Search

Abstract Background The strengthening of interdisciplinary care collaboration in Parkinson's disease is taking on increasing importance in daily medical routine. Therefore, care providers worldwide are organizing themselves in disease-specific regional network structures. However, the existing networks are heterogeneous, and the driving key players are yet unidentified. Objectives To systematically identify key factors of the composition of health care professionals, who are initially interested in the development of a Parkinson network for interdisciplinary care collaboration, their motivation, and expectations, we conducted a basic evaluation in three different German regions covering a total number of 23,405 people with Parkinson’s. Methods A specially developed semi-open questionnaire focusing on socio-demographic information, ways of contact, interdisciplinary collaboration, and connectedness was used. Statistical analyses were performed based on a predesigned codebook. Results The most crucial professions were outpatient therapists (physio-, occupational-, speech therapists) (36.7%), average case load of 10.1 patients/3 months and inpatient movement disorder specialists (21.1%), average case load of 197.4 patients/3 months. Before implementation of PD networks, 48.9% of outpatient therapists did not have any contact with neurologists. 58.9% of caregivers considered the current frequency of collaboration to be insufficient. The lack of political support as well as a lack of time were identified as main hurdles to increased collaboration. Conclusion The identified driving forces in strengthened care collaboration are assigned to different healthcare sectors. This makes networks which provide tools for specialized education and interdisciplinary, cross-sectoral communication indispensable. For an areawide rollout, a rethinking of political frameworks towards network care is strongly necessary.

Summary: Two SARS-CoV-2 nosocomial outbreaks occurred on the haematology ward of our hospital. Patients on the ward were at high risk for severe infection because of their immunocompromised status. Whole Genome Sequencing proved transmission of a particular SARS-CoV-2 variant in each outbreak. The first outbreak (20 patients/31 healthcare workers (HCW)) occurred in November 2020 and was caused by a variant belonging to lineage B.1.221. At that time, there were still uncertainties on mode of transmission of SARS-CoV-2, and vaccines nor therapy were available. Despite HCW wearing II-R masks in all patient contacts and FFP-2 masks during aerosol generating procedures (AGP), the outbreak continued. Therefore, extra measures were introduced. Firstly, regular PCR-screening of asymptomatic patients and HCW; positive patients were isolated and positive HCW were excluded from work as a rule and they were only allowed to resume their work if a follow-up PCR CT-value was ≥30 and were asymptomatic or having only mild symptoms. Secondly, the use of FFP-2 masks was expanded to some long-lasting, close-contact, non-AGPs. After implementing these measures, the incidence of new cases declined gradually. Thirty-seven percent of patients died due to COVID-19.The second outbreak (10 patients/2 HCW) was caused by the highly transmissible omicron BA.1 variant and occurred in February 2022, where transmission occurred on shared rooms despite the extra infection control measures. It was controlled much faster, and the clinical impact was low as the majority of patients was vaccinated; no patients died and symptoms were relatively mild in both patients and HCW.

Mit wachsender Zahl der Akteure wird die Landschaft des Forschungsdatenmanagements (FDM) zunehmend unübersichtlich. Obwohl es einige einschlägige Ressourcen und Anlaufstellen gibt, sind Informationen zu FDM-Strukturen bisher zumeist verstreut und unstrukturiert. Wikidata bietet eine Infrastruktur, in der diese Informationen als Linked Open Data strukturiert gespeichert werden können. Der Beitrag illustriert die Möglichkeiten, wie man Einträge in Wikidata anlegt, editiert und auswertet, am Beispiel von FDM-Servicestellen und den Konsortien der Nationalen Forschungsdateninfrastruktur.