Potentials and current shortcomings in the cooperation between German centers for rare diseases and primary care physicians: results from the project TRANSLATE-NAMSE

Background

The TRANSLATE-NAMSE project with the strengthening of the centers for rare diseases with their affiliation to the European Reference Networks was a major step towards the implementation of the German National Plan of Action for People with Rare Diseases establishing better care structures. As primary care physicians, general practitioners and pediatricians play a central role in the diagnosis of patients with rare disease, as it is usually them referring to specialists and rare disease centers. Therefore, the interface management between primary care physicians and the centers for rare diseases is of particular importance.

Methods

In a mixed-method-approach an anonymous postal survey of 1,500 randomly selected primary care physicians in Germany was conducted with focus on (1) knowledge about a center for rare diseases and how it works, (2) in case of cooperation, satisfaction with the services provided by centers, and (3) expectations and needs they have with regard to the centers. In addition, in-depth telephone interviews were conducted with physicians who had already referred patients to a center.

Results

In total, 248 physicians responded to the survey, and 15 primary care physicians were interviewed. We observed a wide lack of knowledge about the existence of (45.6% confirmed to know at least one center) about how to access rare disease centers (50.4% of those who know a center confirmed knowledge) and what the center specializes in. In case of cooperation the evaluation was mostly positive.

Conclusion

To improve medical care, the interplay between primary care physicians and rare disease centers needs to be strengthened. (1) To improve the communication, the objectives and functioning of the rare disease centers should become more visible. (2) Other projects dealing with the analysis and improvement of interface management between centers and primary care physicians, as described in the National Plan of Action for People with Rare Diseases, need to be implemented immediately. (3) If the project is evaluated positively, the structures of TRANSLATE-NAMSE should be introduced nationwide into the German health care system to ensure comprehensive, quality-assured care for people with rare diseases with special consideration of the key role of primary care physicians—also taking into account the financial expenditures of this new care model.

[Effects of new minimum volume standards in visceral surgery on healthcare in Brandenburg, Germany, from the perspective of healthcare providers]

BACKGROUND

The legally prescribed minimum volume standards for complex esophageal and pancreatic surgery have been increased or will increase in 2023 and 2025, respectively. Hospitals not reaching the minimum volume standards are no longer allowed to perform these surgeries and are not entitled tor reimbursement.

OBJECTIVE

The study aims to explore which effects are expected by healthcare professionals and patient representatives and what possible solutions exist for Brandenburg, a rural federal state in northeast Germany.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this study 19 expert interviews were conducted with hospital employees (head/senior physicians, nursing director), resident physicians and patient representatives between July 2022 and January 2023. The data analysis was based on content analysis.

RESULTS

Healthcare professionals and patient representatives expect a redistribution into a few clinics for surgical care (specialized centres); conversely more clinics that do not (no longer) perform the defined surgeries but could function as gatekeeping hospitals for basic care, diagnostics and follow-up (regional centres). The redistribution could also impact forms of treatment that are not directly defined within the regulation for minimum volume standards. The increased thresholds could also affect medical training and staff recruitment. A solution could be collaborations between different hospitals, which would have to be structurally promoted.

CONCLUSION

The study showed that minimum volume standards not only influence the quality of outcomes and accessibility but also have a multitude of other effects. Particularly for rural regions, minimum volume standards are challenging for access to esophageal and pancreatic surgery as well as for communication between specialized and regional centres or resident providers.