[Non-medical aspects in the care for multimorbid patients in general practice. What kind of support and cooperation is desired? Focus groups with general practitioners in Berlin]

[General practices and community care points work hand in hand in the care of multimorbid patients: What are the advantages? - A qualitative study with general practitioners and medical practice assistants]

BACKGROUND

Caring for an increasing number of multimorbid people is a challenge for general practices in Germany. A possible approach to ensure future care could be the cooperation between general practices and community care points, which have so far been a little-known option among general practitioners. The aim of this study was to investigate the benefits or additional burdens that, from the perspective of general practices, a cooperation between general practices and community care points would bring for both the general practitioners themselves and their patients.

METHODS

In the mixed-methods study COMPASS II, general practices were able to refer multimorbid patients with social counselling needs to a community care point. Semi-structured guideline-based telephone interviews were conducted with nine general practitioners and nine medical practice assistants regarding the feasibility of cooperation with the community care points. The interviews were analysed using framework analysis.

RESULTS

In the qualitative interviews, the general practitioners and medical practice assistants reported that the community care points helped them save time by relieving them of social counselling tasks. The interviewees felt relieved by knowing that the community care points expertly take care of their patients' social concerns. From the perspective of the interviewees, multimorbid patients experienced changes in their care through the counselling in community care points, such as adjusting the level of care they require. Social counsellors provided patients and their relatives with an overview of the support options available. The majority of the interviewees did not feel that cooperating with the community care point put an additional burden on their patients or on themselves.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Cooperation between general practices and community care points has the potential to improve care for multimorbid patients and reduce the workload burden on general practices. Community care points are legally anchored counselling services which general practitioners could increasingly involve in the care of patients with multimorbidity.

[Do General Practitioners have Experience with Social Care Points? A Berlin-Wide Survey]

Primary care for multimorbid patients involves social counseling in addition to medical care. Community care points are established institutions for social counseling at district level in Berlin. A Berlin-wide questionnaire survey examined primary care physicians' knowledge of and experience with community care points. 700 questionnaires were analysed exploratively and descriptively. General practitioners were only partially familiar with the services of community care points (60% barely or not at all). 57% of the general practitioners stated that they already had contact with community care points. General practitioners who had not yet had contact with a community care point recommended other advice centers for social (76%) and care-related advice (79%) to their patients. A majority of general practitioners expressed a wish to get more information about community care points.

[Referrals from general practice to community care points. What are the patients' experiences? An interview study]

INTRODUCTION

Primary care for multimorbid patients does not only include medical but also social counseling. In Germany, community care points represent an institutionalised support offer for counseling for social and care-related issues at district level.

METHODS

Within the framework of an intervention study on the cooperation between general practices and community care points in Berlin, 14 telephone interviews were conducted with multimorbid patients with social counseling needs who received advice by a community care point. The aim was to investigate satisfaction with the cooperation process as a whole and with the counseling provided by the community care points. The transcribed interviews were analysed using the framework analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, the patients were satisfied with the counseling they received from the community care points. In many cases, even after counseling, patients were not aware of the range of services offered by the community care points, and there was confusion about community care points and locally known mobile care services. Patients felt that it was particularly important to have a friendly, reliable contact person, to be close to their own place of residence and to have a long-term connection to the service. From the point of view of those affected, the general practitioner remains an important contact person who initiates the counseling, if necessary, and coordinates the interventions to be derived from the counseling result.

DISCUSSION

The confusion about community care points and mobile care services due to a lack of knowledge about the range of services offered by community care points are central topics in the interviews. This could be due to the heterogeneous supply of the community care points as well as the lack of networking with GP practices. A standardisation of the offer and increased information and networking activities of the community care points at district level could contribute to an increased level of awareness and improve transparency of their services.

CONCLUSION

In the long term, cooperation between community care points and general practitioners could help relieve the burden on general practitioners and improve social care for multimorbid patients at district level.

Analysis of the key themes in the healthcare of older people with multimorbidity in Germany: a framework analysis as part of the LoChro trial

OBJECTIVES

Multimorbidity challenges healthcare systems. In Germany, coordination of healthcare for older multimorbid patients remains unstructured.This study aims to identify key themes in the healthcare of these patients and the inter-relationships between them.

DESIGN

Framework analysis of six cases based on 1-year data of primary and secondary care, patient-answered questionnaires and video material.

SETTING

Southern Germany.

