Epidemiology, health care needs and care volumes of peripheral venous diseases in Germany: multi-source analysis of primary and secondary data

Summary

Background: Vein diseases are frequent and medically relevant. Objective: To characterize phlebological health care and treatment needs in Germany. Methods: Multisource analysis of data from the sick funds, the Federal Statistical Office and primary studies. Results: In Germany, at least 22% of the population (18 million) suffer from venous diseases requiring treatment. 4.1 million phlebo-logical ambulant treatments are carried out annually, about 125,000 hospital cases are documented as the main diagnosis, including approx. 88,500 with varicosis and approx. 35,300 with thrombo(phlebitis). The number of inpatient treatments for varicosis has decreased by 16% in the last 10 years, by 47% in the last 17 years, and the number of out-patient phlebological treatments has increased by 5–10% annually in the last 5 years. Main ambulant health care specialists are surgeons and dermatologists, main inpatient departments are surgery, dermatology and angiology as well as professional vein clinics. Health care needs will increase by 3–8% annually in the future. Being a major part of quality-assured care, 3,049 physicians in 2016 had a certified additional training in phlebology. Conclusion: Peripheral venous diseases require a high level of care in Germany. Phlebology and certified phlebologists are an important pillar of the specialised care needed.

 

MissingLinkText

Keywords

Phlebology - health care - epidemiology

 

MissingLinkText

Interessenkonflikt

Nach Angaben der Autoren bestehen keine Interessenkonflikte.

