Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36897332›Full record

ArticleBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2023

[Utilization of palliative care at the end of life in Germany: temporal trend (2016-2019) and regional variability].

Bianka Ditscheid, Franziska Meissner, Cordula Gebel, Beata Hennig, Ursula Marschall, Winfried Meißner, Ulrich Wedding, Antje Freytag

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
In one paragraph

Article in Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

8 authors.

Bianka DitscheidInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Bachstr. 18, 07743, Jena, Deutschland.
Franziska MeissnerInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Bachstr. 18, 07743, Jena, Deutschland.
Cordula GebelAbteilung Palliativmedizin der Klinik für Innere Medizin II, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Jena, Deutschland.
Beata HennigBARMER, Wuppertal, Deutschland.
Ursula MarschallBARMER, Wuppertal, Deutschland.
Winfried MeißnerAbteilung Palliativmedizin der Klinik für Innere Medizin II, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Jena, Deutschland.
Ulrich WeddingAbteilung 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.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Germany, palliative care (PC) is provided on a homecare, inpatient, general, and specialized basis. Since little is currently known about the temporal course and regional differences in the forms of care, the present study was aimed to investigate this.

methodIn a retrospective routine data study with 417,405 BARMER-insured persons who died between 2016 and 2019, we determined the utilization rates of primary PC (PPC), specially qualified and coordinated palliative homecare (PPC+), specialized palliative homecare (SPHC), inpatient PC, and hospice care on the basis of services billed at least once in the last year of life. We calculated time trends and regional variability and controlled for needs-related patient characteristics and access-related county of community characteristics.

resultsFrom 2016 to 2019, total PC increased from 33.8 to 36.2%, SPHC from 13.3 to 16.0% (max: Rhineland-Palatinate), and inpatient PC from 8.9 to 9.9% (max: Thuringia). PPC decreased from 25.8 to 23.9% (min: Brandenburg) and PPC+ came in at 4.4% (max: Saarland) in 2019. Hospice care remained constant at 3.4%. Regional variability in utilization rates remained high, increased for PPC and inpatient PC from 2016 to 2019, and decreased for SPHC and hospice care. The regional differences were also evident after adjustment.

conclusionIncreasingly more SPHC, less PPC, and high regional variability, which cannot be explained by demand- or access-related characteristics, indicate that the use of PC forms is oriented less to demand than to regionally available care capacities. In view of the growing need for palliative care due to demographic factors and decreasing personnel resources, this development must be viewed critically.

Indexed as

Hospice CarePalliative CareDeathGermanyHumansRetrospective StudiesClaims dataHospicePalliative (home) careRegional variationSpecialized palliative homecareSpecially qualified and coordinated palliative homecareUtilization

Identifiers

PMID36897332
PMCPMC10063517

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.