Dataset Information

Patient-rated importance of key information on screening colonoscopy in Germany: a survey of statutory health insurance members.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Primary colonoscopic screening is considered to be of great benefit but also has the potential to cause severe harm. Thus, eligible subjects should be supported in making an informed choice whether to participate.

Objectives

To identify information on screening colonoscopy that colonoscopy-naïve subjects rate as particularly important for decision making.

Design

Survey of German statutory health insurance members using a written questionnaire in November 2015.

Study population

Colonoscopy-naïve individuals aged 50 to 65 years.

Main outcome measures

Importance of key information about screening colonoscopy, including potential risks and benefits, baseline risk of colorectal cancer/polyps and practical aspects of the procedure, as well as associations between participants' characteristics and their judgement of information as to being 'very important'.

Results

Of 1871 respondents (overall response rate: 31%), a subgroup of 370 colonoscopy-naïve subjects was eligible for inclusion (average age: 55 years, 47% male). Information on the risks was rated as very important by most respondents, unimportant by 6%. Information on the benefits was considered unimportant by 26%. Regression analysis showed that less educated persons regarded most items to be more often relevant than highly educated subjects. A greater proportion of women than men rated details regarding pain and practical aspects as very important. Subjects with a low educational level living alone were identified as the group with the least interest in information on risks.

Conclusion

Cultivating awareness around the central meaning of the (quantitative) benefits of screening in informed decision making should be focused on more in future information materials. The high requirement of less educated people to become more informed provides a strong motivation for further efforts to develop evidence-based information that adequately informs this group. Tailoring information according to gender-specific needs may be warranted in light of the observed differences in information preferences between women and men.

SUBMITTER: Dreier M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6082454 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient-rated importance of key information on screening colonoscopy in Germany: a survey of statutory health insurance members.

Dreier Maren M Krueger Kathrin K Walter Ulla U

BMJ open 20180713 7

<h4>Background</h4>Primary colonoscopic screening is considered to be of great benefit but also has the potential to cause severe harm. Thus, eligible subjects should be supported in making an informed choice whether to participate.<h4>Objectives</h4>To identify information on screening colonoscopy that colonoscopy-naïve subjects rate as particularly important for decision making.<h4>Design</h4>Survey of German statutory health insurance members using a written questionnaire in November 2015.<h4 ...[more]

PMID: 30007923

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSecond medical opinions can give patients confidence when choosing among treatment options and help them understand their diagnosis. Health insurers in several countries, including Germany, offer formal second opinion programs (SecOPs). We systematically collected and analyzed information on German health insurers' approach to SecOPs, how the SecOPs are structured, and to what extent they are evaluated.MethodsIn April 2019, we sent a questionnaire by post to all German statutory (n = 109) and private health insurers (n = 52). In September 2019, we contacted the nonresponders by email. The results were analyzed descriptively. They are presented overall and grouped by type of insurance (statutory/private health insurer).ResultsThirty one of One hundred sixty one health insurers (response rate 19%) agreed to participate. The participating insurers covered approximately 40% of the statutory and 34% of the private health insured people. A total of 44 SecOPs were identified with a median of 1 SecOP (interquartile range (IQR) 1-2) offered by a health insurer. SecOPs were in place mainly for orthopedic (21/28 insurers with SecOPs; 75%) and oncologic indications (20/28; 71%). Indications were chosen principally based on their potential impact on a patient (22/28; 79%). The key qualification criterion for second opinion providers was their expertise (30/44 SecOPs; 68%). Second opinions were usually provided based on submitted documents only (21/44; 48%) or on direct contact between a patient and a doctor (20/44; 45%). They were delivered after a median of 9 days (IQR 5-15). A median of 31 (IQR 7-85) insured persons per year used SecOPs. Only 12 of 44 SecOPs were confirmed to have conducted a formal evaluation process (27%) or, if not, plan such a process in the future (10/22; 45%).ConclusionHealth insurers' SecOPs focus on orthopedic and oncologic indications and are based on submitted documents or on direct patient-physician contact. The formal evaluation of SecOPs needs to be expanded and the results should be published. This can allow the evaluation of the impact of SecOPs on insured persons' health status and satisfaction, as well as on the number of interventions performed. Our results should be interpreted with caution due to the low participation rate.

Project description:BackgroundIn Germany, skin cancer screening (SCS) is available free of charge every two years to all those with statutory health insurance over the age of 35. General Practitioners (GP) can carry out the screening if they have completed an 8-hour training course. GPs play a crucial role in the implementation of SCS and act as gatekeepers between initial patient contact and referral to dermatologists.ObjectiveTo record how comprehensively GPs carry out SCS in terms of patient information and body examination, as well as to explore GPs opinions on the feasibility of SCS.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted. A questionnaire was sent to GPs with permission to perform SCS in two regions of Germany (Bavaria and Saxony) between August and September 2021. Data were analyzed using descriptive analysis. Subgroup analysis was performed according to regions (federal state, location of physician´s office), professional experience (experience in years, number of monthly screenings, age) and gender. Open questions were evaluated using qualitative content analysis.ResultsIn the survey, 204 GPs responded. Genitalia (40.7%, 83/203), anal fold (62.3%, 127/204) and oral mucosa (66.7%, 136/204) were the least examined body regions during screening. Information on risks (false-positive findings: 18.6%, 38/203; false-negative findings: 13.2%, 27/203; overdiagnosis: 7.8%, 16/203) and benefits (48.0%, 98/202) were not always provided. GPs who performed screenings more frequently were more likely to provide information about the benefits of SCS (p<0.001; >10 vs. <5 screenings per month). Opinions were provided on uncertainties, knowledge requirements, structural and organizational requirements of SCS, SCS training and evaluation. The organization and remuneration of the SCS programme was seen as a barrier to implementation. GPs expressed uncertainties especially in unclear findings and in dermatoscopy.ConclusionUncertainties in the implementation of the SCS should be addressed by offering refresher courses. Good networking between GPs and dermatologists is essential to improve SCS quality.

Project description:BackgroundThe provision and quality of end-of-life care (EoLC) in Germany is inconsistent. Therefore, an evaluation of current EoLC based on quality indicators is needed. This study aims to evaluate EoLC in Germany on the basis of quality indicators pertaining to curative overtreatment, palliative undertreatment and delayed palliative care (PC). Results were compared with previous findings.MethodsData from a statutory health insurance provider (AOK Lower Saxony) pertaining to deceased members in the years 2016 and 2017 were used to evaluate EoLC. The main indicators were: chemotherapy for cancer patients in the last month of life, first-time percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) for patients with dementia in the last 3 months of life, number of hospitalisations and days spent in inpatient treatment in the last 6 months of life, and provision of generalist and specialist outpatient PC in the last year of life. Data were analysed descriptively.ResultsData for 64,275 deceased members (54.3% female; 35.1% cancer patients) were analysed. With respect to curative overtreatment, 10.4% of the deceased with cancer underwent chemotherapy in the last month and 0.9% with dementia had a new PEG insertion in the last 3 months of life. The mean number of hospitalisations and inpatient treatment days per deceased member was 1.6 and 16.5, respectively, in the last 6 months of life. Concerning palliative undertreatment, generalist outpatient PC was provided for 28.0% and specialist outpatient PC was provided for 9.0% of the deceased. Regarding indicators for delayed PC, the median onset of generalist and specialist outpatient PC was 47.0 and 24.0 days before death, respectively.ConclusionCompared to data from 2010 to 2014, the data analysed in the present study suggest an ongoing curative overtreatment in terms of chemotherapy and hospitalisation, a reduction in new PEG insertions and an increase in specialist PC. The number of patients receiving generalist PC remained low, with delayed onset. Greater awareness of generalist PC and the early integration of PC are recommended.Trial registrationThe study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register ( DRKS00015108 ; 22 January 2019).

Project description:BackgroundMost individuals are infected with human papillomavirus (HPV) at least once in their lifetime. Infections with low-risk types can cause genital warts, whereas high-risk types can cause malignant tumors. The aim of this study was to determine the burden of anogenital diseases potentially related to HPV in young women based on German statutory health insurance claims data.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective claims data analysis using the "Institute for Applied Health Research Berlin" (InGef) Research Database, containing claims data from approximately 4 million individuals. In the period from 2012 to 2017 all women born in1989-1992, who were continuously insured between the age of 23-25 years were identified. Using ICD-10-GM codes (verified diagnosis in the outpatient sector or primary or secondary diagnosis in the inpatient sector) the administrative prevalence (95% confidence interval) of genital warts (A63.0), anogenital diseases grade I (K62.8, N87.0, N89.0, N90.0), grade II (N87.1, N89.1, N90.1) and grade III (D01.3, D06.-, D06.0, D07.1, D07.2, N87.2, N89.2, N90.2) was calculated (women with diagnosis divided by all women).ResultsFrom 2012 to 2017, a total of 15,358 (birth cohort 1989), 16,027 (birth cohort 1990), 14,748 (birth cohort 1991) and 14,862 (birth cohort 1992) women at the age of 23-25 were identified. A decrease of the administrative prevalence was observed in genital warts (1.30% (1.12-1.49) birth cohort 1989 vs. 0.94% (0.79-1.10) birth cohort 1992) and anogenital diseases grade III (1.09% (0.93-1.26) birth cohort 1989 vs. 0.71% (0.58-0.86) birth cohort 1992). In anogenital diseases grade III, this trend was especially observed for severe cervical dysplasia (N87.2) (0.91% (0.76-1.07) birth cohort 1989 vs. 0.60% (0.48-0.74) birth cohort 1992). In contrast, anogenital diseases grade I (1.41% (1.23-1.61) birth cohort 1989 vs. 1.31% (1.14-1.51) birth cohort 1992) and grade II (0.61% (0.49-0.75) birth cohort 1989 vs. 0.52% (0.42-0.65) birth cohort 1992) remained stable.ConclusionsA decrease of the burden of anogenital disease potentially related to HPV was observed in the younger birth cohorts. This was observed especially for genital warts and anogenital diseases grade III. Further research to investigate this trend for the upcoming years in light of varying HPV vaccination coverage for newer birth cohorts is necessary.

Project description:BackgroundRecent patent losses for antiretroviral drugs (ARV) have led to the debate of cost-saving through the replacement of patented drugs with generic drugs. The split of recommended single-tablet regimens (STR) into their single substance partners is one of the considerations mentioned in said debate. Particularly, generic tenofovir disoproxil/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) is expected to hold untapped cost-saving potential, which may curb increasing overall expenditures for combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) within the statutory health insurance (SHI) of Germany.MethodsData of ARV reimbursed by the SHI were used to describe the trends of defined daily doses (DDD) as well as the revenue within the German ARV market. They were also used to determine the cost-savings of moving to generic drugs. The time period observed was between January 2017 and June 2019. The potential cost-savings were determined with following assumption in mind: the maximum possible use of generic ARV, including 1) the split of STR and replacing all substance partners with generic ones, and 2) replacing patented tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine (TAF/FTC) with generic TDF/FTC.ResultsThroughout the observation period, the DDD of generic ARV increased nearly five-fold while their revenue increased more than four-fold. Total cost-saving showed a sharp increase over the same period, with generic TDF/FTC accounting for a share of around 70%. The largest potential cost-saving could have been achieved through replacing patented TAF/FTC with generic TDF/FTC, peaking at nearly 10% of total revenue, but showing decreasing trends in general.ConclusionThe progressive distribution of generic ARV ensured increasing cost-savings, but consequently curbed the potential cost-savings. Unique price reductions of generic TDF/FTC have played a pivotal role for these effects. In any case, substituting with generic ARV should not fail to adhere to the treatment guidelines and continue to consider the medical requirements for the treatment.

Dataset Information

Patient-rated importance of key information on screening colonoscopy in Germany: a survey of statutory health insurance members.

Background

Objectives

Design

Study population

Main outcome measures

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Patient-rated importance of key information on screening colonoscopy in Germany: a survey of statutory health insurance members.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets