Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen最新文献_第6页

Sicherheitsbedenken und Speak-up in der Patientenversorgung aus Sicht der Auszubildenden der Pflegeassistenzberufe in Tirol – eine multizentrische, explorativ-quantitative Querschnittstudie [从蒂罗尔护理助理实习生的角度看病人护理中的安全问题和畅所欲言——一项多中心探索性定量横断面研究]。

IF 1.4 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES

Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen

Pub Date : 2025-07-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.zefq.2025.05.002

Stephanie Siebenförcher , Marten Schmied , Magdalena Hoffmann , Christine Schwarz , David Schwappach , Gerald Sendlhofer , Margret Jäger , Gerhard Müller

Background

‘Speak up’ refers to the act of raising safety concerns, which can greatly influence patient safety outcomes. In healthcare, hierarchical structures may inhibit nursing assistant trainees from voicing their concerns effectively. This study explored the speak-up behavior and perceptions of safety culture among nursing assistant trainees in Tyrol (Austria). It also investigated the reasons and barriers for speaking up, as well as potential differences in speak-up behavior based on macro-social characteristics.

Methods

Between May and July 2023, a multicentric, exploratory quantitative cross-sectional study was conducted involving 508 trainees in nursing assistance and advanced nursing assistance across seven training institutions in Tyrol. Data were collected using the “Speaking Up about Patient Safety Questionnaire” (SUPS-Q). Descriptive statistics along with the Mann-Whitney U test were employed for data analysis.

Results

A total of 358 nursing assistant trainee participated in the study. Most trainees reported perceiving safety concerns, actively speaking up about them, and experiencing a generally positive safety culture during their internships. However, common barriers to speaking up included fear of negative repercussions for their training (45.6%) and uncertainty about how to articulate their concerns (31.8%). The primary motivations for addressing safety concerns were the desire to prevent harm (71.3%) and a strong sense of duty (62.5%).

Discussion

Compared to existing studies with nursing students, trainees in the nursing assistant professions seem to express their safety concerns more often. The reasons for this could be primarily intradisciplinary communication and a higher average age.

Conclusion

Trainees in nursing assistance professions tend to be more willing to voice their safety concerns than nursing students. Further multicenter studies should be undertaken to improve the transferability of results.

背景：“Speak up”是指提出安全问题的行为，这可以极大地影响患者的安全结果。在医疗保健中，等级结构可能会抑制护理助理实习生有效地表达他们的担忧。本研究探讨奥地利蒂罗尔市护理助理实习生的畅所欲言行为及安全文化认知。本文还研究了基于宏观社会特征的直言不讳的原因和障碍，以及直言不讳行为的潜在差异。方法：在2023年5月至7月期间，对蒂罗尔7家培训机构的508名护理辅助和高级护理辅助学员进行了一项多中心、探索性定量横断面研究。使用“畅所欲言患者安全问卷”（SUPS-Q）收集数据。采用描述性统计和Mann-Whitney U检验进行数据分析。结果：共有358名实习护理员参与研究。大多数受训者报告说，他们在实习期间感受到安全问题，积极地谈论这些问题，并体验到一种普遍积极的安全文化。然而，说出来的常见障碍包括害怕对培训的负面影响（45.6%）和不确定如何表达他们的担忧（31.8%）。解决安全问题的主要动机是希望防止伤害（71.3%）和强烈的责任感（62.5%）。讨论：与现有的护理学生研究相比，护理助理专业的学员似乎更经常表达他们的安全担忧。造成这种情况的主要原因可能是跨学科的交流和较高的平均年龄。结论：护理辅助专业的实习生比护生更愿意表达他们对安全的担忧。应开展进一步的多中心研究，以提高结果的可转移性。

