AimTo describe general practitioners' (GPs) perspectives on end‐of‐life care of nursing home residents.MethodsWe carried out a cross‐sectional study. A questionnaire was sent to a random sample of 1121 GPs in the German federal states of Bremen and Lower Saxony in 2018. Data were compared between GPs with a qualification in palliative medicine and those without such qualifications, and multivariable logistic regression was performed.ResultsOverall, 375 questionnaires were returned (response rate 34%). The majority of GPs (71%) agreed that nursing home residents are treated too often in hospitals at the end of life, and more than half rated end‐of‐life care in nursing homes as “rather poor” (54%). For both questions, GPs with a qualification in palliative medicine showed higher agreements. In the multivariable analysis, a prior qualification in palliative medicine was also strongly associated with rating end‐of‐life care as “rather poor” (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.10–3.23). Respondents cited higher staffing ratios and better trained nursing staff as the most important measures to improve end‐of‐life care. Furthermore, it was estimated that just 37% of residents have an advance directive, with only one‐third including valid information on end‐of‐life hospitalizations.ConclusionsThis study showed that GPs tend to be critical regarding end‐of‐life care in nursing homes. To improve end‐of‐life care, better training in palliative care for nursing staff and GPs might be warranted. In addition, advance care planning can help to ensure that residents' wishes are respected. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2020; 20: 25–30.

BackgroundWaiting times for an outpatient appointment in Germany differ between insurants of the statutory and private health insurance schemes, especially for specialised care. The aim of this study was to uncover possible differences in waiting times depending on health insurance scheme and to identify predictors for excessive waiting times in primary care.MethodsWe used data of the Bertelsmann Foundation Healthcare Monitor, which is a repeated cross sectional study dealing with experiences in health care and attitudes towards current health policy themes. We analysed the surveys conducted from 2011 to 2013, with respondents assigned to their health insurance fund, namely AOK, BARMER GEK, BKK, DAK, TK, IKK, other statutory funds and private funds. The mean waiting times for an appointment and spent in a physician’s waiting room, and the satisfaction with waiting times were evaluated with respect to different health insurance funds. A logistic regression model was used to calculate the chance of excessive waiting times with respect to health insurance fund, age, sex, health and socioeconomic status. The ninetieth percentile of the waiting time distribution (10 days) was chosen as the cut-off point between average and excessive.ResultsA total of 5618 respondents were analysed. Mean waiting times in primary care were low (4.0 days) and homogeneous (SHIs: 3.6–4.9 days), even though privately insured respondents reported shorter waiting times for appointments (3.3 days). They also reported a greater satisfaction with waiting times (77.5%) than SHI insurants (64.5%). However, we identified a group (10.1%), who experienced excessive waiting times in primary care. Compared to privately insured respondents, the chance of excessive waiting times was increased for SHI insurants (highest odds ratio for BKK: 2.17; 95%-CI: 1.38–3.42). Additionally, higher age and residence in East Germany were associated with higher chances of waiting times of 10 days or more.ConclusionsPrimary care in Germany is readily accessible with generally short waiting times. However, barriers in access to the health care system affect a certain part of patients depending on insurance status, age and region of residence. Ways to improve the access need to be studied.

Background: Visits in emergency departments and hospital admissions are common among nursing home (NH) residents and they are associated with significant complications. Many of these transfers are considered inappropriate. This study aimed to compare the perceptions of general practitioners (GPs) and NH staff on hospital transfers among residents and to illustrate measures for improvement. Methods: Two cross-sectional studies were conducted as surveys among 1121 GPs in the German federal states Bremen and Lower Saxony and staff from 1069 NHs (preferably nursing staff managers) from all over Germany, each randomly selected. Questionnaires were sent in August 2018 and January 2019, respectively. The answers were compared between GPs and NH staff using descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U tests and χ2-tests. Results: We received 375 GP questionnaires (response: 34%) and 486 NH questionnaires (response: 45%). GPs estimated the proportion of inappropriate transfers higher than NH staff (hospital admissions: 35.0% vs. 25.6%, p < 0.0001; emergency department visits: 39.9% vs. 20.9%, p < 0.0001). The majority of NH staff and nearly half of the GPs agreed that NH residents do often not benefit from hospital admissions (NHs: 61.4% vs. GPs: 48.8%; p = 0.0009). Both groups rated almost all potential measures for improvement differently (p < 0.0001), however, GPs and NH staff considered most areas to reduce hospital transfers importantly. The two most important measures for GPs were more nursing staff (91.6%) and better communication between nursing staff and GP (90.9%). NH staff considered better care / availability of GP (82.8%) and medical specialists (81.3%) as most important. Both groups rated similarly the importance of explicit advance directives (GPs: 77.2%, NHs: 72.4%; p = 0.1492). Conclusions: A substantial proportion of hospital transfers from NHs were considered inappropriate. Partly, the ratings of possible areas for improvement differed between GPs and NH staff indicating that both groups seem to pass the responsibility to each other. These findings, however, support the need for interprofessional collaboration.

