ArticleDer Nervenarzt2015
[Structural quality in psychiatric and psychotherapeutic hospitals].
Article in Der Nervenarzt, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Structural features and regional characteristics of psychiatric hospitals in Germany].Der Nervenarzt · 2019Article
- [Rationing in inpatient psychiatric care].Der Nervenarzt · 2017Article
- [Do the areas of nursing and specialist therapy have sufficient personnel?].Der Nervenarzt · 2016Article
- [Manpower requirements for medical doctors in psychiatric departments of community hospitals--bottom-up calculation for the psychiatric department of Donauspital in Vienna].Neuropsychiatrie : Klinik, Diagnostik, Therapie und Rehabilitation : Organ der Gesellschaft Osterreichischer Nervenarzte und Psychiater · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe new German flat rate reimbursement system for psychiatry and psychosomatics (PEPP) is primarily based on the diagnostic classification and the costs of therapeutic processes. In 2019 the current normative standard for calculating the therapeutic staff in psychiatric clinics (Psych-PV) will be substituted by a stepwise adaptation process over 5 years. Using regionally calculated remuneration factors, all clinic budgets should eventually converge to comparable values.
aimMajor factors influencing the structural quality of therapy in psychiatric clinics are identified and recommendations are given to support the work of the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA) which has been appointed to develop new recommendations for the minimum setting of personnel requirements.
resultsThe full reimbursement of the necessary staff and of the costs resulting from outsourcing of day clinics and outpatient departments in the community, including the obligation to treat psychiatric emergency patients is mandatory and currently not sufficiently guaranteed in the new PEPP system. A workflow which opens the possibility to finance therapeutic innovations (e.g. psychotherapy) and helps to overcome the financial sectorial boundaries between inpatient and outpatient treatment is also missing. DISCUSSION: A mandatory recommendation for minimum staff settings needs a guaranteed full financing from the political side. Additionally, important would be an option for financing of therapeutic innovations and increased costs because of changed patient structures with respect to diagnosis and severity. Moreover, a sufficient remuneration for regional treatment responsibilities and for additional financial outlay resulting from structural costs for regionally outsourced departments is needed to avoid supplementary financing by reducing the budget for the therapeutic staff.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.