{"title":"Sicherheitsbedenken und Speak-up in der Patientenversorgung aus Sicht der Auszubildenden der Pflegeassistenzberufe in Tirol – eine multizentrische, explorativ-quantitative Querschnittstudie","authors":"Stephanie Siebenförcher , Marten Schmied , Magdalena Hoffmann , Christine Schwarz , David Schwappach , Gerald Sendlhofer , Margret Jäger , Gerhard Müller","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.05.002","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.05.002","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>‘Speak up’ refers to the act of raising safety concerns, which can greatly influence patient safety outcomes. In healthcare, hierarchical structures may inhibit nursing assistant trainees from voicing their concerns effectively. This study explored the speak-up behavior and perceptions of safety culture among nursing assistant trainees in Tyrol (Austria). It also investigated the reasons and barriers for speaking up, as well as potential differences in speak-up behavior based on macro-social characteristics.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Between May and July 2023, a multicentric, exploratory quantitative cross-sectional study was conducted involving 508 trainees in nursing assistance and advanced nursing assistance across seven training institutions in Tyrol. Data were collected using the “Speaking Up about Patient Safety Questionnaire” (SUPS-Q). Descriptive statistics along with the Mann-Whitney U test were employed for data analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 358 nursing assistant trainee participated in the study. Most trainees reported perceiving safety concerns, actively speaking up about them, and experiencing a generally positive safety culture during their internships. However, common barriers to speaking up included fear of negative repercussions for their training (45.6%) and uncertainty about how to articulate their concerns (31.8%). The primary motivations for addressing safety concerns were the desire to prevent harm (71.3%) and a strong sense of duty (62.5%).</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>Compared to existing studies with nursing students, trainees in the nursing assistant professions seem to express their safety concerns more often. The reasons for this could be primarily intradisciplinary communication and a higher average age.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Trainees in nursing assistance professions tend to be more willing to voice their safety concerns than nursing students. Further multicenter studies should be undertaken to improve the transferability of results.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":"196 ","pages":"Pages 38-46"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144276203","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Interventionen, um Moral Distress in der ambulanten Pflege zu reduzieren: eine Interviewstudie mit Pflegenden und Pflegeethiker*innen [减少家庭护理中道德困扰的干预措施：对护士和护理伦理学家的访谈研究]。

IF 1.4 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES

Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen

Pub Date : 2025-07-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.zefq.2025.05.005

Julia Petersen , Ulrike Rösler , Gabriele Meyer , Christiane Luderer

Background

Moral distress affects the health of home care nurses and can lead to the decision to leave the profession early. Little is known about the ways to reduce moral distress in the context of home care nursing.

Objective

Identification of interventions to reduce moral distress in home care nurses.

Method

Interviews with home care nurses (n = 20; 04−08/2023) from different organizations and with from different federal states and with care ethicists (n = 6; 10/2023−04/2024) were conducted, transcribed and analyzed via qualitative content analysis.

Results

On the one hand, interventions were identified that directly address the situations triggering moral distress or relate to the organization of work: e.g., support from superiors, evaluation of informal care, adaptation of the performance and billing system, family-friendly working time models, greater scope for decision-making, and improved cooperation between healthcare stakeholders. On the other hand, the respondents would like to see “ethical interventions”, such as ethics counseling, and more opportunities for professional exchange, e.g., in the context of team meetings on ethical issues.

Conclusions

In addition to improving working conditions and creating a positive organizational culture, outpatient ethics consultations at provider level or across care services represent an important intervention.

背景：道德困境影响家庭护理护士的健康，并可能导致决定提前离开这个行业。在家庭护理的背景下，人们对减少道德困扰的方法知之甚少。目的：探讨减少家庭护理护士道德困扰的干预措施。方法：访谈家庭护理护士(n=20；（4-08/2023），来自不同的组织，来自不同的联邦州和护理伦理学家(n=6；10/2023-04/2024)，通过定性内容分析进行转录和分析。结果：一方面，我们确定了直接解决引发道德困境的情况或与工作组织有关的干预措施：例如上级支持、非正式护理的评估、绩效和计费系统的适应、家庭友好的工作时间模式、更大的决策范围以及改善医疗保健利益相关者之间的合作。另一方面，受访者希望看到“伦理干预”，如伦理咨询，以及更多的专业交流机会，如在伦理问题团队会议的背景下。结论：除了改善工作条件和创造积极的组织文化，门诊伦理咨询在提供者层面或跨护理服务是一个重要的干预措施。

