Herrmann‐Lingen, Christoph

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","Doc09"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","German medical science : GMS e-journal"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","12"],["dc.contributor.author","Ladwig, Karl-Heinz"],["dc.contributor.author","Lederbogen, Florian"],["dc.contributor.author","Albus, Christian"],["dc.contributor.author","Angermann, Christiane"],["dc.contributor.author","Borggrefe, Martin"],["dc.contributor.author","Fischer, Denise"],["dc.contributor.author","Fritzsche, Kurt"],["dc.contributor.author","Haass, Markus"],["dc.contributor.author","Jordan, Jochen"],["dc.contributor.author","Jünger, Jana"],["dc.contributor.author","Kindermann, Ingrid"],["dc.contributor.author","Köllner, Volker"],["dc.contributor.author","Kuhn, Bernhard"],["dc.contributor.author","Scherer, Martin"],["dc.contributor.author","Seyfarth, Melchior"],["dc.contributor.author","Völler, Heinz"],["dc.contributor.author","Waller, Christiane"],["dc.contributor.author","Herrmann-Lingen, Christoph"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-09T11:41:21Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-09T11:41:21Z"],["dc.date.issued","2014"],["dc.description.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."],["dc.description.abstract","Hintergrund: Die rasche Weiterentwicklung der psychokardiologischen Forschung, aber auch die wachsende Verankerung psychosozialer Fragestellungen im klinischen Alltag haben die Klinische Kommission der DGK bewogen, einer Aktualisierung und Weiterentwicklung des 2008 erstmals publizierten Positionspapiers zur Bedeutung psychosozialer Faktoren in der Kardiologie zuzustimmen. Methoden: Der Kreis der Autoren wurde vergrößert, allgemeine Aspekte eingefügt und das Wissen in allen Abschnitten auf den heutigen Stand gebracht. Schwerpunkte der Empfehlungen sind die koronare Herzerkrankung, Herzrhythmusstörungen und die Herzinsuffizienz, da hier der Stand der empirischen Evidenz und des klinisches Wissens zu psychosozialen Fragestellungen am weitesten entwickelt ist. Berücksichtigt wurden bei den Empfehlungen Besonderheiten von Frauen und Männern, Unterschiede bzgl. der Lebensspanne, Einflüsse auf die kognitive Leistungsfähigkeit und die interaktive synergistische Bedeutung klassischer Risikofaktoren bei affektiver Komorbidität. Ergebnisse: Eine I-A-Empfehlung (Empfehlungsgrad I, Evidenzgrad A) wurde vergeben für die Aufforderung, psychosoziale Risikofaktoren bei der Einschätzung des KHK-Risikos zu berücksichtigen, die als unabhängige ätiologische und prognostische Risikofaktoren für das Auftreten der koronaren Herzerkrankung (KHK) und für Komplikationen im Behandlungsverlauf der KHK bedeutsam sind. Ferner für die Empfehlung, Patienten mit Herzoperationen von einem interdisziplinären Team zu betreuten, in dem die Möglichkeit besteht, auf psychosoziale Aspekte einzugehen, da bei diesen Patienten komorbide psychische Störungen wie Depressivität, Angst und posttraumatische Belastungsstörung häufig und prognostisch ungünstig sind. Eine I-B-Empfehlung wurde vergeben für die Behandlung psychosozialer Risikofaktoren mit dem Ziel einer Primärprävention der KHK, wenn das Risikomerkmal an sich Krankheitswert hat (z. B. Depression) oder die Behandlung klassischer Risikofaktoren erschwert ist. Eine antidepressive Pharmakotherapie soll Patienten nach akutem Koronarsyndrom sowie in der Phase der chronischen KHK angeboten werden, die an einer mindestens mittelschweren rezidivierenden depressiven Störung leiden. Dabei sollen vorzugsweise Substanzen aus der Gruppe der selektiven Serotoninwiederaufnahmehemmer (SSRI) zum Einsatz kommen. Bei der langfristigen ärztlichen Begleitung von ICD-Patienten sollen die psychosozialen Folgen der ICD-Technologie beachtet und insbesondere relevante Affektstörungen sowie Krisen bei ICD-Patienten erkannt und fachgerecht behandelt werden. Schlussfolgerungen: Das Positionspapier formuliert konkrete Anwendungsfelder mit hoher Priorität für die Einbeziehung psychosozialer Faktoren in die kardiologische Praxis, die eine leitlinienkonforme Evidenz aufweisen. Trotz deutlicher Fortschritte seit der Erstveröffentlichung des Positionspapiers existieren weiterhin Forschungsdefizite für die Bewertung der Wirksamkeit psychotherapeutischer und psychopharmakologischer Konzepte bei kardialen Patienten. Curricula für die Vermittlung von (psycho-)diagnostischer, kommunikativer und differenzialdiagnostischer Kompetenz müssen rasch entwickelt werden, um eine Transmission des aktuellen Wissensstands in die Alltagspraxis zu ermöglichen."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.3205/000194"],["dc.identifier.fs","610882"],["dc.identifier.pmid","24808816"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/11990"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/58411"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.relation.issn","1612-3174"],["dc.rights","CC BY-NC-ND 3.