called the "Questionnaire of Chronic Illness Care in Primary Care" (QCPC) was developed for use in Germany for this reason. Here, we present the results of the psychometric properties and test-retest reliability of QCPC. Methods A total of 109 family doctors from different German states participated in the validation study. Participating physicians completed the QCPC, which includes items concerning the CCM and practice structure, at baseline (T0) and 3 weeks later (T1). Internal consistency reliability and test-retest reliability were evaluated using Cronbach's alpha and Pearson's r, respectively. Results The QCPC contains five elements of the CCM (decision support, delivery system design, self-management support, clinical information systems, and community linkages). All subscales demonstrated moderate internal consistency and moderate test-retest reliability over a three-week interval. Conclusions The QCPC is an appropriate instrument to assess the structure of chronic illness care. Unlike the ACIC, the QCPC can be used by health care providers without CCM training. The QCPC can detect the actual state of care as well as areas for improvement of care according to the CCM.