{"title":"Interventionen, um Moral Distress in der ambulanten Pflege zu reduzieren: eine Interviewstudie mit Pflegenden und Pflegeethiker*innen","authors":"Julia Petersen , Ulrike Rösler , Gabriele Meyer , Christiane Luderer","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.05.005","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.05.005","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Moral distress affects the health of home care nurses and can lead to the decision to leave the profession early. Little is known about the ways to reduce moral distress in the context of home care nursing.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Identification of interventions to reduce moral distress in home care nurses.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>Interviews with home care nurses (n=20; 04−08/2023) from different organizations and with from different federal states and with care ethicists (n=6; 10/2023−04/2024) were conducted, transcribed and analyzed via qualitative content analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>On the one hand, interventions were identified that directly address the situations triggering moral distress or relate to the organization of work: e.g., support from superiors, evaluation of informal care, adaptation of the performance and billing system, family-friendly working time models, greater scope for decision-making, and improved cooperation between healthcare stakeholders. On the other hand, the respondents would like to see “ethical interventions”, such as ethics counseling, and more opportunities for professional exchange, e.g., in the context of team meetings on ethical issues.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In addition to improving working conditions and creating a positive organizational culture, outpatient ethics consultations at provider level or across care services represent an important intervention.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":"196 ","pages":"Pages 15-21"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144334128","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Liste der Affiliierten Institute und Fachgesellschaften / List of Affiliations 附属机构名单

IF 1.4 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES

Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen

Pub Date : 2025-07-01 DOI: 10.1016/S1865-9217(25)00171-0

引用次数: 0

Honorierung von Leitlinienarbeit: die Perspektive der Engagierten [从相关人员的角度对指导工作的认可和奖励]。

IF 1.4 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES

Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen

Pub Date : 2025-07-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.zefq.2025.04.004

Susanne In der Smitten , Valeria Aman , Nikita Sorgatz , Christopher Traylor , Christoph Herrmann-Lingen

Background

In the specialist literature clinical practice guidelines are primarily discussed with a focus on the methodology of their development and their importance for medical care. There is a lack of research on the motivation of contributors and on forms of recognition and rewards for involvement in guideline development.

Methods

Between August and December 2023, an exploratory online survey on the possibilities of recognizing engagement in guideline development was conducted among members of scientific medical societies and members of German medical faculties. The survey was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF; funding codes 16PU17025A; 16PU17025B) and provided 375 evaluable cases.

Results

Four out of five respondents (79.1%) stated that they got involved in guideline work via an enquiry from a scientific medical society. They saw the added value above all in medical care (90.3% answering ‘(rather) true’), but a function of network maintenance was also (rather) affirmed (77.8%). A majority of 80.5% of respondents were in favor of rewarding guideline work, in particular through reimbursement of travel expenses (73.4%) and time off work (70.5%), but also in systems of indicator-based resource allocation (52.7%), other expense allowances (48.3%), or payment of a fee (42.5%). This was specified in free-text responses. The relevance of considering engagement in guideline work in habilitation and job appointment procedures was separately identified. Those against financial remuneration emphasized non-monetary benefits of collaboration, such as network or knowledge expansion, or expressed fears of possible negative consequences, for example with regard to conflicts of interest.

Conclusion

No standard yet exists for recognizing involvement with guideline development. Different forms of expense allowances, time off work and recognition in performance evaluation and resource allocation procedures should be tested and examined for possible consequences.

背景：在专家文献中，临床实践指南主要讨论的重点是其发展的方法及其对医疗保健的重要性。缺乏对贡献者动机的研究，以及对参与指南制定的认可和奖励形式的研究。方法：在2023年8月至12月期间，在科学医学学会成员和德国医学院成员中进行了一项关于承认参与指南制定可能性的探索性在线调查。这项调查是由德国联邦教育和研究部(BMBF；资助代码16PU17025A；16PU17025B)，并提供375个可评估的案例。结果：五分之四（79.1%）的受访者表示他们是通过科学医学学会的咨询参与指南工作的。回答“（相当）正确”的占90.3%，其次是“（相当）肯定”的网络维护功能（77.8%）。80.5%的大多数受访者赞成奖励指标性工作，特别是通过报销差旅费（73.4%）和休假（70.5%），以及基于指标的资源分配制度（52.7%），其他费用补贴（48.3%）或支付费用（42.5%）。这在自由文本响应中指定。在康复和工作任命程序中考虑参与指导工作的相关性分别被确定。那些反对经济报酬的人强调合作的非金钱利益，例如网络或知识的扩展，或表示担心可能的负面后果，例如关于利益冲突。结论：目前还没有标准来识别指南制定的参与程度。应试验和审查不同形式的费用津贴、休假和对业绩评价和资源分配程序的认可，以确定可能产生的后果。

{"title":"Honorierung von Leitlinienarbeit: die Perspektive der Engagierten","authors":"Susanne In der Smitten , Valeria Aman , Nikita Sorgatz , Christopher Traylor , Christoph Herrmann-Lingen","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.04.004","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.04.004","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>In the specialist literature clinical practice guidelines are primarily discussed with a focus on the methodology of their development and their importance for medical care. There is a lack of research on the motivation of contributors and on forms of recognition and rewards for involvement in guideline development.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Between August and December 2023, an exploratory online survey on the possibilities of recognizing engagement in guideline development was conducted among members of scientific medical societies and members of German medical faculties. The survey was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF; funding codes 16PU17025A; 16PU17025B) and provided 375 evaluable cases.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Four out of five respondents (79.1%) stated that they got involved in guideline work via an enquiry from a scientific medical society. They saw the added value above all in medical care (90.3% answering ‘(rather) true’), but a function of network maintenance was also (rather) affirmed (77.8%). A majority of 80.5% of respondents were in favor of rewarding guideline work, in particular through reimbursement of travel expenses (73.4%) and time off work (70.5%), but also in systems of indicator-based resource allocation (52.7%), other expense allowances (48.3%), or payment of a fee (42.5%). This was specified in free-text responses. The relevance of considering engagement in guideline work in habilitation and job appointment procedures was separately identified. Those against financial remuneration emphasized non-monetary benefits of collaboration, such as network or knowledge expansion, or expressed fears of possible negative consequences, for example with regard to conflicts of interest.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>No standard yet exists for recognizing involvement with guideline development. Different forms of expense allowances, time off work and recognition in performance evaluation and resource allocation procedures should be tested and examined for possible consequences.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":"196 ","pages":"Pages 47-52"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144081316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Förderung der evidenzbasierten Praxis durch die Implementierung eines Journal Clubs im Setting eines Universitätsklinikums [通过在大学医院环境中实施期刊俱乐部促进循证实践]。

IF 1.4 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES

Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen

Pub Date : 2025-07-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.zefq.2025.05.004

Annalena Paus , Isabelle Stickdorn

Introduction

A lack of structural-organisational and methodological skills can be a reason why evidence-based methods are not applied by healthcare practitioners. A Journal Club (JC) can be a suitable forum to strengthen the critical exchange of scientific findings in practice and thus promote evidence-based practice. The aim of this practical project was to implement and evaluate a JC in an interprofessional department for therapeutic health professions at a university hospital.

Methods

Based on a literature review and expert discussions, a guideline for the implementation of a JC was developed. This guideline was used to set up a JC for therapeutic healthcare professions at a university hospital. To evaluate the JC, written feedback forms were handed out to the participants after each JC.

Results

Ten JCs were conducted between March 2023 and January 2025 and attended by an average of 43 participants. 278 feedback forms from JC participants were analysed. Overall satisfaction with the JC was rated at an average of 8.6 on a rating scale of 0–10 (0 = lowest satisfaction, 10 = highest satisfaction). 92.0% of participants agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that a JC offers a suitable forum to strengthen evidence-based practice. 37.2% of participants stated that since they started attending the JC, they have more frequently incorporated study results into their therapeutic decision-making.

Conclusion

The results show that a JC can be a promising platform for strengthening evidence-based work in everyday therapeutic practice.

缺乏结构组织和方法学技能可能是医疗保健从业者不应用循证方法的原因。期刊俱乐部（JC）可以成为一个合适的论坛，在实践中加强科学发现的批判性交流，从而促进循证实践。这个实际项目的目的是在一所大学医院的治疗卫生专业跨专业部门实施和评估一个JC。方法：在文献回顾和专家讨论的基础上，制定了一个JC的实施指南。该指南被用于建立大学医院治疗保健专业的JC。为了评估JC，书面反馈表格在每个JC之后分发给参与者。结果：在2023年3月至2025年1月期间进行了10次JCs，平均有43名参与者参加。分析了JC参与者的278份反馈表格。对JC的总体满意度平均为8.6分（0 -10分）（0 = 最低满意度，10 = 最高满意度）。92.0%的与会者同意或强烈同意JC为加强循证实践提供了合适的论坛。37.2%的参与者表示，自从他们开始参加JC以来，他们更频繁地将研究结果纳入他们的治疗决策。结论：临床综合诊疗是加强临床实践循证工作的良好平台。

