@article{LadwigLederbogenAlbusetal.2014,
  author    = {Ladwig, Karl-Heinz and Lederbogen, Florian and Albus, Christian and Angermann, Christiane and Borggrefe, Martin and Fischer, Denise and Fritzsche, Kurt and Haass, Markus and Jordan, Jochen and J{\"u}nger, Jana and Kindermann, Ingrid and K{\"o}llner, Volker and Kuhn, Bernhard and Scherer, Martin and Seyfarth, Melchior and V{\"o}ller, Heinz and Waller, Christiane and Herrmann-Lingen, Christoph},
  title     = {Position paper on the importance of psychosocial factors in cardiology: Update 2013},
  series = {GMS German Medical Science},
  volume    = {12},
  journal   = {GMS German Medical Science},
  doi       = {10.3205/000194},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-121196},
  year      = {2014},
  abstract  = {Background: The rapid progress of psychosomatic research in cardiology and also the increasing impact of psychosocial issues in the clinical daily routine have prompted the Clinical Commission of the German Heart Society (DGK) to agree to an update of the first state of the art paper on this issue which was originally released in 2008. Methods: The circle of experts was increased, general aspects were implemented and the state of the art was updated. Particular emphasis was dedicated to coronary heart diseases (CHD), heart rhythm diseases and heart failure because to date the evidence-based clinical knowledge is most advanced in these particular areas. Differences between men and women and over the life span were considered in the recommendations as were influences of cognitive capability and the interactive and synergistic impact of classical somatic risk factors on the affective comorbidity in heart disease patients. Results: A IA recommendation (recommendation grade I and evidence grade A) was given for the need to consider psychosocial risk factors in the estimation of coronary risks as etiological and prognostic risk factors. Furthermore, for the recommendation to routinely integrate psychosocial patient management into the care of heart surgery patients because in these patients, comorbid affective disorders (e.g. depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder) are highly prevalent and often have a malignant prognosis. A IB recommendation was given for the treatment of psychosocial risk factors aiming to prevent the onset of CHD, particularly if the psychosocial risk factor is harmful in itself (e.g. depression) or constrains the treatment of the somatic risk factors. Patients with acute and chronic CHD should be offered anti-depressive medication if these patients suffer from medium to severe states of depression and in this case medication with selective reuptake inhibitors should be given. In the long-term course of treatment with implanted cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) a subjective health technology assessment is warranted. In particular, the likelihood of affective comorbidities and the onset of psychological crises should be carefully considered. Conclusions: The present state of the art paper presents an update of current empirical evidence in psychocardiology. The paper provides evidence-based recommendations for the integration of psychosocial factors into cardiological practice and highlights areas of high priority. The evidence for estimating the efficiency for psychotherapeutic and psychopharmacological interventions has increased substantially since the first release of the policy document but is, however, still weak. There remains an urgent need to establish curricula for physician competence in psychodiagnosis, communication and referral to ensure that current psychocardiac knowledge is translated into the daily routine.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{TischerStuppJansonetal.2021,
  author    = {Tischer, Christina and Stupp, Carolin and Janson, Patrick and Willeke, Kristina and Hung, Chu-Wei and Fl{\"o}ter, Jessica and Kirchner, Anna and Zink, Katharina and Eder, Lisa and Hackl, Christina and M{\"u}hle, Ursula and Weidmann, Manfred and Nennstiel, Uta and Kuhn, Joseph and Weidner, Christian and Liebl, Bernhard and Wildner, Manfred and Keil, Thomas},
  title     = {Evaluation of screening tests in Bavarian healthcare facilities during the second wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic},
  series = {International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health},
  volume    = {18},
  journal   = {International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health},
  number    = {14},
  issn      = {1660-4601},
  doi       = {10.3390/ijerph18147371},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-242637},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Due to the lack of data on asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2-positive persons in healthcare institutions, they represent an inestimable risk. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to evaluate the first 1,000,000 reported screening tests of asymptomatic staff, patients, residents, and visitors in hospitals and long-term care (LTC) facilities in the State of Bavaria over a period of seven months. Data were used from the online database BayCoRei (Bavarian Corona Screening Tests), established in July 2020. Descriptive analyses were performed, describing the temporal pattern of persons that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) or antigen tests, stratified by facility. Until 15 March 2021, this database had collected 1,038,146 test results of asymptomatic subjects in healthcare facilities (382,240 by RT-PCR, and 655,906 by antigen tests). Of the RT-PCR tests, 2.2\% (n = 8380) were positive: 3.0\% in LTC facilities, 2.2\% in hospitals, and 1.2\% in rehabilitation institutions. Of the antigen tests, 0.4\% (n = 2327) were positive: 0.5\% in LTC facilities, and 0.3\% in both hospitals and rehabilitation institutions, respectively. In LTC facilities and hospitals, infection surveillance using RT-PCR tests, or the less expensive but less sensitive, faster antigen tests, could facilitate the long-term management of the healthcare workforce, patients, and residents.},
  language  = {en}
}