@article{AppelSchulerVogeletal.2017, author = {Appel, Patricia and Schuler, Michael and Vogel, Heiner and Oezelsel, Amina and Faller, Hermann}, title = {Short Questionnaire for Workplace Analysis (KFZA): factorial validation in physicians and nurses working in hospital settings}, series = {Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology}, volume = {12}, journal = {Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology}, number = {11}, doi = {10.1186/s12995-017-0157-6}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-157510}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Background: In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in psychosocial workplace risk assessments in Germany. One of the questionnaires commonly employed for this purpose is the Short Questionnaire for Workplace Analysis (KFZA). Originally, the KFZA was developed and validated for office workers. The aim of the present study was to examine the factorial validity of the KFZA when applied to hospital settings. Therefore, we examined the factorial structure of a questionnaire that contained all the original items plus an extension adding 11 questions specific to hospital workplaces and analyzed both, the original version and the extended version. Methods: We analyzed questionnaire data of a total of 1731 physicians and nurses obtained over a 10-year period. Listwise exclusion of data sets was applied to account for variations in questionnaire versions and yielded 1163 questionnaires (1095 for the extended version) remaining for factor analysis. To examine the factor structure, we conducted a principal component factor analysis. The number of factors was determined using the Kaiser criterion and scree-plot methods. Factor interpretation was based on orthogonal Varimax rotation as well as oblique rotation. Results: The Kaiser criterion revealed a 7-factor solution for the 26 items of the KFZA, accounting for 62.0\% of variance. The seven factors were named: "Social Relationships", "Job Control", "Opportunities for Participation and Professional Development", "Quantitative Work Demands", "Workplace Environment", "Variability" and "Qualitative Work Demands". The factor analysis of the 37 items of the extended version yielded a 9-factor solution. The two additional factors were named "Consequences of Strain" and "Emotional Demands". Cronbach's α ranged from 0.63 to 0.87 for these scales. Conclusions: Overall, the KFZA turned out to be applicable to hospital workers, and its content-related structure was replicated well with some limitations. However, instead of the 11 factors originally proposed for office workers, a 7-factor solution appeared to be more suitable when employed in hospitals. In particular, the items of the KFZA factor "Completeness of Task" might need adaptation for the use in hospitals. Our study contributes to the assessment of the validity of this popular instrument and should stimulate further psychometric testing.}, language = {en} } @article{SemrauHentschkeBuchmannetal.2015, author = {Semrau, Jana and Hentschke, Christian and Buchmann, Jana and Meng, Karin and Vogel, Heiner and Faller, Hermann and Bork, Hartmut and Pfeifer, Klaus}, title = {Long-term effects of interprofessional biopsychosocial rehabilitation for adults with chronic non-specific low back pain: a multicentre, quasi-experimental study}, series = {PLoS ONE}, volume = {10}, journal = {PLoS ONE}, number = {3}, doi = {10.1371/ journal.pone.0118609}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-143594}, pages = {e0118609}, year = {2015}, abstract = {Background Improvement of the long-term effectiveness of multidisciplinary ortho-paedic rehabilitation (MOR) in the management of chronic non-specific low back pain (CLBP) remains a central issue for health care in Germany. We developed an interprofessional and interdisciplinary, biopsychosocial rehabilitation concept named "PASTOR" to promote self-management in adults with CLBP and compared its effectiveness with the current model of MOR. Methods A multicentre quasi-experimental study with three measurement time points was implemented. 680 adults aged 18 to 65 with CLBP were assed for eligibil-ity in three inpatient rehabilitation centres in Germany. At first the effects of the MOR, with a total extent of 48 hours (control group), were assessed. Thereafter, PASTOR was implemented and evaluated in the same centres (intervention group). It consisted of six interprofessional modules, which were provided on 12 days in fixed groups, with a total extent of 48 hours. Participants were assessed with self-report measures at baseline, discharge, and 12 months for functional ability (primary outcome) using the Hannover Functional Ability Questionnaire (FFbH-R) and vari-ous secondary outcomes (e.g. pain, health status, physical activity, pain coping, pain-related cognitions). Results In total 536 participants