Practice Manager

The ability to set a hierarchy without panic: an explicit criterion for prioritization (medical urgency, patient safety, management relationship), delegation or reallocation where possible (a colleague takes the phone, calling in a float), clear upward communication to the practice owner about what will not get done. Bonus: the candidate mentions having negotiated the timing of a seemingly urgent owner request in order to protect a medical priority. Anyone who says I just did everything shows no discrimination between topics and ends up in the burnout that is very common in this role.

Vigilance and structured escalation: the candidate describes the discovery (quarterly billing, KV feedback, an internal audit, a colleague's tip), quantifies the discrepancy in euros and points, and proposes a measure (re-billing, training the MFAs, adjusting treatment documentation). Bonus: she/he introduced a control (a four-eyes check before quarter close, a monthly spot check) to prevent recurrence. Anyone who has never seen a billing discrepancy has worked in very small practices with no billing responsibility, or lacks a critical eye.

Empathetic firmness: the candidate describes how she/he delivered the message (in person, by phone, in the right setting rather than in a crowded waiting area), acknowledges the patient's emotional state and offers a concrete next action (a replacement appointment, clarification with the treating clinician, escalation to the practice owner). Bonus: she/he names a situation where the patient stayed with the practice after the clarification. Anyone who just recites procedure or describes the patient as difficult shows a weakness that leads to poor reviews on Jameda, Google and Sanego.

A clear immediate triage: (1) triage the emergency at once, move them into treatment or call the emergency services depending on symptoms (a medical priority, non-negotiable), (2) reorganize the consulting hours: communicate longer waiting times transparently to patients, postpone two non-urgent appointments, (3) upward communication to the physicians / practitioners with a plan, not with panic. Anyone who answers I call the practice owner without deciding themselves shows a lack of autonomy. Anyone who leaves the emergency sitting in the waiting area to save the consulting schedule shows a dangerous inversion of priorities.

De-escalation in the right room: the candidate moves the patient out of the waiting area into a quiet room (a consultation room, an empty treatment room), listens, acknowledges the frustration, explains the cause factually and offers a concrete next action (a priority appointment, a follow-up with the treating clinician, a written reply from practice management). Bonus: she/he mentions that nothing is decided in the waiting area, but it is communicated (for example a short, transparent announcement to the waiting patients about the delay). Anyone who keeps arguing in public or dismisses the patient curtly actively damages the practice's reputation.

A structured diagnosis before action: (1) analysis of the existing GOÄ invoicing: which IGeL (individual health services) or self-pay services are offered, which are not, where are they communicated weakly? (2) training the MFAs in patient-appropriate explanation of self-pay services (cost transparency, benefit explanation, no high-pressure tactics), (3) adjusting appointment capacity for longer private-consultation slots, (4) monthly quarterly monitoring with the practice owner. Bonus: the candidate mentions the ethical limits (patient benefit before practice revenue, no pressure situations) and the legal limits (clear written information before treatment starts, per GOÄ rules). Anyone who answers in purely sales terms, without mentioning the ethical and legal dimension, shows a weakness that gets expensive in reviews and KV complaints.

A systemic method: (1) diagnosis: audit the existing scheduling rules per physician / practitioner (slot length by service, buffer times, emergency slots, home-visit blocks), (2) data analysis of the last 3 months (no-show rate by weekday, time of day, patient group), (3) measures: adjusted slot lengths to each physician's / practitioner's pace, SMS or email reminders 48 and 24 hours ahead, an overbooking rule for chronic no-show patients, clear emergency slots, (4) training the MFAs on the new scheduling logic, (5) weekly monitoring of the three metrics waiting time, no-show rate, utilization per physician / practitioner. Anyone who answers I keep a better Excel without distinguishing the root causes repairs the symptom, not the system.

Calm adherence to procedure: the candidate (1) politely invites the patient into a separate room, (2) listens and documents what the patient presents, without admitting fault, without any medical statement, without a refund promise, (3) explains the correct process: a written request for record access handled in a DSGVO-compliant way within the statutory deadline, consultation with the liability insurer of the practice and the treating clinician, a written reply from practice management, (4) escalates immediately to the practice owner by phone or emergency channel, (5) documents the conversation in the patient file. Anyone who answers the allegations medically, admits fault or promises a refund exposes the practice to significant legal risk. Anyone who dismisses the patient brusquely escalates the situation toward lawyers and the media.

