Dataset Information

Partnerships between Medical Centres and General Hospitals Providing Normal Care Standards in Gynaecology and Obstetrics in Germany.

ABSTRACT: Hospital managers and the heads of medical departments are nowadays being faced with ever increasing demands. It is becoming difficult for some small hospitals to find highly experienced or even experienced medical staff, to provide specific health-care services at break-even prices and to maintain their position in competition with other hospitals. On the other hand, large hospitals are facing enormous pressure in the investment and costs fields. Cooperation could provide a solution for these problems. For an optimal strategic exploitation of the hospitals, their direction could be placed in the hands of a joint medical director. However, the directorship of two hospitals is associated both with opportunities and with risks. The present article illustrates the widely differing aspects of the cooperation between a medical centre and a general hospital providing standard care from both a theoretical point of view and on the basis of practical experience with an actual cooperation of this type in Heidelberg.

SUBMITTER: Schutz F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4168358 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Partnerships between Medical Centres and General Hospitals Providing Normal Care Standards in Gynaecology and Obstetrics in Germany.

Schütz F F Maleika A A Poeschl J J Domschke C C Seitz H H Beuter-Winkler P P Sohn C C

Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde 20121001 10

Hospital managers and the heads of medical departments are nowadays being faced with ever increasing demands. It is becoming difficult for some small hospitals to find highly experienced or even experienced medical staff, to provide specific health-care services at break-even prices and to maintain their position in competition with other hospitals. On the other hand, large hospitals are facing enormous pressure in the investment and costs fields. Cooperation could provide a solution for these p ...[more]

PMID: 25308978

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and aimsCOVID-19 vaccination has been in the spotlight for almost a year now, both within the scientific community and in the general population. The issue of healthcare workers' (HCWs) hesitancy is particularly salient, given that they are at the forefront of the fight against COVID-19. Not only could unvaccinated HCW spread the disease, but HCWs are also critical messengers in building confidence towards COVID-19 vaccines. The goal of this study was to examine the perception of COVID-19 risk and of its vaccine acceptance among employees (i.e., HCW plus administrative staff) in the Department of Paediatrics, Gynaecology and Obstetrics at the University Hospitals of Geneva, for the purpose of drawing lessons on the determinants of vaccination morale.MethodsWe conducted an anonymous online survey comparing vaccination attitudes among vaccinated and unvaccinated workers in June 2021. It included questions on perception of COVID-19 risks and COVID-19 vaccines. Vaccination was not mandatory in our institution but was strongly recommended.ResultsIn June 2021, 66% of the 1,800 employees of our department had received two doses of COVID-19 vaccine by the time of the survey. Among the employees, 776 participated (43%) to the survey, and among them 684 (88%) had chosen to be vaccinated. Participants working for longer in a hospital, with a chronic disease and a household contact with chronic disease were more likely to be vaccinated. Doctors were twice as likely to be vaccinated than nurses. Among unvaccinated hospital employees, 48 (52%) responded that they would not change their mind. Further, 35 (38%) were not feeling in danger of contracting severe COVID-19, and 32 (35%) had fears about possible side effects of COVID-19 vaccines that they wanted to discuss with a specialist.ConclusionOur study indicates that, while two-third of the employees had been vaccinated, quite many were still hesitant. The unvaccinated explained their choice by not feeling at risk of complicated COVID-19, and because of fear of possible side effects associated with the vaccine. Investments in COVID-19 vaccine education is a critical component for increasing vaccine acceptance among the unvaccinated.

Project description:Background: The shortage of skilled personnel is ubiquitous, basic and further training is a key aspect in the recruitment of new medical colleagues. The significance of the nursing practicum in its function as gateway to the gynaecology and obstetrics discipline is practically unexplored. Methods: In an online questionnaire, medical students in all German faculties were questioned about the practica in their courses. The questionnaire reached 9079 medical students. 149 participants in nursing practica were selectively asked to answer 140 questions. We analysed those students who could, on the basis of their experiences in nursing practica, imagine undertaking an internship (clinical elective) in gynaecology (internship yes "Iy") separately from those who could not or were still undecided (internship no "In" or, respectively, internship perhaps "Ip"). Results: Altogether 149 medical students who participated in a nursing practicum in the gynaecology discipline were selected, of these 94.9 % were female. 92 (61.7 %) of the students replied that, after their gynaecological nursing practicum, they wanted to undertake an internship in gynaecology (Iy); 39 (26.2 %) answered negatively (In) and 18 (12.1 %) were still undecided (Ip). With regard to the parameters gender, age and duration of study, there were no significant differences among the 3 groups (χ2 0.83). Besides the didactic and professional quality of the training, Iy also mentioned having had a higher practical orientation. They attained their aims more frequently, were better integrated in the health-care team and acquired more practical competences. Satisfaction with the practicum was evaluated as highest among the Iy. Discussion: Those students who could imagine taking an internship in gynaecology were seen to be more satisfied with their practica than those participants who declined or were undecided. The high proportion of females is an early indicator for a feminisation of the specialty. If necessary this could be countered with the help of nursing management.

Project description:IntroductionThe career intentions of medical students can exert influence on service provision and medical staffing in the health services. It is vital for a specialty's development and sustainability that it has a constant stream of trainees into it annually. An appreciation of how a specialty is viewed by medical students can be used as an opportunity for early intervention in order to improve perception of the specialty and reduce future workforce problems, such as retention and attrition within obstetrics and gynaecology (O&G). We aimed to analyse positive and negative factors of the specialty of O&G as perceived by medical students in order to gain insight into changes that need to be made to improve recruitment and retention into the specialty.MethodsA 70-item structured questionnaire consisting of demographic information and 5-point Likert scale questions relating to O&G was administered to final year medical students in the Republic of Ireland. Data were analysed with descriptive statistics, logistic regression, and odds ratios as appropriate.ResultsOf 195 medical students approached, 134 completed the questionnaire, a response rate of 68.7%. The majority were female (55.2%, n = 74) and 76.1% of respondents (n = 102) were Direct Entry Medicine students, with the remainder Graduate Entry Medicine students. 30.8% (n = 41) of students who responded scored 6 or more on a 10-point Likert scale when asked about their likelihood of considering a career in O&G. Students' clerkship experience factored heavily into their perception of the specialty and was more likely to be positive if they experienced direct consultant engagement and the opportunity for hands-on experience. Lifestyle factors, litigation and media were found to be deterrents to considering the specialty after graduation.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates the importance of good clerkship experience in fostering an interest amongst undergraduates in O&G. Educators and those working within the specialty should showcase the strengths of the specialty during undergraduate education, and work on ameliorating deterrents to ultimately provide a structured approach to improving recruitment into O&G.

Project description:Background and objectivesThe aim was to systematically review whether the reporting and analysis of trial-based cost-effectiveness evaluations in the field of obstetrics and gynaecology comply with guidelines and recommendations, and whether this has improved over time.Data sources and selection criteriaA literature search was performed in MEDLINE, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) and the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database to identify trial-based cost-effectiveness evaluations in obstetrics and gynaecology published between January 1, 2000 and May 16, 2017. Studies performed in middle- and low-income countries and studies related to prevention, midwifery, and reproduction were excluded.Data collection and analysisReporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standard (CHEERS) statement (a modified version with 21 items, as we focused on trial-based cost-effectiveness evaluations) and the statistical quality was assessed using a literature-based list of criteria (8 items). Exploratory regression analyses were performed to assess the association between reporting and statistical quality scores and publication year.ResultsThe electronic search resulted in 5482 potentially eligible studies. Forty-five studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 22 in obstetrics and 23 in gynaecology. Twenty-seven (60%) studies did not adhere to 50% (n = 10) or more of the reporting quality items and 32 studies (71%) did not meet 50% (n = 4) or more of the statistical quality items. As for the statistical quality, no study used the appropriate method to assess cost differences, no advanced methods were used to deal with missing data, and clustering of data was ignored in all studies. No significant improvements over time were found in reporting or statistical quality in gynaecology, whereas in obstetrics a significant improvement in reporting and statistical quality was found over time.LimitationsThe focus of this review was on trial-based cost-effectiveness evaluations in obstetrics and gynaecology, so further research is needed to explore whether results from this review are generalizable to other medical disciplines.Conclusions and implications of key findingsThe reporting and analysis of trial-based cost-effectiveness evaluations in gynaecology and obstetrics is generally poor. Since this can result in biased results, incorrect conclusions, and inappropriate healthcare decisions, there is an urgent need for improvement in the methods of cost-effectiveness evaluations in this field.

Project description:BackgroundMissed nursing care is considered an error of omission and is defined as any aspect of required patient care that is omitted (either in part or whole) or significantly delayed. Nursing care missed in the perinatal setting can cause negative outcomes and repercussions for the quality and safety of care. This has been reported in multiple settings and countries and is tied to negative maternal outcomes. Preventing missed nursing care requires in-depth research considering the clinical setting.ObjectiveThe main aim of the study was to assess commonly missed nursing care elements, reasons, and factors for the omission in the obstetric and gynecologic units of general hospitals in Tigray 2017/18.Methods and materialsA cross-sectional study was conducted in eight randomly selected general hospitals in Tigray, Ethiopia. A total of 422 nurses and midwives were selected through simple random sampling using the staff list as a sampling frame. To identify the commonly missed nursing care and related factors, the MISSCARE survey tool was used. Descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess potential risk factors of nursing cares omission.ResultThe study results showed that 299 (74.6%) participants commonly missed at least one nursing care in the perinatal setting. Labor resources 386(96.3%), teamwork 365(91%), material resources 361 (90%) and communication 342 (85.3%) were the reasons identified for commonly missing care. In the multivariate analyses, sex (p-value <0.001), educational level (p-value 0.034), working shift (p-value <0.001) and having an intention to leave the institution (p-value <0.001) showed a significant association with commonly missing care.ConclusionThe proportion of commonly missed nursing care was high. After adjusting for demographic variables, labor resources, material resources, and communication were reasons for commonly missed nursing care. Increasing male professional proportion, investing in nurses/midwives training, and harmonizing nursing service administration through appropriate working shift arrangement and timely assessment of professionals' stability and satisfaction could minimize frequent omission of nursing care.

Dataset Information

Partnerships between Medical Centres and General Hospitals Providing Normal Care Standards in Gynaecology and Obstetrics in Germany.

Publications

Partnerships between Medical Centres and General Hospitals Providing Normal Care Standards in Gynaecology and Obstetrics in Germany.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets