Background: Symptom checkers (SCs) for laypersons’ self-assessment and preliminary self-diagnosis are widely used by the public. Little is known about the impact of these tools on health care professionals (HCPs) in primary care and their work. This is relevant to understanding how technological changes might affect the working world and how this is linked to work-related psychosocial demands and resources for HCPs. Objective: This scoping review aimed to systematically explore the existing publications on the impacts of SCs on HCPs in primary care and to identify knowledge gaps. Methods: We used the Arksey and O’Malley framework. We based our search string on the participant, concept, and context scheme and searched PubMed (MEDLINE) and CINAHL in January and June 2021. We performed a reference search in August 2021 and a manual search in November 2021. We included publications of peer-reviewed journals that focused on artificial intelligence- or algorithm-based self-diagnosing apps and tools for laypersons and had primary care or nonclinical settings as a relevant context. The characteristics of these studies were described numerically. We used thematic analysis to identify core themes. We followed the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist to report the study. Results: Of the 2729 publications identified through initial and follow-up database searches, 43 full texts were screened for eligibility, of which 9 were included. Further 8 publications were included through manual search. Two publications were excluded after receiving feedback in the peer-review process. Fifteen publications were included in the final sample, which comprised 5 (33%) commentaries or nonresearch publications, 3 (20%) literature reviews, and 7 (47%) research publications. The earliest publications stemmed from 2015. We identified 5 themes. The theme finding prediagnosis comprised the comparison between SCs and physicians. We identified the performance of the diagnosis and the relevance of human factors as topics. In the theme layperson-technology relationship, we identified potentials for laypersons’ empowerment and harm through SCs. Our analysis showed potential disruptions of the physician-patient relationship and uncontested roles of HCPs in the theme (impacts on) physician-patient relationship. In the theme impacts on HCPs’ tasks, we described the reduction or increase in HCPs’ workload. We identified potential transformations of HCPs’ work and impacts on the health care system in the theme future role of SCs in health care. Conclusions: The scoping review approach was suitable for this new field of research. The heterogeneity of technologies and wordings was challenging. We identified research gaps in the literature regarding the impact of artificial intelligence– or algorithm-based self-diagnosing apps or tools on the work of HCPs in primary care. Further empirical studies on HCPs’ lived experiences are needed, as the current literature depicts expectations rather than empirical findings.

Symptom Checker Applications (SCA) are mobile applications often designed for the end-user to assist with symptom assessment and self-triage. SCA are meant to provide the user with easily accessible information about their own health conditions. However, SCA raise questions regarding ethical, legal, and social aspects (ELSA), for example, regarding fair access to this new technology. The aim of this scoping review is to identify the ELSA of SCA in the scientific literature. A scoping review was conducted to identify the ELSA of SCA. Ten databases (e.g., Web of Science and PubMed) were used. Studies on SCA that address ELSA, written in English or German, were included in the review. The ELSA of SCA were extracted and synthesized using qualitative content analysis. A total of 25,061 references were identified, of which 39 were included in the analysis. The identified aspects were allotted to three main categories: (1) Technology; (2) Individual Level; and (3) Healthcare system. The results show that there are controversial debates in the literature on the ethical and social challenges of SCA usage. Furthermore, the debates are characterised by a lack of a specific legal perspective and empirical data. The review provides an overview on the spectrum of ELSA regarding SCA. It offers guidance to stakeholders in the healthcare system, for example, patients, healthcare professionals, and insurance providers and could be used in future empirical research to investigate the perspectives of those affected, such as users.

General practices are established microenterprises in Germany providing a variety of preventive and therapeutic health care services and procedures in a challenging working environment. For example, general practice teams are confronted increasingly with work-related demands, which have been associated with poor psychological and physical outcomes. It is therefore important to gain a better understanding of issues related to occupational health and safety for personnel working in the primary care setting. This study aims to gain an in-depth understanding of psychosocial demands and resources in the primary care setting. We applied an ethnographic design, comprising a combination of participating observations, individual interviews with general practitioners (GPs) (N = 6), and focus group discussion with practice assistants and administrative staff (N = 19) in five general practices in Germany. A grounded theory approach was applied to analyze all data. Our results identified psychosocial demands and resources exemplified mainly along two typical tasks in GP practices: the issuing of medical prescriptions and blood sampling. Main psychosocial demands included factors related to work content and tasks, organization of work, and the working environment. For example, daily routines across all practices were characterized by a very high work intensity including disturbances, interruptions, delegation, and the division of labor between GPs and practice staff. Work-related resources comprised the staff’s influence on aspects related to work organization and social support. The triangulation of methods and data formats allowed the disclosure of interconnectedness between these factors. Although work processes in general practices are complex and required to comply with legal regulations, there are opportunities for practice owners and practice teams to establish working procedures in ways that reduce psychosocial risks and strengthen work-related resources.

