Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35168286›Full record

ArticleGesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany))2022

[Experiences with Regional Medical Coordinators in Ambulatory Care in the Early COVID-19 Phase 2020 in Bavaria: Survey of Regional Ambulatory Coordinators and General Practitioners].

Michaela Olm, Jens Boris Schymura, Marion Torge, Bernhard Riedl, Peter Wapler, Anton Wartner, Florian Vorderwülbecke, Antonius Schneider, Klaus Linde

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. [General Practitioners' Experiences with COVID-19: a Survey After the First Wave of the Pandemic in March/April 2020].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2023
    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

9 authors.

Michaela OlmInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, Technische Universität München Fakultät für Medizin, München, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5263-0977
Jens Boris SchymuraInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, Technische Universität München Fakultät für Medizin, München, Germany.
Marion TorgeInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, Technische Universität München Fakultät für Medizin, München, Germany.
Bernhard RiedlInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, Technische Universität München Fakultät für Medizin, München, Germany.
Peter WaplerInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, Technische Universität München Fakultät für Medizin, München, Germany.
Anton WartnerInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, Technische Universität München Fakultät für Medizin, München, Germany.
Florian VorderwülbeckeInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, Technische Universität München Fakultät für Medizin, München, Germany.
Antonius SchneiderInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, Technische Universität München Fakultät für Medizin, München, Germany.
Klaus LindeInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, Technische Universität München Fakultät für Medizin, München, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the state of emergency in Bavaria in the early Corona phase 2020, some physicians in ambulatory care were appointed as regional medical coordinators (RMCs). The aim of the present study was to evaluate this newly introduced but temporary position.

methodsIn November 2020, a paper-based questionnaire was sent out to all 85 RMCs who could be identified through an internet research and to all 197 teaching practices of the Institute of General Practice and Health Services Research at the Technical University of Munich. The data analysis was descriptive and anonymised.

resultsOverall, 75 (88%) RMCs and 156 (79%) general practitioners (GPs) were included. 97% of the RMCs and 67% of the GPs assessed the introduction of RMCs in ambulatory care as reasonable, but also as an intervention concerning the self-administration of physicians (RMCs: 59% and GPs: 42%). 37% of the GPs stated that RMCs should be avoided as far as possible in future pandemic situations. Overall, GPs with more intensive contact to an RMC showed higher levels of agreement. Both groups rated the collaboration and communication strategies of politics, authorities and the Bavarian Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians as difficult and often contradictory. However, most of the RMCs assessed the cooperation with politics and authorities at the local level as positive. The lack of medical protective equipment at the beginning of the pandemic was judged critically by both groups of the respondents.

conclusionsThe establishment of RMCs in the early Corona phase 2020 in Bavaria was considered sensible by almost all RMCs and the majority of the surveyed GPs. For the future, it seems necessary to involve primary care physicians more intensively and permanently in decision-making processes and to strengthen existing structures.

Indexed as

COVID-19General PractitionersAmbulatory CareGermanyHumansSARS-CoV-2Surveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID35168286
PMCPMC11248550

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.