{"title":"Förderung der evidenzbasierten Praxis durch die Implementierung eines Journal Clubs im Setting eines Universitätsklinikums","authors":"Annalena Paus , Isabelle Stickdorn","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.05.004","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.05.004","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>A lack of structural-organisational and methodological skills can be a reason why evidence-based methods are not applied by healthcare practitioners. A Journal Club (JC) can be a suitable forum to strengthen the critical exchange of scientific findings in practice and thus promote evidence-based practice. The aim of this practical project was to implement and evaluate a JC in an interprofessional department for therapeutic health professions at a university hospital.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Based on a literature review and expert discussions, a guideline for the implementation of a JC was developed. This guideline was used to set up a JC for therapeutic healthcare professions at a university hospital. To evaluate the JC, written feedback forms were handed out to the participants after each JC.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Ten JCs were conducted between March 2023 and January 2025 and attended by an average of 43 participants. 278 feedback forms from JC participants were analysed. Overall satisfaction with the JC was rated at an average of 8.6 on a rating scale of 0–10 (0 = lowest satisfaction, 10 = highest satisfaction). 92.0% of participants agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that a JC offers a suitable forum to strengthen evidence-based practice. 37.2% of participants stated that since they started attending the JC, they have more frequently incorporated study results into their therapeutic decision-making.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The results show that a JC can be a promising platform for strengthening evidence-based work in everyday therapeutic practice.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":"196 ","pages":"Pages 22-28"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144334129","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Nutzer*innenerfahrung mit allgemeinverständlichen Kurzzusammenfassungen psychologischer systematischer Übersichtsarbeiten mit Metaanalyse („KLARpsy“-Texte) – eine qualitative Studie mit der „Lautes Denken“-Methode [使用元分析（“KLARpsy”文本）的心理系统评论的简单语言摘要的用户体验-使用出声思考方法的定性研究]。

IF 1.4 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES

Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen

Pub Date : 2025-07-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.zefq.2025.04.003

Marwin Weber , Marlene Stoll , Anita Chasiotis , Claudia Breuer , Joerg J. Meerpohl , Angela M. Kunzler

Background

Science communication can support informed decision-making. As part of the “PLan Psy” project, a guideline for producing plain language summaries of systematic reviews with meta-analysis on psychological topics (“KLARpsy” texts), was developed. This study aims to investigate the similarities and differences in the user experience with “KLARpsy texts” between laypersons and professionals (science communicators and psychologists).

Methods

We conducted a qualitative online interview study. Participants read two “KLARpsy” texts presented on a mock-up website and verbalized their impressions and experiences using the think aloud method. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed with a deductive approach using content analysis.

Results

The study was completed by twelve participants (nine female, three male), including six laypersons, three science communicators, and three psychologists. Both groups found the “KLARpsy” texts to be mainly useful, user-friendly, and trustworthy. Nevertheless, professional users preferred the original studies. Both groups emphasized the need for more detailed descriptions regarding methodology and result presentation. The “KLARsaurus” glossary promoted comprehensibility. The text structure supported usability. However, the structure and transitions between study-specific and general information as well as sentence structure were sometimes seen as non-intuitive. Some opinions on comprehensibility and information density were not consistent within the two groups.

Discussion

The plain language summaries in the form of ‘KLARpsy’ texts were perceived by interested participants as added value for laypersons. Both laypersons and professionals attach particular importance to a transparent and critical, but also understandable and clear presentation of study results. Individual preferences and differences in the perspectives of both user groups highlight challenges of standardizing such a science communication format.

背景：科学传播可以支持知情决策。作为“PLan Psy”项目的一部分，制定了一项指导方针，用于对心理学主题（“KLARpsy”文本）进行meta分析的系统评论进行简单的语言摘要。本研究旨在探讨外行人和专业人士（科学传播者和心理学家）在使用“克拉普西文本”时的用户体验的异同。方法：采用定性在线访谈研究。参与者在一个模拟网站上阅读两篇“KLARpsy”文本，并使用“大声思考”的方法将他们的印象和经历用语言表达出来。访谈被逐字记录下来，并使用内容分析的演绎方法进行分析。结果：共有12名参与者（9名女性，3名男性）完成了研究，其中包括6名外行人，3名科学传播者和3名心理学家。两组人都认为“KLARpsy”文本主要是有用的，用户友好的，值得信赖的。然而，专业用户更喜欢原始研究。两个小组都强调需要对方法和结果的呈现进行更详细的描述。“KLARsaurus”词汇表提高了可理解性。文本结构支持可用性。然而，研究特定信息和一般信息之间的结构和转换以及句子结构有时被认为是非直觉的。两组在可理解性和信息密度方面的一些观点并不一致。讨论：“KLARpsy”文本形式的简单语言摘要被感兴趣的参与者视为外行人的附加价值。外行和专业人士都特别重视透明和批判性，但也可以理解和清晰地展示研究结果。两个用户群体的个人偏好和观点的差异突出了使这种科学传播格式标准化的挑战。