PARTICIPANTS

Six multimorbid older patients participating in a randomised controlled trial that compared usual care with a local, collaborative, stepped and personalised care management approach for older people with chronic diseases (LoChro-trial). The LoChro care intervention involved a care manager who assisted participants in self-management. The primary outcome was a composite of functional health and depressive symptoms at 12 and 18 months. The LoChro-intervention had no effect on the primary outcome.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Key themes in the healthcare of older patients with multimorbidity and the inter-relationships between them.

METHODS

One-year data included diagnoses, treatment plans, examinations, assessments and discharge reports. Patient perspectives were assessed using the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care. In three cases, videos of the LoChro intervention showed patients describing their health needs. These data were evaluated by three doctors and public health researchers. Using framework analysis, recurring themes influencing the healthcare situation of multimorbid older patients and their inter-relationships were identified.

RESULTS

Participants had an average age of 77, with 13 diagnoses, taking eight medications regularly. The five key themes describing the healthcare situation of these multimorbid patients were as follows: insufficient coordination, overuse and underuse of medical care, doctor and patient roles. Each theme covered three to four subcategories. The most significant inter-relationships between these themes were a lack of coordination leading to overuse and underuse of medical care. These were characterised by redundant inpatient stays, potential prescribing omissions and missed examinations. Deficiencies in vaccinations and secondary prevention were also demonstrated.

CONCLUSION

Coordination of care for multimorbid older patients in Germany is still deficient. Future healthcare arrangements should be explored with the participation of physicians and patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

LoChro trial: DRKS00013904.

Identifying patients with psychosocial problems in general practice: A scoping review

Objective

We conducted a scoping review with the aim of comprehensively investigating what tools or methods have been examined in general practice research that capture a wide range of psychosocial problems (PSPs) and serve to identify patients and highlight their characteristics.

Methods

We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews and the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer's Manual on scoping reviews. A systematic search was conducted in four electronic databases (Medline [Ovid], Web of Science Core Collection, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library) for quantitative and qualitative studies in English, Spanish, French, and German with no time limit. The protocol was registered with Open Science Framework and published in BMJ Open.

Results

Of the 839 articles identified, 66 met the criteria for study eligibility, from which 61 instruments were identified. The publications were from 18 different countries, with most studies employing an observational design and including mostly adult patients. Among all instruments, 22 were reported as validated, which we present in this paper. Overall, quality criteria were reported differently, with studies generally providing little detail. Most of the instruments were used as paper and pencil questionnaires. We found considerable heterogeneity in the theoretical conceptualisation, definition, and measurement of PSPs, ranging from psychiatric case findings to specific social problems.

Discussion and conclusion

This review presents a number of tools and methods that have been studied and used in general practice research. Adapted and tailored to local circumstances, practice populations, and needs, they could be useful for identifying patients with PSPs in daily GP practice; however, this requires further research. Given the heterogeneity of studies and instruments, future research efforts should include both a more structured evaluation of instruments and the incorporation of consensus methods to move forward from instrument research to actual use in daily practice.

Interprofessional collaboration to support patients with social problems in general practice—a qualitative focus group study

Background

Social problems of patients such as family or work-related conflicts as well as financial difficulties affect the individual health situation and the treatment of diseases in general practice. General practitioners (GPs) would like to have direct access to professionals in social care services. In Germany, there are many different social care facilities for people with a wide range of social problems. As the social and health care systems hardly interact collaborations between social professionals (SPs) and GPs are rare exceptions.

This study explored perspectives of GPs regarding their patients with social problems in combination with the perspectives of SPs. Aim of this study was to explore how a systematic interprofessional collaboration between GPs and SPs could be realised.

Methods

We carried out a participatory sequential qualitative study design consisting of two focus groups with GPs, two with SPs and two mixed-professional focus groups with GPs and SPs. The focus groups were conducted with semi-structured moderating guidelines and analysed with a qualitative content analysis approach using inductive and deductive categories.

Results

GPs view themselves as the first point of contact for their patients' social problems. For persistent social problems, they expressed a desire for support and SPs were willing to provide this. We developed a stepped care implementation model for a systematic cooperation consisting of nine collaboration strategies. These strategies included: index or website of social care services, referrals to the social care system, using flyers and posters of social care services, direct contact/hotline to local social care services, participation in meetings of social care facilities, involving physician assistants, external social care advice service in GP rooms, implementation in education and training and access to volunteers.

