Epidemiology of depression and distress in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and validation of an indicator scale of perceived stress for psychosocial impairments

Background

Previous studies showed associations of stress and episodes of active disease [1,2]. We reported survey data on psychosocial problems of IBD patients [3]. This study investigates associations of stress with health impairments and analyses a scale of perceived stress as an indicator for psychosocial impairments (construct/criterion validity) [4].

Methods

In a multiregional German survey in 2005, 1083 patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis were recruited (gastroenterological practices, university outpatient clinics, patient organization). The questionnaire incorporated WHO's ICF [5] and established items and scales (i.a. HADS [6]). Scale construction followed item response theory analysing psychometric properties.

Results

Of the survey responders (58% CD, 65% female, mean age 42yrs), ⅓ reported severe fatigue. Clinically relevant anxiety was observed in 24%, depression in 29% of men and 21% of women. With three items we constructed a scale with good psychometric properties. Three groups (low, moderate, high perceived stress) were identified, differing substantially in reported anxiety/depression and the GIBDI disease activity score.

Conclusions

IBD patients report multiple psychosocial impairments. The scale of perceived stress may identify IBD patients with high demand for psychosocial attendance, if confirmed in independent samples. For enhanced secondary prevention [7] we propose integration of this psychosocial indicator into the diagnostic process.

Feasibility and long-term efficacy of a proactive health program in the treatment of chronic back pain: a randomized controlled trial

Background

To facilitate access to evidence-based care for back pain, a German private medical insurance offered a health program proactively to their members. Feasibility and long-term efficacy of this approach were evaluated.

Methods

Using Zelen’s design, adult members of the health insurance with chronic back pain according to billing data were randomized to the intervention (IG) or the control group (CG). Participants allocated to the IG were invited to participate in the comprehensive health program comprising medical exercise therapy and life style coaching, and those allocated to the CG to a longitudinal back pain survey. Primary outcomes were back pain severity (Korff’s Chronic Pain Grade Questionnaire) as well as health-related quality of life (SF-12) assessed by identical online questionnaires at baseline and 2-year follow-up in both study arms. In addition to analyses of covariance, a subgroup analysis explored the heterogeneity of treatment effects among different risks of back pain chronification (STarT Back Tool).

Results

Out of 3462 persons selected, randomized and thereafter contacted, 552 agreed to participate. At the 24-month follow-up, data on 189 of 258 (73.3%) of the IG were available, in the CG on 255 of 294 (86.7%). Significant, small beneficial effects were seen in primary outcomes: Compared to the CG, the IG reported less disability (1.6 vs 2.0; p = 0.025; d = 0.24) and scored better at the SF-12 physical health scale (43.3 vs 41.0; p < 0.007; d = 0.26). No effect was seen in back pain intensity and in the SF-12 mental health scale. Persons with medium or high risk of back pain chronification at baseline responded better to the health program in all primary outcomes than the subgroup with low risk at baseline.

Conclusions

After 2 years, the proactive health program resulted in small positive long-term improvements. Using risk screening prior to inclusion in the health program might increase the percentage of participants deriving benefits from it.

Trial registration

The trial was registered at the German Clinical Trials Register under DRKS00015463 retrospectively (dated 4 Sept 2018).

[Put to Test: Medical Inpatient Rehabilitation of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases]

BACKGROUND

Many CED-patients struggle with complex problem profiles and may be offered and profit from multidisciplinary multimodal rehabilitation. It is still unclear by whom and with what effects this option is used.

METHODS

We compared the results of an observational cohort study of 199 CED-inpatients of a single rehab clinic with those of 310 gastroenterological outpatients using propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Rehabilitands show more complex problem profiles than CED-outpatients. After 6 months of follow up direct and indirect change measures show generally small positive changes - however comparable in quality and size with that of matched outpatients.

CONCLUSION

Complex rehab is mainly used by CED-patients with several bio-psycho-social problems. Our preliminary data do not suggest a marked additional benefit of inpatient rehab compared to specialised outpatient care. Stricter controlled trials are urgently needed.

