Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42568062›Full record

ArticleBMC primary care2026

"We could do more": exploring violance prevention measures in German outpatient primary care - a qualitative study.

Stefanie Mache, Monika Bernburg, Annika Würtenberger, David A Groneberg, Volker Harth

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC primary care, 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

5 authors.

Stefanie MacheInstitute for Occupational and Maritime Medicine (ZfAM), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Hamburg, 20459, Germany. s.mache@uke.de.
Monika BernburgInstitute of Occupational Medicine, Social Medicine and Environmental Medicine, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, 60590, Germany.
Annika WürtenbergerInstitute of Occupational Medicine, Social Medicine and Environmental Medicine, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, 60590, Germany.
David A GronebergInstitute of Occupational Medicine, Social Medicine and Environmental Medicine, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, 60590, Germany.
Volker HarthInstitute for Occupational and Maritime Medicine (ZfAM), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Hamburg, 20459, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealthcare workers in general practice are exposed to verbal and physical violence from patients and accompanying persons. While research has predominantly focused on hospital settings, evidence on violence prevention in primary care remains limited. General practice staff often report feeling insufficiently prepared to manage aggressive behaviour. This study explored staff perceptions of violence prevention measures in outpatient care, including perceived usefulness, implementation barriers, and unmet needs.

methodsA qualitative study was conducted involving 45 semi-structured interviews with physicians and medical assistants working in direct patient care in German general practices. Interviews explored experiences with violence prevention measures, perceived usefulness, barriers to implementation, and additional needs. Data were analysed using qualitative content analysis according to Mayring.

resultsParticipants described environmental (e.g., alarm systems), organisational (e.g., staff organisation and practice procedures), and individual-level measures (e.g., communication strategies and staff training) for violence prevention in ambulatory care. Violence prevention was perceived as a multi-layered organisational process rather than a single intervention. In many practices, formal violence prevention guidelines or standard operating procedures were absent, insufficiently implemented, or perceived as impractical for routine care. Exploratory comparisons suggested that these overarching themes were largely consistent across practice settings, professions, and gender, with contextual differences primarily reflecting professional roles and organisational circumstances.

conclusionsViolence prevention in general practice requires a systematic, multi-level approach addressing environmental, organisational, and individual factors. Adequate staffing and manageable workloads appear central to enabling consistent implementation of preventive strategies across different primary care contexts. Practice-specific guidance should be developed, communicated, and integrated into routine care to support structured responses to aggression. Future research should further explore and evaluate tools for early identification of patients at risk of aggression and examine how contextual factors influence the implementation and effectiveness of violence prevention strategies in primary care.

Indexed as

Ambulatory CareAttitude of Health PersonnelGeneral PracticePrimary Health CareViolenceWorkplace ViolenceAdultFemaleGermanyHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchWorking ConditionsDe-escalationGeneral practiceOccupational healthPrimary careQualitative researchViolence preventionWorkplace violence

Identifiers

PMID42568062
PMCPMC13449390

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.