Search

Aim: Examine perceptions of nurses who obtained a recognised nursing qualification in Germany about the integration of internationally qualified nurses (IQN) in the German nursing workforce. Design: Qualitative interview study. Methods: Semi‐structured interviews with 21 state‐qualified nurses who had graduated from a German nursing program were conducted either face‐to‐face or by telephone. Nurses were selected using the purposive sampling method. Additionally, to reach a sufficient sample size, snowball sampling was applied. Each interview was pseudonymized and transcribed. Transcripts were coded according to Qualitative Content Analysis with data structured into themes and sub‐themes. The study was reported according to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Studies (COREQ) checklist for qualitative research. Results: Two main themes including sub‐themes were identified: (a) Enabling Factors to Workplace Integration: motivated nursing team, structured orientation program, support by a preceptor, additional practical skills and specific language training and (b) Barriers to Workplace Integration: lack of language proficiency, cultural differences, othering and racism/discrimination. The findings of the study suggest that working in a diverse workplace can be challenging, it is therefore important for successful integration to recognise not only the experiences of IQN but also the perceptions of nurses who work with internationally qualified peers. No patient or public contribution. Registration number: The study has been prospectively registered (27 June 2019) at the German Clinical Trial Register (REDACTED). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Older adults with multimorbidity represent a growing segment of the population. Metrics to assess quality, safety and effectiveness of care can support policy makers and healthcare providers in addressing patient needs. However, there is a lack of valid measures of quality of care for this population. In the MULTIqual project, 24 general practitioner (GP)-reported and 14 patient-reported quality indicators for the healthcare of older adults with multimorbidity were developed in Germany in a systematic approach. This study aimed to select, validate and pilot core sets of these indicators. Methods: In a cross-sectional observational study, we collected data in general practices (n = 35) and patients aged 65 years and older with three or more chronic conditions (n = 346). One-dimensional core sets for both perspectives were selected by stepwise backward selection based on corrected item-total correlations. We established structural validity, discriminative capacity, feasibility and patient-professional agreement for the selected indicators. Multilevel multivariable linear regression models adjusted for random effects at practice level were calculated to examine construct validity. Results: Twelve GP-reported and seven patient-reported indicators were selected, with item-total correlations ranging from 0.332 to 0.576. Fulfilment rates ranged from 24.6 to 89.0%. Between 0 and 12.7% of the values were missing. Seventeen indicators had agreement rates between patients and professionals of 24.1% to 75.9% and one had 90.7% positive and 5.1% negative agreement. Patients who were born abroad (− 1.04, 95% CI = − 2.00/ − 0.08, p = 0.033) and had higher health-related quality of life (− 1.37, 95% CI = − 2.39/ − 0.36, p = 0.008), fewer contacts with their GP (0.14, 95% CI = 0.04/0.23, p = 0.007) and lower willingness to use their GPs as coordinators of their care (0.13, 95% CI = 0.06/0.20, p < 0.001) were more likely to have lower GP-reported healthcare quality scores. Patients who had fewer GP contacts (0.12, 95% CI = 0.04/0.20, p = 0.002) and were less willing to use their GP to coordinate their care (0.16, 95% CI = 0.10/0.21, p < 0.001) were more likely to have lower patient-reported healthcare quality scores. Conclusions: The quality indicator core sets are the first brief measurement tools specifically designed to assess quality of care for patients with multimorbidity. The indicators can facilitate implementation of treatment standards and offer viable alternatives to the current practice of combining disease-related metrics with poor applicability to patients with multimorbidity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Primary care is a relevant pillar in managing not only individual, but also societal medical crises. The COVID-19 pandemic has demanded a rapid response from primary care with interventions in the health care system. The aim of this paper was to explore the responses of primary care practitioners (PCP) during the early COVID-19 pandemic and to analyze these with a view on the resilience of the primary health care system from the PCPs perspective. Methods: Shortly after the first COVID-19 wave (July—October 2020) n = 39, semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with PCP in practices and at Corona contact points (CCP) in Baden-Wuerttemberg (Germany). Qualitative content analysis was applied, and the evolved