Refine
Document Type
- Article (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- - (4)
- Health information (2)
- Allergy prevention (1)
- Atrial fibrillation (1)
- Coronary heart disease (1)
- Decision support (1)
- Entscheidungsunterstützung (1)
- Evidence transfer (1)
- Gesundheitsinformation (1)
- Gesundheitssystem (1)
Hintergrund
In der COVID-19-Pandemie ging die Versorgung nichtübertragbarer Erkrankungen zeitweise deutlich zurück, auch weil Menschen Angst vor einer Ansteckung hatten. Wir führen eine Bestandsaufnahme zur organisationalen Gesundheitskompetenz in der Regelversorgung nichtübertragbarer Erkrankungen in der ersten Welle der COVID-19-Pandemie durch und fragen: Inwiefern wurden Menschen mit gesundheitlichen Beschwerden dabei unterstützt, gesundheitskompetente Entscheidungen für oder gegen die Inanspruchnahme von Versorgungsleistungen zu treffen?
Methodik
Strukturierende Inhaltsanalyse der Internetpräsenzen der Mitglieder der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlich Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften (AWMF; n = 179), der kassen(zahn)ärztlichen Vereinigungen (K(Z)Ven; n = 38), ausgewählter Krankenkassen (n = 21), ausgewählter Behandlungseinrichtungen (n = 25) und überregionaler Anbieter von Gesundheitsinformationen (n = 5) zu Informationen und Angeboten zum Thema.
Ergebnisse
Die geprüften Internetpräsenzen informieren weitgehend rund um COVID-19, aber nur selten darüber, wie man sich bei einer (vermuteten) anderen Erkrankung in Bezug auf die Inanspruchnahme von Versorgungsleistungen verhält. 2 Portale von Anbietern von Gesundheitsinformationen, eine Krankenkasse, aber keine der KVen bieten explizite Entscheidungshilfen an. KVen weisen öfter, aber nicht durchgängig auf die generelle Möglichkeit von Videosprechstunden hin.
Diskussion
Für die meisten Patient*innen gab es damit keine gezielten Informationen zu dem Thema. Angesichts der Fortdauer der COVID-19-Pandemie gilt es, vorhandene vertrauenswürdige, qualitativ hochwertige Informations- und Beratungskapazitäten auszubauen und ihre Bekanntheit zu erhöhen, um gesundheitskompetente Entscheidungen auch in der Pandemie zu ermöglichen.
Background
When parents want to make health-related decisions for their child, they need to be able to handle health information from a potentially endless range of sources. Early childhood allergy prevention (ECAP) is a good example: recommendations have shifted from allergen avoidance to early introduction of allergenic foods. We investigated how parents of children under 3 years old access, appraise and apply health information about ECAP, and their respective needs and preferences.
Methods
We conducted 23 focus groups and 24 interviews with 114 parents of children with varied risk for allergies. The recruitment strategy and a topic guide were co-designed with the target group and professionals from public health, education, and medicine. Data were mostly collected via video calls, recorded and then transcribed verbatim. Content analysis according to Kuckartz was performed using MAXQDA and findings are presented as a descriptive overview.
Results
Parents most frequently referred to family members, friends, and other parents as sources of ECAP information, as well as healthcare professionals (HCPs), particularly pediatricians. Parents said that they exchanged experiences and practices with their peers, while relying on HCPs for guidance on decision-making. When searching for information online, they infrequently recalled the sources used and were rarely aware of providers of “good” health information. While parents often reported trying to identify the authors of information to appraise its reliability, they said they did not undertake more comprehensive information quality checks. The choice and presentation of ECAP information was frequently criticized by all parent groups; in particular, parents of at-risk children or with a manifested allergy were often dissatisfied with HCP consultations, and hence did not straightforwardly apply advice. Though many trusted their HCPs, parents often reported taking preventive measures based on their own intuition.
Conclusion
One suggestion to react upon the many criticisms expressed by parents regarding who and how provides ECAP information is to integrate central ECAP recommendations into regular child care counseling by HCPs—provided that feasible ways for doing so are identified. This would assist disease prevention, as parents without specific concerns are often unaware of the ECAP dimension of issues such as nutrition.
Abstract
Background
Chronic heart disease affects millions of people worldwide and the prevalence is increasing. By now, there is an extensive literature on outpatient care of people with chronic heart disease. We aimed to systematically identify and map models of outpatient care for people with chronic heart disease in terms of the interventions included and the outcomes measured and reported to determine areas in need of further research.
Methods
We created an evidence map of published systematic reviews. PubMed, Cochrane Library (Wiley), Web of Science, and Scopus were searched to identify all relevant articles from January 2000 to June 2021 published in English or German language. From each included systematic review, we abstracted search dates, number and type of included studies, objectives, populations, interventions, and outcomes. Models of care were categorised into six approaches: cardiac rehabilitation, chronic disease management, home-based care, outpatient clinic, telemedicine, and transitional care. Intervention categories were developed inductively. Outcomes were mapped onto the taxonomy developed by the COMET initiative.
Results
The systematic literature search identified 8043 potentially relevant publications on models of outpatient care for patients with chronic heart diseases. Finally, 47 systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria, covering 1206 primary studies (including double counting). We identified six different models of care and described which interventions were used and what outcomes were included to measure their effectiveness. Education-related and telemedicine interventions were described in more than 50% of the models of outpatient care. The most frequently used outcome domains were death and life impact.
Conclusion
Evidence on outpatient care for people with chronic heart diseases is broad. However, comparability is limited due to differences in interventions and outcome measures. Outpatient care for people with coronary heart disease and atrial fibrillation is a less well-studied area compared to heart failure. Our evidence mapping demonstrates the need for a core outcome set and further studies to examine the effects of models of outpatient care or different interventions with adjusted outcome parameters.
Systematic review registration
PROSPERO (CRD42020166330).
Abstract
Background
When seeking advice on allergy prevention in early childhood (Early Childhood Allergy Prevention, ECAP), parents often turn to health and social care providers, such as paediatricians, midwives, and family centres. However, these actors fulfil various, often care-related, roles, and cannot be considered ‘health information providers’ by default. In addition, although the scientific evidence for ECAP is often known by health professionals, it is not actively communicated. In this study protocol, we describe the planned procedure for the development and implementation of a process to communicate ECAP information to parents, with a focus on reaching out to those from migrant communities. Thereby, we also aim to contribute to the understanding of how to design more robust approaches to deliver health information.
Methods
We have chosen the Implementation Research Logic Model as our framework for a multi-stage process. Firstly, we will map regional and local health and social care providers to find potential providers of ECAP information. We will then approach actors from each mapping category for qualitative interviews to assess facilitators and barriers to implementation. Next, we will define actions to ease the implementation process, develop exemplary ECAP information materials for parents, and deliver these to pre-selected health and social care individuals and organizations. Each step will be adapted to meet the needs and preferences of culturally and linguistically diverse populations. Finally, the process will be evaluated for key implementation outcomes (e.g., acceptability, feasibility, effectiveness) by interviewing information providers and surveying information recipients.
Discussion
From a Public Health perspective, studies seem warranted that investigate how evidence from health research may be effectively communicated to the public, rather than merely focusing on, e.g., intervention development. Also, it has often been highlighted that the dissemination of health information needs to better target those who face the greatest difficulties when seeking advice, i.e. individuals/parents who recently migrated. ECAP is a good use case, as scientific evidence is constantly evolving, and the communication of information is hampered by low awareness of high quality sources.