[Employees with chronic diseases - additional results of randomized controlled trial among adult members of a German statutory health insurance with inflammatory bowel diseases]

BACKGROUND

Chronic and prognostically doubtful diseases like inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) often lead to reduced work ability. Whether self-management-interventions have positive effects on work related outcomes is so far unclear.

METHODS

Data from a randomized controlled trial of adult members of a German statutory health insurance with medically confirmed IBD were reanalyzed. We focused on 337 gainfully employed study participants. They completed a screening questionnaire enquiring about 22 disease-related bio-psycho-social problems. The intervention group (IG) received individualized (problem-adapted) written recommendations; the control group remained under usual care. 12 months later a follow-up questionnaire was employed, data on sick leave were made available by the health insurance.

RESULTS

The IG showed beneficial effects in all primary outcomes (EuroQol visual analog scale score, index for measuring participation restriction and number of self-reported disability days). At baseline one in four of the employed participants reported a negative subjective prognosis of their work capacity (assessed by means of a 3-item Likert scale, SPE scale). No positive intervention effects on work-related outcomes (subjective prognosis of gainful employment, episodes and days of sick leave) could be detected.

CONCLUSIONS

In IBD patients work and earning capacity is often at risk and should be regularly assessed. Effective interventions to protect or restore gainful employment are needed. Medical-vocational rehabilitation could be a treatment option; its efficacy and benefit (in IBD) are still to be demonstrated.

[The Danish Debate on Priority Setting in Medicine--An Update]

In the last years, the Danish debate about priority setting in medicine has gained new strength. This paper shows the main focuses of the current discussion based on a research of Danish primary literature. For the first time since the 1990s the Danish Council of Ethics has been involved with priority setting in medicine in a project running from 2011 to 2013. The Council emphasises the importance of legitimate processes and calls for visible values and criteria. A focus of the debate is how to deal with new expensive drugs. Politicians, physicians, health economists and the Council of Ethics have called for a national institution for priority setting in medicine. They have mainly looked to the Norwegian National Council for Priority Setting in Health Care and the British National Institute for Health and Care Excellence for inspiration. The Danish Government considered establishing a national institute for priority setting, but the plans were not put into practice. In the year 2012 a new national project was launched to create clinical guidelines. Danish doctors welcome the guidelines as a good basis for priority setting. Just like in earlier Danish priority setting debates, a coordinating institution is lacking to bundle the discussion and keep it going. The debate seems to have come to an end once again. The fact that it was seriously considered to establish an institute for priority setting is a new development. It can be expected that the discussion will be resumed in the near future, possibly the idea of an institute for priority setting will be readopted. The general conditions for priority setting in health care have improved.

[Feasibility and benefit of an active screening for rehab need and subsequent written advice to file an application for rehab treatment in AOK-insurants enrolled in the disease management program diabetes type 2 (PARTID-trial)]

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Type 2 diabetes (DM II) is the world's most widespread metabolic disease. Numerous investigations have demonstrated that intensive, multimodal interventions can reduce the occurrence of DM-associated comobidities and mortality. Medical rehabilitation could offer such an alternative, albeit one with an obvious time limit. There is currently no active program in Germany designed to screen for pa-tients' need for rehab. Here, we investigated -whether screening for rehab need in DMII pa-tients accompanied by written advice to file an application for rehab treatment would generate a relevant number of rehab measures, whether -inpatient rehab results in improved mid-term prognoses, and which patients demonstrate a particular benefit from such a program.

METHODS

We screened 5 500 employed individuals aged 18-54 years for their need for rehab via an extensive questionnaire based on the "Lübeck Algorithm". The patients were registered in the DMP (disease management program) Diabetes mellitus Type 2 in the AOK Rheinland/-Hamburg health insurance division, and payed into DRV (German statutory pension insurance -scheme) Rheinland retirement insurance. Pa-tients needing rehab who presented no exclusion criteria (i. e., for a rehab intervention far from their place of residence) were randomized to a control or intervention group at a ratio of 3:1. Patients in the intervention group received a letter from the AOK advising them to fill out an application for rehab. A very short, simple application form was included in the mailing. 12 months after randomization we conducted a query to determine the effects of rehab. Our primary endpoint was a cardiovascular risk score specifically devised for diabetics. Multi-level models were applied to measure changes in cardiovascular risk.

