Carina Lummer, Carsten Eggers, Andreas Becker, Fenja Demandt, Tobias Warnecke
{"title":"帕金森病的跨学科网络护理合作:德国的基线评估。","authors":"Carina Lummer, Carsten Eggers, Andreas Becker, Fenja Demandt, Tobias Warnecke","doi":"10.1186/s42466-023-00300-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The strengthening of interdisciplinary care collaboration in Parkinson's disease is taking on increasing importance in daily medical routine. Therefore, care providers worldwide are organizing themselves in disease-specific regional network structures. However, the existing networks are heterogeneous, and the driving key players are yet unidentified.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To systematically identify key factors of the composition of health care professionals, who are initially interested in the development of a Parkinson network for interdisciplinary care collaboration, their motivation, and expectations, we conducted a basic evaluation in three different German regions covering a total number of 23,405 people with Parkinson's.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A specially developed semi-open questionnaire focusing on socio-demographic information, ways of contact, interdisciplinary collaboration, and connectedness was used. Statistical analyses were performed based on a predesigned codebook.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most crucial professions were outpatient therapists (physio-, occupational-, speech therapists) (36.7%), average case load of 10.1 patients/3 months and inpatient movement disorder specialists (21.1%), average case load of 197.4 patients/3 months. Before implementation of PD networks, 48.9% of outpatient therapists did not have any contact with neurologists. 58.9% of caregivers considered the current frequency of collaboration to be insufficient. The lack of political support as well as a lack of time were identified as main hurdles to increased collaboration.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The identified driving forces in strengthened care collaboration are assigned to different healthcare sectors. This makes networks which provide tools for specialized education and interdisciplinary, cross-sectoral communication indispensable. For an areawide rollout, a rethinking of political frameworks towards network care is strongly necessary.</p>","PeriodicalId":94156,"journal":{"name":"Neurological research and practice","volume":"6 1","pages":"5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10782567/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interdisciplinary network care collaboration in Parkinson's disease: a baseline evaluation in Germany.\",\"authors\":\"Carina Lummer, Carsten Eggers, Andreas Becker, Fenja Demandt, Tobias Warnecke\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s42466-023-00300-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The strengthening of interdisciplinary care collaboration in Parkinson's disease is taking on increasing importance in daily medical routine. Therefore, care providers worldwide are organizing themselves in disease-specific regional network structures. However, the existing networks are heterogeneous, and the driving key players are yet unidentified.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To systematically identify key factors of the composition of health care professionals, who are initially interested in the development of a Parkinson network for interdisciplinary care collaboration, their motivation, and expectations, we conducted a basic evaluation in three different German regions covering a total number of 23,405 people with Parkinson's.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A specially developed semi-open questionnaire focusing on socio-demographic information, ways of contact, interdisciplinary collaboration, and connectedness was used. Statistical analyses were performed based on a predesigned codebook.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most crucial professions were outpatient therapists (physio-, occupational-, speech therapists) (36.7%), average case load of 10.1 patients/3 months and inpatient movement disorder specialists (21.1%), average case load of 197.4 patients/3 months. Before implementation of PD networks, 48.9% of outpatient therapists did not have any contact with neurologists. 58.9% of caregivers considered the current frequency of collaboration to be insufficient. The lack of political support as well as a lack of time were identified as main hurdles to increased collaboration.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The identified driving forces in strengthened care collaboration are assigned to different healthcare sectors. This makes networks which provide tools for specialized education and interdisciplinary, cross-sectoral communication indispensable. For an areawide rollout, a rethinking of political frameworks towards network care is strongly necessary.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94156,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurological research and practice\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10782567/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurological research and practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-023-00300-5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurological research and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-023-00300-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Interdisciplinary network care collaboration in Parkinson's disease: a baseline evaluation in Germany.
Background: The strengthening of interdisciplinary care collaboration in Parkinson's disease is taking on increasing importance in daily medical routine. Therefore, care providers worldwide are organizing themselves in disease-specific regional network structures. However, the existing networks are heterogeneous, and the driving key players are yet unidentified.
Objectives: To systematically identify key factors of the composition of health care professionals, who are initially interested in the development of a Parkinson network for interdisciplinary care collaboration, their motivation, and expectations, we conducted a basic evaluation in three different German regions covering a total number of 23,405 people with Parkinson's.
Methods: A specially developed semi-open questionnaire focusing on socio-demographic information, ways of contact, interdisciplinary collaboration, and connectedness was used. Statistical analyses were performed based on a predesigned codebook.
Results: The most crucial professions were outpatient therapists (physio-, occupational-, speech therapists) (36.7%), average case load of 10.1 patients/3 months and inpatient movement disorder specialists (21.1%), average case load of 197.4 patients/3 months. Before implementation of PD networks, 48.9% of outpatient therapists did not have any contact with neurologists. 58.9% of caregivers considered the current frequency of collaboration to be insufficient. The lack of political support as well as a lack of time were identified as main hurdles to increased collaboration.
Conclusion: The identified driving forces in strengthened care collaboration are assigned to different healthcare sectors. This makes networks which provide tools for specialized education and interdisciplinary, cross-sectoral communication indispensable. For an areawide rollout, a rethinking of political frameworks towards network care is strongly necessary.