Project framing with regulatory awareness: (1) inventory: current practice management system (PVS), hardware, networking, the telematics infrastructure (TI), KIM provider, connector status, (2) a training plan for all MFAs on the new workflows (eAU issuance, KIM dispatch, eRezept (e-prescription), ePA (electronic patient record)), (3) DSGVO and confidentiality compliance: an authorization concept, access logging, data backup, a record of processing activities per DSGVO Art. 30, data-processing agreements with the PVS provider, (4) phased rollout with a 4-week pilot, then full rollout, (5) QM documentation of the new processes, (6) a contingency plan for TI outages (a fallback plan for at least 2 working days). Bonus: the candidate mentions funding eligibility (KV flat rates for TI components) and the statutory deadlines (eAU mandatory since 01.01.2022, eRezept since 01.01.2024). Anyone who selects software without a framework or skips the DSGVO dimension exposes the practice to fines and patient lawsuits.

Concrete familiarity with the billing cycle: KV quarterly billing (the KBV interface, EBM-code plausibility checks, justification texts, correction payments), private invoicing per GOÄ (multiplier rates, requested services, IGeL information, GOÄ codes), creating and chasing patient invoices, BG (statutory accident insurance) billing for work accidents, aids and devices with the health insurers. Bonus: the candidate names the PVS in use (Medistar, T2med, CGM Albis, Tomedo, Dampsoft, Z1) and describes a migration or switch they led. Anyone who only answers I receive applications or the billing service calls the KV, without showing technical depth, is at MFA level rather than Practice Manager level.

Concrete QM officer experience: documented practice guidelines, a hygiene plan per RKI recommendations, an emergency-management plan, an annual patient survey, a complaint-management process, error and risk management, regular staff training, MPG and MPBetreibV (medical-device operating) compliance, sterilization validation in dental and surgical practices. Bonus: the candidate describes a concrete KV or public-health-office spot check they experienced and passed, or a QM certification (KTQ, DIN EN ISO 9001, QEP) they actively supported. Anyone who answers QM is the practice owner's job has not filled the role at the required depth.

A structured method with risk prioritization: (1) immediate action: the USB stick with unencrypted patient data is a reportable data breach under DSGVO Art. 33; secure it at once, check whether a report to the state data protection authority within 72 hours is required, (2) inventory of all processing activities (patient data, employee data, suppliers, marketing), (3) update of the record of processing activities per Art. 30, (4) conclude the missing data-processing agreements with the PVS provider, tax advisor, IT provider, external billing service, (5) restructure the authorization concept: role-based, four-eyes principle for sensitive actions, access logging, (6) train the whole team on DSGVO and medical confidentiality under § 203 StGB, (7) appoint an external data protection officer if required (mandatory for practices that process special categories of personal data on a non-occasional basis). Anyone who overlooks the reporting duty for the data breach exposes the practice to fines of up to 4 % of annual revenue.

A learning posture: the candidate describes having integrated the feedback (not just heard it) and changed the practice. Bonus: she/he shared what was learned with the team or documented a new process to prevent recurrence. Anyone who describes having justified their own logic instead of taking the remark on board shows a coachability weakness that, in the close pairing of practice owner plus Practice Manager, quickly leads to conflict.

A partnership posture: preparing topics in advance, anticipating needs, the ability to say no or question a decision when it collides with a legal, ethical or organizational limit. Anyone who describes a pure execution posture shows a weakness that leads to compliance erosion in practices; anyone who describes a permanent power struggle has a fit problem with the role. Bonus: the candidate names a situation where she/he pushed through a recommendation against the practice owner's original wish (for example on a DSGVO question, a personnel decision or a GOÄ billing matter).

The ability to say no without accusing, and to recall your own professional ethics: medical confidentiality under § 203 StGB applies to the Practice Manager too, DSGVO Art. 9 for health data is criminally sanctioned, and every access is logged in the PVS. Bonus: the candidate proposes a legal alternative (document a clear treatment relationship, obtain the consent of the person concerned, four-eyes principle) and recalls the civil and criminal consequences for the practice owner and the Practice Manager personally. Anyone who answers I just do it without questioning does not protect the practice and endangers their own professional standing. Anyone who refuses curtly without explaining the legal framework shows a weakness in cross-functional communication.