[Obtaining a Second Opinion in Germany: an Analysis of the Billing Data of the Health Insurer AOK Nordost].

IF 0.8 4区 医学 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Gesundheitswesen Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-16 DOI:10.1055/a-2304-5361
Dunja Bruch, Olga Resch, Stephanie Sehlen, Barbara Prediger, Filip Schröter, Achim Franzen, Cecile Ronckers, Edmund Neugebauer, Susann May
{"title":"[Obtaining a Second Opinion in Germany: an Analysis of the Billing Data of the Health Insurer AOK Nordost].","authors":"Dunja Bruch, Olga Resch, Stephanie Sehlen, Barbara Prediger, Filip Schröter, Achim Franzen, Cecile Ronckers, Edmund Neugebauer, Susann May","doi":"10.1055/a-2304-5361","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this billing data analysis was to examine the implementation of the second opinion directive in Germany and to investigate how often informing patients about their right to a second opinion (SO) and obtaining a SO are documented.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To examine the frequency of \"informing about SO\" and \"obtaining an SO\", insured patients who received an indication for tonsillectomy, tonsillotomy or hysterectomy in 2019 or 2020 were included, as well as insured patients who received an indication for shoulder arthroscopy in Q2-Q3 2020. Data were analyzed descriptively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the study period, 5307 surgeries were reported for the above-mentioned indications. \"Informing about SO\" was documented for 121 patients with surgery and \"obtaining an SO\" was documented for 12 patients with surgery. The proportion of documented \"informing about SO\" compared to the number of surgeries was highest for tonsillectomy/tonsillotomy<18 years (4%) and lowest for shoulder arthroscopy (0.6%). In total, no patient was documented for both \"informing about SO\" and \"obtaining an SO\".</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The present billing data analysis shows that information about the right to an SO according to the directive as well as the obtaining of such an SO has not yet been implemented in standard care as required by law.</p>","PeriodicalId":47653,"journal":{"name":"Gesundheitswesen","volume":"86 7","pages":"494-498"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gesundheitswesen","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2304-5361","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this billing data analysis was to examine the implementation of the second opinion directive in Germany and to investigate how often informing patients about their right to a second opinion (SO) and obtaining a SO are documented.

Methods: To examine the frequency of "informing about SO" and "obtaining an SO", insured patients who received an indication for tonsillectomy, tonsillotomy or hysterectomy in 2019 or 2020 were included, as well as insured patients who received an indication for shoulder arthroscopy in Q2-Q3 2020. Data were analyzed descriptively.

Results: During the study period, 5307 surgeries were reported for the above-mentioned indications. "Informing about SO" was documented for 121 patients with surgery and "obtaining an SO" was documented for 12 patients with surgery. The proportion of documented "informing about SO" compared to the number of surgeries was highest for tonsillectomy/tonsillotomy<18 years (4%) and lowest for shoulder arthroscopy (0.6%). In total, no patient was documented for both "informing about SO" and "obtaining an SO".

Conclusions: The present billing data analysis shows that information about the right to an SO according to the directive as well as the obtaining of such an SO has not yet been implemented in standard care as required by law.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[在德国获得第二意见:对 AOK Nordost 医疗保险公司账单数据的分析]。
目的本账单数据分析旨在研究第二意见指令在德国的实施情况,并调查告知患者其有权获得第二意见(SO)和获得第二意见的记录频率:为了研究 "告知第二意见 "和 "获得第二意见 "的频率,研究对象包括在2019年或2020年获得扁桃体切除术、扁桃体切开术或子宫切除术指征的参保患者,以及在2020年第二季度至第三季度获得肩关节镜指征的参保患者。对数据进行了描述性分析:在研究期间,报告了 5307 例上述适应症的手术。121例手术患者记录了 "告知SO",12例手术患者记录了 "获得SO"。与手术数量相比,扁桃体切除术/扁桃体切开术中记录 "告知《手术条例》"的比例最高:本账单数据分析显示,关于根据指令有权获得《手术申请表》的信息以及获得此类《手术申请表》的信息尚未按照法律要求在标准护理中实施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Gesundheitswesen
Gesundheitswesen PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
18.20%
发文量
308
期刊介绍: The health service informs you comprehensively and up-to-date about the most important topics of the health care system. In addition to guidelines, overviews and comments, you will find current research results and contributions to CME-certified continuing education and training. The journal offers a scientific discussion forum and a platform for communications from professional societies. The content quality is ensured by a publisher body, the expert advisory board and other experts in the peer review process.
期刊最新文献
[Correction: Challenges in Rehabilitation of People with Cognitive and/or Multiple Impairments: Insights from a Pilot Study]. [Correction: Level of knowledge and intention to use digital health services among people with depression: a survey]. [Good cartographic Practice in Health Care, Version 2 - abbreviated version]. [Cross-sector regional care networks to ensure needs-based (inpatient) care in times of crisis - results of focus group discussions with healthcare providers]. [Challenges of digital competence in the public health department: findings from a real-world laboratory].
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1