Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33765096›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Utilization of in- and outpatient hospital care in Germany during the Covid-19 pandemic insights from the German-wide Helios hospital network.

Andreas Bollmann, Sven Hohenstein, Vincent Pellissier, Katharina Stengler, Peter Reichardt, Jörg-Peter Ritz, Holger Thiele, Michael A Borger, Gerhard Hindricks, Andreas Meier-Hellmann and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on oncological care in Germany: rapid review.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Andreas BollmannHeart Center Leipzig at University of Leipzig and Leipzig Heart Institute, Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5441-3906
Sven HohensteinHeart Center Leipzig at University of Leipzig and Leipzig Heart Institute, Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9708-1593
Vincent PellissierHeart Center Leipzig at University of Leipzig and Leipzig Heart Institute, Leipzig, Germany.
Katharina StenglerDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Helios Park Hospital, Leipzig, Germany.
Peter ReichardtOncology Center Berlin-Buch, Helios Hospital Berlin-Buch and Berlin Cancer Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Jörg-Peter RitzDepartment of Surgery, Helios Hospital Schwerin, Schwerin, Germany.
Holger ThieleHeart Center Leipzig at University of Leipzig and Leipzig Heart Institute, Leipzig, Germany.
Michael A BorgerHeart Center Leipzig at University of Leipzig and Leipzig Heart Institute, Leipzig, Germany.
Gerhard HindricksHeart Center Leipzig at University of Leipzig and Leipzig Heart Institute, Leipzig, Germany.
Andreas Meier-HellmannHelios Kliniken, Berlin, Germany.
Ralf KuhlenHelios Health, Berlin, Germany.
Leipzig Heart Institute · DEHelios Hospital Berlin-Buch · DEHelios Hospital Schwerin · DEHelios Kliniken · DEHelios Park-Klinikum Leipzig · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the early phase of the Covid-19 pandemic, reductions of hospital admissions with a focus on emergencies have been observed for several medical and surgical conditions, while trend data during later stages of the pandemic are scarce. Consequently, this study aims to provide up-to-date hospitalization trends for several conditions including cardiovascular, psychiatry, oncology and surgery cases in both the in- and outpatient setting. METHODS AND

findingsUsing claims data of 86 Helios hospitals in Germany, consecutive cases with an in- or outpatient hospital admission between March 13, 2020 (the begin of the "protection" stage of the German pandemic plan) and December 10, 2020 (end of study period) were analyzed and compared to a corresponding period covering the same weeks in 2019. Cause-specific hospitalizations were defined based on the primary discharge diagnosis according to International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10) or German procedure classification codes for cardiovascular, oncology, psychiatry and surgery cases. Cumulative hospitalization deficit was computed as the difference between the expected and observed cumulative admission number for every week in the study period, expressed as a percentage of the cumulative expected number. The expected admission number was defined as the weekly average during the control period. A total of 1,493,915 hospital admissions (723,364 during the study and 770,551 during the control period) were included. At the end of the study period, total cumulative hospitalization deficit was -10% [95% confidence interval -10; -10] for cardiovascular and -9% [-10; -9] for surgical cases, higher than -4% [-4; -3] in psychiatry and 4% [4; 4] in oncology cases. The utilization of inpatient care and subsequent hospitalization deficit was similar in trend with some variation in magnitude between cardiovascular (-12% [-13; -12]), psychiatry (-18% [-19; -17]), oncology (-7% [-8; -7]) and surgery cases (-11% [-11; -11]). Similarly, cardiovascular and surgical outpatient cases had a deficit of -5% [-6; -5] and -3% [-4; -3], respectively. This was in contrast to psychiatry (2% [1; 2]) and oncology cases (21% [20; 21]) that had a surplus in the outpatient sector. While in-hospital mortality, was higher during the Covid-19 pandemic in cardiovascular (3.9 vs. 3.5%, OR 1.10 [95% CI 1.06-1.15], P<0.01) and in oncology cases (4.5 vs. 4.3%, OR 1.06 [95% CI 1.01-1.11], P<0.01), it was similar in surgical (0.9 vs. 0.8%, OR 1.06 [95% CI 1.00-1.13], P = 0.07) and in psychiatry cases (0.4 vs. 0.5%, OR 1.01 [95% CI 0.78-1.31], P<0.95).

conclusionsThere have been varying changes in care pathways and in-hospital mortality in different disciplines during the Covid-19 pandemic in Germany. Despite all the inherent and well-known limitations of claims data use, this data may be used for health care surveillance as the pandemic continues worldwide. While this study provides an up-to-date analysis of utilization of hospital care in the largest German hospital network, short- and long-term consequences are unknown and deserve further studies.

Indexed as

Ambulatory CareCardiovascular DiseasesCOVID-19Databases, FactualGermanyHospitalizationHospital MortalityHospitalsHumansNeoplasmsOdds RatioPatient AdmissionSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID33765096
PMCPMC7993839
OpenAlexW3139538251

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.