Search

Background: A significant and growing portion of the global burden of diseases is caused by neurological disorders. Tele-neurology has the potential to improve access to health care services and the quality of care, particularly in rural and underserved areas. The economic evaluation of the stepped wedge randomised controlled trial NeTKoH aims to ascertain the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility regarding the effects of a tele-neurologic intervention in primary care in a rural area in Germany. Methods: This protocol outlines the methods used when conducting the trial-based economic evaluation of NeTKoH. The outcomes used in our economic analysis are all prespecified endpoints of the NeTKoH trial. Outcomes considered for the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses will be quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) derived from the EQ-5D-5L, proportion of neurologic problems being solved at the GP's office (primary outcome), hospital length-of-stay and number of hospital stays. Costs will be prospectively collected during the trial by the participating statutory health insurances, and will be analysed from a statutory health insurance perspective within the German health care system. This economic evaluation will be reported complying with the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Discussion: This within-trial economic evaluation relaying the costs and outcomes of an interdisciplinary tele-consulting intervention will provide high-quality evidence for cost-effectiveness and policy implications of a tele-neurological programme, including the potential for application in other rural areas in Germany or other jurisdictions with a comparable health system. Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00024492), date registered: September 28, 2021. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Neurological disorders account for a large and increasing proportion of the global burden of disease. Therefore, it is important to strengthen the management of neurologic care, particularly in rural areas. The use of tele-neurology in primary care in rural areas is internationally considered to have the potential to increase access to health care services and improve the quality of care in these underserved areas. NeTKoH aims to address the existing knowledge gap regarding the effects of a tele-neurologic intervention in primary care under real-world conditions in a rural area in Germany. Methods: NeTKoH is a cluster-randomized controlled trial with a stepped-wedge design involving 33 outpatient general practitioner's (GP) offices (clusters) in a rural area in Northeast Germany. During 11 predetermined steps, all clusters are randomized before they cross over into groups from the control to the intervention arm. The targeted sample size is 1,089 patients with neurologic symptoms that are continuously being recruited. In the intervention arm, tele-neurologic consultations will be provided via a face-to-face video conferencing system with a neurologic expert at a university hospital. The control arm will receive usual care. The primary outcome is the proportion of neurologic problems being solved at the GP's office. Secondary outcomes will comprise hospital stays and days, time until neurologic specialist appointments and diagnostics, patients' health status and quality of life, outpatient and inpatient referrals. A concurrent observational study, together with a process, implementation, and health economic evaluation, will also be conducted. Discussion: Using a stepped-wedge cluster design in a real-life situation can help with logistic challenges and enhance the motivation of the participating GPs, as all, at some point, will be in the intervention phase. With the additional implementation evaluation pertaining to external validity, an observational study, and a health economic evaluation, NeTKoH will be able to provide an extensive evaluation for health policy decision-makers regarding the uptake into standard care. Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00024492). Date registered: September 28, 2021. Date and protocol version: June 2023, version 1. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, governments imposed various measures to decrease the rate of disease spread, and health care policy makers prioritized resource allocation to accommodate COVID-19 patients. We conducted a cross-sectional online survey in Germany (July 2020-June 2021) to assess the frequency of changes to cancer care among cancer patients and to explore the psychological impact of the pandemic writ large. Cancer patients who contacted the Cancer Information Service (Krebsinformationsdienst, KID) of the German Cancer Research Center (Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, DKFZ) via email were invited to complete an online questionnaire, capturing demographics, cancer specifics (e.g., type, disease phase, primary place of treatment, etc.), and any changes to their medical, follow-up, psycho-oncological or nursing care. General level of psychological distress was measured using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) along with face-validated items regarding worries and social isolation specific to the pandemic. In total, 13% of 621 patients reported a change to their treatment or care plan. Of those patients with changes, the majority of changes were made to follow-up care after treatment (56%), to monitoring during treatment (29%) and to psychological counseling (20%). Of the overall sample, more than half of patients (55%) reported symptoms of anxiety and 39% reported symptoms of depression. Patients with a change in cancer care were more likely to report symptoms of depression than those with no change (AOR: 2.18; 95% CI: 1.26-3.76). Concern about the pandemic affecting the quality of health care was a predictor of both anxiety (AOR: 2.76; 95% CI: 1.75-4.35) and depression (AOR: 2.15; 95% CI: 1.43-3.23). Results showed that the majority of cancer patients in our study did not experience a change in their cancer care. However, the level of anxiety and psycho-social burden of cancer patients during the pandemic was high throughout the study period. Our findings underscore the need for health care services and policy makers to assess and to attend cancer patients' medical needs, with added emphasis on patients' psychological and social well-being. This applies particularly in situations where the healthcare system is strained and prioritization is necessary., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Eckford, Gaisser, Arndt, Baumann, Kludt, Mehlis, Ubels, Winkler, Weg-Remers and Schlander.)

Introduction: Nurses are assigned a key role in pandemic response, with work engagement considered to be pivotal. The job demands-resources theory assumes that work engagement depends on job resources and job demands. Key job resources and demands have already been proposed for nurses. However, there is no evidence on their importance under pandemic conditions. Hence, the aim of this study was to investigate their relevance to nurses' work engagement during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: The study was carried out in a cross-sectional design and addressed nurses in direct health care settings in Germany. Data was collected administering a quantitative online survey using valid and reliable measures during the second wave of the pandemic. A convenience sample was obtained, including the use of social media, randomly selected health care facilities, and all universities with nursing-related programs in Germany. The dataset for analyses comprised a total of 1,027 cases. The sample included nurses of various educational levels and from different sectors. Multiple linear regression analysis after multiple imputation was used to examine the relevance of key resources and demands for work engagement., Results: Key resources and demands explained 36% of the variance in nurses' work engagement during the COVID-19 pandemic. Positive associations were found between the key resources of autonomy (β¯ SP =0.072, 95% CI [0.011; 0.133]), professional resources (β¯ SP =0.204, 95% CI [0.124; 0.285]), and interpersonal relationships (β¯ SP =0.178, 95% CI [0.117; 0.240]) and nurses' work engagement. On the demands side, lack of formal rewards negatively (β¯ SP =-0.312, 95% CI [-0.380; -0.245]) affected work engagement, whereas work overload (β¯ SP =0.063, 95% CI [0.001; 0.126]) was positively associated with work engagement., Discussion: The job demands-resources theory is suitable for explaining nurses' work engagement even in times of crisis. Taken together, key resources and demands have a significant influence on nurses' work engagement under pandemic conditions. However, not all so-called key resources and demands actually have a key status in a pandemic., Conclusion: Any lack of formal rewards should be countered, professional resources should be sustainably secured, and the autonomy of nurses and their interpersonal relationships should be strengthened. Nursing management decisions should be made not only with the current pandemic but also the post-pandemic period in mind., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier GmbH.)