• Literatur

• 1 Eklöf B, Rutherford RB, Bergan JJ. et al. Revision of the CEAP classification for chronic venous disorders: Consensus statement.. J Vasc Surg 2004; 40: 1248-1252.
• 2 Stücker M, Debus ES, Hoffmann J. et al. Consensus statement on the symptom-based treatment of chronic venous diseases.. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges 2016; 14: 575-83.
• 3 GBE-Bund. http://www.gbe-bund.de/oowa921-install/servlet/oowa/aw92/dboowasys921.xwdevkit/xwd_init?gbe.isgbetol/xs_start_neu&p_aid=i&p_aid=33954832&nummer=612&p_s prache=D&p_indsp=93&p_aid=42395654.
• 4 Glaeske G, Augustin M, Abholz H. et al. Epidemiologische Methoden für die Versorgungsforschung.. Gesundheitswesen 2009; 71: 685-93.
• 5 Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M. et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.. J Clin Epidemiol 2018; 61: 344-349.
• 6 Schulenburg JM, Greiner W, Jost F. et al. Deutsche Empfehlungen zur gesundheitsökonomischen Evaluation – dritte und aktualisierte Fas-sung des Hannoveraner Konsens.. Gesundh ökon Qual manag 2007; 12: 285-290.
• 7 Augustin M.. Versorgungsforschung bei schweren chronischen Erkrankungen: Ergebnisse und Nutzen am Beispiel chronischer Wunden. In Trittin C. (Hrsg.): Versorgungsforschung. Zwischen Routinedaten, Qualitätssicherung und Patientenorientierung. Siegburg: Asgard Verlagsservice; 2015: 237-256
• 8 Bowling A.. Measuring disease: a review of disease-specific quality of life measurement scales. Buck-ingham: Open University Press; 1995
• 9 Downs SH, Black N.. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomized and non-randomised studies of health care interventions.. J Epidemiol Community Health 1998; 52: 377-384.
• 10 Dwan K, Altman DG, Arnaiz JA. et al. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias.. PLoS ONE 2008; 3: e3081.
• 11 Icks A, Chernyak N, Bestehorn K. et al. Methoden der gesundheitsökonomischen Evaluation in der Versorgungsforschung.. Gesundheitswesen 2010; 72: 917-933.
• 12 Swart E, Ihle P, Gothe H.. Routinedaten im Gesundheitswesen: Handbuch Sekundärdatenanalyse: Grundlagen, Methoden und Perspektiven. 2. Aufl.. Bern: Hans Huber; 2014
• 13 Deutsches Institut für Medizinische Dokumentation und Information (Dimdi). https://www.dimdi.de/static/de/klassi/icd-10-gm/index.htm Zugriff 04.07.2018
• 14 Kirsten N, Zander N, Gensel F. et al. Population-based epidemiologic study in venous diseases in Germany: Prevalence, comorbidity, and medical needs in a cohort of 19,104 workers. Project Final Report. University of Hamburg, 2016 and oral presentation at the Annual Meeting of the European Wound Management Association (EWMA), Amsterdam 03.03.2017.
• 15 Statistisches Bundesamt (Destatis). https://www.destatis.de/DE/ZahlenFakten/GesellschaftStaat/Gesundheit/Krankenhaeuser/Methoden/Krankenhausstatistik.html
• 16 Heyer K.. Versorgungsepidemiologie des Ulcus cruris in Deutschland – Erkrankungshäufigkeit, Versorgungsqualität und Prädiktoren der Wundheilung. Wiesbaden: Springer; 2016
• 17 Rabe E, Pannier-Fischer F, Bromen K. et al. Bonner Venenstudie der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Phlebologie – Epidemiologische Untersuchung zur Frage der Häufigkeit und Ausprägung von chronischen Venenkrankheiten in der städtischen und ländlichen Wohnbevölkerung.. Phlebologie 2003; 32: 1-14.
• 18 Sommer R, Kiedrowski R, Stavermann T. et al. Stellenwert und Umfang der phlebologischen Versorgung in dermatologischen Praxen. Phlebologie; 2018. doi: 10.12687/phleb2441–5–2018
• 19 Augustin M, Debus ES, Bruning G. et al. Development and Validation of a Short Version of the Freiburg Life Quality Assessment for Chronic Venous Disease (FLQA-VS-10).. Wound Medicine 2015; 8: 31-35.
• 20 Zschocke I, Bross F, Maier K. et al. Quality of Life in Different Stages of Chronic Venous Insufficiency and Leg Ulcer.. Dermatol Psychosom 2002; 3: 126-131.
• 21 Augustin M, Dieterle W, Zschocke I. et al. Development and Validation of a Disease Specific Questionnaire on the Quality of Life of Patients with Chronic Venous Insufficiency.. Vasa 1997; 26: 291-301.
• 22 Sommer R, Augustin M, Blome C.. Erfassung von Lebensqualität und Verwendung patientenberichteter Endpunkte in der Praxis.. Phlebologie 2017; 46: 334-339.
• 23 Purwins S, Herberger K, Debus ES. et al. Cost-of-illness of chronic leg ulcers in Germany.. Int Wound J 2010; 7: 7-102.
• 24 Augustin M, Brocatti LK, Rustenbach SJ. et al. Cost-of-illness of leg ulcers in the community.. 2014; 11: 283-92.
• 25 Kemper C, Sauer K, Glaeske G.. Barmer GEK Heilund Hilfsmittelreport 2011. Auswertungsergebnisse der Barmer GEK Heil- und Hilfsmitteldaten aus den Jahren 2009 bis 2010. Schriftenreihe zur Gesundheitsanalyse; Band: 10 2011
• 26 Heyer K, Augustin M.. Therapie chronischer Wunden – Schwerpunkt Ulcus cruris. In Sauer K, Rothgang H, Glaeske G.. Barmer GEK Heil- und Hilfsmittelreport 2014 – Schriftenreihe zur Gesundheitsanalyse, Band 28.. Berlin: Asgard Verlags-service GmbH; 2014: 85-106.
• 27 Heyer K, Protz K, Glaeske G, Augustin M.. Epidemiology and Use of Compression Treatment in Venous Leg Ulcers: Nationwide Claims Data Analysis in Germany. Int Wound J 2016; 14 (02) 338-343.
• 28 Augustin M, Rustenbach SJ, Debus S. et al. Quality of Care in Chronic Leg Ulcer in the Community: Introduction of Quality Indicators and a Scoring System.. Dermatology 2011; 222: 321-329.
• 29 Protz K, Heyer K, Doerler M. et al. Compression therapy: Scientific Background and Practical Applications.. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges 2014; 12: 794-802.
• 30 Heyer K, Protz K, Augustin M.. Compression Therapy – Cross-sectional Observational Survey About Knowledge and Practical Treatment of Specialised and Non-specialised Nurses and Therapists.. Int Wound J 2017; 14: 1148-1153.
• 31 Korn P, Patel ST, Heller JA. et al. Why insurers should reimburse for compression stockings in patients with chronic venous stasis.. J Vasc Surg 2002; 35: 950-957.