Cornelia Mahler

Strategies for Reducing Potentially Avoidable Hospitalizations for Ambulatory Care–Sensitive Conditions

PURPOSE Hospitalizations for ambulatory care–sensitive conditions (ACSCs) are seen as potentially avoidable with optimal primary care. Little is known, however, about how primary care physicians rate these hospitalizations and whether and how they could be avoided. This study explores the complex causality of such hospitalizations from the perspective of primary care physicians. METHODS We conducted semistructured interviews with 12 primary care physicians from 10 primary care clinics in Germany regarding 104 hospitalizations of 81 patients with ACSCs at high risk of rehospitalization. RESULTS Participating physicians rated 43 (41%) of the 104 hospitalizations to be potentially avoidable. During the interviews the cause of hospitalization fell into 5 principal categories: system related (eg, unavailability of ambulatory services), physician related (eg, suboptimal monitoring), medical (eg, medication side effects), patient related (eg, delayed help-seeking), and social (eg, lack of social support). Subcategories frequently associated with physicians’ rating of hospitalizations for ACSCs as potentially avoidable were after-hours absence of the treating physician, failure to use ambulatory services, suboptimal monitoring, patients’ fearfulness, cultural background and insufficient language skills of patients, medication errors, medication nonadherence, and overprotective caregivers. Comorbidities and medical emergencies were frequent causes attributed to ACSC-based hospitalizations that were rated as being unavoidable. CONCLUSIONS Primary care physicians rated a significant proportion of hospitalizations for ACSCs to be potentially avoidable. Strategies to avoid these hospitalizations may target after-hours care, optimal use of ambulatory services, intensified monitoring of high-risk patients, and initiatives to improve patients’ willingness and ability to seek timely help, as well as patients’ medication adherence.

Nursing process documentation systems in clinical routine—prerequisites and experiences

Documentation of the nursing process is an important, but often neglected part of clinical documentation. Paper-based systems have been introduced to support nursing process documentation. Frequently, however, problems, such as low quality and high writing efforts, are reported. However, it is still unclear if computer-based documentation systems can reduce these problems. At the Heidelberg University Medical Center, computer-based nursing process documentation projects began in 1998. A computer-based nursing documentation system has now been successfully introduced on four wards of three different departments, supporting all six phases of the nursing process. The introduction of the new documentation system was accompanied by systematic evaluations of prerequisites and consequences. In this paper, we present preliminary results of this evaluation, focusing on prerequisites of computer-based nursing process documentation. We will discuss in detail the creation and use of predefined nursing care plans as one important prerequisite for computer-based nursing documentation. We will also focus on acceptance issues and on organizational and technical issues.

The Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) : A problematic evaluative scale for the interprofessional field

The Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS): A problematic evaluative scale for the interprofessional field Cornelia Mahler, Sarah Berger & Scott Reeves a Department of General Practice & Health Services Research, University of Heidelberg, Germany and b Centre for Health & Social Care Research, Kingston University & St George’s, University of London, UK Published online: 25 Jul 2015.

Internal consistency of the readiness for interprofessional learning scale in German health care students and professionals

BackgroundThe implementation of a bachelor degree in “Interprofessional Health Care” at the University of Heidelberg, Germany has fostered the need to evaluate the impact of this innovative programme. The Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) was developed by Parsell and Bligh (1999) to assess student’s attitudes towards interprofessional education. The RIPLS consists of 19 items and four subscales were identified by McFadyen (J Interprof Care19:595–603, 2005): “teamwork and collaboration”, “negative professional identity”, “positive professional identity” and “roles and responsibilities”. The RIPLS has been translated into a number of languages and used in a variety of different educational settings. A German version of the RIPLS was not available. Aim of the study was the translation of the RIPLS into German and testing of internal consistency.MethodsThe RIPLS was translated to German according to international guidelines and its psychometric properties were assessed in two online surveys with two different samples a) health care graduates and b) health care students. Descriptive analysis (mean, SD, corrected item-total correlation) of the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale – German (RIPLS-D) was performed for item characteristics and Cronbach’s Alpha was calculated for internal consistency of overall and subscales of the RIPLS-D.ResultsEach sample consisted of 76 datasets. Reliability for the RIPLS-D overall scale was 0.83 in both samples. The subscales displayed internal consistency between 0.42 and 0.88. Corrected item-total correlation showed low values in two subscales in the sample of graduates.ConclusionsWhile the overall RIPLS-D scale is reliable, several subscales showed low values and should be used with caution to measure readiness for interprofessional learning in the German health care context. Internal consistency of the instrument does not seem to be given in health care professionals at different stages of their professional career. In particular the sub-scale “roles and responsibilities” was problematic. For these reasons, the RIPLS-D cannot be recommended for use to assess this concept.

Let’s talk about medication: concordance in rating medication adherence among multimorbid patients and their general practitioners

Background Medication adherence can be essential for improving health outcomes. Patients with multiple chronic conditions, often receiving multiple medications, are at higher risk for medication nonadherence. Previous research has focused on concordance between patients and providers about which medication should be taken. However, the question of whether patients and providers are concordant in rating actual medication intake has not been answered as yet. This study aimed to explore the extent and predictors of patient – provider concordance in rating medication adherence in patients with multiple chronic conditions. Methods Overall medication adherence was measured by self-report (Medication Adherence Report Scale, MARS-D) in a sample of 92 patients with multiple chronic conditions. Twelve treating primary care physicians were asked to rate medication adherence in these patients using a mirrored version of the MARS-D. Concordance between external rating and self-reported medication adherence was analyzed descriptively. Predictors of concordance in rating medication adherence were explored in a multilevel analysis. Results Patients rate their medication adherence markedly higher than their general practitioner. Accordingly, the percentage of concordance ranges between 40% (forgot to take medication) and 61% (deliberately omitted a dose). In multilevel analysis, concordance in rating medication adherence was positively associated with being the single primary care provider (β 2.24, P < 0.0001) and frequent questioning about medication use (β 0.66, P = 0.0031). At the patient level, “not [being] married” (β −0.81, P = 0.0064) and “number of prescribed medications” (β −0.10, P = 0.0203) were negative predictors of patient – provider concordance in rating medication adherence. Conclusion Concordance for rating medication adherence between general practitioners and their patients was low. Talking about medication on a regular basis and better continuity of care may enhance patient – provider concordance in rating medication adherence as a prerequisite for shared decisions concerning medication in patients with multiple chronic conditions.

Can a feedback report and training session on medication counseling for general practitioners improve patient satisfaction with information on medicines

Background Regular intake of medicines prevents hospitalization and improves treatment outcomes in patients with chronic diseases; however, requires good patient–physician communication. Yet, this communication is often insufficient and characterized by misunderstandings. This paper aimed to explore whether a training session on medication counseling for general practitioners (GPs) can improve patient satisfaction about information on medicines. Methods Within a seamless care project (HeiCare®), a questionnaire to assess patient satisfaction with information on medicines and other questions related to medication issues was distributed among 370 patients. Results were returned to physicians in a feedback report, discussed in a training session, and a subsequent second questionnaire was sent to patients. Results Patients showed a significant increase in satisfaction with overall information on medicines and with information on potential problems when experiencing medication counseling after their GP received a feedback report and/or training session. Conclusion Individual feedback and training sessions can improve medication counseling and GPs’ awareness of patients’ attitudes toward medicines and thus increase patients’ satisfaction with medicines information received. Regular feedback to the GP on patients’ satisfaction with information and patients’ beliefs in medicines can be obtained by patient surveys or by addressing these issues in regular medication counseling encounters. Physicians need to be trained to listen to patients’ views and concerns on medication.

Psychometric Properties of a German Version of the “Satisfaction with Information about Medicines Scale” (SIMS-D)

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to translate the Satisfaction with Information about Medicines Scale (SIMS) into German and test its psychometric properties in a German primary care setting. The SIMS was developed to assess the extent to which patients feel they have received enough information about their medicines. METHODS Three hundred seventy chronically ill patients were included in the study. The SIMS was translated to SIMS-D (German version) and evaluated in terms of acceptability, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, discriminant, and criterion-related validity. RESULTS The SIMS-D showed good internal consistency (Cronbachs alpha 0.92) and adequate test-retest reliability (Pearsons r > 0.7). Relationships to external criteria regarding medication management were acceptable (Spearmans rho > 0.4). The SIMS-D was reasonably well accepted (return rate of 71%); however, older people produced more missing values when filling in the questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS Preliminary evidence was given that the SIMS-D is a suitable instrument for measuring patient satisfaction with information about medicines in German primary care settings.

Developing and implementing a complex Complementary and Alternative (CAM) nursing intervention for breast and gynecologic cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy--report from the CONGO (complementary nursing in gynecologic oncology) study.

