Biopolymers - facts and statistics

The IfBB – Institute for Bioplastics and Biocomposites is a research institute within the Hochschule Hannover, University of Applied Sciences and Arts, which was established in 2011 to respond to the growing need for expert knowledge in the area of bioplastics. With its practice-oriented research and its collaboration with industrial partners, the IfBB is able to shore up the market for bioplastics and, in addition, foster unbiased public awareness and understanding of the topic. As an independent research-led expert institution for bioplastics, the IfBB is willing to share its expertise, research findings and data with any interested party via the Internet, online and offline publications or at fairs and conferences. In carrying on these efforts, substantial information regarding market trends, processes and resource needs for bioplastics is being presented here in a concise format, in addition to the more detailed and comprehensive publication and “Engineering Biopolymers”1. One of our main concerns is to furnish a more rational basis for discussing bioplastics and use fact-based arguments in the public discourse. Furthermore, “Biopolymers – facts and statistics” aims to provide specific, qualified answers easily and quickly for decision-makers in particular from public administration and the industrial sector. Therefore, this publication is made up like a set of rules and standards and largely foregoes textual detail. It offers extensive market-relevant and technical facts presented in graphs and charts, which means that the information is much easier to grasp. The reader can expect comparative market figures for various materials, regions, applications, process routes, agricultural land use or resource consumption, production capacities, geographic distribution, etc.

A cross-sectional study assessing the association between online ratings and structural and quality of care measures : results from two German physician rating websites

BACKGROUND: Even though physician rating websites (PRWs) have been gaining in importance in both practice and research, little evidence is available on the association of patients' online ratings with the quality of care of physicians. It thus remains unclear whether patients should rely on these ratings when selecting a physician. The objective of this study was to measure the association between online ratings and structural and quality of care measures for 65 physician practices from the German Integrated Health Care Network "Quality and Efficiency" (QuE). METHODS: Online reviews from two German PRWs were included which covered a three-year period (2011 to 2013) and included 1179 and 991 ratings, respectively. Information for 65 QuE practices was obtained for the year 2012 and included 21 measures related to structural information (N = 6), process quality (N = 10), intermediate outcomes (N = 2), patient satisfaction (N = 1), and costs (N = 2). The Spearman rank coefficient of correlation was applied to measure the association between ratings and practice-related information. RESULTS: Patient satisfaction results from offline surveys and the patients per doctor ratio in a practice were shown to be significantly associated with online ratings on both PRWs. For one PRW, additional significant associations could be shown between online ratings and cost-related measures for medication, preventative examinations, and one diabetes type 2-related intermediate outcome measure. There again, results from the second PRW showed significant associations with the age of the physicians and the number of patients per practice, four process-related quality measures for diabetes type 2 and asthma, and one cost-related measure for medication. CONCLUSIONS: Several significant associations were found which varied between the PRWs. Patients interested in the satisfaction of other patients with a physician might select a physician on the basis of online ratings. Even though our results indicate associations with some diabetes and asthma measures, but not with coronary heart disease measures, there is still insufficient evidence to draw strong conclusions. The limited number of practices in our study may have weakened our findings.