Hat die Zahl der in einer Arztpraxis behandelten Demenzpatienten Einfluss auf die Kontinuität der Behandlung mit Antidementiva?

Zusammenfassung

Ziel Untersuchung des Einflusses der Fallzahl von Patienten mit Demenz (PmD) in Haus- und Facharztpraxen auf die Kontinuität der Behandlung mit Antidementiva.

Methodik Zeitraum 2004 – 2013: 1116 Hausarztpraxen, 200 Facharztpraxen, 37 178 PmD; Beobachtungszeit: 36 Monate. Praxisgruppen mit 1 – 9, 10 – 20, 21 – 49 und ≥ 50 PmD.

Ergebnisse Bei durchschnittlich 150 behandelten PmD/Praxis ist die Behandlungskontinuität größer als bei 5 PmD/Praxis (73,6 % vs. 42,1 %). Neben der Fallzahl hat die Spezialisierung, nicht jedoch die Praxisgröße Einfluss auf die Behandlungskontinuität.

Schlussfolgerung Praxen mit mehr als 50 antidementiv behandelten PmD weisen eine größere Behandlungskontinuität auf. Die Behandlungskontinuität wird durch die Einbeziehung von Fachärzten erhöht.

Abstract

Objective The goal of this study is to investigate the impact of the number of dementia cases in general and specialist practices on the continuity of treatment with antidementia drugs.

Methodology Period between 2004 and 2013: 1116 general practices, 200 specialist practices, 37 178 dementia cases; observation period: 36 months. Practice groups with 1 – 9, 10 – 20, 21-s49, and ≥ 50 dementia cases.

Results The treatment continuity is higher in practices with an average of 150 dementia cases than in practices with five dementia cases (73.6 % vs. 42.1 %). In addition to the number of cases, treatment continuity is also affected by the specialization, but not by the practice size.

Conclusion Practices with more than 50 patients treated with antidementia drugs exhibit greater treatment continuity. Treatment continuity is increased if specialists are involved in the treatment.

Schlüsselwörter

Demenz - Fallzahl - Volume-Outcome-Beziehung - Hausarzt - Facharzt

Key words

dementia - caseload - volume-outcome-relationship - primary care physician - neurologist