AbstractPurpose/objectivesThe purpose of this study was to develop a complex nursing intervention including complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for breast and gynecologic cancer patients during chemotherapy to improve quality of life.MethodsData sources Theoretical framework and concepts, practical nursing knowledge, and evidence-based studies were compiled in interprofessional meetings. Data synthesis The final complex intervention consists of three autonomous, but interacting components: (1) CAM nursing package, (2) resource-oriented counseling, and (3) evidence-based information material on CAM. CAM interventions include acupressure, aromatherapy, compress, and massage, targeting 14 clinically relevant symptoms during chemotherapy. Participants receive these interventions during chemotherapy with instructions for self care. During a counseling interview, the patient’s needs and preferences are assessed by trained nurses. Furthermore, participants are equipped with evidence-based information material (booklet and DVD). Prior to study start, nurses attended training modules for administering CAM therapies and for communicating and counseling within the salutogenic approach.ConclusionsIt was possible to design a multimodal CAM nursing intervention based on a theoretical concept, evidence-based studies, and practical nursing experience targeting the prevention or relief of side-effects women suffer during chemotherapy. The systematic analysis of the CONGO study will contribute to evidence-based CAM nursing care within supportive cancer care.Implications for integrative cancer careOncology nurses play an important role in supportive CAM care of breast and gynecologic cancer patients in daily clinical practice. Within oncology outpatient services, the implementation of evidence-based CAM nursing interventions and counseling may contribute to understand the impact of nursing on patient quality of life and symptom relief. This can lead to a new understanding of the nurse’s professional role.

A complex nursing intervention of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) to increase quality of life in patients with breast and gynecologic cancer undergoing chemotherapy: study protocol for a partially randomized patient preference trial

BackgroundHealth-related quality of life (HRQoL) is most adversely affected in cancer patients between diagnosis and the end of chemotherapy. The aim of the Complementary Nursing in Gynecologic Oncology (CONGO) study is to assess the effectiveness of a complex nursing care intervention of CAM to increase HRQoL in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.Methods/designCONGO is a prospective partially randomized patient preference (PRPP) trial including adult women diagnosed with breast and gynecologic cancer starting a new chemotherapy regimen. Patients without strong preferences for CAM will be randomized to usual nursing care or complex nursing care; those patients with strong preferences will be allowed their choice. The intervention consists of three interacting and intertwined elements: CAM nursing intervention packet, counseling on CAM using a resource-oriented approach and evidence-based informational material on CAM.Primary outcome data on participants’ HRQoL will be collected from baseline until the end of treatment and long-term follow-up using the EORTC-QLQ-C30. Secondary outcomes include nausea, fatigue, pain, anxiety/depression, social support, self-efficacy, patient competence, spiritual wellbeing, and satisfaction with care. Accompanying research on economic outcomes as well as a mixed-methods process evaluation will be conducted.A total of 590 patients (236 patients in the randomized part of the study and 354 patients in the observational part of the study) will be recruited in the two outpatient clinics. The first analysis step will be the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis of the randomized part of the trial. A linear mixed model will be used to compare the continuous primary endpoint between the intervention and control arm of the randomized group. The observational part of the trial will be analyzed descriptively. External validity will be assessed by comparing randomized with nonrandomized patients.DiscussionCancer patients are increasingly using CAM as supportive cancer care, however, a patient-centered model of care that includes CAM for the patient during chemotherapy still needs to be evaluated. This protocol has been designed to test if the effects of the intervention go beyond potential benefits in quality-of-life outcomes.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register (DRKS), DRKS00006056 (15 April 2014).

Re-profiling today's health care curricula for tomorrow's workforce: Establishing an interprofessional degree in Germany.

Abstract Laws regulating education of most health professional groups in Germany today mean that curricula re-profiling in response to changing priorities in the practice environment is a significant challenge. Legally dictated theoretical and clinical requirements for the vocational training of health professionals leaves little room for re-profiling in response to movements such as interprofessional education. An educational innovation was needed that worked within existing structures in Germany. The result was a formal collaboration between the Academy for Health Professionals and the University of Heidelberg allowing students undertaking vocational training to also complete a university degree in parallel. The aim of this article is to describe the curriculum development for the Bachelor of Science – Interprofessional Health Care. This article outlines an evidence-based approach to the process to curriculum development that resulted in a competency-based degree offering comprehensive interprofessional education at undergraduate level for healthcare students based in Germany.