categories were related to in a framework for resilience. Results: Primary care had an overall strong ability to adapt and show resilience, albeit with wide variance in speed and scope of the responses. When coping with uncertainty, the reasons given by PCPs in favor of opening a CCP mainly involved intrinsic motivation and self-initiative; the reasons against doing so were i.e. the lack of personal protective equipment, problems with space, and worries about organizational burden. A strong association existed between the establishment of a CCP and the use of resources (i.e. existing networks, personal protective equipment, exercising an office of professional political function). Our study predominantly found adaptive aspects for measures taken at medical practices and transformative aspects for setting up outpatient infection centers. PCPs played an important role in the coordination process (i.e. actively transferring knowledge, integration in crisis management teams, inclusion in regional strategic efforts) reaching a high level in the dimensions knowledge and legitimacy. The dimension interdependence repeatedly came into focus (i.e. working with stakeholders to open CCP, interacting among different types of primary care facilities, intersectoral interfaces). A need for regional capacity planning was visible at the time of the interviews. Conclusions: The results can be used for practical and research-based institutional and capacity planning, for developing resilience in primary care and for augmentation by perspectives from other stakeholders in the primary health care system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The increasing nursing shortages worldwide has focused attention on the need to find more effective ways to recruit and retain nurses. The aim of this study was to gain understanding of factors that keep German nurses in nursing and explore their perceptions of factors that contribute to nurses leaving or staying in the profession. Methods: An explorative qualitative study was undertaken at four different hospitals (two university hospitals and two public hospitals) in Baden-Wuerttemberg, a state in South Germany. Semi-structured face-to-face or telephone interviews were conducted with 21 state-qualified nurses who had graduated from a German nursing program. Each interview was pseudonymized and transcribed. Transcripts were coded according to Qualitative Content Analysis with data structured into themes and subthemes. The study was reported according to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Studies (COREQ) checklist for qualitative research. Results: Two themes emerged from the analysis and each theme had several subthemes: a) PUSH FACTORS i.e. factors that may push nurses to consider leaving the profession included limited career prospects, generational barriers, poor public image of nursing, and workplace pressures; b) PULL FACTORS i.e. factors that nurses wished for and could keep them in the profession included professional pride, improved remuneration, recognition of nursing, professionalisation, and improving the image of nursing as a profession. Conclusion: The decision to leave or stay in nursing is influenced by a complex range of dynamic push and pull factors. Nurse Managers responsible for stabilizing the workforce and maintaining their health system will continue to have to navigate challenges until working conditions, appropriate wages and career development opportunities are addressed. A key to tackling nursing shortages may be focusing on pull factors and nurse managers listening in particular to the perspectives of junior nurses directly involved in patient care, as giving them opportunity to further develop professionally, reinforcing a strong and supportive workplace relationships, paying an appropriate salary, and improving the public image of nursing profession. Registration number: The study has been prospectively registered (27 June 2019) at the German Clinical Trial Register (DRKS00017465). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic various ambulatory health care models (SARS-CoV-2 contact points: Subspecialised Primary Care Practices, Fever Clinics, and Special Places for Corona-Testing) were organised in a short period in Baden-Wuerttemberg, a region in Southern Germany. The aim of these SARS-CoV-2 contact points was to ensure medical treatment for patients with (suspected) and without SARS-CoV-2 infection. The present study aimed to assess the beliefs and practices of primary care physicians who either led a Subspecialised Primary Care Practice or a Primary Care Practice providing care as usual in Baden-Wuerttemberg during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This cross-sectional study was based on a paper-based questionnaire in primary care physicians during the first wave of the pandemic. Participants were identified via the web page of the Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians Baden-Wuerttemberg. The questionnaire was distributed in June and July 2020. It measured knowledge, practices, self-efficacy