RESULTS

850 patients (rate of return=16%) returned completed screening forms to us. After having excluded those with faulty diagnoses and/or those who had refused to participate, 829 patients remained. 94% of them presented a need for rehab according to specific criteria (39% with a simple and 55% with complex problem profiles). 266 patients stated in the questionnaire that a rehab program was impossible for them for personal reasons. Of those patients who remained, we randomized 299 to the intervention cohort and 102 to the control group. Almost 70% of the intervention group completed an application for rehab, and our follow-up revealed that most of them participated in a rehab intervention. Return rate after one year was 82%. Analysis on the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle revealed no significant effect on cardiovascular risk (p=0.68); however, per-protocol analysis demonstrated a significant effect in the intervention cohort (p=0.025). Males, and patients with an uncomplicated problem profile profited from the intervention.

DISCUSSION

We discovered that a proactive procedure leads to the identification of a highly relevant group of insured individuals, and that it is suited to generating a large number of medically -justified rehab applications. ITT analysis on the effi-cacy of inpatient rehabilitation for type 2 diabetes mellitus in terms of the cardiovascular 5-year risk, however, failed to display a significant statistical effect in this study population (insurees of generally lower socioeconomic status having no intention to apply for rehab treatment). Rehab treatment for type 2 diabetes does not seem to be universally effective. This of course does not apply to rehab in general, as patients usually participate in rehab of their own volition. More research is needed on this issue.

[Proactive screening for rehabilitation need in type 2 diabetics from an AOK Disease Management Programe: which patients will be identified?]

BACKGROUND

Medical rehabilitation seems suitable for implementing multimodal interventions for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Rehabilitation in Germany on principle requires that insurees file an application. Proactive screening for rehabilitation need has only been explored in pilot projects so far. It seems a promising attempt to assess rehab need by questionnaire especially in patients with type 2 diabetes. We do not know though how patients who have been screened positive for rehab need differ from other patients with type 2 diabetes as to their health and risk profiles. This could provide an indication of the validity of the proactive approach.

METHODS

Members of an Allgemeine Ortskrankenkasse (AOK) Disease Management Program (DMP) for type 2 diabetes were screened for rehab need by questionnaire. 13 diabetes-specific problem areas were assessed. Problems were assigned to 10 specific treatments (problem-treatment-pairs). Rehab need was presumed if patients needed 3 or more treatments. Patients were then compared to regular rehab patients as well as patients with type 2 diabetes from primary care medical offices.

RESULTS

From 5500 DMP-patients 829 returned the questionnaire (return rate: 15.5%). From these 94% met the criteria for rehab need; of these 55% needed 6 or more treatments (complex problems). Patients who screened positive for rehab suffered from more health problems and had worse risk profiles as compared to patients from medical offices, and disease burden was comparable or worse as compared to regular rehab patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This indicates that proactive screening for rehab need in patients with type 2 diabetes leads to reasonable (valid) results. The very low return rate suggests that the sample may be considerably biased, though. Possibly, mainly patients with greater impairment to health responded to the screening.

[Criteria for medical prioritisation: results from a regional survey and methodological reflections]

AIMS

In Germany, in contrast to many foreign countries, scientists and medical professionals have been discussing prioritisation in medicine almost without consulting German citizens. We address the question of what questionnaire surveys can contribute to the understanding of citizens' attitudes towards prioritisation - with a focus on some difficulties and challenges of the method.

METHOD

We conducted a postal survey with a random sample of 3 000 residents of the City of Lübeck (age ≥18). Respondents were asked to appraise different substantial and procedural criteria for prioritisation in medicine. In addition to descriptive statistical analyses, logistical regression models were performed to identify potential explanatory variables for the appraisal of prioritisation criteria.

