[Medical care in GP practices during the Covid-19 pandemic: A questionnaire-based survey among general practitioners and medical practice assistants asking for their opinion about changes, needs and burdens]

[Changes in the provision and utilization of health care in German primary care practices during the COVID-19 pandemic - A survey of patients in three federal states]

INTRODUCTION

During the COVID-19 pandemic general practitioners (GP) practice teams were temporally confronted with major challenges which were accompanied by changes in practice organization and service provision. So far, little has been known about the views of patients who visited the GP practice for other than COVID-related reasons with regard to provision and use of GP services, the adjustments in the practice and the work of the practice team members.

METHODS

The patient survey is a sub-study of the mixed-methods study VeCo-Praxis (GP healthcare for patients not suffering from COVID during the Corona pandemic) of the research practice network RESPoNsE (Research Practice Network East), which was conducted in the federal states of Berlin, Brandenburg and Thuringia. The questionnaire-based survey was carried out among patients who visited their GP practice in November 2022. The topics covered in the survey were developed by two focus groups consisting of 13 members of the RESPoNsE patient advisory board. The questionnaire was developed and piloted in a participatory approach with the RESPoNsE Patient Advisory Board. The results were analyzed descriptively using SPSS and discussed with the advisory board.

RESULTS

1,405 questionnaires from 37 practices were analyzed. 97% of respondents felt that the treatment they received at their GP practice during the COVID-19 pandemic was good. For the vast majority, appointments and acute consultations, prescriptions, laboratory tests, discussions of diagnostic results, routine follow-up check-ups and health checks were available to a sufficient extent. From the patients' perspective, the practices have successfully adapted to the challenges caused by COVID-19. Overall, the patients' trust in and their appreciation of the work of the practice staff have increased since the pandemic. Patients stated that GP practices should continue hygiene procedures, such as wearing a mask or keeping physical distance, in the future.

DISCUSSION

Despite multiple reports of a significant decline in both provision and utilization of standard care in GP practices during the pandemic, our survey showed that the majority of patients felt that they received adequate GP care and were highly satisfied. The results should be interpreted against the background of possible selection bias.

CONCLUSION

In this survey, GP patients were predominantly appreciative of GP care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The patients' assessment of the provision and use of GP services during the pandemic complements the corresponding perspective of GPs and medical practice assistants.

[General practitioners' perspectives on the perceived effectiveness of the disease management programs for type 2 diabetes and coronary heart disease: Results of a focus group study]

BACKGROUND

The majority of patients in disease management programs (DMPs) for type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and coronary heart disease (CHD) in Germany are enrolled by their general practitioner (GP). The aim of this study was, in the context of upcoming DMP expansions, to elicit GPs' current experiences and opinions regarding the perceived effectiveness and acceptance of the DMPs T2DM and CHD, as well as to determine beneficial and hindering aspects of the implementation of these programs from a GP's perspective.

METHODS

In August and September 2020, 20 GPs of teaching practices of the University Hospital Cologne with experiences in DMPs were interviewed in semi-structured focus group discussions. Their expectations, attitudes and opinions regarding the DMPs T2DM and CHD were evaluated and analyzed according to the content-structuring qualitative content analysis by Kuckartz.

RESULTS

The DMP T2DM was rated as generally positive by the respondents due to the structured treatment including regular foot and eye examinations, close patient contacts and perceptions of improved health outcomes. The DMP CHD was rated more negatively by the respondents because of a high and partly unnecessary documentation workload and limited therapeutic freedom, leading to a perceived ineffectiveness for patients' health outcomes. Thus, there was a discrepancy in the perceived effectiveness of the examined DMPs, causing a lower acceptance of the DMP CHD. Therefore, some of the respondents tended to enroll fewer patients into the DMP CHD or to drop out of the DMP CHD.

DISCUSSION

In order to increase the acceptance and sustainability of DMPs some elements of the DMP CHD as well as the remuneration and the documentation need to be reconsidered. Additionally, future studies on the acceptance of DMPs should differentiate between different DMPs in order to generate valid results.

"We literally worked in parking lots, cars, garages, and separately set up party tents": qualitative study on the experiences of GPs in the frame of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Austria

BACKGROUND

Primary care is internationally recognised as one of the cornerstones of health care. During the COVID-19 pandemic, primary care physicians were assigned a variety of tasks and thus made a significant contribution to a country's pandemic response. They were expected to perform a variety of tasks, such as diagnosing and treating people with COVID-19, maintaining health care for all other patients, as well as several public health tasks, such as diagnostic testing and vaccination, protecting patients and staff from infection, and serving as community trusted persons. In Austria, there are no structured levels of care, no definition of the role of the general practitioner during a pandemic is given, and no specific support structures are present. The aim of this study was to assess the views and experiences of primary care physicians regarding supportive and hindering factors for pandemic preparedness in Austria.

METHODS

Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. A total of 30 general practitioners were interviewed, with particular attention to an equitable distribution in small, medium and large primary care facilities. Qualitative content analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Interviewees described a wide range of infection control, organisational and communication measures that they had implemented. They made changes to practise equipment, found makeshift solutions when supplies were scarce, and established communication and information pathways when official communication lines were inadequate.

CONCLUSION

General practitioners took on essential tasks and showed a high level of understanding of their role in the pandemic response. This was achieved mainly at an informal level and with high personal commitment. Their functioning in the absence of structural regulations and support shows that they had a clear intrinsic understanding of their responsibilities. To ensure reliability and sustainability and to reduce their burden, it will be necessary to clarify the role and tasks of a general practitioner and to provide the necessary support. This concerns both infrastructural support and communication and information strategies. As part of the reform to strengthen primary care, primary care needs to be seen, valued and involved in decision-making processes.

Stress experiences of healthcare assistants in family practice at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed methods study

Background

At the beginning of the pandemic in 2020, healthcare assistants in general practices were confronted with numerous new challenges. The aim of the study was to investigate the stress factors of healthcare assistants in March/April 2020 as well as in the further course of the pandemic in 2020.

Methods

From August to December 2020, 6,300 randomly selected healthcare assistants in four German states were invited to participate in the study. We performed a mixed methods design using semi-structured telephone interviews and a cross-sectional survey with quantitative and open questions. The feeling of psychological burden was assessed on a 6-point likert-scale. We defined stress factors and categorized them in patient, non-patient and organizational stress factors. The results of the three data sets were compared within a triangulation protocol.

Results

One thousand two hundred seventy-four surveys were analyzed and 28 interviews with 34 healthcare assistants were conducted. Of the participants, 29.5% reported experiences of a very high or high feeling of psychological burden in March/April 2020. Worries about the patients' health and an uncertainty around the new disease were among the patient-related stress factors. Non-patient-related stress factors were problems with the compatibility of work and family, and the fear of infecting relatives with COVID-19. Organizational efforts and dissatisfaction with governmental pandemic management were reported as organizational stress factors. Support from the employer and team cohesion were considered as important resources.

Discussion

It is necessary to reduce stress among healthcare assistants by improving their working conditions and to strengthen their resilience to ensure primary healthcare delivery in future health crises.