Abstract Background Digitalization has significantly expanded the possibilities for collecting health data. Besides options such as online surveys, data can be collected through the use of digital applications (apps). Once users have given their consent, contact information from the app registration can be accessed to invite the relevant target group for further surveys. To generate a sufficient amount of data, a high level of willingness to participate and long-term involvement are required. This study aims to illustrate the willingness to share data and what can be expected from it by means of the Neo-MILK app, which supports mothers during lactation. Methods The willingness to share data and the data resulting from the use of the app is shown by the frequency of consent to the different data use options and the users’ participation. Results While over 68% of the n = 1079 registered app users consented to the use of their app data, 47% agreed to be contacted again for scientific purposes. Data from n = 421 active users were available for analysis. From n = 220 mothers, milk pumping data was available. In 36% of cases, little (<10) or no information on pumping was provided. Of the users who agreed to be contacted again for scientific purposes, n = 300 were invited to participate in another survey and 23% (n = 69) participated. Conclusions In this example, the general willingness to share data and participate in further studies shows great potential for data collection. However, the data collection methods differ primarily in the motivation to participate. When collecting data through app usage, ensuring that the design of the app meets the needs of the user is essential to optimize the user experience and thereby generating complete data. If the use of contact information has been agreed to, incentives may be considered to increase the willingness to participate. Required ethics approvals and data protection regulations should also be ensured for app-based data collection. Key messages • Generating data via app usage as well as the collection of data through the use of users’ contact information shows great potential for health research. • App-based data collection should be considered when planning future health research projects.

Objectives: During the COVID-19 pandemic, dental appointments were cancelled or postponed by both patients and dentists. This study investigated the associations between German dentists' concerns on cross infection and their emotional burden due to personal economic impact on dentist -initiated appointment cancellations. Methods: Data were collected using an anonymous cross-sectional online survey of outpatient physicians in Germany from March through April 2020. Dental treatments were divided into 3 treatment categories (plannable treatments, acute treatments without COVID-19 -like symptoms, and acute treatments with COVID-19 -like symptoms). Descriptive analyses and multivariate logistic regression models were performed. Results: A sample of 269 self-employed dentists was considered. Cancellations of prophylaxis appointments were reported by 82% of dentists, whilst 49% reported cancellations of appointments for acute complaints with simultaneous patient -side COVID-19 -like symptoms. Further, 58% of respondents stated high or very high concerns about COVID-19 selfinfection; 81% stated to be emotionally burdened by the personal economic impact. Dentists' concern of infecting themselves significantly decreased the likelihood of maintaining appointments, with odds ratios of 0.635 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.426 to 0.932) for plannable treatments and 0.587 (95% CI, 0.367 to 0.916) for treatments of patients with acute complaints and simultaneous COVID-19 -like symptoms. In addition, there was a significant negative association between dentists who reported emotional distress due to personal economic impact and the likelihood to maintain appointments, with odds ratios of 0.291 (95% CI, 0.123 to 0.695) for plannable treatments and 0.231 (95% CI, 0.053; 0.706) for treatments of patients without acute complaints and simultaneous COVID-19 -like symptoms. Conclusion: Dentists' fear of infecting themselves with COVID-19 played a role in terms of practice -related appointment cancellations. Dentists differentiated their appointment cancellations according to different treatment categories and patient needs. If dental care is to be maintained in pandemic times, physicians' personal factors such as concerns about infection and perceived pandemic -related personal economic impact need to be considered. (c) 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of FDI World Dental Federation. This is an open access article under the CC BY -NC -ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

AIM:To explore whether and how expressing breast milk is perceived as helpful in coping with negative emotions due to premature birth by mothers of very low birth weight (VLBW) infants. METHODS:Qualitative interviews and a retrospective cross-sectional questionnaire with mothers of VLBW infants were conducted and analysed using an exploratory sequential mixed-method design. Hypotheses were built using qualitative content analysis and quantitatively tested using multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS:Interviews with 12 mothers and questionnaires of 518 mothers were analysed. Coping with prematurity by expressing milk was seen as a way to maintain the caregiving role for the mothers, where three relevant factors arouse: making up for what happened, providing the best for their infant and fear of low milk supply. Quantitative analysis showed that mothers with a high milk supply (Coef. = 1.1, p < 0.000) and more feelings of guilt due to premature birth (Coef. = -0.1; p = 0.015) perceived expressing breast milk significantly more as a resource for coping. CONCLUSION:This study adds knowledge on how expressing breast milk for their VLBW infant may support mothers in coping with premature birth, by revealing the association with milk supply and feelings of guilt due to premature birth.

