ArticleBMC public health2026
Organisational, hygiene- and team-related changes in German general practices during and after the COVID-19 pandemic: a participatory cross-sectional survey among medical assistants (WiSBAH study).
Article in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEven before the COVID-19 pandemic, the daily work of medical staff in general practices was characterised by high stress levels; during the pandemic there was a further increase in workload. In response, many practices implemented organisational and hygiene-related measures primarily to maintain patient care and infection control, which also affected working conditions, particularly for medical assistants (MAs). This study aimed to investigate the MAs’ perspective on changes in practice organisation, hygiene, and team interaction that facilitated their work during the COVID-19 pandemic.
methodsThis study was conducted as a cross-sectional study among MAs within the North-Rhine Westphalia General Practitioner Research Network (NRW-GPRN). The questionnaire was developed participatorily in eight focus groups with 50 MAs and refined through cognitive pretesting. Data were collected anonymously via LimeSurvey between August and December 2023. Descriptive analyses were performed in SPSS.
resultsA total of 355 questionnaires were completed by MAs. Almost all (n = 343, 96.6%) reported that the GP practice they worked in had introduced telephone consultations at the start of the pandemic; about one third reported implementation of video consultations (n = 109). Both measures largely facilitated the work of MAs. A change in internal work processes during the pandemic was reported by 41.1% (n = 146) of employees due to changed responsibilities and by 28.5% (n = 101) in connection with changed working hours, and changes were partly perceived as a reduction in workload. Additionally, 38.6% reported improved team communication, which further contributed to a reduction in workload. Furthermore, most MAs (60.6%) considered stress reduction measures useful during periods of high workload and named a variety of measures that could help cope with stressful work phases. At the same time, nearly two thirds (63.1%) felt burdened by the increased risk of infection even after the pandemic. Consistent with this, 74.5% (n = 264) reported continuing to wear masks when dealing with acutely infected patients.
conclusionsThis study highlights how organisational adjustments, role clarity and team communication were perceived by MAs during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. While the survey does not allow causal inference or assessment of psychological constructs, the findings provide practical insights for improving workload management and supporting MAs in general practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.