Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33742429›Full record

ArticleGesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany))2021

[Primary Care Strategies and Cooperation During the First Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany].

Sandra Stengel, Catharina Roth, Amanda Breckner, Frank Peters-Klimm, Simon Schwill, Sophia Möllinger, Nicola Buhlinger-Göpfarth, Joachim Szecsenyi, Michel Wensing

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Sandra StengelAbteilung Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, UniversitätsKlinikum Heidelberg,Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Catharina RothAbteilung Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, UniversitätsKlinikum Heidelberg,Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Amanda BrecknerAbteilung Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, UniversitätsKlinikum Heidelberg,Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Frank Peters-KlimmAbteilung Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, UniversitätsKlinikum Heidelberg,Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Simon SchwillAbteilung Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, UniversitätsKlinikum Heidelberg,Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Sophia MöllingerAbteilung Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, UniversitätsKlinikum Heidelberg,Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Nicola Buhlinger-Göpfarth75181 Pforzheim, Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Nicola Buhlinger-Göpfarth & Dr. Eleonore Fritz, Pforzheim, Deutschland.
Joachim SzecsenyiAbteilung Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, UniversitätsKlinikum Heidelberg,Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Michel WensingAbteilung Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, UniversitätsKlinikum Heidelberg,Heidelberg, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this study was to give an early snapshot of primary care strategies that were implemented to cope with the early period of the COVID-19 pandemic in Baden-Wuerttemberg (Germany).

methodsIn June 2020, all 271 outpatient SARS-CoV-2 contact points, established by the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (16 centers for testing, 204 specialized family practices, 51 Outpatients Corona Centers), and a randomly generated sample of 400 primary care practices of Baden-Wuerttemberg were invited to take part in a paper-based questionnaire. The data were gathered anonymously and analysed descriptively.

resultsOut of those invited, n=63 (15.8%) primary care practices and n=92 (33.9%) SARS-CoV-2 contact points participated; 78.7% of the primary care practices cooperated with SARS-CoV-2 contact points (n=48). In all, 92.1% had implemented a compulsory registration by phone for patients with (suspected) COVID-19 (n=58) and 81% offered consultation exclusively by phone or video in case of a mild courses (n=51). The new outpatient SARS-CoV-2 contact points were established in collaboration with several stakeholders, mainly led by primary care physicians (n=76, 82.6%) and almost 50% of these were established in March 2020 (n=42, 48.3%). The most commonly reported method of registration was regulated mainly by primary care practices (n=88, 95.7%) and public health departments (n=74, 80.4%). In 92.4% (n=85) of cases, it was possible to register by phone. The consultation response was most commonly given in the form of oral information to the patient (n=65, 77.4%). Less then 50% of the SARS-CoV-2 contact points used standardized sheets for registration, documentation and consultation. The assessment of future primary care structures for (suspected) COVID-19 patients were heterogeneous.

conclusionsEffort, improvisation and collaboration were required for a successful and rapid implementation of measures for primary care during the initial period of the COVID-19 pandemic. Impulses for ongoing development of primary care strategies during a pandemic can be derived out of these results.

Indexed as

COVID-19PandemicsGermanyHumansPrimary Health CareSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID33742429
PMCPMC8043590

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.