were consecutively assigned to PASTOR (n=266) or MOR (n=270). At 12 months, complete data of 368 participants was available. The adjusted between-roup difference in the FFbH-R at 12 months was 6.58 (95\% CI 3.38 to 9.78) using complete data and 3.56 (95\% CI 0.45 to 6.67) using available da-ta, corresponding to significant small-to-medium effect sizes of d=0.42 (p<0.001) and d=0.10 (p=0.025) in favour of PASTOR. Further improvements in secondary out-comes were also observed in favour of PASTOR. Conclusion The interprofessional and interdisciplinary, biopsychosocial rehabilita-tion program PASTOR shows some improvements of the long-term effectiveness of inpatient rehabilitation in the management of adults with CLBP. Further insights into mechanisms of action of complex intervention programs are required.}, language = {en} } @article{StrahlGerlichAlpersetal.2018, author = {Strahl, Andr{\´e} and Gerlich, Christian and Alpers, Georg W. and Ehrmann, Katja and Gehrke, J{\"o}rg and M{\"u}ller-Garnn, Annette and Vogel, Heiner}, title = {Development and evaluation of a standardized peer-training in the context of peer review for quality assurance in work capacity evaluation}, series = {BMC Medical Education}, volume = {18}, journal = {BMC Medical Education}, number = {135}, doi = {10.1186/s12909-018-1233-z}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-175738}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Background: The German quality assurance programme for evaluating work capacity is based on peer review that evaluates the quality of medical experts' reports. Low reliability is thought to be due to systematic differences among peers. For this purpose, we developed a curriculum for a standardized peer-training (SPT). This study investigates, whether the SPT increases the inter-rater reliability of social medical physicians participating in a cross-institutional peer review. Methods: Forty physicians from 16 regional German Pension Insurances were subjected to SPT. The three-day training course consist of nine educational objectives recorded in a training manual. The SPT is split into a basic module providing basic information about the peer review and an advanced module for small groups of up to 12 peers training peer review using medical reports. Feasibility was tested by assessing selection, comprehensibility and subjective use of contents delivered, the trainers' delivery and design of training materials. The effectiveness of SPT was determined by evaluating peer concordance using three anonymised medical reports assessed by each peer. Percentage agreement and Fleiss' kappa (κ\(_m\)) were calculated. Concordance was compared with review results from a previous unstructured, non-standardized peer-training programme (control condition) performed by 19 peers from 12 German Pension Insurances departments. The control condition focused exclusively on the application of peer review in small groups. No specifically training materials, methods and trainer instructions were used. Results: Peer-training was shown to be feasible. The level of subjective confidence in handling the peer review instrument varied between 70 and 90\%. Average percentage agreement for the main outcome criterion was 60.2\%, resulting in a κ\(_m\) of 0.39. By comparison, the average percentage concordance was 40.2\% and the κ\(_m\) was 0.12 for the control condition. Conclusion: Concordance with the main criterion was relevant but not significant (p = 0.2) higher for SPT than for the control condition. Fleiss' kappa coefficient showed that peer concordance was higher for SPT than randomly expected. Nevertheless, a score of 0.39 for the main criterion indicated only fair inter-rater reliability, considerably lower than the conventional standard of 0.7 for adequate reliability.}, language = {en} } @article{SchwaabBjarnasonWehrensMengetal.2021, author = {Schwaab, Bernhard and Bjarnason-Wehrens, Birna and Meng, Karin and Albus, Christian and Salzwedel, Annett and Schmid, Jean-Paul and Benzer, Werner and Metz, Matthes and Jensen, Katrin and Rauch, Bernhard and B{\"o}nner, Gerd and Brzoska, Patrick and Buhr-Schinner, Heike and Charrier, Albrecht and Cordes, Carsten and D{\"o}rr, Gesine and Eichler, Sarah and Exner, Anne-Kathrin and Fromm, Bernd and Gielen, Stephan and Glatz, Johannes and Gohlke, Helmut and Grilli, Maurizio and Gysan, Detlef and H{\"a}rtel, Ursula and Hahmann, Harry and Herrmann-Lingen, Christoph and Karger, Gabriele and Karoff, Marthin and Kiwus, Ulrich and Knoglinger, Ernst and Krusch, Christian-Wolfgang and Langheim, Eike and Mann, Johannes and Max, Regina and Metzendorf, Maria-Inti and Nebel, Roland and Niebauer, Josef and Predel, Hans-Georg and Preßler, Axel and Razum, Oliver and Reiss, Nils and Saure, Daniel and von Schacky, Clemens and Sch{\"u}tt, Morten and Schultz, Konrad and Skoda, Eva-Maria and Steube, Diethard and Streibelt, Marco