Background: COVID-19 vaccination is recognized as a key component in addressing the COVID-19 pan-demic. Physicians' attitudes toward vaccination are known to play a defining role in the management and dissemination of medical advice to patients. In Germany, outpatient practitioners are predominantly responsible for the dissemination of vaccines.Method: Using a cross-sectional online survey, 932 outpatient general practitioners, gynecologists, and pediatricians in Germany were asked in fall, 2021, about their attitude toward COVID-19 vaccination and - among others - their communication in vaccine discussions, their assessment of vaccine safety, and reporting of suspected adverse events. Physicians were divided into two groups along their attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination. In addition, multivariate linear regression models were constructed to assess differences in communication strategies.Results: 92 % of physicians had a positive or very positive attitude toward COVID-19 vaccination. Own vaccination status, practice-based vaccination delivery, and estimated vaccination coverage among patients were significantly associated with the attitude toward vaccination. Confidence in vaccine safety was significantly lower among physicians with negative attitudes. There were no differences between the two groups in self-assessment of the ability to detect suspected adverse events, but there were differ-ences in the observing and reporting of adverse events. For the linear regression models, we found that a more negative attitude toward COVID-19 vaccination was significantly associated with increased accep-tance of patient refusal of COVID-19 vaccination and empathic behavior for patient concerns. In contrast, willingness to engage in a detailed persuasion consultation was significantly lower. Pediatricians showed significantly higher empathy for patient-side concerns compared to general practitioners, whereas gyne-cologists showed less empathy than general practitioners.Discussion: The physician's attitude toward COVID-19 vaccination influences the physician's practices as a vaccine provider. However, when providing medical advice and healthcare, the physician should focus on the actual needs of the patient.(c) 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction Mother’s own milk is the best nutrition for every newborn and especially for vulnerable infants such as preterm infants with a very low birth weight below 1,500 grams (VLBW). If no MOM is available, human donor milk is the alternative of choice. Mothers of preterm born infants face challenging conditions that impair sufficient milk production. For this reason, it is particularly important to provide structural lactation support and, at the same time, to promote the establishment of human donor milk banks. Methods and analysis Via a multidisciplinary approach the Neo-MILK study will develop an intervention for structured breastfeeding and lactation support. This will be based on a comprehensive status quo and needs assessment. In addition, the implementation of human donor milk banks (HDMB) will be supported by the development of standards. Ethics and dissemination Intervention development is participatory, involving different disciplines and stakeholders. All surveys are subject to approval by the ethics committee. During the course of the project, the results will be communicated to the scientific community and the general public via publications, the project homepage and social media. Trial registration number DRKS00024799 (German Clinical Trials Register).

Abstract Background The best nutrition for all new-borns and especially vulnerable groups like preterm infants is motheŕs own milk (MOM). Nevertheless, recent research showed that many preterm infants receive formula in neonatal intensive care units (NICU) in Germany. In order to achieve MOM feeding in preterm infants, a MOM-friendly clinical environment is crucial. In Germany, no data is yet available on the attitudes towards MOM of physicians and nurses in NICUs and mothers. Methods Written surveys were conducted to assess attitudes and the current status of MOM-feeding from different perspectives (medical and nursing staff and mothers of preterm infants). Questions included personal attitudes towards MOM and perceived lactation support in NICUs. Descriptive statistics and bivariate tests (Spearman's rho, Pearson chi2) were examined. Results Data of 158 leading physicians (response rate: 76%), 143 nurses (response rate: 68%) and 533 mothers (response rate: 32%) was included. The personal importance of MOM feeding is slightly higher in both physicians and nurses than their attitude towards the effects of feeding with MOM on the medical outcome of preterm infants (M: 9.5/9.5 vs. 8.3/8.9; [1-10]). Mothers predominantly perceived the NICU staff as MOM promotive (M:4.7,4.9; [1-6]) and reported an overall positive attitude towards feeding preterm infants with MOM (M:5.6; [1-6]). Their attitude showed no significant differences between educational levels (p = 0.635), age (p = 0.079) or ethnicity (p = 0.184), whereas the MOM promotive NICU staff was significantly correlated to the motherś attitude (p = 0.001, p = 0.001). Conclusions The status quo of attitudes towards MOM in Germany is rather positive in both health care professionals and mothers, independently of sociodemographic characteristics. Presumably, the challenge in achieving MOM feeding seems to occur in transferring positive attitudes to actual interventions. Key messages • To enhance MOM feeding in preterm infants, future interventions should focus on the transmission of positive attitudes to actual strategies. • NICU staff that is MOM promotive is eminent for the maternal attitudes towards MOM.

Background General practitioners (GPs) are essential for providing and maintaining health care during a pandemic. Pandemic preparedness (PP) of GPs can play a vital role in their management of a pandemic situation. This study aimed to examine the association stockpiled personal protective equipment (PPE) and knowledge of pandemic plans on perceived PP among German GPs. This analysis is part of the research project COVID-GAMS (Funding code: 01KI2099). Methods Three multivariable linear regression models were developed based on an online cross-sectional survey for the period March-April 2020 (the onset of the pandemic in Germany). Data were collected using self-developed items on self-assessed PP and knowledge of a pandemic plan and its utility. The stock of seven PPE items was queried. For PPE items, three different PPE scores were compared. Control variables for all models were gender and age. Results 508 GPs were included in the study; 65.16% believed that they were very poorly or poorly prepared. Furthermore, 13.83% of GPs were aware of a pandemic plan; 40% rated those plans as beneficial. The stock of FFP-2/3 masks, protective suits, face shields, safety glasses, and medical face masks were mostly considered completely insufficient or insufficient, whereas disposable gloves and disinfectants were considered sufficient or completely sufficient. The stock of PPE was significantly positively associated with PP and had the largest effect on PP across all models; the association of the knowledge of a pandemic plan was significant but considerably smaller. PPE scores did not vary considerably in their explanatory power. The assessment of a pandemic plan as beneficial did not significantly affect PP. Conclusions An adequate stockpile of PPE is essential for perceived pandemic preparedness among GPs. Pandemic plans are considered less important for GPs. General practitioners, health authorities, and policy makers should focus on stockpiling PPE for future pandemic emergencies. Key messages Sufficient stockpiled personal protective equipment is the most important factor influencing pandemic preparedness of general practitioners in Germany. Knowledge on a pandemic plan has a subordinate effect on pandemic preparedness of general practitioners; usefulness of a pandemic plan does not have a significant effect.

AbstractBackgroundAlthough most patients are suitable for both hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD), there seem to be differences in the outlook of patients who choose one modality over the other. There is currently limited literature about the impact of patients’ personal attitudes on the decision for PD or HD. In this study, we tried to find out whether there were differences between patients who were on HD and PD in their desire for control and responsibility for their treatment.MethodsThe data were drawn from a nationwide postal survey of 630 HD and PD patients. Patients’ desire for control was measured by scores on the internal locus of control (ILOC) scale. Patients were also asked how important taking responsibility for their dialysis had been for their treatment decision (ITR). Two multivariate logistic regression models, both adjusted for age, were applied to investigate whether there were differences between HD and PD patients in ILOC and ITR. Having one generic measure (ILOC) and one tailored to the dialysis context (ITR) gave the opportunity to investigate if it is a generic personality trait or rather a specific attitude that affects choice of dialysis modality.ResultsPD patients were younger and showed higher ILOC and ITR values. Multivariate logistic regression models adjusted for age confirmed the significant influence of ILOC and ITR on the uptake of PD. The odds ratios for being in the PD group were 1.53 for ILOC (p = 0.030; 95% CI 1.04–2.25), 1.49 for ITR (p = 0.019; 95% CI 1.07–2.07), and 0.95 (p = 0.000; 95% CI 0.94–0.97) for age in both models.ConclusionsOur analysis shows the impact of personal attitudes on the uptake of PD. Participants who generally want to keep control of their lives and take responsibility for their dialysis treatment tended to choose PD. As PD is a home dialysis treatment that requires patients to participate and contribute, it is beneficial if patients’ personalities support the treatment procedure. Having two completely different treatment options that suit to different personalities gives us the opportunity to consider the relationship between personal attitudes and choice of dialysis modality.Trial registrationThe MAU-PD study is registered at the German Clinical Trials Register.DRKS-ID:DRKS00012555.Date of Registration in DRKS: 2018/01/04.

Background Hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) are equivalent treatment alternatives for patients with end stage renal disease. In Germany, there is a legal obligation to inform every patient about all treatment alternatives and their possible harms and benefits. However, there is a low utilization of PD. Therefore, the question arises, whether HD patients perceive that they were informed about different dialysis options. We further investigate, if personal characteristics of informed and non-informed patients vary, and if both groups experienced the decision for their dialysis treatment as shared decision making (SDM). Methods The database was a nationwide postal survey of 590 HD patients from two statutory health insurers in Germany. Participants were asked whether they have been informed about both dialysis options. A logistic regression model examines impact factors on this information. We investigate differences in the German version of the 9-item SDM Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) between informed and non-informed patients with a multivariate linear regression model. Results 56 % of the respondents reported they had been informed about different dialysis treatment options. Patients older than 65 had a 61 % lower chance than patients ≤ 65 for this information ( p < 0.001). High educated patients had a 47 % higher chance for this information than patients with low education level ( p = 0.030). Informed patients rated a higher SDM-Q-9 scores than non-informed patients (76.9 vs. 44.2; p < 0.001). Non-informed patients showed high values in those SDM-Q-9 items which had no regard to different treatment options. Conclusions A great proportion of HD patients – mostly elderly patients and patients with a low education level – did not perceive that they were informed about different dialysis options before dialysis was initiated. The current obligation to provide information about all treatment alternatives in Germany is a first step to assure the unselected access to different treatment options. But it has not reached routine application in health care yet. Information about different treatment options can pave the way for SDM. While SDM is considered to be a valuable tool in clinical medicine, there is still room for improvement for its successful implementation when it comes to decision making on different dialysis treatment options. Trial registration The MAU-PD study (Multidimensional analysis of causes for the low prevalence of ambulatory peritoneal dialysis in Germany) is registered at the German Clinical Trials Register. DRKS-ID: DRKS00012555 Link: https://www.drks.de/drks_web/setLocale_EN.do . Date of Registration in DRKS: 2018/01/04.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic significantly changed the work of general practitioners (GPs). At the onset of the pandemic in March 2020, German outpatient practices had to adapt quickly. Pandemic preparedness (PP) of GPs may play a vital role in their management of a pandemic. Objectives The study aimed to examine the association in the stock of seven personal protective equipment (PPE) items and knowledge of pandemic plans on perceived PP among GPs. Methods Three multivariable linear regression models were developed based on an online cross-sectional survey for the period March–April 2020 (the onset of the pandemic in Germany). Data were collected using self-developed items on self-assessed PP and knowledge of a pandemic plan and its utility. The stock of seven PPE items was queried. For PPE items, three different PPE scores were compared. Control variables for all models were gender and age. Results In total, 508 GPs were included in the study; 65.16% believed that they were very poorly or poorly prepared. Furthermore, 13.83% of GPs were aware of a pandemic plan; 40% rated those plans as beneficial. The stock of FFP-2/3 masks, protective suits, face shields, safety glasses, and medical face masks were mostly considered completely insufficient or insufficient, whereas disposable gloves and disinfectants were considered sufficient or completely sufficient. The stock of PPE was significantly positively associated with PP and had the largest effect on PP; the association of the knowledge of a pandemic plan was significant but small. PPE scores did not vary considerably in their explanatory power. The assessment of a pandemic plan as beneficial did not significantly affect PP. Conclusion The stock of PPE seems to be the determining factor for PP among German GPs; for COVID-19, sufficient masks are the determining factor. Knowledge of a pandemic plans play a secondary role in PP.

Introduction Patients with end-stage kidney failure can be treated either by transplant or by dialysis, which can be administered as haemodialysis (HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD). Although they are equivalent therapeutic options in terms of mortality, the percentage of patients in Germany treated with PD is currently very low (∼6%) compared with other countries. The aim of our study is to analyse the factors behind this percentage and their relevance to the choice of dialysis treatment in Germany. This includes analyses of regional disparities in the provision of care for dialysis patients as well as the evaluations of costs and the influence of reimbursement structures. This approach should provide further insights to explain the variation in the usage of PD and HD and will help to define starting points for future interventions. Methods and analysis A mixed-methods approach will be applied to several data sources, including administrative data (ambulatory physicians’ claim data, statutory health insurance claim data), quality assurance data from one of the largest German dialysis providers Kuratorium für Dialyse (KfH) and qualitative and quantitative survey data (patients, nephrologists and dialysis nurses). Qualitative data will be analysed content-analytically. Based on the quantitative data, multivariable analyses will be performed and, where possible, hierarchical models will be tested. This multidimensional approach will enable us to account for the different factors influencing the penetration of PD in Germany. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval (17-299) has been obtained from the Ethics Committee of the Medical Faculty of the University of Cologne on 25 April 2018. National and international dissemination will be accomplished by informing healthcare practitioners, patients and professional organisations and other stakeholders via conferences, scientific and non-scientific publications and seminars. Trial registration number DRKS00012555; Pre-Results.