Dataset Information

Patients' subjective concepts about primary healthcare utilisation: the study protocol of a qualitative comparative study between Norway and Germany.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In Germany, utilisation of ambulatory healthcare services is high compared with other countries: While a study based on the process data of German statutory health insurances showed an average of 17.1 physician-patient-contacts per year, the comparable figure for Norway is about five. The usual models of healthcare utilisation, such as Rosenstock's Health Belief Model and Andersen's Behavioural Model, cannot explain these differences adequately. Organisational factors of the healthcare system, such as gatekeeping, do not explain the magnitude of the differences. Our hypothesis is that patients' subjective concepts about primary healthcare utilisation play a major role in explaining different healthcare utilisation behaviour in different countries. Hence, the aim of this study is to explore these subjective concepts comparatively, between Germany and Norway.

Methods/design

With that aim in mind, we chose a comparative qualitative study design. In Norway and Germany, we are going to interview 20 patients each with qualitative episodic interviews. In addition, we are going to conduct participant observation in four German and four Norwegian primary care practices. The data will be analysed by thematic coding. Using selected categories, we are going to conduct comparative case and group analyses.

Ethics and dissemination

The study adheres to the Declaration of Helsinki. All interviewees will sign informed consent forms and all patients will be observed during consultation. Strict rules for data security will apply. Developed theory and policy implications are going to be disseminated by a workshop, presentations for experts and laypersons and publications.

SUBMITTER: Herrmann WJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3686237 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patients' subjective concepts about primary healthcare utilisation: the study protocol of a qualitative comparative study between Norway and Germany.

Herrmann Wolfram J WJ Haarmann Alexander A Flick Uwe U Bærheim Anders A Lichte Thomas T Herrmann Markus M

BMJ open 20130620 6

<h4>Background</h4>In Germany, utilisation of ambulatory healthcare services is high compared with other countries: While a study based on the process data of German statutory health insurances showed an average of 17.1 physician-patient-contacts per year, the comparable figure for Norway is about five. The usual models of healthcare utilisation, such as Rosenstock's Health Belief Model and Andersen's Behavioural Model, cannot explain these differences adequately. Organisational factors of the h ...[more]

PMID: 23794555

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective and settingNational, system-wide safety investigation represents a new approach to safety improvement in healthcare. In 2019, a new master's level course in Safety Investigation in Healthcare was established to support the training and development of a new team of investigators from an independent investigatory body. The course was established at one Norwegian university and a total of 19 students were enrolled and completed the course. The aim of this study was to qualitatively evaluate the course, and the objectives were to explore the students' needs and expectations prior to the course conduct, and their experiences and suggestions for improvements after course completion.DesignThe study design was a qualitative explorative study with individual and focus group interviews. Data collection included five individual interviews prior to course participation and two focus group interviews, after course participation, with a total sample size of 13 participants. Data were analysed according to thematic analysis.ResultsThe results showed a need for a common conceptual foundation for the multidisciplinary team of safety investigators who were all employed in the same investigatory body. Course participation contributed to create reflexive spaces for the participants and generated new knowledge about the need for a broad range of investigatory tools and approaches. This contrasted with the initial aspiration among the participants to have a recipe for how to conduct safety investigations.ConclusionsCourse participation contributed to a common language among a highly multidisciplinary group of safety investigators and supported building a culture of collaborative learning. The need for additional activities to further develop a safety investigation curriculum in healthcare was identified. It is recommended that such a curriculum be co-created with independent investigators, safety scientists, patients and users, and healthcare professionals to ensure a strong methods repertoire and a sound theoretical backdrop for investigatory practice.

