Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39928157›Full record

ArticleMedizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin2026

[Opportunities and barriers of IPReG for out-of-hospital intensive care : Explorative interview study with payers and health policy stakeholders as part of the PRiVENT study].

Elena Biehler, Thomas Fleischhauer, Gerhard E Fuchs, Johanna Forstner, Aline Weis, Selina von Schumann, Julia D Michels-Zetsche, Franziska C Trudzinski, Felix J F Herth, Joachim Szecsenyi and 1 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyEnglish Abstract
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Elena BiehlerAbteilung Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, 69120, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, Heidelberg, Deutschland. elena.biehler@med.uni-heidelberg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-3489-4059
Thomas FleischhauerAbteilung Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, 69120, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Gerhard E FuchsAbteilung Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, 69120, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Johanna ForstnerZentralinstitut für Seelische Gesundheit, Mannheim, Deutschland.
Aline WeisNationales Centrum für Tumorerkrankungen Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Selina von SchumannAbteilung Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, 69120, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Julia D Michels-ZetschePneumologie und Beatmungsmedizin, Thoraxklinik Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Franziska C TrudzinskiPneumologie und Beatmungsmedizin, Thoraxklinik Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Felix J F HerthPneumologie und Beatmungsmedizin, Thoraxklinik Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Joachim SzecsenyiAbteilung Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, 69120, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Michel WensingAbteilung Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, 69120, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, Heidelberg, Deutschland.

Funding

Gemeinsame Bundesausschuss 01NVF1903
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe number of long-term ventilated patients in out-of-hospital intensive care (OIC) in Germany has risen sharply in recent years. Due to financial disincentives, structural care deficits and resource bottlenecks, there is an increasing risk of inadequate care. In 2020, the Intensive Care and Rehabilitation Strengthening Act (IPReG) was therefore passed by legislators with the aim of improving OIC. This study examines the opportunities and challenges of the IPReG with regard to the care of long-term ventilated patients in OIC from the perspective of payers and healthcare policy. MATERIALS AND

methodsA qualitative interview study was conducted as part of the process evaluation of the multicenter study PRiVENT (Prevention of invasive Ventilation). Using semi-structured, guideline-based individual interviews, health policy actors and representatives of statutory health insurers were asked about the IPReG.

resultsIn all, 11 health policymakers and 12 representatives of statutory health insurance companies took part in the interviews. Both interview groups showed a positive attitude towards the IPReG and expressed the expectation of added value for the outpatient care of long-term ventilated patients. The current remuneration regulations for weaning and the assessment of weaning potential in the OIC were criticized, among other things.

conclusionThe IPReG provides a legal basis for improving OIC, but there is still room for improvement in its current version. The evaluation planned by legislators should be used to identify potential weaknesses and make appropriate adjustments.

Indexed as

Ambulatory CareCritical CareHealth PolicyNational Health ProgramsRespiration, ArtificialGermanyHumansInterviews as TopicLong-Term CareHealth PolicyIntensive care medicineInvasive ventilationLong-term ventilationWeaning

Identifiers

PMID39928157

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.