Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31888935›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Effect of involving certified healthcare assistants in primary care in Germany: a cross-sectional study.

Jonas D Senft, Michel Wensing, Regina Poss-Doering, Joachim Szecsenyi, Gunter Laux

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jonas D SenftDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany jonas.senft@med.uni-heidelberg.de.ORCID 0000-0001-6989-950X
Michel WensingDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Regina Poss-DoeringDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Joachim SzecsenyiDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Gunter LauxDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesGrowing prevalence of chronic diseases and limited resources are the key challenges for future healthcare. As a promising approach to maintain high-quality primary care, non-physician healthcare professionals have been trained to broaden qualifications and responsibilities. This study aimed to assess the influence of involving certified healthcare assistants (HCAs, German: Versorgungsassistent/in in der Hausarztpraxis) on quality and efficacy of primary care in Germany.

designCross-sectional study.

settingPrimary care.

participantsPatients insured by the Allgemeine Ortskrankenkasse (AOK) statutory health insurer (AOK, Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany).

interventionsSince 2008 practice assistants in Germany can enhance their professional education to become certified HCAs. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Claims data related to patients treated in practices employing at least one HCA were compared with data from practices not employing HCAs to determine frequency of consultations, hospital admissions and readmissions. Economic analysis comprised hospitalisation costs, prescriptions of follow-on drugs and outpatient medication costs.

resultsA total of 397 493 patients were treated in HCA practices, 463 730 patients attended to non-HCA practices. Patients in HCA practices had an 8.2% lower rate of specialist consultations (p<0.0001), a 4.0% lower rate of hospitalisations (p<0.0001), a 3.5% lower rate of readmissions (p=0.0463), a 14.2% lower rate of follow-on drug prescriptions (p<0.0001) and 4.7% lower costs of total medication (p<0.0001). No difference was found regarding the consultation rate of general practitioners and hospital costs.

conclusionsFor the first time, this high-volume claims data analysis showed that involving HCAs in primary care in Germany is associated with a reduction in hospital admissions, specialist consultations and medication costs. Consequently, broadening qualifications may be a successful strategy not only to share physicians' work load but to improve quality and efficacy in primary care to meet future challenges. Future studies may explore specific tasks to be shared with non-physician workforces and standardisation of the professional role.

Indexed as

Allied Health PersonnelCross-Sectional StudiesDrug CostsDrug TherapyEfficiency, OrganizationalFemaleGermanyHealth Care CostsHospitalizationHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrimary Health CareQuality of Health Caregeneral medicine (see internal medicine)health economicshealth services administration & management

Identifiers

PMID31888935
PMCPMC6936982

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.