Project description:BackgroundMost health systems are insufficiently prepared to promote the participation of chronically ill patients in their care. Strong primary health care (PHC) strengthens patients' resources and thus promotes their participation. The tasks of providing continuous care to people with chronic diseases and promoting self-management are the responsibility of PHC nurses. Recent research assessing enablers of or barriers to nurses' efforts to support patients' participation has mostly not considered the special situation of patients with chronic diseases or focused on the PHC setting.ObjectiveTo investigate enablers of and barriers to PHC nurses' efforts to promote the participation of chronically ill patients in their care.MethodsWe interviewed 34 practicing PHC nurses and 23 key informants with advanced knowledge of PHC nursing practice in Brazil, Germany and Spain. The data was analyzed using thematic coding.ResultsWe identified four categories of barriers and enablers. (1) Establishing bonds with patients: Interviewees emphasized that understanding patients' views and behaviours is important for PHC nurses. (2) Cooperation with relatives and families: Good relationships with families are fundamental, however conflicts within families could challenge PHC nurses efforts to strengthen participation. (3) Communication and cooperation within PHC teams: PHC nurses see Cooperative team structures as a potential enabler, while the dominance of a 'biomedical' approach to patient care is seen as a barrier. (4) Work environment: Interviewees agreed that increased workload is a barrier to patient participation.Discussion and conclusionsSupporting patient participation should be acknowledged as an important responsibility for nurses by general practitioners and PHC planners. PHC nurses should be trained in communicative competence when discussing participation with chronically ill patients. Interprofessional education could strengthen other professionals' understanding of patient participation as a nursing task.Patient or public contributionThis study is part of a research project associated with the research network 'forges: User-oriented care: Promotion of health in the context of chronic diseases and care dependency'. The study's focus and provisional results were discussed continuously with partners in health and social care practice and presented to and discussed with the public at two conferences in which patient representatives, professionals and researchers participated.

Project description:IntroductionThe need of a regional healthcare monitoring in order to evaluate quality and utilisation of health services in smaller scale is internationally and in Germany well established. Little is known about variation in healthcare in rural German areas, especially for women's health. In particular, endometriosis is highly prevalent and known to be unsatisfactorily treated. Thus, this study aims to investigate utilisation and quality of care, the influence of structural determinants on quality and the patient's experiences on endometriosis healthcare in rural Hesse.Methods and analysisWe will use a mixed methods approach to ensure reliable mapping of the care situation for endometriosis patients in seven counties in Central and Eastern Hesse. First, retrospective secondary utilisation data and quality indicators will be used to describe possible regional variation in the treatment of endometriosis in the outpatient and inpatient sector. Second, we compare structural determinants of regions with quality of care. Third, we conduct qualitative, semistructured interviews with endometriosis patients on their perspective and experiences in those chosen rural regions. Data will then be analysed using descriptive statistics, small area variation analyses and multifactorial analyses of variance (ANOVAs). The interview will be interpreted using the experience-focused phenomenological approach.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by the ethics committee of Philipps-University Marburg. Utilisation data and structural determinants are anonymised and partly aggregated. The interview will use tokens for pseudonymisation to prevent the collected data from being assigned to an individual person. Also, informed consent will be obtained from patients.The results of this study will be reported to the scientific community in peer-reviewed journals and at conferences. A summary of the key findings will be provided to the interviewed patients and the Endometriosis Association Germany.

Project description:IntroductionPatients and families affected by a rare disease are burdened in multiple ways. Functional interface management can unburden patients or relatives from the need to be solely accountable for the navigation through the healthcare system. This study aims at (1) providing an assessment of approaches and interface management concepts in the care of rare diseases, (2) evaluating selected existing approaches and concepts and (3) developing best practice recommendations for interface management.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a mixed-methods study with three phases. In phase 1, we will develop a tool to assess existing concepts of interface management for rare diseases based on a literature search and an expert workshop. The tool will be applied in a telephone survey with representatives of centres or clinics of expertise for rare diseases (target: n=100) and cooperating practitioners (target: n=60). Based on the results of phase 1, we will select four to six centres of expertise with interface management concepts, which will be evaluated extensively in phase 2. For the evaluation, we will conduct semistructured interviews with practitioners cooperating with centres or clinics for rare diseases (target: n=50), a paper-based survey including patients or parents/legal guardians (target: n=300) from the selected centres or clinics, and semistructured interviews with patients or parents/legal guardians (target: n=50). The final phase of the study will be an integration of results from phases 1 and 2 to develop best practice recommendations for interface management in healthcare of rare diseases. In a concluding expert workshop, recommendations will be presented and finalised.Ethics and disseminationThis study was approved by the Local Psychological Ethics Committee of the Center for Psychosocial Medicine of the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (LPEK-0062). The findings of our study will be presented on national and international conferences and published in scientific, peer-reviewed journals. To assure that centres for rare diseases get access to the study results, centres are invited to send a representative to a final expert workshop in phase 3. Moreover, an executive summary will be provided and sent to relevant stakeholders.Trial registration numberGerman Clinical Trials Registry (DRKS00020488).

