ArticleGesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany))2022
[Communication Pathways and Difficulties with Nursing Homes and Digital Perspectives: A Survey of German General Practitioners].
Article in Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- 'The GP's offices are far away and the gain would be great.'-A qualitative study on nursing home staff's perspectives on digital solutions for communication issues with general practitioners.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2026Article
- [Transparency and Efficiency through Digital Healthcare? Results of a Survey of Generation Y].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2024Article
- [Quality measurement in long-term care facilities-the need for a systemic understanding].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aim of the studyTo outline basic information on communication structures and obstacles between GPs and nursing homes as well as GPs' perspectives on usage of E-health technology.
methodsA questionnaire-based cross-sectional study carried out among n=600 randomly selected GPs in Germany sent by mail.
resultsThe response rate was 20% (n=114). The respondent's mean age was 53 years (min=35; max=77), two-thirds were women (65%). GPs mainly used fax (92%) and telephone (87%) to communicate with nursing homes. Less than 10% routinely used digital technologies like E-mail (7%), E-health software (6%) or chat-services (1%). About half of GPs reported unnecessary (52%) or unspecific (51%) nursing home visit requests as well as unreported medication plan changes by other physicians (51%) as a common but avoidable problem. Many GPs wanted to use E-medication plans (85%), E-follow-up prescriptions (79%) and E-letters of referral (69%) in the future. 33% of GPs were already using fully digitalized patient files. Only 9% worked exclusively paper-based.
conclusionThough GPs are open to digitalized communication with nursing homes, fax and telephone are still mostly used. GPs prefer to execute less complex tasks digitally, such as change of medication plans and letters of referral. Fewer can imagine digital solutions for complex procedures such as acute health problems and ward rounds. Only 8% do not want to work digitally at all.
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.