ArticleWiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)2021
Attitudes to and experience of disease management programs in primary care-an exploratory survey of general practitioners in Germany.
Article in Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring the experiences of GPs in establishing and operating the chronic disease management programme in clinical practice in Ireland. A qualitative study.The European journal of general practice · 2024Article
- Primary care involvement in clinical research - prerequisites, motivators, and barriers: results from a study series.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2024Article
- How can counselling by family physicians on nutrition and physical activity be improved: trends from a survey in Germany.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Article
- Article
- Exploring regional and sociodemographic disparities associated with unenrollment for the disease management program for type 2 Diabetes Mellitus using Bayesian spatial modelling.Research in health services & regions · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDisease management programs (DMPs) were set up in Germany in 2003 to improve outpatient care of chronically ill patients. The present study looks at the attitudes and experiences of general practitioners (GPs) in relation to DMPs, how they rate them almost 20 years after their introduction and where they see a need for improvement.
methodsA total of 1504 GPs in the Federal States of Rhineland Palatinate, Saarland and Hesse were surveyed between December 2019 and March 2020 using a written questionnaire.
resultsIn total, 58% of respondents rate DMPs positively and regard them as making a useful contribution to primary care. The guarantee of regular, structured patient care and greater compliance are regarded as particularly positive aspects. It was also established that diagnostic and therapeutic knowledge was expanded through participation in DMPs. 57% essentially follow the DMP recommendations for (drug) treatment. Despite positive experiences of DMPs in patient care, the GPs surveyed mention various challenges (documentation requirements, frequent changes to the programmes, inflexibility). Univariant linear regression analysis revealed factors influencing the satisfaction with DMPs, such as improvement of compliance and clearly defined procedures in medical care.
conclusionMost of the GPs surveyed consider the combination of continuous patient care and evidence-based diagnosis and treatment to be a great advantage. To better adapt DMPs to the conditions of primary care, it makes sense to simplify the documentation requirements, to regulate cooperation with other healthcare levels more clearly and to give GPs more decision-making flexibility. Increased inclusion of GP experience in the process of developing and refining DMPs can be helpful.
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.