• Literatur

• 1 Bickel H. Die Häufigkeit von Demenzerkrankungen. Informationsblatt 1. Deutsche Alzheimer Gesellschaft e.V. 2016: 1-7 Im Internet: www.deutsche-alzheimer.de/infoblatt Stand: 16.10.2016
• 2 Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychiatrie, Psychotherapie und Nervenheilkunde und Deutsche Gesellschaft für Neurologie. (eds) S3-Leitlinie „Demenzen“. Vollständig überarbeitet: 24. Januar 2016. Im Internet: 2016 www.dgn.org Stand: 16.10.2016
• 3 Fink A. Doblhammer G. Risk of Long-Term Care Dependence for Dementia Patients is Associated with Type of Physician: An Analysis of German Health Claims Data for the Years 2006 to 2010. J Alzheimers Dis 2015; 47 (02) 443-452
• 4 Bohlken J. Schulz M. Rapp MA. et al. Pharmacotherapy of dementia in Germany: Results from a nationwide claims database. Eur J Neuropsychopharmcol 2015; 25 (12) 2333-2338
• 5 Maxwell CJ. Stock K. Seitz D. et al. Persistence and adherence with dementia pharmacotherapy: relevance of patient, provider, and system factors. Can J Psychiatry 2014; 59 (12) 624-631
• 6 Bohlken J. Weber S. Rapp MA. et al. Continuous treatment with antidementia drugs in Germany 2003–2013: a retrospective database analysis. Int Psychogeriatr 2015; 27 (08) 1335-1342
• 7 Kamimura T. Ishiwata R. Inoue T. Medication reminder device for the elderly patients with mild cognitive impairment. Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen 2012; 27: 238-242
• 8 Booker A. Jacob LE. Rapp M. et al. Risk factors for dementia diagnosis in German primary care practices. Int Psychogeriatr 2016; 28 (07) 1059-1065
• 9 Booker A. Bohlken J. Rapp MA. et al. Persistence with antidepressant drugs in patients with dementia: a retrospective database analysis. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 2016; 54: 323-329
• 10 Gillespie R. Mullan J. Harrison L. Managing medications: the role of informal caregivers of older adults and people living with dementia. A review of the literature. J Clin Nurs 2014; 23 (23) 3296-3308
• 11 Fiß T. Thyrian JR. Wucherer D. Medication management for people with dementia in primary care: description of implementation in the DelpHi study. BMC Geriatr 2013; 13: 121
• 12 Bohlken J. Ambulante Demenzversorgung. Integration fachärztlicher und ergotherapeutischer Kompetenz. Neurotransmitter 2005; 3: 62-66
• 13 Luft HS. Hunt SS. Maerki SC. The volume-outcome relationship: practice-makes-perfect or selective-referral patterns?. Health Serv Res 1987; 22 (02) 157-182
• 14 Halm EA. Lee C. Chassin MR. Is volume related to outcome in health care? A systematic review and methodologic critique of the literature. Ann Intern Med 2002; 137 (06) 511-520
• 15 Amato L. Colais P. Davoli M. et al. Volume and health outcomes: evidence from systematic reviews and from evaluation of Italian hospital data. Epidemiol Prev 2013; 37 (02) 1-100 [Article in Italian]
• 16 Panaich SS. Patel N. Arora S. et al. Influence of hospital volume and outcomes of adult structural heart procedures. World J Cardiol 2016; 8 (04) 302-309
• 17 Druss BG. Miller CL. Pincus HA. et al. The volume-quality relationship of mental health care: does practice make perfect?. Am J Psychiatry 2004; 161 (12) 2282-2286
• 18 Lin HC. Lee HC. Psychiatrists’ caseload volume, length of stay and mental health care readmission rates: A three-year population-based study. Psychiatry Res 2009; 166: 15-23
• 19 Vedavanam S. Steel N. Broadbent J. et al. Recorded quality of care for depression in general practice: An observational study. Br J Gen Pract 2009; 59 (559) 94-98
• 20 Tschuschke V. Crameri A. Koehler M. et al. The role of therapists’ treatment adherence, professional experience, therapeutic alliance, and clients’ severity of psychological problems: Prediction of treatment outcome in eight different psychotherapy approaches. Preliminary results of a naturalistic study. Psychother Res 2015; 25 (04) 420-434
• 21 Chow DL. Miller SD. Seidel JA. et al. The role of deliberate practice in the development of highly effective psychotherapists. Psychotherapy (Chic) 2015; 52 (03) 337-345
• 22 Goldberg SB. Rousmaniere T. Miller SD. et al. Do psychotherapists improve with time and experience? A longitudinal analysis of outcomes in a clinical setting. J Couns Psychol 2016; 63 (01) 1-11
• 23 Ng CW. Ng KP. Does practice size matter? Review of effects on quality of care in primary care. Br J Gen Pract 2013; 63 (614) 604-610
• 24 Becher H. Kostev K. Schröder-Bernhardi D. Validity and representativeness of the „Disease Analyzer“ patient database for use in pharmacoepidemiological and pharmacoeconomic studies. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 2009; 47: 617-626
• 25 Ogdie A. Langan S. Parkinson J. et al. Medical Record Databases. In: Strom BL. Kimmel S. Hennessy S. (Eds.) Pharmacoepidemiology. 5th ed. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania; 2012: 224-243
• 26 Swart E. Good Practice of secondary data analysis. First Revision. Gesundheitswesen 2008; 70: 54-60
• 27 Gozalo P. Leland NE. Christian TJ. et al. Volume Matters: Returning Home After Hip Fracture. J Am Geriatr Soc 2015; 63 (10) 2043-2051
• 28 Paraskevas KI. Loftus IM. Carotid artery stenting: high-risk interventionist versus high-risk center. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 2015; 56 (02) 153-157
• 29 Saxena S. Car J. Eldred D. et al. Practice size, caseload, deprivation and quality of care of patients with coronary heart disease, hypertension and stroke in primary care: national cross-sectional study. BMC Health Serv Res 2007; 7: 96
• 30 Wang JS. Lin SY. Sheu WH. et al. Effects of patient volume on quality of outpatient diabetes care. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2009; 84 (02) e27-e29
• 31 Lee HC. Lin HC. Is the volume-outcome relationship sustained in psychiatric care?. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 2007; 42 (08) 669-672
• 32 Lee KC. Sethuraman K. Yong J. On the Hospital Volume and Outcome Relationship: Does Specialization Matter More Than Volume?. Health Serv Res 2015; 50 (06) 2019-2036
• 33 Han KT. Lee SY. Kim SJ. et al. Readmission rates of South Korean psychiatric inpatients by inpatient volumes per psychiatrist. BMC Psychiatry 2016; 16: 96
• 34 Jørgensen M. Mainz J. Johnsen SP. Admission Volume and Quality of Mental Health Care Among Danish Patients With Recently Diagnosed Schizophrenia. Psychiatr Serv 2016; 67 (05) 536-542
• 35 Schulz M. Bohlken J. Hering R. et al. Diagnostische und therapeutische Leistungsdichte von neu erkrankten, zu Hause lebenden Patienten mit Demenz. Publication Versorgungsatlas, Zentralinsitut der Kassenärztlichen Bundesvereinigung. Im Internet www.versorgungsatlas.de Stand: 16.10.2016
• 36 Suh DC. Thomas SK. Valiyeva E. et al. Drug persistency of two cholinesterase inhibitors: rivastigmine versus donepezil in elderly patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Drugs Aging 2005; 22: 695-707
• 37 Amuah JE. Hogan DB. Eliasziw M. et al. Persistence with cholinesterase inhibitor therapy in a populationbased cohort of patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2010; 19: 670-679
• 38 Matthias K. Gruber S. Pietsch B. Evidenz von Volume-Outcome-Beziehungen und Mindestmengen: Diskussion in der aktuellen Literatur. Gesundheits- und Sozialpolitik 2014; 3: 23-30
• 39 Loos S. Albrecht M. Schiffhorst G. Bertelsmann Stiftung. et al. (Hrsg) Faktencheck Krankenhausstruktur. Spezialisierung und Zentrenbildung. IGES/Bertelsmannstiftung 8.9.2016. Im Internet: www.bertelsmannstiftung.de/publikationen Stand 16.10.2016