Health information management of older, multimorbid patients in German primary care: feasibility and first results of the outcome measures of a cluster-randomised controlled pilot trial - HYPERION-TransCare.

IF 2 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Astrid-Alexandra Klein, Maria Hanf, Truc Sophia Dinh, Franziska Brosse, Jenny Petermann, Steve Piller, Sylvia Schulz-Rothe, Lena Schäfer, Karola Mergenthal, Hanna M Seidling, Sophia Klasing, Nina Timmesfeld, Bahareh Yousefi, Marjan van den Akker, Karen Voigt
{"title":"Health information management of older, multimorbid patients in German primary care: feasibility and first results of the outcome measures of a cluster-randomised controlled pilot trial - HYPERION-TransCare.","authors":"Astrid-Alexandra Klein, Maria Hanf, Truc Sophia Dinh, Franziska Brosse, Jenny Petermann, Steve Piller, Sylvia Schulz-Rothe, Lena Schäfer, Karola Mergenthal, Hanna M Seidling, Sophia Klasing, Nina Timmesfeld, Bahareh Yousefi, Marjan van den Akker, Karen Voigt","doi":"10.1186/s12875-025-02774-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Availability of information at the interface of outpatient and inpatient care remains an important and inadequately resolved issue in Germany and beyond. As a vulnerable group with complex care needs, older patients, mostly multimorbid, are especially affected by the consequences. This trial tested the feasibility and implementability of a complex intervention which aimed at improving the availability of health information among patients and different healthcare providers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The prospective two-arm blinded pilot cRCT was accompanied by an explorative mixed-methods process evaluation. Over a period of six months in 2022, general practitioner (GP) practices in Germany with patients (≥ 65, multimorbid, polypharmacy) participated in testing the implementation of the intervention and the trial design (intervention (IG) vs control group (CG)). Here, the focus is on the feasibility and exploratory results of the primary (combined endpoint of hospitalisation, falls and mortality) and secondary outcome measures (improving GP practices' and patients' knowledge of health-related resource use (FIMA), as well as improving patients' Health Literacy (HLQ-G) and Satisfaction with Medication Information (SIMS-D)). Data were analysed according to the intention to treat principle.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve GP practices were randomised (6 per IG/CG). Of 159 patients invited, 93 were included in the analyses (52 IG/41 CG). At t0 and t1, only few self-reported data from patients (5 resp. 10) or from the GP questionnaire (resp. 0) were missing. At least one survey perspective was available for each patient at both survey times. Overall, there were few missing items in the questionnaires, so the scores could not be calculated in 4-18% of cases (primary combined endpoint 9%), and there were no single items with increased missing values (n = 0 to 7). The concordance of the hospitalisation data from patients and GP practices was about 80%. Exploratory analyses showed no effects of the intervention on primary or secondary outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The primary combined endpoint was feasible. The secondary outcomes and survey methods used also proved feasible for GP practices and older multimorbid patients, with low missing rates. However, there was no hint of the influence of the intervention in the study groups in the explorative analyses.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>The trial was registered in the DRKS German Clinical Trials Register: registration number DRKS00027649 (date: 19.01.2022); http://www.drks.de/DRKS00027649 .</p>","PeriodicalId":72428,"journal":{"name":"BMC primary care","volume":"26 1","pages":"98"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11971799/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC primary care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-025-02774-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"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: Availability of information at the interface of outpatient and inpatient care remains an important and inadequately resolved issue in Germany and beyond. As a vulnerable group with complex care needs, older patients, mostly multimorbid, are especially affected by the consequences. This trial tested the feasibility and implementability of a complex intervention which aimed at improving the availability of health information among patients and different healthcare providers.

Methods: The prospective two-arm blinded pilot cRCT was accompanied by an explorative mixed-methods process evaluation. Over a period of six months in 2022, general practitioner (GP) practices in Germany with patients (≥ 65, multimorbid, polypharmacy) participated in testing the implementation of the intervention and the trial design (intervention (IG) vs control group (CG)). Here, the focus is on the feasibility and exploratory results of the primary (combined endpoint of hospitalisation, falls and mortality) and secondary outcome measures (improving GP practices' and patients' knowledge of health-related resource use (FIMA), as well as improving patients' Health Literacy (HLQ-G) and Satisfaction with Medication Information (SIMS-D)). Data were analysed according to the intention to treat principle.

Results: Twelve GP practices were randomised (6 per IG/CG). Of 159 patients invited, 93 were included in the analyses (52 IG/41 CG). At t0 and t1, only few self-reported data from patients (5 resp. 10) or from the GP questionnaire (resp. 0) were missing. At least one survey perspective was available for each patient at both survey times. Overall, there were few missing items in the questionnaires, so the scores could not be calculated in 4-18% of cases (primary combined endpoint 9%), and there were no single items with increased missing values (n = 0 to 7). The concordance of the hospitalisation data from patients and GP practices was about 80%. Exploratory analyses showed no effects of the intervention on primary or secondary outcome measures.

Conclusions: The primary combined endpoint was feasible. The secondary outcomes and survey methods used also proved feasible for GP practices and older multimorbid patients, with low missing rates. However, there was no hint of the influence of the intervention in the study groups in the explorative analyses.

Trial registration: The trial was registered in the DRKS German Clinical Trials Register: registration number DRKS00027649 (date: 19.01.2022); http://www.drks.de/DRKS00027649 .

德国基层医疗机构对多病症老年患者的健康信息管理:集群随机对照试点试验--HYPERION-TransCare--的可行性和初步结果。
背景:在门诊和住院护理的界面信息的可用性仍然是一个重要的和不充分解决的问题,在德国和超越。作为具有复杂护理需求的弱势群体,老年患者(大多患有多种疾病)尤其受到后果的影响。该试验测试了一项复杂干预措施的可行性和可执行性,该措施旨在改善患者和不同医疗保健提供者之间健康信息的可获得性。方法:前瞻性双臂盲法先导cRCT伴有探索性混合方法过程评价。在2022年为期6个月的时间里,德国的全科医生(GP)执业患者(≥65岁,多种疾病,多种药物)参与了干预措施的实施和试验设计(干预组(IG) vs对照组(CG))的测试。在这里,重点是可行性和探索性结果的主要(住院,跌倒和死亡率的综合终点)和次要结果测量(改善GP实践和患者对健康相关资源使用的知识(FIMA),以及提高患者的健康素养(HLQ-G)和对药物信息的满意度(SIMS-D))。根据意向治疗原则对资料进行分析。结果:12个GP实践被随机分配(每个IG/CG 6个)。入选的159例患者中,有93例纳入分析(52 IG/41 CG)。在t0和t1时,只有少数患者自我报告的数据(5例)。10)或GP问卷(见第10页)。0)人失踪了。在两次调查中,每个患者至少有一个调查视角。总体而言,问卷中缺失的项目很少,因此4-18%的病例(主要联合终点9%)无法计算得分,并且没有单个项目缺失值增加(n = 0至7)。患者住院数据与全科医生的一致性约为80%。探索性分析显示,干预对主要或次要结果测量没有影响。结论:主要联合终点是可行的。次要结果和使用的调查方法也被证明对全科医生和老年多病患者是可行的,漏报率低。然而,在探索性分析中,没有发现干预对研究组的影响。试验注册:该试验已在DRKS德国临床试验注册中心注册:注册号DRKS00027649(日期:19.01.2022);http://www.drks.de/DRKS00027649。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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