and fears towards SARS-CoV-2, using newly developed questions. Data was descriptively analysed. Results: One hundred fifty-five participants (92 leads of SARS-CoV-2 contact points/ 63 leads of primary care practices) completed the questionnaire. Out of 92 leads of SARS-CoV-2 contact points 74 stated to lead n Subspecialised Primary Care Practices. About half participants of both groups did not fear an own infection with the novel virus (between 50.8% and 62.2%), however about 75% feared financial loss. Knowledge was gained using various sources; main sources were the Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (between 82.5% and 83.8%) and the German Society for Hygiene and Microbiology (RKI) (between 88.9% and 95.9%). Leads of Subspecialised Primary Care Practice felt more confident to perform anamnestic/diagnostic procedures (p < 0.001). The same was found for the confidence level regarding decision-making concerning the further treatment (p < 0.001). Several prevention measures to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2 were adopted. Subspecialised Primary Care Practice had treated on average more patients with (suspected) COVID-19 (mean 408.12) than primary care practices (mean 83.8) (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that the Subspecialised Primary Care Practice that were implemented during the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic contributed containment of the pandemic. Leads of Subspecialised Primary Care Practice indicated that physical separation of patients with potential SARS-CoV-2 infection was easier compared to those who continued working in their own practice. Additionally, leads of Subspecialised Primary Care Practice felt more confident in dealing with patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Trial registration: The study has been prospectively registered at the German Clinical Trial Register (DRKS00022224). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the improvement of employment opportunities for women in the German labor market. In particular, local employment programs in Hamburg, Dortmund and Munich to promote career development perspectives for women are outlined. Self-help initiatives and special job services for welfare recipients are examined and the level of participation in these programs is noted.

Objectives: This study aimed to explore the association between patient activation and patients' experience of care among an elderly multimorbid population in Germany., Design: Cross-sectional study., Setting: Primary care practices in two German settings., Participants: 346 patients with 3 or more chronic conditions aged 65 years and over from 36 primary care practices., Outcome Measures: Patient activation was measured with the patient activation measure (PAM). To assess patient experiences with primary care, a set of questions concerning domains of primary care were included. Multilevel regression analyses were performed to examine which domains of care were associated with patient activation., Results: Out of 1243 invited patients, a total of 346 took part in the study (participation rate 27.8 %). Mean PAM score was 76.1. Across all patients, 3.8% achieved PAM level 1, 7.5% level 2, 27.2% level 3% and 60.7% level 4. PAM scores suggest a highly activated patient group. In the regression analysis, three out ten domains of patients' experiences showed an association with patient activation. The domains 'being involved in decision as much as desired' (B=-8.56, p=0.012) and 'receiving a self-management plan' (B=6.51, p=0.051) were associated with higher patient activation scores. Patients with an up-to-date medication plan had lower patient activation scores (B=-12.01, p=0.041)., Conclusion: Specific domains of primary care were found to be associated with patient activation. To enhance patient activation, primary care physicians may increase involvement of patients in decisions. Future research should examine the causality of these associations., Trial Registration Number: DRKS00015718., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Inadequate assessment of the severity and urgency of health problems is one of the factors contributing to unnecessary emergency department visits. A software-based instrument for standardized initial assessment (SmED) aims to support healthcare professionals and steer patients to the appropriate source of care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation process of SmED based on the point of view of users in order to facilitate sustainable implementation., Methods: A quantitative process evaluation on the basis of a paper-based questionnaire was carried out alongside the implementation of SmED in 26 outpatient emergency care services within 11 federal states in Germany. Healthcare professionals who worked with SmED either at the joint contact points of the outpatient emergency care service and the emergency departments of hospitals ("Joint Counter", German "Gemeinsamer Tresen") or at the initial telephone contact points of the outpatient emergency care service (116117) were invited to participate in the survey., Results: 200 users of SmED completed the questionnaire comprising the five scales: Intervention effectiveness/efficacy, Interprofessional context/occupational Interest, Individual Context, Organisational Framework Conditions, and Medical Context. Several individual characteristics were related to the implementation process of SmED. Female and younger healthcare professionals and participants with less than five years of professional experience tended to evaluate the implementation process as more positive. Factors related to the Individual Context and to the Medical Context were associated with the reported use of SmED (p = 0.004 and 0.041, respectively)., Conclusion: The involvement of healthcare professionals, particularly more experienced professionals, in the implementation of SmED may help to facilitate sustainable implementation. In addition, training of potential user prior and during the implementation process and the adaption of Organisational Context factors are crucial. Trial registration The study was registered at the German Clinical Trials Register prior to the start of the study (DRKS00017014)., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to give an early snapshot of primary care strategies that were implemented to cope with the early period of the COVID-19 pandemic in Baden-Wuerttemberg (Germany)., Methods: In June 2020, all 271 outpatient SARS-CoV-2 contact points, established by the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (16 centers for testing, 204 specialized family practices, 51 Outpatients Corona Centers), and a randomly generated sample of 400 primary care practices of Baden-Wuerttemberg were invited to take part in a paper-based questionnaire. The data were gathered anonymously and analysed descriptively., Results: Out of those invited, n=63 (15.8%) primary care practices and n=92 (33.9%) SARS-CoV-2 contact points participated; 78.7% of the primary care practices cooperated with SARS-CoV-2 contact points (n=48). In all, 92.1% had implemented a compulsory registration by phone for patients with (suspected) COVID-19 (n=58) and 81% offered consultation exclusively by phone or video in case of a mild courses (n=51). The new outpatient SARS-CoV-2 contact points were established in collaboration with several stakeholders, mainly led by primary care physicians (n=76, 82.6%) and almost 50% of these were established in March 2020 (n=42, 48.3%). The most commonly reported method of registration was regulated mainly by primary care practices (n=88, 95.7%) and public health departments (n=74, 80.4%). In 92.4% (n=85) of cases, it was possible to register by phone. The consultation response was most commonly given in the form of oral information to the patient (n=65, 77.4%). Less then 50% of the SARS-CoV-2 contact points used standardized sheets for registration, documentation and consultation. The assessment of future primary care structures for (suspected) COVID-19 patients were heterogeneous., Conclusions: Effort, improvisation and collaboration were required for a successful and rapid implementation of measures for primary care during the initial period of the COVID-19 pandemic. Impulses for ongoing development of primary care strategies during a pandemic can be derived out of these results., Competing Interests: AB, SM, FPK, CR, SSc und MW geben keine Interessenskonflikte an. NBG und SSt haben im März/April je eine Fieberambulanz aufgebaut. NBG erhielt Dienstpauschalen, SSt eine Aufwandsentschädigung für den Aufbau von der KVBW., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background: The on-call service (emergency service) has been reachable under 116117 in Germany since 2012. Nevertheless, this number is almost unknown to most Germans. A literature review of emergency service has shown that information which can be found is often incomplete and unclear. Thus, the aim of this study was to cover the status quo regarding 116117 at the federal level in Germany., Methods: In February 2019 all physicians working with a statutory health insurance were asked to fill in an online survey. The survey was based on a literature review regarding emergency service and on-call service at the federal level in Germany. The questionnaire covered different areas. In this paper only results regarding 116117 will be reported. Data were analyzed descriptively., Results: The organization and range of services as well as the qualifications of the staff are structured differently at the federal level. Services provided by 116117 are arrangements for home visits, out-of-hours service appointments, consulting, and forwarding to 112. Staff includes physician assistants, nurses, and physicians., Conclusion: Standardized regulations at the federal level might improve transparency. The planned extension of 116117 to include a standardized initial medical assessment as well as 24/7 accessibility could facilitate patient access to adequate medical treatment., Competing Interests: Die Autorinnen/Autoren geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)