Project description:BackgroundPrimary healthcare in Sweden and worldwide has a diverse structure with many kinds of healthcare units involved. This is a challenge for collaboration between different professions in primary healthcare, as the different healthcare professions often work in silos. Interprofessional education (IPE) in the context of primary healthcare is less studied than IPE at hospitals and most of the studies in primary healthcare have focused on collaboration between general practitioners and nurses. The aim of this study was to describe how healthcare students perceived conditions for IPE in primary healthcare.MethodsQualitative group interviews were used and a total of 26 students, recruited on a voluntary basis participated in four group interviews with students mixed from study programmes in nursing, physiotherapy, occupational therapy and medicine. Students from the study programme in medicine were in their second to eleventh semesters of 11 semesters in total, whilst students from the occupational therapist, physiotherapist and nursing programmes were in their fourth to sixth of six semesters in total.ResultsOur findings indicated one theme: Students perceived a need for support and awareness of IPE from both study programmes and clinical placements. Five categories were found to belong to the theme. Students' tunnel-vision focus on their own profession may have affected their ability to collaborate with students from other professions. The nature of the patients' healthcare problems decided if they were perceived as suitable for IPE. Clinical supervisors' support for and attitude towards IPE were important. The hierarchy between different professions was perceived as a hindrance for seeking help from the other professions. The students asked for more collaboration between different study programmes, in order to gain knowledge about the roles and responsibilities of the other professions.ConclusionsIn conclusion, students in this study considered it essential for different study programmes and clinical placements to be more aware of the opportunities for and importance of IPE. The study identified conditions that were required for IPE in primary healthcare that may be helpful for healthcare teachers and clinical supervisors to better understand how students perceive IPE in primary healthcare, thus facilitating the planning of IPE.

Project description:Antibiotic resistance is a global health concern. Although numerous strategies have tried to reduce inadequate antibiotic prescribing, antibiotics are still prescribed in 60% of acute lower respiratory tract infections (ALRTIs) cases in Catalonia (Spain). This study aims to explore service users' experiences of ALRTIs, the quality and access to healthcare services, and health education. Selective purposive sampling was carried out, based on a prior definition of participant characteristics. These were sex, age, ethnicity, date of the last ALRTI, number of ALRTIs in the last year, and treatments received. Participants with a previous diagnosis of ALRTIs were recruited from three primary health care centres in Barcelona and one in Tarragona. Twenty-nine interviews were conducted between April and June 2019. A content thematic analysis was performed. Three themes were identified: 1) risk perceptions and help-seeking; 2) treatment preferences and antibiotic use; and 3) relationship dynamics and communication with healthcare professionals. Accounts of service users' sense of autonomy towards their health and power dynamics within the healthcare system were apparent. Supporting service users to become reliable, subjective and agentic experts of their health and bodies could help them to voice their healthcare agendas. Power structures embedded within healthcare, political and economic institutions should be challenged so that healthcare services can be co-developed (with service users) and based on service users' autonomy and horizontal relationships. Special consideration should be paid to the intersection of social vulnerabilities. A concordance approach to prescribing could be key to improve the responsible use of antibiotics and to contribute to the prevention of AMR in primary healthcare. The marketisation of health, and the increased demands of private healthcare in Spain due to the financial pressures on public healthcare as a consequence of the financial crisis of 2008 and the COVID-19 pandemic, are a risk for promoting adequate antibiotic prescribing and use. Trial registration The ISAAC-CAT study has been registered in the NCT registry, ID: NCT03931577.

Dataset Information

Patients' subjective concepts about primary healthcare utilisation: the study protocol of a qualitative comparative study between Norway and Germany.

Background

Methods/design

Ethics and dissemination

Publications

Patients' subjective concepts about primary healthcare utilisation: the study protocol of a qualitative comparative study between Norway and Germany.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets