Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40581641›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2025

Anticipated effects of centralising complex gastrointestinal surgery in a rural area in Germany - perspective of health professionals: a qualitative study.

Charlotte M Kugler, Stephan Gretschel, Julia Scharfe, Stefanie Pfisterer-Heise, René Mantke, Dawid Pieper

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

6 authors.

Charlotte M KuglerInstitute for Health Services and Health System Research, Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School (Theodor Fontane), Immanuel Klinik Rüdersdorf Seebad 82/83, 15562, Rüdersdorf bei Berlin, Germany. Charlotte.kugler@mhb-fontane.de.
Stephan GretschelClinic for General, Visceral, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, University Hospital Ruppin-Brandenburg, Neuruppin, Germany.
Julia ScharfeInstitute for Health Services and Health System Research, Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School (Theodor Fontane), Immanuel Klinik Rüdersdorf Seebad 82/83, 15562, Rüdersdorf bei Berlin, Germany.
Stefanie Pfisterer-HeiseInstitute for Health Services and Health System Research, Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School (Theodor Fontane), Immanuel Klinik Rüdersdorf Seebad 82/83, 15562, Rüdersdorf bei Berlin, Germany.
René MantkeClinic for General and Visceral Surgery, University Hospital Brandenburg an der Havel Brandenburg Medical School (Theodor Fontane), Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany.
Dawid PieperInstitute for Health Services and Health System Research, Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School (Theodor Fontane), Immanuel Klinik Rüdersdorf Seebad 82/83, 15562, Rüdersdorf bei Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFor centralising complex gastrointestinal surgery, minimum volume standards have been implemented in Germany. To increase centralisation and thus patient safety, the minimum volume standards for complex oesophageal and pancreatic surgery were set to rise in 2023 and 2025, respectively. Hospitals that do not meet these minimum volume standards will lose authorisation to perform these surgical procedures and are not eligible for reimbursement. Volume-outcome studies focus on patient outcomes at high or low hospital volumes. Other impacts on the service, professionals (e.g. medical training) are not covered. Therefore, the study aims to add health care professionals’ perspectives on centralisation in Brandenburg, a sparsely populated federal state in the East of Germany. It investigates what effects they anticipate and aims to identify potential solutions.

methodsWe conducted 19 semi-structured expert interviews with regional health care professionals (diverse professions and specialisations, hospital and outpatient) and patient representatives between 07/2022 and 01/2023. Interviews were transcribed and analysed according to qualitative content analysis.

resultsHealthcare professionals and patient representatives anticipated a trend towards consolidating complex oesophageal and pancreatic surgery into a few number of specialised clinics for surgical procedures (specialised centres). Conversely, there could be a rise in the number of clinics no longer offering these procedures, but instead focusing on serving as regional centres to provide general care, diagnostics, and post-discharge follow-ups for oesophageal and pancreatic patients. This redistribution might also have unintended effects on treatments beyond the scope of the minimum volume standards and could influence medical training programs and the recruitment of medical staff. Fostering structural collaboration among hospitals was suggested as a solution.

conclusionsThe results indicate that centralisation could not only influence outcome quality and accessibility, but could also lead to a range of other consequences. Especially in sparsely populated areas, meeting new minimum volume standards proves to be demanding in terms of both patients accessing complex gastrointestinal surgery and facilitating effective communication between specialised centres and regional centres or local healthcare providers.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelDigestive System Surgical ProceduresRural Health ServicesGermanyHumansInterviews as TopicQualitative ResearchCentralizationRural careVisceral surgery

Identifiers

PMID40581641
PMCPMC12206360

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.