{"title":"Nutzer*innenerfahrung mit allgemeinverständlichen Kurzzusammenfassungen psychologischer systematischer Übersichtsarbeiten mit Metaanalyse („KLARpsy“-Texte) – eine qualitative Studie mit der „Lautes Denken“-Methode","authors":"Marwin Weber , Marlene Stoll , Anita Chasiotis , Claudia Breuer , Joerg J. Meerpohl , Angela M. Kunzler","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.04.003","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.04.003","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Science communication can support informed decision-making. As part of the “PLan Psy” project, a guideline for producing plain language summaries of systematic reviews with meta-analysis on psychological topics (“KLARpsy” texts), was developed. This study aims to investigate the similarities and differences in the user experience with “KLARpsy texts” between laypersons and professionals (science communicators and psychologists).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a qualitative online interview study. Participants read two “KLARpsy” texts presented on a mock-up website and verbalized their impressions and experiences using the think aloud method. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed with a deductive approach using content analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The study was completed by twelve participants (nine female, three male), including six laypersons, three science communicators, and three psychologists. Both groups found the “KLARpsy” texts to be mainly useful, user-friendly, and trustworthy. Nevertheless, professional users preferred the original studies. Both groups emphasized the need for more detailed descriptions regarding methodology and result presentation. The “KLARsaurus” glossary promoted comprehensibility. The text structure supported usability. However, the structure and transitions between study-specific and general information as well as sentence structure were sometimes seen as non-intuitive. Some opinions on comprehensibility and information density were not consistent within the two groups.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>The plain language summaries in the form of ‘KLARpsy’ texts were perceived by interested participants as added value for laypersons. Both laypersons and professionals attach particular importance to a transparent and critical, but also understandable and clear presentation of study results. Individual preferences and differences in the perspectives of both user groups highlight challenges of standardizing such a science communication format.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":"196 ","pages":"Pages 4-14"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144079753","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Aktive Beteiligung von Medizinischen Fachangestellten in der allgemeinmedizinischen Forschung in Deutschland [德国医疗助理积极参与初级保健研究]。

IF 1.4 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES

Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen

Pub Date : 2025-07-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.zefq.2025.03.012

Susanne Kersten , Doreen Kuschick , Annett Bräsigk , Andreas Polanc , Sandra Salm

Introduction

Since 2020, the Federal Ministry of Education and Research has been funding the establishment of six research practice networks in primary care in Germany through the Initiative DESAM-ForNet. The aim is to create a practice-based and efficient research infrastructure. The involvement of medical assistants (MAs) in these networks is of central importance, as they are able to contribute valuable perspectives and knowledge through their daily practice work and are often involved in studies.

Methods

Three tabular instruments were developed to record MA participation. In each research practice network, the tables were used to document the involvement of MAs in the network structure, their qualifications and their role in research projects. The information from each network was discussed and summarized in terms of similarities and differences.

Results

Reports were provided from five practice-based research networks where MAs are actively involved in various participation formats such as committees, round tables, and advisory boards. MAs are involved at different quality levels in the development of the networks and the implementation of studies. In addition, the practice-based research network offers specific qualifications to train MAs for research work. MAs receive financial incentives and/or certificates for their participation.

Discussion

The results show that MAs play an important role in research practice networks, especially in a co-determining function. Overall, MA participation through research practice networks is established, but not yet as self-evident as patient participation. In order to further strengthen participation of MAs, future measures should promote their involvement in decision-making processes and enable them to obtain additional qualifications. The role of MAs in research should be further expanded at all quality levels of involvement.

Conclusion

The active involvement of MAs in the development and operation of research practice networks is essential to ensure the practical relevance of research projects. Greater participation could further improve the quality of research and should therefore be specifically promoted.

