Dataset Information

Second opinion programmes in Germany: a mixed-methods study protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Second opinion programmes aim to support the patients' decision-making process and to avoid treatments that are unnecessary from a medical perspective. The German second opinion directive, introduced in December 2018, constitutes a new legal framework in statutory health insurance for seeking second opinions for elective procedures and so far includes tonsillectomy, tonsillotomy, hysterectomy and shoulder arthroscopy. The directive mandates physicians who recommend one of the above-mentioned surgeries to inform their patients of their legal right to visit a certified second opinion provider. Since second opinion programmes are a fairly recent phenomenon in Germany, no comprehensive data are yet available on the degree of implementation, users, potential barriers and their effectiveness. We aim to examine the characteristics and the use of second opinion programmes as well as the needs and wishes from the perspective of (potential) users in Germany, with focus on the decision-making process, the patient-physician relationship and the motivation to seek a second opinion, as well as the role of health literacy.

Methods and analysis

Six substudies will include the following stakeholders: (1 and 2) patients with one of the four surgery-indications covered by the directive, (3) patients who electively sought an online-based second opinion, (4) patients with oncological diseases, (5) the general population and (6) medical specialists. A mixed-methods approach will be used, including questionnaires, interviews and focus groups. The data will be evaluated using quantitative descriptive analysis and qualitative content analysis. The integration of the results will take place in the form of a triangulation protocol.

Ethics and dissemination

The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Brandenburg Medical School. The findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific conferences.

SUBMITTER: Bruch D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7878127 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Second opinion programmes in Germany: a mixed-methods study protocol.

Bruch Dunja D May Susann S Prediger Barbara B Könsgen Nadja N Alexandrov Alexander A Mählmann Sonja S Voß Karl K Liersch Sebastian S Loh Jan-Christoph JC Christensen Bernd B Franzen Achim A von Peter Sebastian S Pieper Dawid D Ronckers Cecile C Neugebauer Edmund E

BMJ open 20210210 2

<h4>Introduction</h4>Second opinion programmes aim to support the patients' decision-making process and to avoid treatments that are unnecessary from a medical perspective. The German second opinion directive, introduced in December 2018, constitutes a new legal framework in statutory health insurance for seeking second opinions for elective procedures and so far includes tonsillectomy, tonsillotomy, hysterectomy and shoulder arthroscopy. The directive mandates physicians who recommend one of th ...[more]

PMID: 33568378

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic is forcing changes to clinical practice within traditional addiction treatment programmes, including the increased use of telehealth, reduced restrictions on methadone administration (eg, increased availability of take-home doses and decreased requirements for in-person visits), reduced reliance on group counselling and less urine drug screening. This paper describes the protocol for a mixed-methods study analysing organisational-level factors that are associated with changes in clinic-level practice changes and treatment retention. Methods and analysis We will employ an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design to study the treatment practices for opioid use disorder (OUD) patients in New York State (NYS). For the quantitative aim, we will use the Client Data System and Medicaid claims data to examine the variation in clinical practices (ie, changes in telehealth, pharmacotherapy, group vs individual counselling and urine drug screening) and retention in treatment for OUD patients across 580 outpatient clinics in NYS during the pandemic. Clinics will be categorised into quartiles based on composite rankings by calculating cross-clinic Z scores for the clinical practice change and treatment retention variables. We will apply the random-effects modelling to estimate change by clinic by introducing a fixed-effect variable for each clinic, adjusting for key individual and geographic characteristics and estimate the changes in the clinical practice changes and treatment retention. We will then employ qualitative methods and interview 200 key informants (ie, programme director, clinical supervisor, counsellor and medical director) to develop an understanding of the quantitative findings by examining organisational characteristics of programmes (n=25) representative of those that rank in the top quartile of clinical practice measures as well as programmes that performed worst on these measures (n=25). Ethics and dissemination The study has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of NYU Langone Health (#i21-00573). Study findings will be disseminated through national and international conferences, reports and peer-reviewed publications.

