Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen最新文献

{"title":"Abschlusseditorial","authors":"Waldemar Siemens , Claudia Breuer , Jörg J. Meerpohl","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.06.006","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.06.006","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":"197 ","pages":"Pages 77-78"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144761703","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Editorial: Digitization and artificial intelligence in healthcare - Gamechanger or nightmare?","authors":"Gerald Sendlhofer, Karin Wolf-Ostermann","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.08.001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.zefq.2025.08.001","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144973762","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Applying qualitative comparative analysis in a systematic review: Lessons learned","authors":"Dorothee Bauernschmidt ,&nbsp;Janina Wittmann ,&nbsp;Julian Hirt ,&nbsp;Gabriele Meyer ,&nbsp;Anja Bieber","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.03.013","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.03.013","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Evidence synthesis of primary studies assessing complex interventions poses challenges due to the heterogeneity of study populations, interventions, outcomes, or study designs. Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) aims to identify conditions or combinations of conditions that lead to a specific outcome and may be an appropriate instrument to deal with heterogeneity and complexity.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>We aimed to describe the lessons learned when applying QCA in a systematic review on technology-based counselling interventions in dementia.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The lessons learned were generated through research team reflection and discussion of the challenges and problems encountered in the process of applying the initial steps of the QCA. As the QCA remained incomplete, a brief account of aspects to be considered when using QCA methodology for data synthesis within a systematic review is presented.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The lessons learned comprise the importance of clear eligibility criteria representing the core elements of interventions and the need for a consistent dataset based on sufficient reporting and suitable publication types. We also recommend adoption of a multi-perspective view by integrating theoretical and practical knowledge.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>QCA may increase knowledge gain in systematic reviews by capturing the complexity of interventions and contexts. An adequate dataset is needed to enable systematic comparison. To achieve this, adherence to frameworks guiding the development, implementation, and evaluation of complex interventions as well as to reporting guidelines is essential.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":"196 ","pages":"Pages 82-86"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144030075","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Kommunikation, Kooperation und Austausch mit Psychotherapeut*innen aus der Sicht von Primärversorger*innen – Befragungsergebnisse im Rahmen des Projekts „Evaluation der Psychotherapie-Richtlinie“","authors":"Pauline Birte Schlesiger ,&nbsp;Jürgen Wasem ,&nbsp;Luisa Friedrich ,&nbsp;Sandra Werner ,&nbsp;Sarah Schlierenkamp ,&nbsp;Gerald Lux ,&nbsp;Anke Walendzik ,&nbsp;Carina Abels ,&nbsp;Klemens Höfer ,&nbsp;Kathrin Klipker ,&nbsp;Ursula Marschall ,&nbsp;Dieter Best ,&nbsp;Christa Schaff ,&nbsp;Helene Timmermann ,&nbsp;Silke Neusser","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.04.005","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.04.005","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>General practitioners (GPs) and psychotherapists fulfill a variety of functions in the care for individuals with mental illness. However, little is currently known about the exchange and communication between these two groups. To address this gap, an exploratory study has been conducted from the perspective of primary care providers to analyze the nature of exchange and communication with psychotherapists.</div></div><div><h3>Methodology</h3><div>A standardized cross-sectional survey was conducted among primary care providers for adults (PEW) and children/adolescents (PKJ) as part of the ’Evaluation of the Psychotherapy Guideline’ project. In July 2021, a random sample from the pool of a target group of specialists with N = 1,700 people from each group were contacted by mail. Another random sample of N = 1,700 from each group was contacted in November 2021. The survey questionnaire included, among other things, questions about the exchange with psychotherapists. The exploratory analysis was descriptive.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of N = 255 and N = 444 valid survey questionnaires from PEW and PKJ was analyzed. The majority of primary care providers are over 50 years old (PEW 72.8%; PKJ 62.0%), and more than half are female (PEW 53.8%; PKJ 53.7%). As reported by PEW, the primary modes of communication and exchange with psychotherapists are via written correspondence (20.4%) and telephone (18.0%). For PKJ, the predominant mode of communication is by phone (22.6%). The majority of primary care providers expressed their dissatisfaction with the exchange with psychotherapists, with the highest rates being observed during (PEW 60.8%; PKJ 47.4%) and after referral (PEW 57.4%; PKJ 49.2%). Satisfaction is influenced by a number of factors, including integration into networks, which has been shown to have a positive effect.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The cross-sectional survey provides insight into the communication and collaboration between primary care providers and psychotherapists. To facilitate improvements, further research is needed on the barriers to interdisciplinary cooperation and communication.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":"196 ","pages":"Pages 53-64"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144121140","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Sicherheitsbedenken und Speak-up in der Patientenversorgung aus Sicht der Auszubildenden der Pflegeassistenzberufe in Tirol – eine multizentrische, explorativ-quantitative Querschnittstudie","authors":"Stephanie Siebenförcher ,&nbsp;Marten Schmied ,&nbsp;Magdalena Hoffmann ,&nbsp;Christine Schwarz ,&nbsp;David Schwappach ,&nbsp;Gerald Sendlhofer ,&nbsp;Margret Jäger ,&nbsp;Gerhard Müller","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.05.002","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.05.002","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>‘Speak up’ refers to the act of raising safety concerns, which can greatly influence patient safety outcomes. In healthcare, hierarchical structures may inhibit nursing assistant trainees from voicing their concerns effectively. This study explored the speak-up behavior and perceptions of safety culture among nursing assistant trainees in Tyrol (Austria). It also investigated the reasons and barriers for speaking up, as well as potential differences in speak-up behavior based on macro-social characteristics.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Between May and July 2023, a multicentric, exploratory quantitative cross-sectional study was conducted involving 508 trainees in nursing assistance and advanced nursing assistance across seven training institutions in Tyrol. Data were collected using the “Speaking Up about Patient Safety Questionnaire” (SUPS-Q). Descriptive statistics along with the Mann-Whitney U test were employed for data analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 358 nursing assistant trainee participated in the study. Most trainees reported perceiving safety concerns, actively speaking up about them, and experiencing a generally positive safety culture during their internships. However, common barriers to speaking up included fear of negative repercussions for their training (45.6%) and uncertainty about how to articulate their concerns (31.8%). The primary motivations for addressing safety concerns were the desire to prevent harm (71.3%) and a strong sense of duty (62.5%).</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>Compared to existing studies with nursing students, trainees in the nursing assistant professions seem to express their safety concerns more often. The reasons for this could be primarily intradisciplinary communication and a higher average age.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Trainees in nursing assistance professions tend to be more willing to voice their safety concerns than nursing students. Further multicenter studies should be undertaken to improve the transferability of results.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":"196 ","pages":"Pages 38-46"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144276203","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Interventionen, um Moral Distress in der ambulanten Pflege zu reduzieren: eine Interviewstudie mit Pflegenden und Pflegeethiker*innen","authors":"Julia Petersen ,&nbsp;Ulrike Rösler ,&nbsp;Gabriele Meyer ,&nbsp;Christiane Luderer","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.05.005","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.05.005","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Moral distress affects the health of home care nurses and can lead to the decision to leave the profession early. Little is known about the ways to reduce moral distress in the context of home care nursing.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Identification of interventions to reduce moral distress in home care nurses.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>Interviews with home care nurses (n<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->20; 04−08/2023) from different organizations and with from different federal states and with care ethicists (n<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->6; 10/2023−04/2024) were conducted, transcribed and analyzed via qualitative content analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>On the one hand, interventions were identified that directly address the situations triggering moral distress or relate to the organization of work: e.g., support from superiors, evaluation of informal care, adaptation of the performance and billing system, family-friendly working time models, greater scope for decision-making, and improved cooperation between healthcare stakeholders. On the other hand, the respondents would like to see “ethical interventions”, such as ethics counseling, and more opportunities for professional exchange, e.g., in the context of team meetings on ethical issues.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In addition to improving working conditions and creating a positive organizational culture, outpatient ethics consultations at provider level or across care services represent an important intervention.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":"196 ","pages":"Pages 15-21"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144334128","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Liste der Affiliierten Institute und Fachgesellschaften / List of Affiliations","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/S1865-9217(25)00171-0","DOIUrl":"10.1016/S1865-9217(25)00171-0","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":"196 ","pages":"Page OBC"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144587978","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Honorierung von Leitlinienarbeit: die Perspektive der Engagierten","authors":"Susanne In der Smitten ,&nbsp;Valeria Aman ,&nbsp;Nikita Sorgatz ,&nbsp;Christopher Traylor ,&nbsp;Christoph Herrmann-Lingen","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.04.004","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.04.004","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>In the specialist literature clinical practice guidelines are primarily discussed with a focus on the methodology of their development and their importance for medical care. There is a lack of research on the motivation of contributors and on forms of recognition and rewards for involvement in guideline development.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Between August and December 2023, an exploratory online survey on the possibilities of recognizing engagement in guideline development was conducted among members of scientific medical societies and members of German medical faculties. The survey was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF; funding codes 16PU17025A; 16PU17025B) and provided 375 evaluable cases.