@article{HebestreitZeidlerSchippersetal.2022,
  author    = {Hebestreit, Helge and Zeidler, Cornelia and Schippers, Christopher and de Zwaan, Martina and Deckert, J{\"u}rgen and Heuschmann, Peter and Krauth, Christian and Bullinger, Monika and Berger, Alexandra and Berneburg, Mark and Brandstetter, Lilly and Deibele, Anna and Dieris-Hirche, Jan and Graessner, Holm and G{\"u}ndel, Harald and Herpertz, Stephan and Heuft, Gereon and Lapstich, Anne-Marie and L{\"u}cke, Thomas and Maisch, Tim and Mundlos, Christine and Petermann-Meyer, Andrea and M{\"u}ller, Susanne and Ott, Stephan and Pfister, Lisa and Quitmann, Julia and Romanos, Marcel and Rutsch, Frank and Schaubert, Kristina and Schubert, Katharina and Schulz, J{\"o}rg B. and Schweiger, Susann and T{\"u}scher, Oliver and Ungeth{\"u}m, Kathrin and Wagner, Thomas O. F. and Haas, Kirsten},
  title     = {Dual guidance structure for evaluation of patients with unclear diagnosis in centers for rare diseases (ZSE-DUO): study protocol for a controlled multi-center cohort study},
  series = {Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases},
  volume    = {17},
  journal   = {Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases},
  number    = {1},
  doi       = {10.1186/s13023-022-02176-1},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-300440},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Background In individuals suffering from a rare disease the diagnostic process and the confirmation of a final diagnosis often extends over many years. Factors contributing to delayed diagnosis include health care professionals' limited knowledge of rare diseases and frequent (co-)occurrence of mental disorders that may complicate and delay the diagnostic process. The ZSE-DUO study aims to assess the benefits of a combination of a physician focusing on somatic aspects with a mental health expert working side by side as a tandem in the diagnostic process. Study design This multi-center, prospective controlled study has a two-phase cohort design. Methods Two cohorts of 682 patients each are sequentially recruited from 11 university-based German Centers for Rare Diseases (CRD): the standard care cohort (control, somatic expertise only) and the innovative care cohort (experimental, combined somatic and mental health expertise). Individuals aged 12 years and older presenting with symptoms and signs which are not explained by current diagnoses will be included. Data will be collected prior to the first visit to the CRD's outpatient clinic (T0), at the first visit (T1) and 12 months thereafter (T2). Outcomes Primary outcome is the percentage of patients with one or more confirmed diagnoses covering the symptomatic spectrum presented. Sample size is calculated to detect a 10 percent increase from 30\% in standard care to 40\% in the innovative dual expert cohort. Secondary outcomes are (a) time to diagnosis/diagnoses explaining the symptomatology; (b) proportion of patients successfully referred from CRD to standard care; (c) costs of diagnosis including incremental cost effectiveness ratios; (d) predictive value of screening instruments administered at T0 to identify patients with mental disorders; (e) patients' quality of life and evaluation of care; and f) physicians' satisfaction with the innovative care approach. Conclusions This is the first multi-center study to investigate the effects of a mental health specialist working in tandem with a somatic expert physician in CRDs. If this innovative approach proves successful, it will be made available on a larger scale nationally and promoted internationally. In the best case, ZSE-DUO can significantly shorten the time to diagnosis for a suspected rare disease.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{HelassGreinacherGoetzetal.2022,
  author    = {Helaß, Madeleine and Greinacher, Anja and G{\"o}tz, Sebastian and M{\"u}ller, Andreas and G{\"u}ndel, Harald and Junne, Florian and Nikendei, Christoph and Maatouk, Imad},
  title     = {Age stereotypes towards younger and older colleagues in registered nurses and supervisors in a university hospital: A generic qualitative study},
  series = {Journal of Advanced Nursing},
  volume    = {78},
  journal   = {Journal of Advanced Nursing},
  number    = {2},
  doi       = {10.1111/jan.15021},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-262751},
  pages     = {471 -- 485},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Aim This study aimed to identify and compare age stereotypes of registered nurses and supervisors in clinical inpatient settings. Design Generic qualitative study using half-standardized interviews. Method Nineteen face-to-face interviews and five focus groups (N = 50) were conducted with nurses of varying levels at a hospital of maximum medical care in Germany between August and November 2018 and were subjected to structured qualitative content analysis. Results Reflecting the ageing process and cooperation in mixed-age teams, nursing staff and supervisors defined similar age stereotypes towards older and younger nurses reminiscent of common generational labels 'Baby Boomers' and Generations X. Their evaluation created an inconsistent and contradictory pattern differing to the respective work context and goals. Age stereotypes were described as both potentially beneficial and detrimental for the individual and the cooperation in the team. If a successfully implemented diversity management focuses age stereotypes, negative assumptions can be reduced and cooperation in mixed-age teams can be considered beneficial. Conclusion Diversity management as measures against age stereotypes and for mutual acceptance and understanding should include staff from various hierarchical levels of the inpatient setting.},
  language  = {en}
}