RESULTS

The response rate was 45.6% (N=1 363). Some prioritisation criteria are accepted by the majority: severity of disease, effectiveness of an intervention and a firm evidence base. Other criteria were appraised controversially: personal life-style, responsibility for family members and general prioritisation of children. A patient's responsibility in society and age as well as an intervention's cost-benefit ratio were generally rejected. The results of logistic regression analyses showed some significant but minor effects of demographic and health-related variables. The citizens in our study want decision-making procedures in health care to be transparent and equally applied to all patients. According to the survey respondents decisions about the catalogue of services of Germany's statutory health insurance should mainly be made by doctors. The statutory health insurance as well as patients and scientists also should take part in the decision-making procedure.

DISCUSSION

Comparing our results to those of a national interview survey reveals some relevant differences: The respondents' assessment of some substantial criteria seems to vary according to the contextualisation and wording of the items. We found less difference - but still some inconsistent results - in the participants' appraisal of potential decision-makers in health care. To our surprise, the logistic regression models including standard demographic and health-related variables account for only a small proportion of the variance of all dependent variables.

CONCLUSION

Our discussion emphasises some difficulties and challenges of questionnaire surveys on prioritisation criteria - reflecting on the state of the German debate on prioritisation. There has been hardly any public discussion on this issue prior to our survey in autumn 2009. It is thus unlikely that people have been able to state well-informed preferences. Instead they seem to have followed some kind of "social reflexes" depending on the context and wording of each item. Subsequent studies on preferences and priorities should (i) more closely assess the understanding of each item in advance and (ii) adapt the aims of their study and its methodology to the actual stage of the public discourse on the topic in question.

[Liveonline aftercare in patients with abdominal obesity in cardio-diabetological rehabilitation: findings of a randomized controlled study]

Obese patients were coached after inpatient medical rehabilitation with a 6 units comprehensive multimodal Liveonline aftercare program. In the randomized controlled study design, significant improvements in all outcome criteria were found both in treatment and control group. The improvements in the treatment group, however, were only partially superior to the control group, especially in the area of food habits. A statistically significant superiority of the treatment group concerning the primary targets waist circumference and body mass index could not be determined. The Liveonline aftercare was evaluated positively by the participants. Future research is discussed.

Clinical status, psychosocial impairments, medical treatment and health care costs for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in Germany: an online IBD registry

BACKGROUND

The aim of this cross-sectional study was to establish an online inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) registry for a first picture of the situation of IBD outpatients' treatment in Germany.

METHODS

Between March 2006 and July 2007 IBD outpatients from 24 gastroenterological specialist practices and two hospitals in Germany were enrolled in an Internet-based registry to evaluate the outpatients' clinical status, psychological impairments, provided health care, as well as medical treatment and medication costs.

RESULTS

1032 IBD patients (ulcerative colitis/UC: 519; Crohn's disease/CD: 511; indeterminate colitis: 2) were enrolled in the study (age: 43 ± 14 years/M ± SD). Disease duration of all patients averaged 10 ± 8.5 years. In 519 UC-patients (49% male; 33% pancolitis), 66% were in remission as were 55% of CD patients (37 % male; 41 % active smokers). Associated with higher rates of disease activity (CDAI ≥ 150; CAI>4) were corticosteroids (CD, UC), topical medication (UC), relevant reported depressive symptoms (15%; 6-31%) and impairments in sexuality (21%; 9-42%). Relevant medication groups prescribed were oral aminosalicylates (UC: 70%; CD: 47%); immunosuppressive therapy - mostly azathioprine/6 MP (CD: 47%; UC: 26%), and Infliximab (CD: 8%; UC: 3%). Strongly associated with their clinical disease activity in UC as well as CD patients, 15% (6-31%) reported relevant depressive symptoms and 21% (9-42%) relevant impairments in sexuality.

