Background: Digital Health and Data Enabling Integrated Care SIG members have been working together on the priority area of interoperability for the last 3 years through meeting at ICIC and NACIC conferences and building partnerships. In these meetings members of the SIG have joined the co-leads to share and advance knowledge regarding translational challenges of interoperability (ICIC23), how to ensure interoperable efforts remain person-centred (ICIC24), and developing a process to iteratively adopt standardized minimum data sets to enable information sharing across systems (NACIC24). These efforts are being brought together into a white paper from the SIG to provide an international perspective on how health and care system efforts towards interoperability may help to ensure, rather than upend, efforts towards delivering more person-centred and integrated health and social care services. This session will seek to wrap-up our 3 year-long discussion on interoperability, sharing with delegates the learnings from past workshops, offering an opportunity to provide feedback on content and to suggest how the white paper’s recommendations can dovetail with relevant national or regional initiatives. Participants will also discuss what is next for the SIG to continue to build the vision for the future of a digitally-enabled integrated care systems. Audience: All existing and newly interested members of the SIG are welcome. Our growing membership consists of patients and family caregivers, researchers, frontline providers, managers, system leaders and decision-makers, policy makers, informaticians, and industry partners. We will also include a virtual component to this meeting so that our larger international members can participate whether attending the conference or not. Approach: The session will begin with a short introduction from SIG leads (C. Steele Gray, L. Lewis, I. Meyer) who will provide a summary of the work from the previous conference workshops on interoperability. Three sections of content will be covered by each of the leads (translational needs, ensuring person-centredness, and data standardization through minimum data sets), which will include points at which delegates can provide feedback and point to national / regional initiatives addressing each section. The leads will use tools like MentiMeter to collect rapid feedback from delegates in and out of the room. This first section of the meeting will take 40 minutes allowing for introduction time and about 12 minutes per section. The final 20 minutes will focus on the future asking delegates to work in small groups in the room and online to discuss the “Future of Digital Health and Data Enabling Integrated Care.” Outcomes: The White Paper being generated by the team will be refined based on feedback from delegates at this conference and posted to the IFIC website and other network websites as an open-source resource and living document. SIG members who share their names and contact information will be credited in the white paper as contributors to the work. The white paper will include the “Future of Digital Health and Data Enabling Integrated Care” discussion as a call to action for international partners around “what’s next.”

Abstract Background Despite the potential of eHealth solutions to enhance medication management and patient safety, the integration of clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) into primary care remains challenging for healthcare systems worldwide. In Germany, the Digital Healthcare Act created a legal framework to accelerate eHealth adoption, but implementation lags behind international standards. We reanalysed data from a completed cluster-randomised stepped wedge trial (SW-CRT) that implemented a CDSS for medication management in German primary care to identify and characterise distinct implementation patterns and their predictive factors. Methods We linked routine health insurance records, practice structural data, pseudonymised CDSS logbook entries, and cross-sectional postal survey data from general practitioners (GPs) participating in the SW-CRT (n = 736 practices). We used hierarchical cluster analysis (Ward’s method) on five implementation outcomes to identify distinct adoption patterns. Random Forest models were developed to assess how well structural, patient-level, and attitudinal variables could classify practices into these patterns. Results Of 736 participating practices, 356 (48%) performed at least one medication review. Hierarchical cluster analysis of these practices based on five implementation outcomes identified three distinct adoption patterns. The remaining 380 practices that did not perform medication reviews constituted a fourth pattern. CDSS usage intensity did not align with cluster-specific intervention effect across patterns. The pattern with the lowest usage intensity and fidelity showed the largest cluster-specific intervention effect on the combined endpoint of hospitalisation and mortality. Practices in this pattern reported significantly higher change commitment, change efficacy, and cognitive participation. Random Forest models using structural variables alone showed limited discrimination (AUC 0.56–0.66). Including a binary indicator of GP survey participation improved discrimination (AUC 0.61–0.82). Conclusions Within this single trial context, higher CDSS usage intensity did not correspond to larger cluster-specific intervention effects, and adoption behaviour was heterogeneous across practices. Structural variables alone were insufficient to distinguish adoption patterns; differences were instead associated with attitudinal factors such as change commitment, change efficacy, and willingness to engage with the intervention. Because these attitudinal measures were collected after practices had reached intervention status, they cannot be interpreted as antecedents of adoption. These findings nonetheless underscore the value of assessing implementer engagement during implementation and of tailoring implementation strategies to distinct adoption patterns rather than pursuing uniform approaches. Trial registration AdAM: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03430336), 6 February 2018; eHealth COMPATH: Open Science Framework (osf.io/gau5w), 29 December 2023.

OBJECTIVES:Vaccinations are important for patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID), including multiple sclerosis (MS), inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (iRMD), or inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). However, safety concerns persist regarding potential disease worsening. This study assessed the risk of IMID worsening requiring emergency hospitalization following pneumococcal or influenza vaccination. METHODS:In this retrospective population-based cohort study, six target trial emulations with time-dependent matching were performed using claims data from the German statutory health insurance BARMER from January 2013 to December 2019. Covariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS:Of 432,768 IMID patients, 9526 MS, 108,422 iRMD, and 19,238 IBD patients were included in pneumococcal trials, and 30,416 MS, 265,850 iRMD, and 53,056 IBD patients in influenza trials. No increased risk was found; instead, a trend toward risk reduction was observed. Pneumococcal trials showed HRs of 0.91 [95% CI: 0.58-1.42] for MS, 0.60 [0.38-0.94] for iRMD, and 0.89 [0.62-1.26] for IBD. The influenza trials showed similar results (MS: 0.94 [0.73-1.21]; iRMD: 0.79 [0.63-1.00]; IBD: 0.83 [0.68-1.03]). CONCLUSIONS:No evidence of increased IMID worsening requiring emergency hospitalization after pneumococcal or influenza vaccination was found, supporting the safety of immunizing these patients.

The integration of eHealth solutions into routine healthcare remains challenging despite their potential to improve care quality and efficiency. Many digital health interventions struggle to scale beyond pilot phases due to usability issues, poor alignment with clinical workflows, limited interest-holder involvement and structural barriers. Living Labs (LLs) have emerged as an approach to address these challenges by enabling co-design and iterative testing of eHealth tools. LLs promote collaboration among patients, healthcare professionals, developers, and policymakers. However, systematic insights into their practical implementation are still limited. This study explores the use of a LL approach to create and adapt project workflows dynamically, as well as its potential as a methodological framework for developing an implementation plan for a digital prescribing workflow (eRIKA). The analysis focuses on intervention-level insights identified throughout the LL process. The study also reflects on limitations of the approach. The eRIKA project was implemented using an LL approach to iteratively refine a digital prescribing workflow in collaboration with end-users. The co-design process was structured into four thematic sprints. Workshops with general practitioners (GP), pharmacists, medical assistants and pharmacy assistants were conducted to test software prototypes and gather feedback. Participants were recruited from six GP practices, six pharmacies, and one hospital in Germany. Data were collected through audio-recorded workshops and the thinking aloud method. Thematic analysis was used to analyze participants’ feedback regarding technical integration, usability, and implementation feasibility of the eRIKA system within routine care settings. The results show a need for seamless technical integration with existing primary care systems and a stable infrastructure, alongside user-friendly, intuitive interfaces that avoid disrupting established workflows. Practically valued features include integrated medication checks, real-time inventory visibility, and the ability to document over-the-counter medications in patient records. Concerns were raised around duplicated workflows, excessive alerts, insufficient training, and unresolved questions about data accuracy, particularly regarding patient-entered information. A desire for direct, digital communication channels was expressed. At a broader level, the LL identified barriers related to the national health IT infrastructure as well as difficulties in cross-sectoral collaboration. Aligning with previous research, the results highlight concerns around workload, system interoperability, role and responsibility, as well as regulatory barriers to implementation. Beyond these established challenges, the results also surface interprofessional tensions between GPs and pharmacists regarding the extent of data sharing required for effective pharmaceutical counselling. Overall, applying the LL method provides meaningful, actionable insights for refining and adapting complex interventions to specific contexts. Further research should explore standardized evaluation frameworks for LL implementations, considering both process optimization and measurable health outcomes, but also the involvement of macro-level interest-holders. RR2-10.2196/87277

Introduction:The primary focus of this paper is the application of case study design to investigate the integration of complex health services. Description:This paper presents a co-created case study research project that examined the integration of a regional palliative care service. It outlines the study's design including the mixed-methods approach to data collection and the processes used for analysis and triangulation. The paper also details the tools and strategies implemented across the macro, meso, and micro levels of the service, offering practical insights into how case study research can be applied to explore the dynamics of integrated care. Discussion:Case study methodology enables comprehensive, context-rich data collection and supports theory development through real-world observation. Its adaptability makes it particularly suited for evaluating complex systems. Co-creation added significant value by fostering interest-holders' engagement and enhancing the relevance and applicability of the findings. The iterative and flexible design also allowed the study to respond effectively to challenges such as COVID-19 restrictions and a national cyber-attack. Conclusion:Case study research is a robust and flexible approach that provides deep insights into the integration of complex healthcare systems. Its co-creation potential and adaptability make it particularly useful in real-world health service evaluations.

Certain medications may adversely affect health during hot days and heatwaves by altering chronic conditions, comorbidities, fluid balance, or impairing heat adaptation. This study aims to develop evidence-based cross-sectoral recommendations for the safe administration of heat-sensitive medications, compiled into a so-called ‘CALOR’ list (calor: Latin for ‘heat’). Development of the CALOR list will follow a four-pillar process. First, a scoping review of scientific literature and best practices will identify potentially inadequate medications during heat events (heat-PIMs) and adaptation measures, resulting in a first draft. Second, an expert panel will refine this draft through a Delphi process to reach consensus on clinically relevant recommendations. Third, German statutory health insurance (SHI) claims data will be analysed to determine heat-PIMs prevalence; data from Cologne residents will additionally be linked with climate data to investigate health outcomes during heat events. Fourth, thirty health professionals (i.e., medical doctors, nurses, pharmacists) will field-test the CALOR list in summer, providing qualitative feedback on feasibility, leading to further refinement of the CALOR list. To our knowledge this study protocol presents the first study attempting to collate a comprehensive and actionable list of recommendations for drug safety management during hot days and heatwaves.

Background: Certain medications can have a negative impact on health during heatwaves. This can be caused through a variety of mechanisms triggered by heat, including insufficient body heat regulation, changes in cardiac or renal function or pharmacokinetic changes. The objective of the ADAPT-Heat project (Adaptation of drug therapy during hot seasons, funded by the German Innovation Fund) is to co-design evidence-based recommendations for heat-sensitive medication adjustments to prevent adverse events. These recommendations are to be applied in primary, secondary and social care, as well as municipal settings. Approach: The project’s first step was a systematic literature review to identify all potentially inadequate medications during heat (heat-PIM). In order to supplement this list with more detailed information, an analysis of claims data of a large German statutory health insurance company (BARMER, 8.7 mio insurants) is being carried out. For each heat-PIM from the literature review, we examine the frequency and average quantity (DDD, defined daily dose) of prescription, the specialization of the prescribing doctors, and the co-morbidities and co-medications of the patients. Results from this are fed back into a co-design activity to develop recommendations for care professionals, municipalities and citizens, involving representatives of all these groups. Results: The literature research yielded a list of ~50 medications, defined by their ATC code (Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification System). These ATC codes are currently being used in the claims data analysis. We will present its results, further research steps and the implications for the development of the recommendations at ICIC25. Implications: On the one hand, the results can help to prioritize the heat-PIM and highlight those which have a high prescription frequency. This is considered necessary due to the large number of heat-PIM identified from literature. The claims data results will also inform the next work step in the project, namely an analysis of actual health impacts of selected medications during past heatwaves. Finally, the results will be used to determine the target group for recommendations more precisely and to adapt these recommendations to the different target groups.

Background: The Projects TOP (“Transsectoral Optimization of Patient Safety”; Project No.: 01NVF19018) and eRIKA (“ePrescription as an Element of Interprofessional Care Pathways for Continuous Medication Therapy Safety”; Project No.: 01NVF21110) address drug therapy safety in polypharmacy patients by integrating Living Labs (LL) as co-design environments. Approach: The project TOP focuses on minimising medication errors in inpatient settings to improve the quality and continuity of care for polypharmacy patients. The LL enabled direct input from healthcare providers in structured workshops, aiming to target seamless transitions between inpatient and outpatient care. Key aspects included defining technical requirements for seamless interoperability across healthcare sectors, facilitated through iterative adjustments and real-time provider feedback. The project eRIKA implements an electronic prescription system with comprehensive drug documentation and safety checks (AMTS). Structured into four sprints, the LL process systematically collected feedback on process flow, software design, and usability. The first two sprints focused on receiving feedback on process flow, while the third focused on design, usability, and the participant acceptance of the software. The fourth sprint tested the electronic prescription was tested in real-world conditions, with prescriptions being issued and processed in pharmacies. Stakeholders in the LL - including physicians, pharmacists, pharmaceutical assistants, and researchers - are directly engaged in design, implementation and monitoring of the overall process. Results: The LL are a valuable tool for co-design within projects, especially for involving diverse stakeholders. User-friendly designs are facilitated through their inclusion, which can enhance project success. LL establish effective cross-sector collaboration for medication safety and enhance the overall functionality in medication management through systematic stakeholder input. Implications: The integration of LL in healthcare projects demonstrates an effective model for enhancing project processes through co-production and multidisciplinary collaboration. Findings from TOP and eRIKA highlight the LL approach as a structured framework that strengthens stakeholder engagement through co-design and a collaborative approach, supporting the development of safer and more efficient medication therapy processes in healthcare.

Abstract:The impact of climate change on human health, healthcare, and health systems constitute one of the most pressing challenges of our time. In response, this position paper outlines perspectives, strategic approaches, and potential solutions aimed at fostering a climate-resilient and low-carbon healthcare sector. It was developed in collaboration with representatives from scientific societies, working groups, professional associations, and institutions with a dedicated expertise on the topic and was the subject of extensive interdisciplinary dialogue. This position paper reflects the outcome of a broad consensus-building process involving stakeholders from diverse academic and professional backgrounds. While it does not claim to be exhaustive, it represents the current state of discussions. The paper addresses six central topics: (1) Transformative research, (2) Research funding and research networking, (3) Data access and linkage, (4) Education and information opportunities, (5) Prevention, mitigation, and adaptation, as well as (6) Sustainability and climate neutrality in the health and research sector. The position paper advocates for intensified collaboration, courage and willingness to make decisions on the part of the scientific community, policymakers, and civil society to develop a future-proof and resilient healthcare system capable of withstanding the multifaceted challenges posed by climate change. This position paper is intended as a foundation for ongoing discourse and the development of concrete policy and practice-oriented strategies to enhance climate resilience and sustainability in health systems over the long term.

Background:Increased life expectancy is associated with increasing multimorbidity and polypharmacy, leading to a heightened risk of drug-drug interactions and adverse events, especially when multiple health care providers are involved. To address the urgent need for safer medication management in this population, tools such as medication plans (MP), electronic prescriptions (e-prescriptions), and clinical decision support systems (CDSS) offer valuable support. These instruments have the potential to enhance medication safety by providing physicians and pharmacists with a comprehensive overview of a patient's overall medication regimen and by assisting health care professionals in making informed prescribing decisions. Objective:This study aims to improve medication therapy safety by combining e-prescriptions, the use of claims data, MPs, CDSS, and interprofessional communication. To comprehensively evaluate this complex intervention, a holistic multiphase study will be conducted, examining (1) the effectiveness of the intervention and (2) health-economic and (3) implementation-related aspects. Methods:A multiphase study design is used. In the first phase, the intervention is implemented in selected outpatient practices (n=10) and pharmacies (n=10) in 2 regions in Germany as part of a cluster-randomized controlled trial to assess process-related outcomes. The primary outcome is the congruence between the MP and claims data. In phase 2, the intervention is scaled up in 3 regions and evaluated in a quasi-experimental study. The required sample size for the intervention group is 3528 patients, with a synthetic control group matched from existing claims data. The primary outcome is a combined end point of all-cause mortality and hospitalization within 3 months of an index prescription. Quantitative methods (descriptive, regression-based methods using claims data, calculation of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, and survey-based analyses of implementation-related aspects) and qualitative methods (interviews and focus groups to capture experiences of health care professionals and patients) are used. Results:In phase 1, a total of 187 patients were recruited (74 in the intervention group and 113 in the control group) by June 2025. Phase 2 is currently ongoing, with data collection continuing through December 31, 2025. Final analyses are planned by March 2027. Conclusions:Medication safety in polypharmacy remains a critical challenge in Germany. This study provides multiperspective evidence supporting the nationwide implementation of the eRIKA (e-prescription as an element of interprofessional care pathways for continuous medication therapy management [eRezept als Element interprofessioneller Versorgungspfade für kontinuierliche AMTS]) intervention.

BACKGROUND:Individuals with autoimmune or immune mediated diseases (AID) are more susceptible to infections and often experience worse outcomes if infected, underscoring the importance of vaccination. However, it remains unclear whether vaccine effectiveness (VE) differs between persons with and without AID. Our aim was to compare the effectiveness of influenza and herpes zoster vaccines in both groups, where the AID group consists of individuals with either multiple sclerosis (MS), chronic inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) or chronic inflammatory rheumatic disorders (CIRD). METHODS:We emulated five target trials using claims data from a large German health insurance provider: one for herpes zoster and four for influenza across different seasons. We used 1:1 balanced risk set matching and Cox proportional hazards models with interaction terms between vaccination status and AID status to estimate VE and differences in VE across groups. RESULTS:For the herpes zoster trial, 169,054 vaccinated individuals were matched to the same number of controls, including 10,994 AID individuals per group. Herpes zoster VE was 68.73 (95% CI 55.75-77.91) in the AID group and 60.30 (55.59-64.52) in the non-AID group (VE ratio: 1.14, 95% CI 0.93-1.30). Across four influenza seasons (2015/2016-2018/2019) between 1403,342 and 1713,064 individuals were included, including between 56,662 and 78,320 AID individuals. Influenza VE varied by outcome, season, and assumptions, but VE ratios remained near one in most analyses (VE ratios: -0.92-3.77), with all CIs including one. CONCLUSIONS:There was no evidence that VE differs meaningfully between individuals with and without AID, conditional on the included confounders. Both vaccines were similarly effective across groups, suggesting that VE is not reduced in MS, IBD, or CIRD patients. Further research is necessary to validate these findings for other AID and infections.

Introduction Diabetic kidney disease and renal replacement therapy are long-term complications of diabetes mellitus and significantly contribute to disease burden. The aim of the analysis was to develop case definitions for diabetic kidney complications in routine data as part of the diabetes surveillance and to internally validate them. Method Based on an age- and sex-stratified sample of persons covered by the Barmer health insurance, individuals with documented diabetes (E10-E14) were included and differentiated by type 1 (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D). Case definitions were developed for persons with diabetic nephropathy (DNP; ICD: N08.3, E1x.2), chronic kidney disease (CKD; ICD: N18) and renal replacement therapy (RRT) with long-term dialysis (EBM: 40815-40819, 40823-40828 / OPS: 8-853, 8-854, 8-855, 8-857) or kidney transplantation (OPS: 5-555; EBM: 04561, 13601; ICD Z94.0). The temporal persistence of DNP and CKD was examined by considering different observation periods, and the internal validity was assessed using additional information from the data set for DNP, CKD, and RRT. Results In 2018, DNP was documented in 15.4% of individuals with diabetes (T1D: 18.3%; T2D: 15.2%), and CKD in 21.8% (T1D: 14.4%, T2D: 22.2%). Considering an observation period of five years (2014-2018), the prevalence estimates increased by 22 and 23%, respectively. RRT was documented in 7.5 per 1,000 individuals with diabetes. Internal validity assessment showed that 96.6% of DNP cases, 93.5% of CKD cases, and all RRT cases met at least one validation criterion. Conclusion With high internal validity, and prevalence estimate consistent across age groups, the case definition of CKD can be considered suitable for use in surveillance. However, we assume that prevalence is underestimated when considering a 1-year period. For the depiction of RRT (kidney transplantation or long-term dialysis) via routine data, documentation of services must be employed.

BACKGROUND:To date, data on the prevalence and age at first management of permanent childhood hearing loss in Germany are lacking. OBJECTIVE:This study aims to depict how often and at what age children and adolescents receive their (first) hearing technology. MATERIALS AND METHODS:In this study, we analyzed claims data from a large German statutory health insurance company (BARMER). A cross-sectional study determined the provision of hearing devices and cochlear implants for children and adolescents aged under 18 years with permanent hearing loss from 2010 to 2020. A longitudinal analysis of a cohort of children born in 2010 was performed to gain insights about age at first management with hearing technology during the first 10 years of life. RESULTS:Between 2010 and 2020, approximately 2800 to 3600 children and adolescents per year were provided with hearing devices and 10 to 30 with cochlear implants. In the 2010 birth cohort, 1.22% of children received their first prescription for hearing devices before the age of 10. The proportionately highest number of first prescriptions was found between 3 and 6 years. In 2020, particularly few children gained access to hearing technology. CONCLUSION:The analysis of the prescribed hearing systems reveals inaccuracies in documentation but also a possible care gap in hearing loss management. For a large percentage of children and adolescents, management of hearing loss took place after the age of 1. The frequent initial provision of hearing technology at preschool age indicates that the proportion of hearing loss that is acquired, detected late, or treated late remained quite high even after the introduction of newborn hearing screening. There is an obvious need for comprehensive tracking of children who fail newborn hearing screening and for other screening and hearing tests. The data for 2020 suggest that hearing loss was diagnosed and treated later due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The aim of this study was to analyze with the help of claims data which additional diagnoses are common for children who are deaf or hard-of-hearing (DHH) and at what frequency. Claims data sets from statutory health insurance providers contain different pieces of information, including medical diagnoses. The analysis of claims data was conducted for the 2010 birth cohort of 38,705 children who were insured by the BARMER health insurance company. This birth cohort was then narrowed down to all children who received a prescription for a hearing device within the first 10 years of their life (n = 474). For these 474 children, we assessed the most common additional diagnoses coded according to the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10-GM and analyzed their frequency. Apart from the high frequency of ear diseases such as “Diseases of middle ear and mastoid” (ICD category H65-H75, 95.4%), we also found a high frequency for “Developmental disorders” (ICD category F80-F89, 81.9%) and various other additional diagnoses. Our results show that DHH children are a heterogenous group with a high frequency of additional diagnoses.

AimThis article presents the study protocol of a retrospective cohort study designed to compare the effectiveness of herpes zoster, and influenza vaccines in individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS), chronic inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), or chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases (CIRD) to individuals without these diseases, using claims data of one of the largest population based health insurances in Germany.BackgroundIndividuals with autoimmune diseases such as MS, IBD, and CIRD are more susceptible to vaccine preventable infectious diseases such as influenza and herpes zoster, due to the autoimmune disease itself, the presence of comorbidities and immunosuppressive therapies. Vaccines are the primary means to prevent such diseases. The efficacy of these vaccines is usually estimated using large randomized controlled trials, from which patients with MS, IBD, and CIRD are often excluded. It is therefore unclear whether these vaccines are also effective for these patients.DesignA target trial emulation based on observational claims data of a statutory health insurance company is proposed.MethodsThis study will aim to emulate multiple target trials to compare the effectiveness of herpes zoster and influenza vaccines in patients with and without MS, IBD and CIRD using data from a large German statutory health insurance provider (BARMER). The primary outcome for each vaccine effectiveness analysis is the disease itself. The analysis will be carried out using both time-dependent matching and a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model in conjunction with g-computation. Additionally, the moderating effect of immunosuppressive therapies on the vaccine effectiveness will be estimated using a stratified secondary analysis.DiscussionThis study will estimate and compare the effectiveness of influenza and herpes zoster vaccines in individuals with and without MS, IBD, and CIRD. Because of the large amount of data, this study will also be able to investigate the role of the immunosuppressive medication on vaccine effectiveness, which may provide guidance for vaccine administration guidelines.