Clear and unambiguous evidence of vaccine safety and efficacy for different subgroups within the same age group as well as organizational efforts to increase vaccination within nursing homes would be recommended.

Contrary to expectation, the associations of wealth and health were inconsistent in the retired study population. These results were obtained in a country with national pension schemes, and it has to be examined whether the findings can be generalised to other countries. The inconsistent findings of indicators of wealth are calling the utility of net worth into question.

Pneumonia is one of the most common infectious diseases with a high mortality, especially in the elderly population. To date, there have been only a few population-based studies dealing with the incidence of pneumonia in nursing homes (NHs). We conducted a cohort study using data from a large German statutory health insurance fund. Between 2010 and 2014, 127 227 NH residents 65 years and older were analysed. For the calculation of incidences per 100 person-years (PY) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), we assessed the first diagnosis of pneumonia during the time in NH. We compared the rates between sexes, age groups, care levels, and comorbidities and we performed a multivariate Cox regression analysis. The mean age in the cohort was 84.0 years (74.6% female). A total of 19 183 incident cases led to an overall 5-year-incidence of 11.8 per 100 PY (95% CI 11.7-12.0). The incidence in men was substantially higher than in women. Rates were highest in the first month after NH placement. Our study revealed that the incidence of pneumonia is high in German NH residents and especially in males. Due to demographic changes, pneumonia will likely be increasingly relevant in the health care of the elderly and institutionalised population.

Background: Provision of ambulatory care by medical specialists for nursing home residents (NHR) is discussed to be inadequate in Germany, however with only incomplete evidence on this topic. We wanted to know whether the transition to a nursing home is associated with a general decrease in medical specialist care and therefore compared contact rates before and after institutionalization. Methods: Claims data of 18,779 newly admitted NHR in 2013 were followed for the whole year prior to and up to two years after admission. The frequencies of contacts to specialists were assessed and stratified by sex, age, care level, dementia diagnosis and chronic conditions. Multivariate analyses were conducted to identify predictors for contacts to specialists. Results: One year after institutionalization the most pronounced decrease was found in contacts with ophthalmologists (38.4% vs. 30.6%) whereas with most other specialties only small changes were found. The only specialty with a large increase were neurologists and psychiatrists (27.2% vs. 43.0%). Differences depending on sex and age were rather small while NHR with dementia or a higher care level had lower contact rates after institutionalization. Before institutionalization most patients were referred to a specialist by a general practitioner (61.7-73.9%) while thereafter this proportion decreased substantially (27.8-58.6%). The strongest predictor for a specialist contact after admission to a nursing home was a contact to a specialist before (OR 8.8, CI 7.96-9.72 for contacts to neurologists or psychiatrists). A higher nursing care level and a higher age were also predictors for specialist contacts. Conclusions: Relevant decreases of ambulatory specialist care utilization after institutionalization are restricted to ophthalmologists. NHR of higher age and higher nursing care level had a lower chance for a specialist contact. The assessment of the adequacy of the provided care after institutionalization remains inconclusive due to little investigated but assumable changes in care needs of NHR. The decreased coordination of care by general practitioners after institutionalization conflicts with health policy goals.

The frequency of contacts of nursing home residents with medical specialists is lower compared to the general population of the same age group in Germany. The aim of this study was to assess general practitioners’ (GPs) views on specialist care needs of nursing home residents, on questions of qualification and care coordination. A cross-sectional study was conducted with a postal questionnaire among a representative sample of 1121 GPs in north-western Germany in 2018. The perceptions of GPs about the relative importance of the type of specialist care that is required in nursing homes was assessed on a five-point Likert scale (0 = very low to 4 = very high). A total of 375 GPs (response 33.5%; mean age 54.4 years; 57.6% male) participated in the survey. GPs assessed care needs as highest for neurologists and psychiatrists (68.7%) and lowest for gynecologists (6.5%). Almost all respondents (96.2%) strongly agreed that medical care for nursing home residents should be coordinated by GPs and that GPs should initiate the referral for further specialist care when required (87.5%). A minority (25.7%) agreed that quality of medical care would improve when care for a nursing home was provided by only one GP practice. GPs perceive the needs of nursing home residents for specialist care as high only in relation to care by neurologists and psychiatrists. GPs consider their own coordination function for medical care in nursing homes as very important.