Judith Stumm1, Lisa Peter2, Ulrike Sonntag2, Lisa Kümpel2, Christoph Heintze2, Susanne Döpfmer2. 1. Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Institut für Allgemeinmedizin, Berlin, Deutschland. Electronic address: judith.stumm@charite.de. 2. Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Institut für Allgemeinmedizin, Berlin, Deutschland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) are the first point of contact and they coordinate the care for multimorbid patients. This article discusses possible solutions for GPs' needs and wishes regarding the support for non-medical issues, in particular social and legal tasks as well as the cooperation with already existing institutions. METHODS: In the third study phase of a mixed-methods approach, two focus groups with eleven GPs from Berlin were carried out. The project is part of the NAVICARE project, funded by the federal Ministry of Education and Research. The focus groups were analyzed using the framework analysis. RESULTS: GPs caring for multimorbid patients are often faced with non-medical patient needs and social consultation issues. They would like to receive support in these areas and want more cooperative care structures. They are largely unaware of existing offers by social institutions in their city districts. The designation of a fixed contact person in social institutions could improve communication and thus enable low-threshold access. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The GPs agree that there is a need for support with social and legal matters in general practice. The focus groups discussed already existing offers that GPs could use more frequently and how a cooperation with providers of social care could succeed. GPs in Berlin think that support and relief measures, in particular in the form of cooperation with institutions in the district that provide social and legal support, are both desirable and conceivable.
BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) are the first point of contact and they coordinate the care for multimorbid patients. This article discusses possible solutions for GPs' needs and wishes regarding the support for non-medical issues, in particular social and legal tasks as well as the cooperation with already existing institutions. METHODS: In the third study phase of a mixed-methods approach, two focus groups with eleven GPs from Berlin were carried out. The project is part of the NAVICARE project, funded by the federal Ministry of Education and Research. The focus groups were analyzed using the framework analysis. RESULTS: GPs caring for multimorbid patients are often faced with non-medical patient needs and social consultation issues. They would like to receive support in these areas and want more cooperative care structures. They are largely unaware of existing offers by social institutions in their city districts. The designation of a fixed contact person in social institutions could improve communication and thus enable low-threshold access. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The GPs agree that there is a need for support with social and legal matters in general practice. The focus groups discussed already existing offers that GPs could use more frequently and how a cooperation with providers of social care could succeed. GPs in Berlin think that support and relief measures, in particular in the form of cooperation with institutions in the district that provide social and legal support, are both desirable and conceivable.
Keywords:
Communication; General practice; Hausarztpraxis; Kommunikation; Multimorbid patients; Multimorbide Patient*innen; Nichtmedizinische Tätigkeiten; Non-medical tasks; Social and legal support offers; Soziale und sozialrechtliche Unterstützungsangebote