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0"],["dc.subject.mesh","Cardiology"],["dc.subject.mesh","Cardiovascular Diseases"],["dc.subject.mesh","Germany"],["dc.subject.mesh","Humans"],["dc.subject.mesh","Mental Disorders"],["dc.subject.mesh","Practice Guidelines as Topic"],["dc.subject.mesh","Psychology"],["dc.subject.mesh","Psychotherapy"],["dc.title","Position paper on the importance of psychosocial factors in cardiology: Update 2013."],["dc.title.translated","Positionspapier zur Bedeutung psychosozialer Faktoren in der Kardiologie: Update 2013"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","11"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","1"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","German Medical Science : GMS e-journal"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","18"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","12"],["dc.contributor.author","Herrmann-Lingen, Christoph"],["dc.contributor.author","Brunner, Edgar"],["dc.contributor.author","Hildenbrand, Sibylle"],["dc.contributor.author","Loew, Thomas H."],["dc.contributor.author","Raupach, Tobias"],["dc.contributor.author","Spies, Claudia D."],["dc.contributor.author","Treede, Rolf-Detlef"],["dc.contributor.author","Vahl, Christian-Friedrich"],["dc.contributor.author","Wenz, Hans-Jürgen"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-09T11:41:08Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-09T11:41:08Z"],["dc.date.issued","2014"],["dc.description.abstract","OBJECTIVE: The evaluation of medical research performance is a key prerequisite for the systematic advancement of medical faculties, research foci, academic departments, and individual scientists' careers. However, it is often based on vaguely defined aims and questionable methods and can thereby lead to unwanted regulatory effects. The current paper aims at defining the position of German academic medicine toward the aims, methods, and consequences of its evaluation. METHODS: During the Berlin Forum of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF) held on 18 October 2013, international experts presented data on methods for evaluating medical research performance. Subsequent discussions among representatives of relevant scientific organizations and within three ad-hoc writing groups led to a first draft of this article. Further discussions within the AWMF Committee for Evaluation of Performance in Research and Teaching and the AWMF Executive Board resulted in the final consented version presented here. RESULTS: The AWMF recommends modifications to the current system of evaluating medical research performance. Evaluations should follow clearly defined and communicated aims and consist of both summative and formative components. Informed peer reviews are valuable but feasible in longer time intervals only. They can be complemented by objective indicators. However, the Journal Impact Factor is not an appropriate measure for evaluating individual publications or their authors. The scientific \"impact\" rather requires multidimensional evaluation. Indicators of potential relevance in this context may include, e.g., normalized citation rates of scientific publications, other forms of reception by the scientific community and the public, and activities in scientific organizations, research synthesis and science communication. In addition, differentiated recommendations are made for evaluating the acquisition of third-party funds and the promotion of junior scientists. CONCLUSIONS: With the explicit recommendations presented in the current position paper, the AWMF suggests enhancements to the practice of evaluating medical research performance by faculties, ministries and research funding organizations."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.3205/000196"],["dc.identifier.fs","607867"],["dc.identifier.pmid","24971044"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/11706"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/58357"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","final"],["dc.relation.issn","1612-3174"],["dc.rights","CC BY-NC-ND 3.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0"],["dc.subject.mesh","Biomedical Research"],["dc.subject.mesh","Employee Performance Appraisal"],["dc.subject.mesh","Financing, Organized"],["dc.subject.mesh","Germany"],["dc.subject.mesh","Guidelines as Topic"],["dc.subject.mesh","Peer Review"],["dc.subject.mesh","Periodicals as Topic"],["dc.title","Evaluation of medical research performance - position paper of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF)."],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]