CONCLUSIONS

The registry constitutes a large complemental database for the patient population in Germany. About one third of the IBD patients were not in clinical remission (CDAI ≥150/CAI >4) (CD: 45%; UC: 27%), although high rates of immunosuppressive drugs (CD: 47%; UC 26%) were administered. This study shows a large burden of active disease associated with an unexpectedly high (co)morbidity and high psychosocial impairments, indicating a reduced health state in IBD patients.

[Assessing complex health problems of patients with IBD--first step to patient activation]

BACKGROUND

Health care for inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), to be comprehensive, takes a broad range of patients' somatic and psychosocial problems into account. Patients should be actively involved in health-care planning and organisation.

METHODS

431 adult patients with Crohn's disease (50 %) or ulcerative colitis participated in a postal questionnaire survey; 6 months apart it twice assessed the patients' individual problem profiles. The results of the assessment were back-reported to each patient combined with targeted (though standardised) recommendations for future care. This publication is the first of a series. It presents the basic study design, describes the prevalence of 16 psychosocial problem domains and analyses their association with socio-demographic and disease variables.

RESULTS

Participants had a mean age of 46 years; 61 % were female; 57 % in remission (GIBDI ≤ 3). The most prevalent problems reported addressed sexual impairments (27 %), high stress (26 %) and depression (21 %). 27 % of the respondents did not report any psychosocial problem. One in five (21 %) described highly complex problem profiles (≥ 5 "active" problems) combined with a mean of 28 disability days within the past 3 months. Complex psychosocial profiles were associated with active disease, Crohn's disease and low educational level.

CONCLUSIONS

IBD patients show a highly variable spectrum of psychosocial problems. Their number is closely associated with disease activity and a social status variable (school education). The gradient could complicate efforts to increase patient participation in care and to enhance self-management.

[The "Wunsch- und Wahlrecht" from §9 SGB IX in case of the application for the medical rehabilitation: findings of a regional survey among insurees of a federal pension fund and a compulsory health insurance fund]

OBJECTIVES

The Social Code Book Nine (SGB IX), which was implemented in 2001, contains the "Wunsch- und Wahlrecht" for medical rehabilitation services in para. 9. This describes a right to participate and choose in the process of rehabilitation. The aim of the study was to collect representative data about the implementation of the para. 9 SGB IX during application for medical rehabilitation services from the applicants' point of view.

METHODS

A total of 2 000 applicants for rehabilitation services (all somatic and psychosomatic indications) of a federal pension fund and a compulsory health insurance fund were invited to take part in a postal survey about the "Wunsch- und Wahlrecht".

RESULTS

The response rate was 66%. Most respondents reported that their application for rehabilitation services was approved immediately. People who supported respondents during application and gave information about the "Wunsch- und Wahlrecht" differed according to the kind of rehabilitation services the respondent applied for. Half of the respondents reported to have known about their "Wunsch- und Wahlrecht". The percentage was considerably higher for patients applying for post-hospital rehabilitation. Approximately 2/3 of the respondents had wishes concerning the choice of rehabilitation clinic. Half of those respondents reported their wishes to the insurer. Most wishes concerned the choice of a specific clinic, a place/region or the clinic's distance from the applicant's home. Wishes reported to the insurer were often considered (89%). Most important selection criteria for rehabilitation clinics were aspects of accommodation, clinic facilities and location, followed by aspects of treatment and the respectful treatment of rehabilitation patients. Concerning the mode of information about rehabilitation clinics, applicants preferred brochures (vs. internet), comparative and impartial information about the clinic and subjective accounts of individual rehabilitation patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is an evaluation of how the "Wunsch- und Wahlrecht" has been translated to reality of rehabilitation services provided by a federal pension fund and a compulsory health insurance fund. The findings show that many respondents know about their "Wunsch- und Wahlrecht" and make use of it to a certain degree. At the moment wishes still relate mainly to the place or region of rehabilitation. This shows the necessity of informing applicants about their "Wunsch- und Wahlrecht" on a regular basis. At the same time they must be enlightened about potentially important criteria for choosing a rehabilitation clinic.

