[Collective patient centeredness and patient involvement through self-help groups]

Psycho-Oncological Self-Help Groups in Bavaria: The Current Situation and Suggestions for Improvement

BACKGROUND

Self-help groups (SHGs) are an important cornerstone of the German health care system. Especially collaborations of SHGs with cancer centers enable active patient involvement in cancer care. We investigated the current situation and unmet needs of Bavarian SHGs in order to point out possible options of action.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study with Bavarian psycho-oncological SHGs. Via e-mail, an online survey was sent to 150 SHGs registered at the BZKF (Bavarian Cancer Research Center). We assessed activities and needs of the SHGs as well as the nature of collaborations with cancer centers. We focused on adaptations during the COVID-19 pandemic and the inclusion of migrants.

RESULTS

46 (33.66%) SHGs participated, while 39 (84.78%) completed the questionnaire. During the COVID-19 pandemic, 50% of the SHGs reported less meetings. 22.7% changed to online meetings or other formats (43.2%). 20.9% of the SHGs had regular meetings with the cancer center, and 23.1% with the psycho-oncology. 51.2% evaluated the psycho-oncological services as neutral to dissatisfying due to lack of information, availability, and long waiting times. The SHGs indicated needs concerning interventions (coping strategies, digital applications, etc.), information, and better communication. Efforts for overcoming inequalities seemed rare: only 13.6% of the SHGs and 16.2% of the cancer centers had services for migrants.

CONCLUSIONS

This study gave an overview of current activities and needs of Bavarian SHGs. The implementation of patient guides, comprehensive information material, and low-threshold psycho-oncological services should be objectives in future care to increase patient satisfaction. The needs for services for migrants should be investigated in more detail.

Self-Care of Adults with Type 2 Diabetes During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Interpretive Description Study

Due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), diabetes services have been disrupted, causing difficulties for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and understanding their experience could help improve diabetes care. Therefore, we used a qualitative interpretive description to explore the experience of self-care of adults with T2DM during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews and analyzed theoretically. The sample (N = 30) was composed of 7 females and 23 males, with a mean age of 69.9 years (60-77) and 19.4 mean years (3-40) of people living with T2DM. Our findings show reduced physical activity and increased smoking and alcohol consumption affected that self-care. Increased food consumption and stress eating, with greater stress and anxiety, caused worsening of glycemic values. Participants were able to contact healthcare professionals via eHealth or telephone. Others, even those with complications, were not able to receive care or advice. These results suggest that easier contact with health providers, continuous engagement, eHealth solutions, and formal peer support could help self-care in T2DM. Advanced nursing roles and services could solve many issues reported in this study during and after the pandemic.

Self-help friendliness in cancer care: A cross-sectional study among self-help group leaders in Germany

BACKGROUND

Peer support is increasingly recognized as crucial for improving health and psychosocial outcomes in oncological care. The integration of cancer self-help groups (SHGs) into cancer care facilities has gained importance in recent years. Yet, there is a lack of knowledge of the extent and quality of cooperation between cancer care facilities and SHGs and their integration into routine care. The concept of self-help friendliness (SHF) provides a feasible instrument for the measurement of cooperation and integration.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study across Germany investigates the experiences of 266 leaders of cancer SHGs concerning their cooperation with cancer care facilities based on the criteria for SHF. The participatory study was developed and conducted with representatives of the House of Cancer Self-Help and the federal associations of cancer self-help.

RESULTS

According to the SHG leaders, about 80% of their members primarily find their way to an SHG via other patients and only less than 50% more or less frequently via hospitals or rehabilitation clinics. The quality of cooperation with cancer centres, hospitals and rehabilitation clinics, however, is rated as good to very good by more than 70% of the respondents. Nine out of 10 quality criteria for SHF are fully or at least partially implemented, the values vary between 53% and 87%. Overall, 58% of the SHG leaders feel well to be very well integrated into care facilities.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show a positive assessment of the involvement of SHGs in oncological care, but differences between inpatient and outpatient care and low referrals to SHGs are prominent. The concept of SHF is a feasible solution for a systematic and measurable involvement of SHGs.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The perspectives and insight of patient representatives obtained through qualitative interviews were directly incorporated into this study. Representatives of cancer self-help organizations were involved in the development of the questionnaire, reviewed it for content and comprehensibility, and further helped to recruit participants.

Collective efficacy measures for women and girls in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

Background

Prior research has shown collective efficacy to be a key determinant of women’s well-being. However, much of the work around measuring this construct has been done in high-income geographies, with very little representation from low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). To fill this gap, and guide future research in low resource settings, we aim to summarize best evidence measures of collective efficacy for women and girls from LMICs.

Methods

Following PRISMA guidelines, we systematically searched five databases for English language peer-reviewed literature on measures of collective efficacy, published between 1 January 2009 and 25 August 2020. In addition, we sought expert input for relevant papers in this area. Research staff screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles in a double-blind review. Inclusion criteria were: (i) original quantitative analysis, and (ii) sample limited to women/girls only (≥ 100), residing in LMICs.

Results

We identified 786 unique articles, 14 of which met inclusion criteria. Eligible studies captured a diversity of population groups, including pregnant women, recent mothers, adolescent girls, and female sex workers, from across national settings. Two broad constructs of collective efficacy were captured by the measures: (i) group dynamics, and (ii) collective action. All 14 studies included items on group dynamics in their measures, whereas seven studies included items on collective action. Four studies validated new measures of collective efficacy, and seven provided evidence supporting the relationship between collective efficacy and outcomes related to women’s well-being. Overall, measures demonstrated good reliability and validity when tested, and those testing for associations or effects found a positive relationship of collective efficacy with women’s health behaviors.

Conclusion

The past decade has resulted in a number of new collective efficacy measures demonstrating good validity in terms of their associations with key health outcomes among women and girls from across LMIC settings, but there remains no standard measure in the field. Those that exist focus on group dynamics, but less often on collective action. A standard measure of collective efficacy inclusive of group dynamics and collective action can support better understanding of the value of women’s collectives across national settings and populations.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12905-022-01688-z.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Endometriosis. Guideline of the DGGG, SGGG and OEGGG (S2k Level, AWMF Registry Number 015/045, August 2020)

Aims The aim of this official guideline published and coordinated by the German Society of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) in cooperation with the Austrian Society for Gynaecology and Obstetrics (OEGGG) and the Swiss Society for Gynaecology and Obstetrics (SGGG) was to provide consensus-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis based on an evaluation of the relevant literature. Methods This S2k guideline represents the structured consensus of a representative panel of experts with different professional backgrounds commissioned by the Guideline Committee of the DGGG, OEGGG and SGGG. Recommendations Recommendations on the epidemiology, aetiology, classification, symptomatology, diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis are given and special situations are discussed.