Search

Specialist clinics play an important role in inpatient care in the German healthcare system. They are characterized by a high degree of specialization and expertise and are described in numerous medical disciplines. However, a generally accepted legal definition of specialist clinics has so far been lacking. The ad hoc committee of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF) for the reform of hospital care in Germany, therefore, presents proposals for a definition, a description of quality characteristics, and an allocation to care levels. In the opinion of the committee, three aspects are necessary for the definition of specialist clinics: a high total number of patients treated, a high proportion of the disease entities attributable to the specialist area according to diagnosis and services, and structural characteristics. The definition proposed here is intended to help the political decision-makers in the federal and state governments to standardize according to medical-scientific criteria.

The measurement of quality indicators supports quality improvement initiatives. The German Interdisciplinary Society of Intensive Care Medicine (DIVI) has published quality indicators for intensive care medicine for the fourth time now. After a scheduled evaluation after three years, changes in several indicators were made. Other indicators were not changed or only minimally. The focus remained strongly on relevant treatment processes like management of analgesia and sedation, mechanical ventilation and weaning, and infections in the ICU. Another focus was communication inside the ICU. The number of 1ndicators remained the same. The development method was more structured and transparency was increased by adding new features like evidence levels or author contribution and potential conflicts of interest. These quality indicators should be used in the peer review in intensive care, a method endorsed by the DIVI. Other forms of measurement and evaluation are also reasonable, for example in quality management. This fourth edition of the quality indicators will be updated in the future to reflect the recently published recommendations on the structure of intensive care units by the DIVI.

In order to improve quality (of therapy), one has to know, evaluate and make transparent, one’s own daily processes. This process of reflection can be supported by the presentation of key data or indicators, in which the real as-is state can be represented. Quality indicators are required in order to depict the as-is state. Quality indicators reflect adherence to specific quality measures. Continuing registration of an indicator is useless once it becomes irrelevant or adherence is 100%.In the field of intensive care medicine, studies of quality indicators have been performed in some countries. Quality indicators relevant for medical quality and outcome in critically ill patients have been identified by following standardized approaches. Different German societies of intensive care medicine have finally agreed on 10 core quality indicators that will be valid for two years and are currently recommended in German intensive care units (ICUs).

Critical care medicine frequently involves decisions and measures that may result in significant consequences for patients. In particular, mistakes may directly or indirectly derive from daily routine processes. In addition, consequences may result from the broader pharmaceutical and technological treatment options, which frequently involve multidimensional aspects. The increasing complexity of pharmaceutical and technological properties must be monitored and taken into account. Besides the presence of various disciplines involved, the provision of 24-hour care requires multiple handovers of significant information each day. Immediate expert action that is well coordinated is just as important as a professional handling of medicine's limitations. Intensivists are increasingly facing professional quality management within the ICU (Intensive Care Unit). This article depicts a practical and effective approach to this complex topic and describes external evaluation of critical care according to peer reviewing processes, which have been successfully implemented in Germany and are likely to gain in significance.

Background The German guideline on intensive care treatment of cardiac surgical patients provides evidence-based recommendations on management and monitoring. It remains unclear if, respectively, to which degree the guidelines are implemented into the daily practice. Therefore, this study aims to characterize the implementation of guideline recommendations in German cardiac surgical intensive care units (ICUs). Methods An internet-based online survey (42 questions, 9 topics) was sent to 158 German head physicians of cardiac surgical ICUs. To compare the effect over time, most questions were based on a previously performed survey (2013) after introduction of the last guideline update in 2008. Results A total of n = 65 (41.1%) questionnaires were included. Monitoring changed to increased provision of available transesophageal echocardiography specialists in 86% (2013: 72.6%), Sv O2 measurement in 93.8% (2013: 55.1%), and electroencephalography in 58.5% (2013: 2.6%). The use of hydroxyethyl starch declined (9.4% vs. 2013: 38.7%), gelatin 4% presented the most administered colloid with 23.4% (2013: 17.4%). Low cardiac output syndrome was primarily treated with levosimendan (30.8%) and epinephrine (23.1%), while norepinephrine (44.6%) and dobutamine (16.9%) represented the most favored drug combination. The main way of distribution was web-based (50.9%), with increasing impact on therapy regimens (36.9% vs. 2013: 24%). Conclusion Changes were found in all questioned sectors compared with the preceding survey, with persisting variability between ICUs. Recommendations of the updated guideline have increasingly entered clinical practice, with participants valuing the updated publication as clinically relevant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Based on a longtime voluntary registry, founded by the German Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (GSTCVS/DGTHG) in 1980, well-defined data of all cardiac, thoracic, and vascular surgery procedures performed in 78 German heart surgery departments during the year 2022 are analyzed. Under the decreasing interference of the worldwide coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, a total of 162,167 procedures were submitted to the registry. A total of 93,913 of these operations are summarized as heart surgery procedures in a classical sense. The unadjusted in-hospital survival rate for the 27,994 isolated coronary artery bypass grafting procedures (relationship on-/off-pump 3.2:1) was 97.5%. For the 38,492 isolated heart valve procedures (20,272 transcatheter interventions included) it was 96.9%, and for the registered pacemaker/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator procedures (19,531) 99.1%, respectively. Concerning short- and long-term circulatory support, a total of 2,737 extracorporeal life support/extracorporeal membrane oxygenation implantations, respectively 672 assist device implantations (L-/ R-/ BVAD, TAH) were registered. In 2022, 356 isolated heart transplantations, 228 isolated lung transplantations, and 5 combined heart-lung transplantations were performed. This annually updated registry of the GSTCVS/DGTHG represents voluntary public reporting by accumulating actual information for nearly all heart surgical procedures in Germany, constitutes advancements in heart medicine, and represents a basis for quality management for all participating institutions. In addition, the registry demonstrates that the provision of cardiac surgery in Germany is up to date, appropriate, and nationwide patient treatment is always available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]