[Use of trajectories for measuring change in medical rehabilitation: a contribution toward comparison of different methods of outcome measurement]

OBJECTIVE

The question of which methods should be used to assess the effects of medical rehabilitation has a long and controversial history. With regard to this background the project "Outcome measurement in medical rehabilitation" aimed at developing a better understanding of the process of change and its assessment. We also looked into possible causes for discrepancies between the results of direct and indirect measures of change. Aims of our study were: (1) to picture trajectories of change in a simple and descriptive way, (2) to compare the resulting solutions, (3) to highlight relations with direct measurement of change and/or global estimation of effects, (4) to compare the predictive value of different measurements of change.

METHODS

We used available data from rehabilitation research which covered direct and indirect measurement of change as well as global measurement of effects and which therefore enabled us to compare different methods of outcome measurements. The well documented record includes data from n=466 patients with chronic back pain. Different trajectories (3 and 5 groups) were defined using their pre/post data.

RESULTS

Depending on limits chosen for positive or negative courses and chosen outcome 20% to almost 40% of the patients showed improvements over the follow-up period. About the same percentages changed for the worse. However, two-thirds of the patients improved at least in one outcome. Compared with those, who did not experience improvements in any outcome, this group indicated better global rehabilitation effects. The different types of trajectories (3 and 5 groups) substantially contribute to the explained variance of catamnestic status at 12 months beyond other predictors as well as beyond initial status. The same applies to the prediction of disability days.

CONCLUSION

The description of trajectories of change yields useful results. In contrast to complex statistical methods we were able to identify groups of patients that can easily be described.

[How should German statutory health insurance-accredited physicians handle non-covered individual health services? Deficits and recommendations from patients' point of view]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

German statutory health insurance-registered physicians increasingly offer individual health services (IHS). Within a mixed methods study, focus groups were conducted to describe deficits and recommendations from patients' point of view about how physicians should handle IHS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seven semi-structured focus groups (alltogether 50 participants) were conducted, stratified for region, gender and school education and homogenised for age and health status. The discussions were recorded, transcribed and content-analysed (thematic coding).

RESULTS

Across all focus groups patients wished in-depth advise, neutral information, transparent dissociation of IHS from services of statutory health insurances (SHI), appropriate time for consideration and information, consultations for a second opinion and transparent billing of all medical services. There was no consensus about who should initiate IHS and who should develop and disseminate information on IHS. Members of SHI wish for information on SHI services and transparent information developed by neutral parties.

DISCUSSION

The handling of IHS needs to be regulated urgently. Based on the integration of quantitative and qualitative data we infer patient-centred conclusions and recommendations for SHI-accredited physicians.

[Preference of patients with inflammatory bowel disease regarding information and shared decision-making: results from a cross-sectional survey in Germany]

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based and consented pathways for patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD, Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis) call for tailored education programmes to foster shared decision-making and patient self-management. Their preferences should be taken into account.

METHODS

In 2005 a cross-sectional postal questionnaire survey was conducted in different regions of Germany. Adult patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) or Crohn's disease (CD) were recruited from specialised gastroenterological practices, university outpatient clinics and the member registry of the relevant patient organisation DCCV. They returned a questionnaire including (inter)nationally established scales (e. g., HADS) as well as questions on their information needs, preferred information sources and their role in decision-making.

RESULTS

Data of 1056 responders could be analysed (65 % female; CD: 58 %; DCCV member: 71 %). The mean age of the patients was 42 (SD 12,8) years. Almost all patients wanted more information on "treatment alternatives" (83 %), "causes of disease" (80 %) and "what can I (still) do by myself" (79 %). 27 % of the patients asked for more information on 15 or more of overall 19 topics. The high information need was significantly associated with HADS potential depressive disorder (score > 8) and HADS probable anxiety disorder (score > 10). Most IBD patients (70 %) obviously regard their physicians as the most desirable source of information, 67 % prefer an active involvement in clinical decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

The data demonstrate high information needs of IBD patients and may serve in the planning of future educational programmes.