导言：自2020年以来，联邦教育和研究部一直在通过DESAM-ForNet倡议资助在德国建立六个初级保健研究实践网络。其目的是创建一个基于实践的高效研究基础设施。医疗助理（MAs）在这些网络中的参与至关重要，因为他们能够通过日常实践工作贡献有价值的观点和知识，并且经常参与研究。方法：研制了三种表格仪器记录MA的参与情况。在每个研究实践网络中，这些表格用于记录ma在网络结构中的参与情况，他们的资格和他们在研究项目中的作用。从异同方面对各网络的信息进行了讨论和总结。结果：报告来自五个基于实践的研究网络，其中MAs积极参与各种参与形式，如委员会，圆桌会议和咨询委员会。MAs以不同的质量水平参与网络的发展和研究的实施。此外，以实践为基础的研究网络提供了专门的资格来培训硕士从事研究工作。MAs的参与将获得财政奖励和/或证书。讨论：研究结果表明，MAs在研究实践网络中发挥着重要作用，特别是在共同决定功能方面。总体而言，通过研究实践网络的MA参与是建立的，但尚未像患者参与那样不言而喻。为了进一步加强行政管理人员的参与，今后的措施应促进他们参与决策过程，并使他们能够获得额外的资格。硕士在研究中的作用应进一步扩大到所有高质量的参与水平。结论：MAs积极参与研究实践网络的开发和运营，对于确保研究项目的实际相关性至关重要。更多的参与可以进一步提高研究的质量，因此应该特别加以促进。

{"title":"Aktive Beteiligung von Medizinischen Fachangestellten in der allgemeinmedizinischen Forschung in Deutschland","authors":"Susanne Kersten , Doreen Kuschick , Annett Bräsigk , Andreas Polanc , Sandra Salm","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.03.012","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.03.012","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Since 2020, the Federal Ministry of Education and Research has been funding the establishment of six research practice networks in primary care in Germany through the Initiative DESAM-ForNet. The aim is to create a practice-based and efficient research infrastructure. The involvement of medical assistants (MAs) in these networks is of central importance, as they are able to contribute valuable perspectives and knowledge through their daily practice work and are often involved in studies.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Three tabular instruments were developed to record MA participation. In each research practice network, the tables were used to document the involvement of MAs in the network structure, their qualifications and their role in research projects. The information from each network was discussed and summarized in terms of similarities and differences.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Reports were provided from five practice-based research networks where MAs are actively involved in various participation formats such as committees, round tables, and advisory boards. MAs are involved at different quality levels in the development of the networks and the implementation of studies. In addition, the practice-based research network offers specific qualifications to train MAs for research work. MAs receive financial incentives and/or certificates for their participation.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>The results show that MAs play an important role in research practice networks, especially in a co-determining function. Overall, MA participation through research practice networks is established, but not yet as self-evident as patient participation. In order to further strengthen participation of MAs, future measures should promote their involvement in decision-making processes and enable them to obtain additional qualifications. The role of MAs in research should be further expanded at all quality levels of involvement.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The active involvement of MAs in the development and operation of research practice networks is essential to ensure the practical relevance of research projects. Greater participation could further improve the quality of research and should therefore be specifically promoted.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":"196 ","pages":"Pages 29-37"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144021263","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

“Living guideline recommendations” – more important than ever?! Successes and challenges of “living guidelines”: A systematic evaluation “生活指南建议”——比以往任何时候都重要？！“生活指南”的成功与挑战：系统评价。

IF 1.4 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES

Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen

Pub Date : 2025-07-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.zefq.2025.05.003

Monika Nothacker, Jordana Dreger, Ina Kopp, Susanne Blödt

Introduction

The development of high-quality guidelines is resource-intensive and time-consuming, and currency is crucial for the improvement of care. Criteria-based update procedures are recommended. Living guidelines (LGs) are intended to quickly incorporate new findings. The guidance of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF) require an annual review and needs-based updating. Internationally, there are different definitions; in particular, the concept of “living recommendations” based on “living systematic reviews” is recommended.

Methods

A search for LGs (March – May 2024) was carried out in the AWMF guideline registry, Medline and three international guideline databases to compare current German and international LGs based on criteria of an LG framework concept and to identifiy favorable and unfavorable implementation factors.

Results

Few current guidelines – 12 German and 26 international – followed a “living” concept. Decisions for German LGs were mostly made per project, internationally mostly at the organisational level. Compared to international LGs, German LGs had more recommendations, with less evidence-based content, and a lower research and update frequency. Not all LGs had a transparent methodological documentation with labelling of new, amended, or confirmed recommendations. More international than German LGs are available in apps with direct access to recommendations.

Discussion

The “Living Guideline” concept is rarely implemented, and the approach continues to vary. During the COVID-19 pandemic, resources and motivation were high. Currently, organizational support in combination with a rather narrow guideline scope seem to offer the best conditions for LGs.

Conclusion

We need current and trustworthy guidelines. Actual concepts provide different opportunities. To support them, decisions should also be made at the organizational level.

导言：制定高质量的指南需要耗费大量资源和时间，而资金对于改善护理至关重要。建议使用基于标准的更新过程。生活指南（LGs）旨在快速纳入新的发现。德国科学医学学会协会（AWMF）的指导要求每年进行一次审查，并根据需求进行更新。国际上有不同的定义；特别推荐基于“生活系统评价”的“生活建议”概念。方法：在AWMF指南登记处、Medline和三个国际指南数据库中检索LGs（2024年3月至5月），根据LG框架概念的标准比较当前德国和国际LGs，并确定有利和不利的实施因素。结果：目前很少有指南（12份德国指南和26份国际指南）遵循“生活”概念。德国LGs的决策大多是在每个项目上做出的，而国际上主要是在组织层面上做出的。与国际LGs相比，德国LGs的建议更多，基于证据的内容较少，研究和更新频率较低。并不是所有的研究组都有一个透明的方法文档，其中标注了新的、修订的或确认的建议。在应用程序中，比德国的LGs更国际化，可以直接访问推荐。讨论：“生活指南”概念很少得到实施，方法也在不断变化。在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间，资源和动力都很高。目前，组织支持与相当狭窄的指导范围相结合似乎为LGs提供了最好的条件。结论：我们需要最新的、值得信赖的指南。实际的概念提供了不同的机会。为了支持他们，还应该在组织一级作出决定。

{"title":"“Living guideline recommendations” – more important than ever?! Successes and challenges of “living guidelines”: A systematic evaluation","authors":"Monika Nothacker, Jordana Dreger, Ina Kopp, Susanne Blödt","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.05.003","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.05.003","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>The development of high-quality guidelines is resource-intensive and time-consuming, and currency is crucial for the improvement of care. Criteria-based update procedures are recommended. Living guidelines (LGs) are intended to quickly incorporate new findings. The guidance of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF) require an annual review and needs-based updating. Internationally, there are different definitions; in particular, the concept of “living recommendations” based on “living systematic reviews” is recommended.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A search for LGs (March – May 2024) was carried out in the AWMF guideline registry, Medline and three international guideline databases to compare current German and international LGs based on criteria of an LG framework concept and to identifiy favorable and unfavorable implementation factors.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Few current guidelines – 12 German and 26 international – followed a “living” concept. Decisions for German LGs were mostly made per project, internationally mostly at the organisational level. Compared to international LGs, German LGs had more recommendations, with less evidence-based content, and a lower research and update frequency. Not all LGs had a transparent methodological documentation with labelling of new, amended, or confirmed recommendations. More international than German LGs are available in apps with direct access to recommendations.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>The “Living Guideline” concept is rarely implemented, and the approach continues to vary. During the COVID-19 pandemic, resources and motivation were high. Currently, organizational support in combination with a rather narrow guideline scope seem to offer the best conditions for LGs.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>We need current and trustworthy guidelines. Actual concepts provide different opportunities. To support them, decisions should also be made at the organizational level.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":"196 ","pages":"Pages 72-81"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144340420","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Inhaltsverzeichnis / Table of Contents 吸入物/目录

IF 1.4 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES

Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen

Pub Date : 2025-07-01 DOI: 10.1016/S1865-9217(25)00162-X

引用次数: 0

Cannabisprävention: Legal, aber … lost?! Wie Plakate mehr verwirren als angemessen aufklären “大麻合法化，但失败了吗？”海报如何让人困惑，而不是正确地提供信息。

IF 1.4 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES

Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen

Pub Date : 2025-07-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.zefq.2025.03.009

Jessica Ruck, Anne Simmenroth

引用次数: 0