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Four out of five respondents (79.1%) stated that they got involved in guideline work via an enquiry from a scientific medical society. They saw the added value above all in medical care (90.3% answering ‘(rather) true’), but a function of network maintenance was also (rather) affirmed (77.8%). A majority of 80.5% of respondents were in favor of rewarding guideline work, in particular through reimbursement of travel expenses (73.4%) and time off work (70.5%), but also in systems of indicator-based resource allocation (52.7%), other expense allowances (48.3%), or payment of a fee (42.5%). This was specified in free-text responses. The relevance of considering engagement in guideline work in habilitation and job appointment procedures was separately identified. Those against financial remuneration emphasized non-monetary benefits of collaboration, such as network or knowledge expansion, or expressed fears of possible negative consequences, for example with regard to conflicts of interest.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>No standard yet exists for recognizing involvement with guideline development. Different forms of expense allowances, time off work and recognition in performance evaluation and resource allocation procedures should be tested and examined for possible consequences.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":"196 ","pages":"Pages 47-52"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144081316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Förderung der evidenzbasierten Praxis durch die Implementierung eines Journal Clubs im Setting eines Universitätsklinikums","authors":"Annalena Paus ,&nbsp;Isabelle Stickdorn","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.05.004","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.05.004","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>A lack of structural-organisational and methodological skills can be a reason why evidence-based methods are not applied by healthcare practitioners. A Journal Club (JC) can be a suitable forum to strengthen the critical exchange of scientific findings in practice and thus promote evidence-based practice. The aim of this practical project was to implement and evaluate a JC in an interprofessional department for therapeutic health professions at a university hospital.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Based on a literature review and expert discussions, a guideline for the implementation of a JC was developed. This guideline was used to set up a JC for therapeutic healthcare professions at a university hospital. To evaluate the JC, written feedback forms were handed out to the participants after each JC.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Ten JCs were conducted between March 2023 and January 2025 and attended by an average of 43 participants. 278 feedback forms from JC participants were analysed. Overall satisfaction with the JC was rated at an average of 8.6 on a rating scale of 0–10 (0 = lowest satisfaction, 10 = highest satisfaction). 92.0% of participants agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that a JC offers a suitable forum to strengthen evidence-based practice. 37.2% of participants stated that since they started attending the JC, they have more frequently incorporated study results into their therapeutic decision-making.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The results show that a JC can be a promising platform for strengthening evidence-based work in everyday therapeutic practice.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":"196 ","pages":"Pages 22-28"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144334129","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Nutzer*innenerfahrung mit allgemeinverständlichen Kurzzusammenfassungen psychologischer systematischer Übersichtsarbeiten mit Metaanalyse („KLARpsy“-Texte) – eine qualitative Studie mit der „Lautes Denken“-Methode","authors":"Marwin Weber ,&nbsp;Marlene Stoll ,&nbsp;Anita Chasiotis ,&nbsp;Claudia Breuer ,&nbsp;Joerg J. Meerpohl ,&nbsp;Angela M. Kunzler","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.04.003","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.04.003","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Science communication can support informed decision-making. As part of the “PLan Psy” project, a guideline for producing plain language summaries of systematic reviews with meta-analysis on psychological topics (“KLARpsy” texts), was developed. This study aims to investigate the similarities and differences in the user experience with “KLARpsy texts” between laypersons and professionals (science communicators and psychologists).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a qualitative online interview study. Participants read two “KLARpsy” texts presented on a mock-up website and verbalized their impressions and experiences using the think aloud method. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed with a deductive approach using content analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The study was completed by twelve participants (nine female, three male), including six laypersons, three science communicators, and three psychologists. Both groups found the “KLARpsy” texts to be mainly useful, user-friendly, and trustworthy. Nevertheless, professional users preferred the original studies. Both groups emphasized the need for more detailed descriptions regarding methodology and result presentation. The “KLARsaurus” glossary promoted comprehensibility. The text structure supported usability. However, the structure and transitions between study-specific and general information as well as sentence structure were sometimes seen as non-intuitive. Some opinions on comprehensibility and information density were not consistent within the two groups.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>The plain language summaries in the form of ‘KLARpsy’ texts were perceived by interested participants as added value for laypersons. Both laypersons and professionals attach particular importance to a transparent and critical, but also understandable and clear presentation of study results. Individual preferences and differences in the perspectives of both user groups highlight challenges of standardizing such a science communication format.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":"196 ","pages":"Pages 4-14"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144079753","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}