[Relevance of the "Wunsch- und Wahlrecht" of § 9 social code book 9 in medical rehabilitation from the patients' perspective]

OBJECTIVES

Everyone applying for medical rehabilitation (and other benefits to support participation) has a "Wunsch- und Wahlrecht" (meaning the right to individual wishes and choice relative to assessments, services and institutions as well as to the various benefits) according to § 9 of Book 9 of the German Social Code (SGB 9) concerning every aspect of the implementation of these services. This study was aimed at exploring the wishes of rehabilitants, their attitudes towards and experiences with the various aspects of the "Wunsch- und Wahlrecht" as well as their criteria in choosing a rehabilitation centre.

METHODS

A total of 10 open guided focus groups were conducted with 71 male and female participants from 5 different indications and aged between 26 and 80 years. Transcripts were analyzed by means of a summary content analysis.

RESULTS

Persons applying for medical rehabilitation benefits did not as a rule get information about their "Wunsch- und Wahlrecht" during the application process. Applying for post-hospital rehabilitation often meant to be faced with an only allegedly existing choice ("pseudo Wunsch- und Wahlrecht"). The participants objected only rarely to this missing share in decision-making. Most of them did not care about their rights to choose a rehab centre if only the application for rehabilitation was allowed. Various arguments were brought forward against the "Wunsch- und Wahlrecht", especially insufficient information about and time for enforcement and implementation of the "Wunsch- und Wahlrecht". Despite an explicit stipulation in § 9 SGB 9, notices of approval rarely stated reasons for ignoring the wishes expressed by the applicants. Many participants had reflected only little about choosing a specific rehab centre when applying for rehabilitation. Accordingly, most of the participants had difficulties to mention possible selection criteria.

DISCUSSION

On the whole, applicants have Only little knowledge about the "Wunsch- und Wahlrecht". This complicates its implementation considerably. The preconditions for making informed and valid choices between different clinics are not given under these circumstances. Most interviewees do not attach much value to the "Wunsch- und Wahlrecht".

CONCLUSIONS

From a social law perspective, it should be demanded that rehab applicants have to get better information about their "Wunsch- und Wahlrecht" and that they must be empowered to decide on their choice based on objective and valid information. The active role in the rehabilitation process that should generally be demanded from rehabilitants, should also be encouraged and fostered in choosing a rehabilitation centre.

[The Danish debate on priority setting in medicine - characteristics and results]

Priority setting in medicine helps to achieve a fair and transparent distribution of health-care resources. The German discussion about priority setting is still in its infancy and may benefit from other countries' experiences. This paper aims to analyse the Danish priority setting debate in order to stimulate the German discussion. The methods used are a literature analysis and a document analysis as well as expert interviews. The Danish debate about priority setting in medicine began in the 1970s, when a government committee was constituted to evaluate health-care priorities at the national level. In the 1980s a broader debate arose in politics, ethics, medicine and health economy. The discussions reached a climax in the 1990s, when many local activities - always involving the public - were initiated. Some Danish counties tried to implement priority setting in the daily routine of health care. The Council of Ethics was a major player in the debate of the 1990s and published a detailed statement on priority setting in 1996. With the new century the debate about priority setting seemed to have come to an end, but in 2006 the Technology Council and the Danish Regions resumed the discussion. In 2009 the Medical Association called for a broad debate in order to achieve equity among all patients. The long lasting Danish debate on priority setting has entailed only very little practical consequences on health care. The main problems seem to have been the missing effort to bundle the various local initiatives on a national level and the lack of powerful players to put results of the discussion into practice. Nevertheless, today the attitude towards priority setting is predominantly positive and even politicians talk freely about it.

[Priorization in healthcare. An important duty, an unnecessary luxury, or playing with fire? A sociomedical point of view]

While setting priorities in healthcare has been discussed internationally for about 25 years, attempts to even start a discussion in Germany have failed for more than a decade. On the contrary, the topic was and still is actively suppressed. In this respect, one helpful mechanism is to deliberately or carelessly confuse prioritization with rationing, a German taboo-word. The national healthcare debate again and again neglects the question on what to spend Germany's still very considerable resources. This helps our health politicians to continue to live the postulate that everybody should have immediate, unrestricted access to all medically indicated healthcare. Attempts to distinguish between priority setting and rationing as two entirely distinct programs based on prioritization models from Sweden, England, and Oregon/USA are presented. While discussing possible objects, levels, criteria, ethics, and normative implications of priority setting in healthcare, recent recommendations of a permanent vaccination committee (STIKO) are used as an example.

