Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34399720›Full record

ArticleBMC ophthalmology2021

Patients' perspective on emergency treatment of ophthalmologic diseases during the first phase of SARS-CoV2 pandemic in a tertiary referral center in Germany - the COVID-DETOUR questionnaire study.

Christoph Ehlken, Constantin von Medem, Maya Lüdemann, Anna Maria Kirsch, Johann Baptist Roider

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05065788 (Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic and Related Lockdown on Eye Emergencies Accesses), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 50% 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.

NCT05065788 completednot on this map

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic and Related Lockdown on Eye Emergencies Accesses

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversità degli Studi dell'InsubriaRan2020 to 2021Enrolled500ConditionsTrauma, Infections, Vision, Loss, Both EyesArmsdata collection
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Christoph EhlkenKlinik für Ophthalmologie des Universitätsklinikums Schleswig Holsteins, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany. christoph.ehlken@uksh.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7388-7173
Constantin von MedemKlinik für Ophthalmologie des Universitätsklinikums Schleswig Holsteins, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
Maya LüdemannKlinik für Ophthalmologie des Universitätsklinikums Schleswig Holsteins, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
Anna Maria KirschKlinik für Ophthalmologie des Universitätsklinikums Schleswig Holsteins, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
Johann Baptist RoiderKlinik für Ophthalmologie des Universitätsklinikums Schleswig Holsteins, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
Universitäts Hautklinik Kiel · DEUniversity Hospital Schleswig-Holstein · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, the need of treatment of urgent ophthalmological diseases and the possible risk of a SARS-CoV-2 infection had to be weighed against each other. In this questionnaire study, we aimed to analyze potential barriers and patients' health beliefs during and after the lockdown early 2020 in a tertiary referral center in Kiel, Germany.

methodsPatients admitted for the treatment of urgent ophthalmic diseases between March 1st, 2020, and June 3rd, 2020, were asked to participate in a questionnaire study. After informed consent was obtained, patients were interviewed using a standardized questionnaire which addressed aspects of their medical history, their health beliefs concerning the COVID-19 pandemic and barriers on their way to the treatment center. The study group was subdivided into two subgroups, depending on the occurrence of their symptoms, before and after the lockdown was ended on April 20th, 2020.

resultsNinety-three patients were included, 43 in subgroup A (before April 20th) and 50 in subgroup B (April 20th or later). Retinal disorders were the most common causes for admission (approximately 60%).. Only 8 patients (8.6%) experienced a delay between their decision to visit a doctor until the actual examination. Every fourth patient was afraid of a COVID-19 infection, and expected a higher likelihood for an infection at the hospital. Patients with comorbidities tended to be more likely to be afraid of an infection (correlation coefficient 0.183, p = 0.0785) and were significantly more likely to be concerned about problems with organizing follow-up care (corr. Coefficient 0.222, p = 0.0328). Higher age was negatively correlated with fear of infection (corr. Coefficient - 0.218, p-value 0.034).

conclusionIn this questionnaire study, only a minority of patients indicated a delay in treatment, regardless of whether symptoms occurred before or after the lockdown before April 20th, 2020. While patients with comorbidities were more concerned about infection and problems during follow-up care, patients of higher age - who have a higher mortality - were less afraid. Protection of high-risk groups should be prioritized during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

trial registrationThe study was registered as DRKS00021630 at the DRKS (Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien) before the conduction of the study on May 5th, 2020.

Indexed as

COVID-19PandemicsCommunicable Disease ControlEmergency TreatmentGermanyHumansRNA, ViralSARS-CoV-2Surveys and QuestionnairesTertiary Care CentersRNA, ViralCOVIDDelay in treatmentEmergencyPandemic

Identifiers

PMID34399720
PMCPMC8366159
OpenAlexW3194057566

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.