Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34330859›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Trends in healthcare utilisation during COVID-19: a longitudinal study from the UK.

Ana Howarth, Morag Munro, Alf Theodorou, Peter R Mills

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Economic burden of cardiovascular disease in the United Kingdom.European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. The impact of COVID-19 on psychiatric clinical encounters among low-income racially-diverse children.Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Ana HowarthCigna Europe, Greenock, UK ana.howarth@cigna.com.ORCID 0000-0002-3519-0989
Morag MunroCigna Europe, Greenock, UK.
Alf TheodorouCigna Europe, Greenock, UK.
Peter R MillsCigna Europe, Greenock, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5892-2345

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic had a major impact on healthcare utilisation. The aim of this retrospective review was to quantify how utilisation of non-COVID care changed during this time so as to gain insight and inform planning of future services during potential second and subsequent waves. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A longitudinal design was used to analyse anonymous private UK health insurer datasets covering the period of January 2018 to August 2020. Taken as a measure of healthcare utilisation in the UK, incidence rates of claims broken down by service area and condition were calculated alongside overall monthly totals and costs. Pre-COVID-19 years were compared with the current year.

resultsHealthcare utilisation during the first wave of COVID-19 decreased by as much as 70% immediately after lockdown measures were implemented. After 2 months, the trend reversed and claims steadily began to increase, but did not reach rates seen from previous years by the end of August 2020. Assessment by service and diagnostic category showed that most areas, especially those highly reliant on in-person treatment, reflected the same pattern (ie, rapid drop followed by a steady recovery). The provision of mental health services differed from this observed trend, where utilisation increased by 20% during the first wave of COVID-19, in comparison to pre-COVID-19 years. The utilisation of maternity services and the treatment of existing cancers also stayed stable, or increased slightly, during this time.

conclusionsHealthcare utilisation in a UK-based privately insured population decreased dramatically during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, being over 70% lower at its height. However, mental health services remained resilient during this time, possibly due to greater virtualisation of diagnostics and care.

Indexed as

COVID-19PandemicsCommunicable Disease ControlFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesPatient Acceptance of Health CarePregnancyRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2United KingdomCOVID-19Health services administration & managementPublic health

Identifiers

PMID34330859
PMCPMC8327639

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.