[Opportunities and barriers of IPReG for out-of-hospital intensive care : Explorative interview study with payers and health policy stakeholders as part of the PRiVENT study].

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Elena Biehler, Thomas Fleischhauer, Gerhard E Fuchs, Johanna Forstner, Aline Weis, Selina von Schumann, Julia D Michels-Zetsche, Franziska C Trudzinski, Felix J F Herth, Joachim Szecsenyi, Michel Wensing
{"title":"[Opportunities and barriers of IPReG for out-of-hospital intensive care : Explorative interview study with payers and health policy stakeholders as part of the PRiVENT study].","authors":"Elena Biehler, Thomas Fleischhauer, Gerhard E Fuchs, Johanna Forstner, Aline Weis, Selina von Schumann, Julia D Michels-Zetsche, Franziska C Trudzinski, Felix J F Herth, Joachim Szecsenyi, Michel Wensing","doi":"10.1007/s00063-025-01247-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The number of long-term ventilated patients in out-of-hospital intensive care (OIC) in Germany has risen sharply in recent years. Due to financial disincentives, structural care deficits and resource bottlenecks, there is an increasing risk of inadequate care. In 2020, the Intensive Care and Rehabilitation Strengthening Act (IPReG) was therefore passed by legislators with the aim of improving OIC. This study examines the opportunities and challenges of the IPReG with regard to the care of long-term ventilated patients in OIC from the perspective of payers and healthcare policy.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A qualitative interview study was conducted as part of the process evaluation of the multicenter study PRiVENT (Prevention of invasive Ventilation). Using semi-structured, guideline-based individual interviews, health policy actors and representatives of statutory health insurers were asked about the IPReG.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In all, 11 health policymakers and 12 representatives of statutory health insurance companies took part in the interviews. Both interview groups showed a positive attitude towards the IPReG and expressed the expectation of added value for the outpatient care of long-term ventilated patients. The current remuneration regulations for weaning and the assessment of weaning potential in the OIC were criticized, among other things.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The IPReG provides a legal basis for improving OIC, but there is still room for improvement in its current version. The evaluation planned by legislators should be used to identify potential weaknesses and make appropriate adjustments.</p>","PeriodicalId":49019,"journal":{"name":"Medizinische Klinik-Intensivmedizin Und Notfallmedizin","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medizinische Klinik-Intensivmedizin Und Notfallmedizin","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00063-025-01247-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The number of long-term ventilated patients in out-of-hospital intensive care (OIC) in Germany has risen sharply in recent years. Due to financial disincentives, structural care deficits and resource bottlenecks, there is an increasing risk of inadequate care. In 2020, the Intensive Care and Rehabilitation Strengthening Act (IPReG) was therefore passed by legislators with the aim of improving OIC. This study examines the opportunities and challenges of the IPReG with regard to the care of long-term ventilated patients in OIC from the perspective of payers and healthcare policy.

Materials and methods: A qualitative interview study was conducted as part of the process evaluation of the multicenter study PRiVENT (Prevention of invasive Ventilation). Using semi-structured, guideline-based individual interviews, health policy actors and representatives of statutory health insurers were asked about the IPReG.

Results: In all, 11 health policymakers and 12 representatives of statutory health insurance companies took part in the interviews. Both interview groups showed a positive attitude towards the IPReG and expressed the expectation of added value for the outpatient care of long-term ventilated patients. The current remuneration regulations for weaning and the assessment of weaning potential in the OIC were criticized, among other things.

Conclusion: The IPReG provides a legal basis for improving OIC, but there is still room for improvement in its current version. The evaluation planned by legislators should be used to identify potential weaknesses and make appropriate adjustments.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
9.10%
发文量
93
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Medizinische Klinik – Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin is an internationally respected interdisciplinary journal. It is intended for physicians, nurses, respiratory and physical therapists active in intensive care and accident/emergency units, but also for internists, anesthesiologists, surgeons, neurologists, and pediatricians with special interest in intensive care medicine. Comprehensive reviews describe the most recent advances in the field of internal medicine with special focus on intensive care problems. Freely submitted original articles present important studies in this discipline and promote scientific exchange, while articles in the category Photo essay feature interesting cases and aim at optimizing diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. In the rubric journal club well-respected experts comment on outstanding international publications. Review articles under the rubric "Continuing Medical Education" present verified results of scientific research and their integration into daily practice. The rubrics "Nursing practice" and "Physical therapy" round out the information.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信