Factors influencing GPs’ perception of specialised palliative homecare (SPHC) importance – results of a cross-sectional study

Author:

Stichling K.,Krause M.,Ditscheid B.,Hach M.,Jansky M.,Kaufmann M.,Lehmann T.,Meißner W.,Nauck F.,Schneider W.,Schulz S.,Vollmar H. C.,Wedding U.,Bleidorn J.,Freytag A.ORCID,Bauer Anna,Bergmann Lia,Ditscheid Bianka,Eichhorn Cornelia,Freytag Antje,Hach Michaela,Hammer Ulrike,Helbig Aicko,Hennig Beata,Jansky Maximiliane,Kaufmann Michelle,Krause Markus,Krauss Sabine,Lehmann Thomas,L’hoest Helmut,Maddela Srikanth,Marschall Ursula,Mboulla Martial,Meißner Winfried,Melching Heiner,Mühler Florian,Nageler Cornelia,Nauck Friedemann,Rothaug Judith,Saam Joachim,Schneider Werner,Schulz Sven,Stichling Kathleen,Vollmar Horst C.,von Hayek Julia,Wedding Ulrich,Völker Marie-Luise,Kley Vivienne,Feustel Jana,Herklotz Ketura,

Abstract

Abstract Background General Practitioners (GPs) are the main providers of primary palliative care (PPC). At the same time they are the main initiators of specialised palliative homecare (SPHC). In Germany, little is known about factors which influence GPs in their involvement of SPHC. Aim of our study is to identify factors that drive GPs to give value to and involve SPHC. Methods A cross-sectional survey was performed. In 2018, questionnaires were mailed to 6000 randomly selected GPs from eight German federal states, focusing on the extent of GPs’ palliative care activities and their involvement of SPHC. Results With a response rate of 19.4% and exclusion of GPs working in SPHC-teams, n = 1026 questionnaires were appropriate for analysis. GPs valued SPHC support as the most “important/very important” for both “technical/invasive treatment measures” (95%) and availability outside practice opening hours (92%). The most relevant factor influencing perceived SPHC-importance was GPs’ self-reported extent of engagement in palliative care (β = − 0.283; CI 95% = − 0.384;−0.182), followed by the perceived quality of utilised SPHC (β = 0.119; CI 95% = 0.048;0.190), involvement in treatment of palliative patients after SPHC initiation (β = 0.088; CI 95% = 0.042;0.134), and conviction that palliative care should be a central part of GPs’ work (β = − 0.062; CI 95% = − 0.116;−0.008). Perceived SPHC-importance is also associated with SPHC-referrals (β =0.138; p < 0.001). The lower the engagement of GPs in palliative care, the more they involve SPHC and vice versa. Conclusions GPs with low reported activity in palliative care are more likely to initialise SPHC for palliative care activities they do not deliver themselves for various reasons, which might mean that the involvement of SPHC is substitutive instead of complementary to primary palliative care. This finding and its interpretation should be given more attention in the future policy framework for (specialised) palliative homecare. Trial registration German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00014726, 14.05.2018.

Funder

German Innovations Fund of the Federal Joint Committee in Germany

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

General Medicine

Reference41 articles.

1. Schneider N, Mitchell GK, Murray SA. Palliative care in urgent need of recognition and development in general practice: the example of Germany. BMC Fam Pract. 2010;11:66. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2296-11-66.

2. Radbruch L, Andersohn F, Walker J. Palliativversorgung: Überversorgung kurativ – Unterversorgung palliativ? 2015. https://faktencheckgesundheit.de/de/faktenchecks/faktencheck-palliativversorgung/ergebnis-ueberblick/. Accessed 9 May 2019.

3. Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss. Richtlinie zur Verordnung von spezialisierter ambulanter Palliativversorgung. https://www.g-ba.de/richtlinien/64/.

4. Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss. Bericht an das Bundesministerium für Gesundheit über die Umsetzung der SAPV-Richtlinie für das Jahr 2016. 2017. https://www.g-ba.de/informationen/richtlinien/64/. Accessed 6 Mar 2019.

5. Grabenhorst U. Specialized ambulatory palliative care: (SAPV) 5-year results of a multi-professional care model by HomeCare linker Niederrhein gGmbH (HC) in the Lower Rhine region. Ann Oncol. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdx382.010.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3