Project description:IntroductionThere is growing awareness that cancer services need to address patients' well-being as well as treating their cancer. We developed systematic approaches to (1) monitoring patients' symptoms including depression using a 'Symptom Monitoring Service' and (2) providing treatment for those with major depression using a programme called 'Depression Care for People with Cancer'. Used together, these two programmes were found to be highly effective and cost-effective in clinical trials. The overall aims of this project are to: (1) study the process of introducing these programmes into routine clinical care in a large cancer service, (2) identify the challenges associated with implementation and how these are overcome, (3) determine their effectiveness in a routine non-research setting and (4) describe patients' and clinicians' experience of the programmes.Methods and analysisThis is a mixed-methods longitudinal implementation study. We will study the process of implementation in three phases (April 2016-December 2018): 'Pre-implementation' (setting up of the new programmes), 'Early Implementation' (implementation of the programmes in a small number of clinics) and 'Implementation and Maintenance' (implementation in the majority of clinics). We will use the following methods of data collection: (1) contemporaneous logs of the implementation process, (2) interviews with healthcare professionals and managers, (3) interviews with patients and (4) routinely collected clinical data.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been reviewed by a joint committee of Oxford University Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust Research and Development Department and the University of Oxford's Clinical Trials and Research Governance Department and judged to be service evaluation, not requiring ethics committee approval. The findings of this study will guide the scaling up implementation of the programmes across the UK and will enable us to construct an implementation toolkit. We will disseminate our findings in publications and at relevant national and international conferences.

Project description:IntroductionThe debate on reconciliation between childcare and working has to be expanded to caregiving for the elderly, since the importance of informal caregiving will increase in the future due to populations' ageing and women's increasing labour force participation. Informal caregivers who are caring for the rising number of persons with dementia (PwD) are often female and subjected to high caregiving requirements. These are added to further demands emerging from their family and work life. How affected caregivers seek to balance those requirements depends on, inter alia, their own characteristics and the informal caregiving network to whom they relate. Both aspects were not yet considered in previous studies. This mixed methods study thus aims to explore the reconciliation between caregiving in dementia, family and employment by including different members of caregiving networks of home-dwelling PwD and by considering their personal characteristics.Methods and analysisBy purposive sampling, we include at least five caregiving networks of home-dwelling PwD; each of them consisting of at least three informal caregivers living in Northern Germany. Narrative interviews of participants will be recorded, transcribed verbatim and interpreted according to the Documentary Method (QUAL). By completing standardised questionnaires, participants will provide sociodemographic and psychographic data concerning themselves and the networks from whom they arise (quan). This supplemental, descriptive information will give further background to the themes and types emerging from the interviews. Hence, the quan-data enrich the QUAL-data by exploring the narratives of participants in the light of their personal and network-related characteristics.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the German Society of Nursing Sciences. Study results will be disseminated through conference presentations and publications in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberDRKS00012929.

Project description:BackgroundIn 2009 health insurers AOK and Bosch BKK introduced the "FacharztProgramm Kardiologie" - a program for coordinated ambulatory cardiology care in the German state of Baden-Württemberg. It aims for efficient, medical guideline-oriented cardiology care to reduce avoidable hospitalizations as well as costs of care. A high number of cardiologists participate and the program has served as blueprint for programs in other medical fields. With many prerequisites and conditions involved, its implementation cannot be expected to be self-directed. Still, only little data on the actual implementation exists. We aimed to determine to what extent medical specialists and cooperating general practitioners implemented the program, which components they adapted, and which contextual factors they deemed relevant.MethodsWe collected data from primary care practices of medical specialists and general practitioners within Baden-Württemberg. Qualitative data was obtained through structured telephone interviews with participating and non-participating medical specialists as well as general practitioners cooperating with the program and general practitioners not cooperating. Interviews were analyzed through content-structuring qualitative content analyses via MAXQDA. Quantitative data was obtained using anonymous written questionnaires completed by participating and non-participating medical specialists as well as general practitioners cooperating with the program. Analyses were performed using SPSS Statistics, mainly with regard to differences within and between groups of physicians.ResultsMost components of the program regarding medical care were well implemented. However, access to medical care was not completely as intended due to high numbers of patients participating in the program and prioritization by physicians. Procedures for communication and cooperation between medical specialists and general practitioners were only partially adhered to and standardized communication was not implemented. A range of regional and practice-related contextual factors influenced implementation and outcomes.ConclusionsImplementation of this program was mixed. Contextual factors posed individual challenges to participating physicians which can't be captured by an encompassing program. Both control mechanisms and tailoring of the program to medical care seem needed.Trial registrationThough not a clinical study, we deemed registration appropriate to ensure transparency. The study has been registered as a non-interventional observation study at the German Clinical Trials Register under ID: DRKS00013070.

Dataset Information

Second opinion programmes in Germany: a mixed-methods study protocol.

Introduction

Methods and analysis

Ethics and dissemination

Publications

Second opinion programmes in Germany: a mixed-methods study protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets