Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35597939›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2022

The use of out-of-hours primary care during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Lotte Ramerman, Corinne Rijpkema, Nanne Bos, Linda E Flinterman, Robert A Verheij

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. 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.

Lotte Ramerman *Nivel, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Postbus 1568, Utrecht, 3500 BN, The Netherlands. l.ramerman@nivel.nl.
Corinne Rijpkema *Nivel, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Postbus 1568, Utrecht, 3500 BN, The Netherlands.
Nanne BosNivel, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Postbus 1568, Utrecht, 3500 BN, The Netherlands.
Linda E FlintermanNivel, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Postbus 1568, Utrecht, 3500 BN, The Netherlands.
Robert A VerheijNivel, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Postbus 1568, Utrecht, 3500 BN, The Netherlands.
Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research · NLTilburg University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the Netherlands, General Practitioners (GP) are usually the first point of contact with a health professional for most health problems. Out-of-hours (OOH) primary care is provided by regional OOH services. Changes in consultation rates at OOH services may be regarded as a warning system for failures elsewhere in the healthcare system. Therefore in this study, we investigated how the COVID-19 pandemic changed the use of primary care OOH services during the first year of the pandemic.

methodsRoutine electronic health records data were used from 60% of OOH services in the Netherlands, collected by the Nivel Primary Care Database. We compared consultation rates per week (2020) for COVID-19-like symptoms and other health problems (e.g. small traumas, urinary tract infections), for different age groups, the proportion of remote consultations, and different levels of urgency during the pandemic compared to the same period in 2019.

resultsThe number of consultations for COVID-19-like symptoms peaked at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, while consultations for other health problems decreased. These changes in consultation rates differed between age groups. Remote consultations took place more frequently for all health problems, while the proportion of non-urgent health problems increased.

conclusionThere were significant changes in the number of consultations and the proportion that were remote for COVID-19-like symptoms and other health problems. Especially care for babies and young children decreased, while the number of consultations for older adults remained stable. The continued use of OOH services by older adults suggests there were unmet care needs elsewhere in our healthcare system.

Indexed as

After-Hours CareCOVID-19General PractitionersRemote ConsultationAgedChildChild, PreschoolHumansInfantPandemicsPrimary Health CareAfter-hours careCOVID-19Electronic health recordsHealth servicesPrimary health care

Identifiers

PMID35597939
PMCPMC9122805
OpenAlexW4281253544

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.