Background: Symptom checker apps (SCAs) are accessible tools that provide early symptom assessment for users. The ethical, legal, and social implications of SCAs and their impact on the patient-physician relationship, the health care providers, and the health care system have sparsely been examined. This study protocol describes an approach to investigate the possible impacts and implications of SCAs on different levels of health care provision. It considers the perspectives of the users, nonusers, general practitioners (GPs), and health care experts. Objective: We aim to assess a comprehensive overview of the use of SCAs and address problematic issues, if any. The primary outcomes of this study are empirically informed multi-perspective recommendations for different stakeholders on the ethical, legal, and social implications of SCAs. Methods: Quantitative and qualitative methods will be used in several overlapping and interconnected study phases. In study phase 1, a comprehensive literature review will be conducted to assess the ethical, legal, social, and systemic impacts of SCAs. Study phase 2 comprises a survey that will be analyzed with a logistic regression. It aims to assess the user degree of SCAs in Germany as well as the predictors for SCA usage. Study phase 3 will investigate self-observational diaries and user interviews, which will be analyzed as integrated cases to assess user perspectives, usage pattern, and arising problems. Study phase 4 will comprise GP interviews to assess their experiences, perspectives, self-image, and concepts and will be analyzed with the basic procedure by Kruse. Moreover, interviews with health care experts will be conducted in study phase 3 and will be analyzed by using the reflexive thematical analysis approach of Braun and Clark. Results: Study phase 1 will be completed in November 2021. We expect the results of study phase 2 in December 2021 and February 2022. In study phase 3, interviews are currently being conducted. The final study endpoint will be in February 2023. Conclusions: The possible ethical, legal, social, and systemic impacts of a widespread use of SCAs that affect stakeholders and stakeholder groups on different levels of health care will be identified. The proposed methodological approach provides a multifaceted and diverse empirical basis for a broad discussion on these implications. Trial Registration: German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) DRKS00022465; https://tinyurl.com/yx53er67 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/34026

Background: General practitioners (GPs) are challenged, e.g. by long working hours, and as employers they are responsible for the creation of working conditions that prevent work-related psychosocial risks. Leadership behaviour plays an important role within the working conditions of employees, thus we focused on two research questions: To what extent and how do GPs fulfil their role as entrepreneurs and leaders responsible for occupational safety and health of the team members in the organization of working time of the employees? What psychosocial factors result from the way of organization of working time for the practice team? Methods: Data was collected by participant observations, individual interviews with six GPs, and five focus group discussions with 19 members of the practice staff in total. We gained access to five general practices through a teaching network associated with the Institute for General Medicine, University Hospital Essen (Germany). The analysis was carried out according to the Grounded Theory approach. Results: GPs have several roles and related tasks to fulfil in the organization of working time. This can lead to perceived psychological stress. With regard to the organization of predictable working hours, vacations and sickness absence, the GPs determined the scope of action of the practice assistants. The delegation of these tasks took place to varying degrees and resulted in different work-related resources and stressors. Conclusion: We described transactional and transformational leadership behaviours which are all related to specific psychosocial demands and resources and may overlap on site. Leadership training seems recommendable as part of the training of GPs and other future leaders of micro-enterprises to promote self-reflection by the entrepreneurs and leaders and strengthen occupational health of leaders and staff.

Background: An increasing shortage of skilled personnel, including medical personnel, has been reported in many postindustrial economies. Persisting and growing trends in absenteeism and incapacity to work due to mental disorders are concerning and have increased political, economic, and scientific interest in better understanding and management of determinants related to the work environment and health. Objective: This study protocol describes an integrated approach of social research methods to explore determinants of work-related stress in general practice teams as an example for micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Methods: The methods applied will allow an in-depth exploration of work practices and experiences relating to psychological well-being in general practice teams. An ethnographic approach will be used to develop an in-depth understanding of the drivers of work-related stress in general practice teams. We will combine participating observation and individual interviews with five to seven general practitioners (GPs), and five to seven focus group discussions with the nonphysician staff (3-4 participants per group) in approximately four GP group practices and one single practice in Germany. Data collection and analysis will follow a grounded theory approach. Results: The Ethics Committee of the Medical Faculty, University Hospital of Tuebingen, Germany, has approved this study (reference number: 640/2017BO2). Recruitment has commenced with study completion anticipated in mid-2020. Conclusions: The data from this project will be used in follow-up projects to develop and test an intervention to reduce and prevent work-related stress in GP practices and other SMEs. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/15809