INTRODUCTION:Healthcare research results often do not find their way into practice due to missing or under-utilized communication channels. Consequently, these results fail to impact the healthcare system. To bridge this "translation gap," solutions tailored to the needs and habits of users are required. METHODS:We conceptualized and implemented an online platform to communicate the results of two completed healthcare research projects to both professionals and the public in Cologne. This was achieved using a co-design approach with end users. The platform was evaluated for user satisfaction, efficiency, effectiveness, conformity with expectations, and usage through participant observation, an online survey, and web statistics analysis. A final redesign was conducted based on the evaluation. RESULTS:The platform was implemented according to the co-design concept. Most online survey participants found the site easy to use and engaging in terms of content. However, criticisms included the lack of multimedia and interactive content, the large amount of text used, and the absence of specific expected information. DISCUSSION:After the redesign, the platform met part of the requirements emerging from the evaluation. Nonetheless, improvements are needed in multimedia and interactive content presentation, as identified in the evaluation. The lack of specific expected content highlights unanswered research questions of the underlying projects. CONCLUSION:The developed platform has been online since the end of the development phase and continues to be used. The study demonstrated that a co-design approach can yield usable results in the field of science.

Hintergrund Ergebnisse aus der Versorgungsforschung gelangen häufig nicht in die Praxis, weil entsprechende Kommunikationskanäle fehlen oder nicht genutzt werden. Damit können diese Ergebnisse dann auch keine Wirkung im Gesundheitswesen entfalten. Es braucht geeignete, an den Bedarfen und Gewohnheiten der Nutzer:innen orientierte Lösungen, um diese Lücke zu überbrücken. Methode Konzeptionierung und Implementierung einer Online-Plattform für die Kommunikation von Ergebnissen zweier abgeschlossener Projekte der Versorgungsforschung an die Fachöffentlichkeit und die Bevölkerung der Stadt Köln im Co-Design mit Endnutzer:innen. Evaluation der Plattform zur Nutzer:innenzufriedenheit, Effizienz, Effektivität, Erwartungskonformität und Nutzung mittels teilnehmender Beobachtung, Online-Survey und Analyse von Webstatistiken. Abschließendes Re-Design auf Grundlage der Evaluation. Ergebnisse Die Plattform wurde auf Grundlage des im Co-Design entwickelten Konzepts implementiert. Ein Großteil der online Befragten fand die Website sowohl inhaltlich interessant als auch gut nutzbar. Bemängelt wurden fehlende multimediale und interaktive Inhalte, die Verwendung großer Textmengen sowie das Fehlen spezifischer erwarteter Informationen. Diskussion Nach dem Re-Design konnte die Plattform einen Teil der in der Evaluation genannten Verbesserungsvorschläge erfüllen. Hinsichtlich der festgestellten Mängel bezüglich multimedialer und interaktiver Inhaltsdarstellung besteht zukünftig Verbesserungsbedarf. Das Fehlen spezifischer erwarteter Inhalte deutet auf bisher unbeantwortete Forschungsfragen hin, die in den zugrunde liegenden Projekten noch nicht beantwortet wurden. Schlussfolgerung Die entwickelte Plattform ist seit Abschluss der Entwicklungsphase online und wird weiter genutzt. Die Studie konnte zeigen, dass ein Co-Design-Ansatz auch im Bereich der Wissenschaftskommunikation zu gut nutzbaren Ergebnissen führt.

Digital Health and Data Enabling Integrated Care SIG members have been working together on the priority area of interoperability. A key international challenge is around standardizing information sharing, including identifying what data is shared and how information maintains its value as it moves across professional and organizational boundaries.To refine and build on the previous two SIG meetings that have focused on the challenge of interoperability, this workshop will help to establish a process for creating Minimum Data Sets for integrated care to streamline interoperability efforts. Delegates will not only engage in an exercise to help identify a minimum data set from the International Patient Summary, but will learn a transferable process that they can apply to other data and information resources in their own networks.AudienceAll existing and newly interested members of the SIG are welcome. Our growing membership consists of patients and family caregivers, researchers, frontline providers, managers, system leaders and decision-makers, policy makers, informaticians, and industry partners. We are particularly keen to grow our North American membership at NACIC24 in Calgary. Approach: The session will begin with a short introduction from SIG leads (C. Steele Gray, L. Lewis, I. Meyer) who will provide a summary of current global standardization efforts, such as the use of openEHR and SNOMED-CT including a specific example from Estonia. SIG guest Matthew Meyer will then present the approach being taken by the Middlesex London Ontario Health Team around developing a Minimum Data Set to guide their interoperability efforts across organizational partners.Delegates in the session will then break into small working groups to go through the exercise where they work from an existing standard, the International Patient Summary, and identify what information is needed for which type of partner (patient/carer, primary care hospital, home care, social and community services, etc...), to establish a Minimum Data Set for this summary. Delegates will then be asked to review the standard and discuss the ease of standardization, and the benefits/risks of including different components for different partners. Finally, delegates will recommend prioritization of elements. Facilitators will guide delegates through the process, using sticky notes and stickers to record and prioritize ideas.Structure: ) Introduction and data standardization overview (5 minutes); 2) Matt Meyer presentation (5 minutes); 3) Table Discussions (25 minutes); 4) Report back (5 minutes)OutcomesWhile there is only 5 minutes set aside for a report back, the facilitators will collect all the work generated by the tables to be included in a white paper report that is being generated by the SIG leads in collaboration with members on "Interoperability for Integrated Care" which is being built from the SIG meetings on this topic from the last two years. Patient and family carer involvement has be significant in past workshops, including the ICIC24 workshop which was co-developed and co-led with a patient partner who is an ongoing active member. And we will be inviting patient and family carer delegates interested in digital health to support this workshop activity. This final session will round out the report, offering what the delegates worked on in the session, but also presenting a potentially transferable process for developing minimum data sets that can be applied by other organizations working on this challenge. The SIG anticipates releasing the white paper by the end of 2024.

Bisher liegen keine Daten zu Versorgungshäufigkeiten und -zeitpunkten von Kindern und Jugendlichen mit permanenter Hörstörung in Deutschland vor. Ziel der Studie ist es, herauszufinden, wie häufig und in welchem Alter Kinder (erstmalig) ein technisches Hörsystem erhielten. Mithilfe von Routinedaten einer der größten deutschen gesetzlichen Krankenkassen (BARMER) wurde eine Querschnittsanalyse für die Jahre 2010 bis 2020 vorgenommen, um zu ermitteln, wie viele Kinder und Jugendliche mit permanenter Hörstörung unter 18 Jahren mit Hörhilfen nach Definition der Hilfsmittelrichtlinie und Cochleaimplantaten versorgt wurden. In einer Längsschnittanalyse einer Kohorte von Kindern des Geburtsjahrgangs 2010 wurde zusätzlich das Alter bei der Verordnung der ersten technischen Hörsysteme in den ersten zehn Lebensjahren betrachtet. Zwischen 2010 und 2020 erhielten jährlich ca. 2800 bis 3600 Kinder und Jugendliche eine Hörhilfe und 10 bis 30 ein Cochleaimplantat. In der Geburtskohorte 2010 erhielten 1,22