Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33185710›Full record

ArticleBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2020

[Palliative care at the end of life in Germany : Utilization and regional distribution].

Bianka Ditscheid, Markus Krause, Thomas Lehmann, Kathleen Stichling, Maximiliane Jansky, Friedemann Nauck, Ulrich Wedding, Werner Schneider, Ursula Marschall, Winfried Meißner and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
–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

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Instructors' Views on and Experiences withInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

12 authors.

Bianka DitscheidInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Bachstr. 18, 07743, Jena, Deutschland.
Markus KrauseInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Bachstr. 18, 07743, Jena, Deutschland.
Thomas LehmannZentrum für Klinische Studien, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Jena, Deutschland.
Kathleen StichlingInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Bachstr. 18, 07743, Jena, Deutschland.
Maximiliane JanskyKlinik für Palliativmedizin, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Göttingen, Deutschland.
Friedemann NauckKlinik für Palliativmedizin, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Göttingen, Deutschland.
Ulrich WeddingAbteilung Palliativmedizin der Klinik für Innere Medizin II, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Jena, Deutschland.
Werner SchneiderZentrum für Interdisziplinäre Gesundheitsforschung, Universität Augsburg, Augsburg, Deutschland.
Ursula MarschallBARMER, Wuppertal, Deutschland.
Winfried MeißnerAbteilung Palliativmedizin der Klinik für Innere Medizin II, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Jena, Deutschland.
Antje FreytagInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Bachstr. 18, 07743, Jena, Deutschland. antje.freytag@med.uni-jena.de.
die SAVOIR-Studiengruppe

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPalliative care supply increased in Germany in recent years. But how many people use which forms of palliative care and how does this differ between regions?

methodRetrospective cohort study with claims data from insured persons who died in 2016: Based on services billed at least once in the last six months of life, we determined the use of primary palliative care (PPC), specialized palliative homecare (SPHC), as well as inpatient palliative and hospice care, using regional billing codes for PPC and SPHC services for the first time.

resultsOf the 95,962 deceased in the study population, 32.7% received palliative care nationwide, with variations from 26.4% in Bremen to 40.8% in Bavaria. PPC services were billed at 24.4% (16.9% in Brandenburg to 34.1% in Bavaria). SPHC services received 13.1% (6.3% in Rhineland-Palatinate to 18.9% in Brandenburg and 22.9% in Westphalia-Lippe with different SPHC practices). Inpatient palliative care was received by 8.1% (6.7% in Schleswig-Holstein/Hesse to 13.0% in Thuringia); 3.3% (1.6% in Bremen to 5.6% in Berlin) with hospice services.

conclusionSPHC is used more frequently than previously reported, while PPC is declining. Utilization seems to be based less on objective needs than on region-specific framework conditions. Besides needs criteria, further development of palliative care should be oriented more towards outcomes and relevant framework conditions.

Indexed as

Hospice and Palliative Care NursingTerminal CareBerlinGermanyHumansPalliative CareRetrospective StudiesClaims dataPalliative homecarePPCRegional comparisonSPHC

Identifiers

PMID33185710
PMCPMC7686196

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.