German medical science : GMS e-journal
-
Quality improvement and safety in intensive care are rapidly evolving topics. However, there is no gold standard for assessing quality improvement in intensive care medicine yet. In 2007 a pilot project in German intensive care units (ICUs) started using voluntary peer reviews as an innovative tool for quality assessment and improvement. We describe the method of voluntary peer review and assessed its feasibility by evaluating anonymized peer review reports and analysed the thematic clusters highlighted in these reports. ⋯ External assessment of structure, process and outcome indicators revealed high percentages of adherence to predefined quality goals. In the SWOT reports 11 main thematic clusters were identified representative for common ICUs. 58.1% of mentioned topics covered personnel issues, team and communication issues as well as organisation and treatment standards. The most mentioned weaknesses were observed in the issues documentation/reporting, hygiene and ethics. We identified several unique patterns regarding quality in the ICU of which long-term personnel problems und lack of good reporting methods were most interesting Conclusion: Voluntary peer review could be established as a feasible and valuable tool for quality improvement. Peer reports addressed common areas of interest in intensive care medicine in more detail compared to other methods like measurement of quality indicators.
-
The number of mobbing experiences recorded has increased during recent years and it has now been established as global phenomenon among the working population. The goal of our study was to analyze the incidence of certain neurologic and psychiatric diseases as a consequence of mobbing as compared with a control group and to examine the possible influence of previous diseases that occurred within one year before the first mobbing documentation on the incidence of mobbing. ⋯ Those who will later become the victims of bullying are more prone to suffer from diseases in general, even before this experience of mobbing has occurred, which underlines the importance of supporting (chronically) ill patients to protect them against bullying. Sequelae of mobbing include, in particular, diseases from the neurologic-psychiatric spectrum.
-
The rapid progress of psychosomatic research in cardiology and also the increasing impact of psychosocial issues in the clinical daily routine have prompted the Clinical Commission of the German Heart Society (DGK) to agree to an update of the first state of the art paper on this issue which was originally released in 2008. ⋯ The present state of the art paper presents an update of current empirical evidence in psychocardiology. The paper provides evidence-based recommendations for the integration of psychosocial factors into cardiological practice and highlights areas of high priority. The evidence for estimating the efficiency for psychotherapeutic and psychopharmacological interventions has increased substantially since the first release of the policy document but is, however, still weak. There remains an urgent need to establish curricula for physician competence in psychodiagnosis, communication and referral to ensure that current psychocardiac knowledge is translated into the daily routine.
-
To discuss the rationale behind informed consent in clinical trials focusing on vulnerable patients from a European and German viewpoint. ⋯ Discovery of life saving and life enhancing new treatments requires partnership that is based on good communication and trust between patients and researchers, sponsors, ethics committees, authorities, lawyers and politicians so that vulnerable patients can benefit from the results of well controlled clinical trials.
-
Comparative Study
Benefits and risks of benzodiazepines and Z-drugs: comparison of perceptions of GPs and community pharmacists in Germany.
Newer non-benzodiazepines zolpidem and zopiclone ("Z-drugs") are often prescribed instead of benzodiazepine hypnotics, although there is no evidence of differences in effectiveness and safety. Aim was to compare perceptions on benefits and harms of benzodiazepines and Z-drugs between general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists (CPs). ⋯ Although it is difficult to draw unambiguous conclusions from these findings, pharmacists might have a somewhat more critical view on Z-drugs, especially concerning side effects.