and St{\"u}ttgen, Martin and St{\"u}ttgen, Michaela and Teufel, Martin and Tschanz, Hansueli and V{\"o}ller, Heinz and Vogel, Heiner and Westphal, Ronja}, title = {Cardiac rehabilitation in German speaking countries of Europe — evidence-based guidelines from Germany, Austria and Switzerland LLKardReha-DACH — part 2}, series = {Journal of Clinical Medicine}, volume = {10}, journal = {Journal of Clinical Medicine}, number = {14}, issn = {2077-0383}, doi = {10.3390/jcm10143071}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-242645}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Background: Scientific guidelines have been developed to update and harmonize exercise based cardiac rehabilitation (ebCR) in German speaking countries. Key recommendations for ebCR indications have recently been published in part 1 of this journal. The present part 2 updates the evidence with respect to contents and delivery of ebCR in clinical practice, focusing on exercise training (ET), psychological interventions (PI), patient education (PE). In addition, special patients' groups and new developments, such as telemedical (Tele) or home-based ebCR, are discussed as well. Methods: Generation of evidence and search of literature have been described in part 1. Results: Well documented evidence confirms the prognostic significance of ET in patients with coronary artery disease. Positive clinical effects of ET are described in patients with congestive heart failure, heart valve surgery or intervention, adults with congenital heart disease, and peripheral arterial disease. Specific recommendations for risk stratification and adequate exercise prescription for continuous-, interval-, and strength training are given in detail. PI when added to ebCR did not show significant positive effects in general. There was a positive trend towards reduction in depressive symptoms for "distress management" and "lifestyle changes". PE is able to increase patients' knowledge and motivation, as well as behavior changes, regarding physical activity, dietary habits, and smoking cessation. The evidence for distinct ebCR programs in special patients' groups is less clear. Studies on Tele-CR predominantly included low-risk patients. Hence, it is questionable, whether clinical results derived from studies in conventional ebCR may be transferred to Tele-CR. Conclusions: ET is the cornerstone of ebCR. Additional PI should be included, adjusted to the needs of the individual patient. PE is able to promote patients self-management, empowerment, and motivation. Diversity-sensitive structures should be established to interact with the needs of special patient groups and gender issues. Tele-CR should be further investigated as a valuable tool to implement ebCR more widely and effectively.}, language = {en} } @article{LukasczikGerlichWolfetal.2020, author = {Lukasczik, Matthias and Gerlich, Christian and Wolf, Hans Dieter and Vogel, Heiner}, title = {Beyond oncology: question prompt lists in healthcare — A scoping review protocol}, series = {Methods and Protocols}, volume = {3}, journal = {Methods and Protocols}, number = {1}, issn = {2409-9279}, doi = {10.3390/mps3010009}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-200832}, pages = {9}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Question prompt lists (QPL) are an instrument to promote patient participation in medical encounters by providing a set of questions patients can use during consultations. QPL have predominantly been examined in oncology. Less is known about their use in other contexts. Therefore, we plan to conduct a scoping review to provide an overview of the fields of healthcare in which QPL have been developed and evaluated. MEDLINE/PUBMED, PSYCINFO, PSYNDEX, WEB OF SCIENCE, and CINAHL will be systematically searched. Primary studies from different healthcare contexts that address the following participants/target groups will be included: persons with an acute, chronic, or recurring health condition other than cancer; healthy persons in non-oncological primary preventive measures. There will be no restrictions in terms of study design, sample size, or outcomes. However, only published studies will be included. Studies that were published in English and German between 1990 and 2019 will be examined. Two independent reviewers will apply defined inclusion/exclusion criteria and determine study eligibility in the review process guided by the PRISMA statement.