Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35247784›Full record

ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2022

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the continuity of care for at-risk patients in Swiss primary care settings: A mixed-methods study.

Michael J Deml, Julia Minnema, Julie Dubois, Oliver Senn, Sven Streit, Yael Rachamin, Katharina Tabea Jungo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. A Crisis in the Health System and Quality of Healthcare in Economically Developed Countries.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

7 authors.

Michael J DemlInstitute of Sociological Research, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland; Division of Social and Behavioural Sciences, School of Public Health & Family Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Julia MinnemaInstitute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland; Department of Internal Medicine, Section of Gerontology and Geriatrics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Julie DuboisInstitute of Family Medicine, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland.
Oliver SennInstitute of Primary Care, University of Zurich and University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Sven StreitInstitute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Yael RachaminInstitute of Primary Care, University of Zurich and University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Katharina Tabea JungoInstitute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. Electronic address: katharina.jungo@protonmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Continuity of care is important for the health of aging individuals with comorbidities. When initial coronavirus mitigation campaigns involved messaging such as "Stay at home-stay safe," and banned provision of non-urgent care, at-risk patients depending upon regular consultations with general practitioners (GPs) faced confusion about the possibility of seeking non-COVID-19 related healthcare. We employed a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design, consisting of a quantitative component followed by a qualitative component, to understand at-risk patients' health services use during the COVID-19 pandemic in Switzerland. Quantitatively, we used electronic medical records data from 272 GPs and 266,796 patients. Based on pre-pandemic data, we predicted weekly consultation counts as well as weekly measurement counts (blood pressure, glycated hemoglobin, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol) per 100 patients that would be expected in 2020 in absence of a pandemic and compared those to actual observed values. Qualitatively, we conducted 23 semi-structured interviews with 24 GPs (∼45 min) and 37 interviews with at-risk patients (∼35 min). Quantitative results demonstrate a significant decrease in consultation and measurement counts during the first shutdown period, with consultation counts quickly returning to normal and moving within expected values for the rest of 2020. Qualitative data contextualize these findings with GPs describing constantly implementing material, administrative, and communication changes. GPs reported communication gaps with the authorities and noted a lack of clear guidelines delineating how to define "at-risk patients" and what cases were "urgent" to treat during shutdowns. Patient interviews show that patient-level factors, such as fear of contracting coronavirus, perceptions that GPs were overburdened, and a sense of solidarity, influenced patients' decisions to consult less at the beginning of the pandemic. Findings demonstrate communication gaps during pandemic periods and provide valuable lessons for future pandemic preparedness, particularly the need for contingency plans for the overall healthcare system instead of plans focusing only on the infectious agent itself.

Indexed as

COVID-19PandemicsContinuity of Patient CareHumansPrimary Health CareSwitzerlandContinuity of careCOVID-19Health services researchHealth services useMixed-methodsPrimary careRisk patients

Identifiers

PMID35247784
PMCPMC8868005

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.