Explore the vast range of titles available.

Introduction: Numerous tools exist to detect potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) and potential prescribing omissions (PPO) in older people, but it remains unclear which tools may be most relevant in which setting. Objectives: This cross sectional study compares six validated tools in terms of PIM and PPO detection. Methods: We examined the PIM/PPO prevalence for all tools combined and the sensitivity of each tool. The pairwise agreement between tools was determined using Cohen’s Kappa. Results: We included 226 patients in need of care (median (IQR age 84 (80–89)). The overall PIM prevalence was 91.6 (95% CI, 87.2–94.9)% and the overall PPO prevalence was 63.7 (57.1–69.9%)%. The detected PIM prevalence ranged from 76.5%, for FORTA-C/D, to 6.6% for anticholinergic drugs (German-ACB). The PPO prevalences for START (63.7%) and FORTA-A (62.8%) were similar. The pairwise agreement between tools was poor to moderate. The sensitivity of PIM detection was highest for FORTA-C/D (55.1%), and increased to 79.2% when distinct items from STOPP were added. Conclusion: Using a single screening tool may not have sufficient sensitivity to detect PIMs and PPOs. Further research is required to optimize the composition of PIM and PPO tools in different settings.

Vaccinations against COVID-19 are of the utmost importance in long-term care facilities. During the pandemic, mental health issues increased significantly. This cross-sectional analysis aimed to assess the associations of depression and anxiety with health literacy in people in need of care and the association of depression and burnout with vaccination readiness against COVID-19 in health care workers (HCWs). Within our cross-sectional study, people in need of care were assessed for symptoms of depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (GAD-7), and health literacy (HLS-EU-Q16). Among HCWs, we assessed symptoms of depression (PHQ-9) and burnout (MBI-HSS), as well as psychological antecedents of vaccination (5C) to measure vaccination readiness against COVID-19. A multivariate regression analysis was performed. Symptoms of a major depression were significantly associated with reduced health literacy (p = 0.010) in people in need of care. Among HCWs, symptoms of depression and burnout reduced vaccination readiness against COVID-19 significantly. In particular, collective responsibility was reduced in HCWs suffering from burnout symptoms (p = 0.001). People in need of care and their HCWs could benefit from intensified target group-specific vaccination counseling. Additionally, more attention should be paid to the protection of mental health in long-term care facilities.

Vaccinations are important for informal caregivers and their care recipients. Mental health problems are common among care givers. The aim of this study was to investigate vaccination readiness in informal caregivers and associations with mental health issues. Associations between vaccination readiness in informal caregivers and the vaccination status of their aged care recipients were examined. Within the multicenter prospective registry study ‘Bavarian ambulatory Covid-19 Monitor (BaCoM) ‘, informal caregivers were asked for symptoms of depression (PHQ-9), burden of caretaking (BSFC-s), psychological antecedents of vaccination readiness (5C model) and previous Covid-19 infections of their care recipients. The vaccination status against Covid-19, seasonal influenza and pneumococcal disease was determined via vaccination certificates. Data analysis was performed using ordinal regressions and Mann-Whitney-U tests. Data of n = 91 informal caregivers, associated with n = 84 care recipients were collected. Symptoms of depression were associated with reduced vaccination readiness (Calculation: p = 0.026, OR = 1.18), as well as the perceived burden of caretaking (Confidence: p = 0.006, OR = 0.88). A previous Covid-19 infection of the care recipients was associated with decreased vaccination readiness of informal caregivers (Median (Q1–Q3) Confidence: 5.0 (4.5–6.0) vs. 4.0 (3.0–5.0); Calculation: 5.0 (3.0–6.0) vs. 4.0 (1.0–5.0)). The vaccination status of the care recipients interrelated significantly with vaccination readiness of their informal caregivers (Confidence: p < 0.001; Complacency: p < 0.01; Constraints p < 0.05). No significant interrelations between vaccination readiness and the vaccination status against seasonal influenza or pneumococcal disease occurred. Mental health issues of informal caregivers seem to be associated with the actual vaccination status against Covid-19 in their care recipients. Target group specific counselling as well as an active involvement of informal caregivers in shared decision-making processes can be of relevance, but even more attention should be paid to the protection of mental health for informal caregivers. Trial registration number: German Register of Clinical Studies DRKS 26039.

IntroductionPeople in need of care or support are severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. We lack valid data of long-term assessments. We present a register study to detect the physical and psychosocial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on people in need of care or support in Bavaria, Germany. To describe the persons’ life conditions comprehensively, we assess the perspectives and needs of the respective care teams too. Results will serve as evidence-based source to manage the pandemic and long-term prevention strategies.Methods and analysisThe ‘Bavarian ambulatory COVID-19 Monitor’ is a multicentre registry including a purposive sample of up to 1000 patient–participants across three study sites in Bavaria. The study group consists of 600 people in need of care with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. Control group 1 comprises 200 people in need of care with a negative SARS-CoV-2 PCR test, while control group 2 comprises 200 people with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test but are not in need of care. We assess the clinical course of infection, psychosocial aspects and care needs using validated measures. Follow-up is every 6 months for up to 3 years. Additionally, we assess up to 400 people linked to these patient–participants (caregivers, general practitioners (GPs)) for their health and needs. Main analyses are stratified by level of care I–V (I=minor/V=most severe impairment of independence), inpatient/outpatient care setting, sex and age. We use descriptive and inferential statistics to analyse cross-sectional data and changes over time. In qualitative interviews with 60 stakeholders (people in need of care, caregivers, GPs, politicians), we explore interface problems of different functional logics, of everyday and professional perspectives.Ethics and disseminationThe Institutional Review Board of the University Hospital LMU Munich (#20-860) and the study sites (Universities of Wurzburg and Erlangen) approved the protocol. We disseminate the results by peer-reviewed publications, international conferences, governmental reports, etc.