}, language = {en} } @article{StrahlGerlichAlpersetal.2019, author = {Strahl, Andr{\´e} and Gerlich, Christian and Alpers, Georg W. and Gehrke, J{\"o}rg and M{\"u}ller-Garnn, Annette and Vogel, Heiner}, title = {An instrument for quality assurance in work capacity evaluation: development, evaluation, and inter-rater reliability}, series = {BMC Health Services Research}, volume = {19}, journal = {BMC Health Services Research}, doi = {10.1186/s12913-019-4387-4}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-200289}, pages = {556}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Background: Employees insured in pension insurance, who are incapable of working due to ill health, are entitled to a disability pension. To assess whether an individual meets the medical requirements to be considered as disabled, a work capacity evaluation is conducted. However, there are no official guidelines on how to perform an external quality assurance for this evaluation process. Furthermore, the quality of medical reports in the field of insurance medicine can vary substantially, and systematic evaluations are scarce. Reliability studies using peer review have repeatedly shown insufficient ability to distinguish between high, moderate and low quality. Considering literature recommendations, we developed an instrument to examine the quality of medical experts'reports. Methods: The peer review manual developed contains six quality domains (formal structure, clarity, transparency, completeness, medical-scientific principles, and efficiency) comprising 22 items. In addition, a superordinate criterion (survey confirmability) rank the overall quality and usefulness of a report. This criterion evaluates problems of innerlogic and reasoning. Development of the manual was assisted by experienced physicians in a pre-test. We examined the observable variance in peer judgements and reliability as the most important outcome criteria. To evaluate inter-rater reliability, 20 anonymous experts' reports detailing the work capacity evaluation were reviewed by 19 trained raters (peers). Percentage agreement and Kendall's W, a reliability measure of concordance between two or more peers, were calculated. A total of 325 reviews were conducted. Results: Agreement of peer judgements with respect to the superordinate criterion ranged from 29.2 to 87.5\%. Kendall's W for the quality domain items varied greatly, ranging from 0.09 to 0.88. With respect to the superordinate criterion, Kendall's W was 0.39, which indicates fair agreement. The results of the percentage agreement revealed systemic peer preferences for certain deficit scale categories. Conclusion: The superordinate criterion was not sufficiently reliable. However, in comparison to other reliability studies, this criterion showed an equivalent reliability value. This report aims to encourage further efforts to improve evaluation instruments. To reduce disagreement between peer judgments, we propose the revision of the peer review instrumentand the development and implementation of a standardized rater training to improve reliability.}, language = {en} } @article{LukasczikWolfGerlichetal.2016, author = {Lukasczik, Matthias and Wolf, Hans-Dieter and Gerlich, Christian and K{\"u}ffner, Roland and Vogel, Heiner and Neuderth, Silke}, title = {Addressing Work-Related Issues in Medical Rehabilitation: Revision of an Online Information Tool for Healthcare Professionals}, series = {Rehabilitation Research and Practice}, volume = {2016}, journal = {Rehabilitation Research and Practice}, doi = {10.1155/2016/7621690}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-146911}, pages = {7621690}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Background. Medical rehabilitation increasingly considers occupational issues as determinants of health and work ability. Information on work-related rehabilitation concepts should therefore be made available to healthcare professionals. Objective. To revise a website providing healthcare professionals in medical rehabilitation facilities with information on work-related concepts in terms of updating existing information and including new topics, based on recommendations from implementation research. Method. The modification process included a questionnaire survey of medical rehabilitation centers (n=28); two workshops with experts from rehabilitation centers, health payers, and research institutions (n=14); the selection of new topics and revision of existing text modules based on expert consensus; and an update of good practice descriptions of work-related measures. Results. Health payers' requirements, workplace descriptions, and practical implementation aids were added as new topics. The database of good practice examples was extended to 63 descriptions. Information on introductory concepts was rewritten and supplemented by current data. Diagnostic tools were updated by including additional assessments. Conclusions. Recommendations from implementation research such as assessing user needs and including expert knowledge may serve as a useful starting point for the dissemination of information on work-related medical rehabilitation into practice. Web-based information tools such as the website presented here can be quickly adapted to current evidence and changes in medicolegal regulations.}, language = {en} }