Conclusions

Our stepped care implementation model for a systematic cooperation of GPs and SPs could be a feasible need- and resource-oriented approach for the collaborative care of patients with social problems to improve their medical treatment in most western healthcare systems. GPs and SPs are ready to generate the necessary evidence for policy makers in high quality RCTs.

Development of a patient-oriented navigation model for patients with lung cancer and stroke in Germany

Background

The concept of patient navigation was first established in the USA to support vulnerable patient groups in receiving timely and comprehensive access to cancer care. It has recently gained increasing interest in Germany to support patients with chronic diseases in a fragmented healthcare system. The aim of this paper is to present the development of such a model adapted to the German context based on the results of mixed-methods studies investigating the need for and barriers to patient-oriented care.

Methods

In a process adapted from Delphi rounds, we conducted regular structured workshops with investigators of the project to discuss results of their studies and identify content and structure of the model based on the data. Workshop discussions were structured along seven core components of a navigation model including target patient groups, navigator tasks, occupational background and education of navigators, and patient-navigator interaction mode.

Results

Using an approach based on empirical data of current care practices with special focus on patients’ perspectives, we developed a patient-oriented navigation model for patients who have experienced stroke and lung cancer in the German healthcare context. Patients without personal social support were viewed as struggling most with the healthcare system, as well as multimorbid and elderly patients. Navigators should serve as a longer-term contact person with a flexible contact mode and timing based on the individual situation and preferences of patients. Navigator tasks include the provision of administrative and organizational support as well as referral and guidance to available resources and beneficial health programs with special forms of knowledge. Implementation of the navigator should be flexibly located to ensure a reliable outreach to vulnerable patients for first contact in settings like specialized in-patient and out-patient settings, while navigation itself focuses on care coordination in the out-patient setting.

Conclusion

Flexibility of navigator tasks needed to be a core characteristic of a navigation model to be perceived as supportive from patients’ perspectives. In a subsequent feasibility study, an intervention based on the model will be evaluated according to its acceptance, demand, and practicality.

Collaboration between general practitioners and social workers: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Aim of the study is to present an overview of collaboration structures and processes between general practitioners and social workers, the target groups addressed as well the quality of available scientific literature.

DESIGN

A scoping review following the guidelines of the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews).

INCLUDED SOURCES AND ARTICLES

According to a pre-published protocol, three databases (PubMed, Web of Science, DZI SoLit) were searched using the participant-concept-context framework. The searches were performed on 21 January 2021 and on 10 August 2021. Literature written in English and German since the year 2000 was included. Two independent researchers screened all abstracts for collaboration between general practitioners and social workers. Articles selected were analysed regarding structures, processes, outcomes, effectiveness and patient target groups.

RESULTS

A total of 72 articles from 17 countries were identified. Collaborative structures and their routine differ markedly between healthcare systems: 36 publications present collaboration structures and 33 articles allow an insight into the processual routines. For all quantitative studies, a level of evidence was assigned. Various measurements are used to determine the effectiveness of collaborations, for example, hospital admissions and professionals' job satisfaction. Case management as person-centred care for defined patient groups is a central aspect of all identified collaborations between general practitioners and social workers.

CONCLUSION

This scoping review showed evidence for benefits on behalf of patients, professionals and healthcare systems by collaborations between general practitioners and social workers, yet more rigorous research is needed to better understand the impact of these collaborations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

www.osf.io/w673q.

Patient Navigation-Who Needs What? Awareness of Patient Navigators and Ranking of Their Tasks in the General Population in Germany

The aim of the present study was to investigate the awareness of patient navigation (PN) in the general population in Germany and to assess which navigator tasks are considered most important. The analysis drew on a 2019 nationwide telephone survey of 6110 adults. We compared rankings of emotional support, administrative support and information among respondents with and without experience of patient navigation. One-fifth of the sample reported having heard of PNs; 13% of this group already had experience with PN. In both groups, the majority (>47%) considered assistance with applications to be most important. This was particularly the case among younger adults and those with a chronic disease. Within the inexperienced group, higher educated people had higher odds of ranking provision of information as most important for them, whereas women and those without a partner had higher odds of ranking emotional support as the most important task. This study shows that the majority of people predominantly expect PN services to offer administrative support, irrespective of their socioeconomic and health status. Whether these expectations are met by the diverse existing PN programs, which often have a strong focus on other tasks (e.g., increasing health literacy), has yet to be evaluated.