Cargando…

Innovationsfonds und Primärversorgung – Welche Erwartungen und Erfahrungen vertreten Hausärzt*innen in Bezug auf die Teilnahme an innovativen Versorgungsmodellen?

BACKGROUND: In 2015, the German Innovation Fund was established to promote improvements in the quality of medical care. In order for new care models and interventions to be tested and incorporated into standard care in the future, primary care must be included. OBJECTIVES: The study explores general...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wangler, Julian, Jansky, Michael
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9132806/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35476151
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00103-022-03533-y
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: In 2015, the German Innovation Fund was established to promote improvements in the quality of medical care. In order for new care models and interventions to be tested and incorporated into standard care in the future, primary care must be included. OBJECTIVES: The study explores general practitioners’ (GPs’) attitudes, participation-relevant expectations, and experiences with regard to Innovation Fund projects. METHODS: Between July and October 2021, all 13,170 general practitioners in Baden-Württemberg, Hesse, and Rhineland-Palatinate were invited to take part in an online survey. Included in the evaluation were 3556 completed questionnaires (response rate: 27%). In addition to the descriptive analysis, a t-test on independent samples was used to determine significant differences between two groups. RESULTS: Of the respondents, 83% were familiar with the Innovation Fund. Most of the respondents associate it with opportunities and potential (including intensification of application-oriented healthcare research, independent financing, and inclusion of primary care). Nevertheless, many GPs are unsure to what extent primary care can benefit from the Innovation Fund in the longer term. When it comes to willingness to participate in Innovation Fund studies, the respondents are divided. Respondents who have already participated in such projects (24%) draw a positive balance (benefit of the intervention, cost-benefit ratio). However, hurdles and stress factors are also reported, such as documentation requirements and interventions in practice processes. CONCLUSIONS: In order to increase the attractiveness of the Innovation Fund for GPs, it is important to ensure that projects are fully compliant with primary care, especially with regard to the scope of medical decision-making, the limitation of documentation obligations, the guarantee of practice routines, a greater involvement in research planning, and an upgrading of the GP setting.