Cargando…

Regional differences in the patient population of general practices in northern Germany: results of a mixed-methods study

OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study was to explore patient types in general practitioner (GP) practices and to quantify the regional differences of the frequencies of these patient types in northern Germany. DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a mixed-methods study based on focus groups and standardised i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hansen, Heike, Schäfer, Ingmar, Pohontsch, Nadine Janis, Kazek, Agata, Hardt, Hanna, Lühmann, Dagmar, Scherer, Martin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7703430/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33247029
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041762
_version_ 1783616636512632832
author Hansen, Heike
Schäfer, Ingmar
Pohontsch, Nadine Janis
Kazek, Agata
Hardt, Hanna
Lühmann, Dagmar
Scherer, Martin
author_facet Hansen, Heike
Schäfer, Ingmar
Pohontsch, Nadine Janis
Kazek, Agata
Hardt, Hanna
Lühmann, Dagmar
Scherer, Martin
author_sort Hansen, Heike
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study was to explore patient types in general practitioner (GP) practices and to quantify the regional differences of the frequencies of these patient types in northern Germany. DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a mixed-methods study based on focus groups and standardised interviews with GPs. All counties and independent cities within a radius of 120 km around Hamburg were assigned one of three regional categories (urban areas, environs, rural areas). The focus groups were analysed using qualitative content analysis. Relative frequencies of consultations by patient types and differences between the regions were calculated. Logistic regression analyses were used to identify differences among regions. PARTICIPANTS: Nine focus groups with 65 GPs (67.7% male). From the 280 initially recruited GPs 211 (65.4% male) could be personally interviewed. RESULTS: Four themes with 27 patient types were derived from the focus groups: patients classified by morbidity, sociodemographic characteristics, special care needs and patient behaviour. Five patient characteristics were significantly more prevalent in urban areas than rural areas: patients with migration background and culturally different disease concepts (OR 1.23; 95% CI 1.06 to 1.42), privately insured patients (OR 1.17; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.31), educationally disadvantaged patients with low health literacy (OR 1.11; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.19), patients with psychiatric disorders (OR 1.07; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.12) and senior citizens living on their own without caregivers (OR 1.05; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.31). Three patient types were significantly less prevalent in urban areas: minors accompanied by their parents (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.61 to 0.83), patients with poor therapy adherence (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.95) and patients with dementia (OR 0.90; 95% CI 0.82 to 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: GPs could compensate the specific needs of their patients with medical training aligned with the requirements of their region. Urban GPs need skills treating patients with psychiatric, social and cultural problems, rural GPs regarding the care for children or noncompliant patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02558322
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7703430
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77034302020-12-09 Regional differences in the patient population of general practices in northern Germany: results of a mixed-methods study Hansen, Heike Schäfer, Ingmar Pohontsch, Nadine Janis Kazek, Agata Hardt, Hanna Lühmann, Dagmar Scherer, Martin BMJ Open General practice / Family practice OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study was to explore patient types in general practitioner (GP) practices and to quantify the regional differences of the frequencies of these patient types in northern Germany. DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a mixed-methods study based on focus groups and standardised interviews with GPs. All counties and independent cities within a radius of 120 km around Hamburg were assigned one of three regional categories (urban areas, environs, rural areas). The focus groups were analysed using qualitative content analysis. Relative frequencies of consultations by patient types and differences between the regions were calculated. Logistic regression analyses were used to identify differences among regions. PARTICIPANTS: Nine focus groups with 65 GPs (67.7% male). From the 280 initially recruited GPs 211 (65.4% male) could be personally interviewed. RESULTS: Four themes with 27 patient types were derived from the focus groups: patients classified by morbidity, sociodemographic characteristics, special care needs and patient behaviour. Five patient characteristics were significantly more prevalent in urban areas than rural areas: patients with migration background and culturally different disease concepts (OR 1.23; 95% CI 1.06 to 1.42), privately insured patients (OR 1.17; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.31), educationally disadvantaged patients with low health literacy (OR 1.11; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.19), patients with psychiatric disorders (OR 1.07; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.12) and senior citizens living on their own without caregivers (OR 1.05; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.31). Three patient types were significantly less prevalent in urban areas: minors accompanied by their parents (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.61 to 0.83), patients with poor therapy adherence (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.95) and patients with dementia (OR 0.90; 95% CI 0.82 to 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: GPs could compensate the specific needs of their patients with medical training aligned with the requirements of their region. Urban GPs need skills treating patients with psychiatric, social and cultural problems, rural GPs regarding the care for children or noncompliant patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02558322 BMJ Publishing Group 2020-11-27 /pmc/articles/PMC7703430/ /pubmed/33247029 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041762 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle General practice / Family practice
Hansen, Heike
Schäfer, Ingmar
Pohontsch, Nadine Janis
Kazek, Agata
Hardt, Hanna
Lühmann, Dagmar
Scherer, Martin
Regional differences in the patient population of general practices in northern Germany: results of a mixed-methods study
title Regional differences in the patient population of general practices in northern Germany: results of a mixed-methods study
title_full Regional differences in the patient population of general practices in northern Germany: results of a mixed-methods study
title_fullStr Regional differences in the patient population of general practices in northern Germany: results of a mixed-methods study
title_full_unstemmed Regional differences in the patient population of general practices in northern Germany: results of a mixed-methods study
title_short Regional differences in the patient population of general practices in northern Germany: results of a mixed-methods study
title_sort regional differences in the patient population of general practices in northern germany: results of a mixed-methods study
topic General practice / Family practice
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7703430/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33247029
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041762
work_keys_str_mv AT hansenheike regionaldifferencesinthepatientpopulationofgeneralpracticesinnortherngermanyresultsofamixedmethodsstudy
AT schaferingmar regionaldifferencesinthepatientpopulationofgeneralpracticesinnortherngermanyresultsofamixedmethodsstudy
AT pohontschnadinejanis regionaldifferencesinthepatientpopulationofgeneralpracticesinnortherngermanyresultsofamixedmethodsstudy
AT kazekagata regionaldifferencesinthepatientpopulationofgeneralpracticesinnortherngermanyresultsofamixedmethodsstudy
AT hardthanna regionaldifferencesinthepatientpopulationofgeneralpracticesinnortherngermanyresultsofamixedmethodsstudy
AT luhmanndagmar regionaldifferencesinthepatientpopulationofgeneralpracticesinnortherngermanyresultsofamixedmethodsstudy
AT scherermartin regionaldifferencesinthepatientpopulationofgeneralpracticesinnortherngermanyresultsofamixedmethodsstudy