Development and evaluation of an implementation strategy for the German guideline on community-acquired pneumonia

BACKGROUND

Data of the German Competence Network for Community-Acquired Pneumonia showed a gap between the recommendations of the national guideline for management of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and the routine care. We developed and evaluated an implementation strategy to improve the quality of care of patients with CAP.

METHOD

A prospective, randomised, controlled trail was conducted within CAPNETZ. In four local clinical centres (LCC), the guideline was implemented by different strategies. The other four LCC served as control group. Indicators for guideline adherence comprised initial site of treatment, initial antibiotic treatment and duration of antibiotic treatment. As patient-related factors, we assessed the effect of guideline implementation on 30-day mortality and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Active guideline implementation yielded an increased proportion of guideline adherence to the length of antibiotic treatment in outpatients (+9.2%), the recommended antibiotic treatment (+5.6%) and duration of antibiotic treatment in inpatients (+5.0%) compared with baseline. In contrast, the proportion of patients in the control group, treated according to the guideline, decreased in the same period by 7.9%, 2.9% and 4.7%, respectively. None of these results was statistically significant. Decrease of CAP-related mortality was higher in the intervention group compared with the control group (2.9% vs 0.5%, ns).

CONCLUSION

This study showed improvements in the process of care after implementation of a guideline for treating CAP. Further strategies, such as quality improvement cycles and medical practice audits, may enhance this effect.

[How can priorities be set in medical services? A Swedish model]

In health care there is a growing gap between what can be accomplished and financed. Priority setting in medicine helps to counteract the challenges of quality improvement, rationalisation, and - as the case may be - rationing adequately. This paper aims to describe a model on priority setting of medical interventions that has been worked out along with the development of health-care guidelines in Sweden. The methods used are a literature analysis and a document analysis as well as expert interviews. The model of vertical priority setting is based on the three priority setting criteria: human dignity, need and solidarity, and cost-efficiency that have been set down by a parliamentary commission from 1992-1995. Objects of priority setting are condition-treatment pairs. Of central importance are the severity of the condition and the benefit of the treatment as an expression of treatment need, as well as cost-efficiency. The model is characterised by a pronounced orientation towards scientific evidence. The priority ratings from 1-10 do not follow a standardised algorithm but can be understood as a comprehensive appraisal. The discussion focuses on the importance of the integration of the medical profession into the development of vertical priority setting guidelines.

[Colon cancer risk in persons at familial or hereditary risk aged < 55 years]

BACKGROUND

The question whether persons at familial or hereditary risk differ in terms of absolute, relative, or cumulative risk for colorectal cancer or not is of importance for the estimation of the potential of early detection of colorectal cancer in persons with familial or hereditary risks.

METHODS

Based on the results of a systematic literature search on absolute, relative, and cumulative risks of familial and hereditary disposition for colorectal cancer as well as actual German tumour incidence data, projections were conducted.

RESULTS

The absolute risk for colorectal cancer in familial risk persons identified by means of a questionnaire is increased by a factor of 2 - 4 depending on the age at questioning, the age of the family member at cancer diagnosis and number of family members with colorectal cancer. Their absolute colorectal cancer risk equals that of persons without this risk who are 10 to 15 years older. Persons with hereditary risk show an increase in risk by a factor of 8 - 80.

CONCLUSION

Persons aged 40 to 45 years with a familial risk constellation show a risk for colorectal cancer that equals the risk of 55- to 59-year-old persons from the general population. Therefore, the legal right for screening colonoscopy should be extended to the persons at risk aged 40 to 45 years. Persons suspected for hereditary risk should have a genetic counselling and, in case of germ mutation, a colonoscopic surveillance according to the actual guidelines.