ArticleZeitschrift fur Rheumatologie2026
[Professional situation of rheumatological specialist assistants (RFA, DGRh-BDRh) after training : Results of a nationwide survey in 2024].
Article in Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since the introduction of the qualification for rheumatological specialist assistants (RFA) by the German Society for Rheumatology (DGRh) and the Professional Association of German Rheumatologists (BDRh) in 2006, this advanced training has become an established component of rheumatological care. Although more than 2000 medical assistants have since completed the RFA qualification, only limited data have been available on their professional situation after completion of the program. The aim of the present nationwide online survey was to assess the current professional situation, areas of activity, job satisfaction and career paths of RFAs in Germany.In October 2024 all graduates from 2006-2024 known to the Rheumatism Academy (Rheumaakademie, n = 677) were invited via email. A total of 263 individuals completed the questionnaire (response rate 39%), of whom 243 provided complete responses.At the time of the survey 81% (n = 199/245) of respondents were still working as RFAs, mostly in rheumatology practices (71%). Independent RFA consultation hours were conducted by 44% (n = 86) of participants, with most offering their own appointments, using defined procedures and having separate consultation rooms available. The main reasons cited for leaving RFA work were high workload, lack of development opportunities, and insufficient recognition. Nevertheless, 96% of those who had left the RFA role remained employed in the medical field.The results show that the RFA has become firmly established as a key component of rheumatological care in Germany; however, due to voluntary participation and limited reachability of all graduates, selection bias is likely and particularly RFAs no longer working in the profession may be underrepresented.To sustainably strengthen and retain this professional group, structural improvements are necessary, especially legal clarification of delegable tasks, the establishment of reimbursement options for RFA consultation hours and the development of advanced qualifications and career pathways.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41603921What 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.