Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35709084›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Impact of COVID-19 on gynecologic and obstetrical services at two large health systems.

Angela L Liang, Lindsay C Turner, Kristen M Voegtline, Sarah B Olson, Brian Wildey, Victoria L Handa

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Family planning behavior before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Angela L LiangJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Lindsay C TurnerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Urogynecology, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Kristen M VoegtlineBiostatistics, Epidemiology and Data Management (BEAD) Core, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Sarah B OlsonBiostatistics, Epidemiology and Data Management (BEAD) Core, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Brian WildeyDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Victoria L HandaDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7635-234X
Johns Hopkins University · USAllegheny Health Network · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic disrupted medical care in the US, leading to a significant drop in utilization of some types of health services. We sought to quantify how the pandemic influenced obstetrics and gynecology care at two large health care organizations. MATERIALS AND

methodsComparing 2020 to 2019, we quantified changes to obstetrics and gynecology care at two large health care organizations in the United States, Allegheny Health Network (in western Pennsylvania) and Johns Hopkins University (in Maryland). The analysis considered the numbers of surgical encounters, in-person visits, and telemedicine visits. For each system, we quantified temporal changes in surgical volume, in-person and telemedicine visits, and financial impact related to professional fee revenues. We used segmented regression to evaluate longitudinal effects.

resultsAt both institutions, the volume of care was similar in the first few months of 2020 compared to 2019 but dropped precipitously in March 2020. From April to June 2020, surgical volumes were 67% of the same period in 2019 at Allegheny Health and 48% of the same period in 2019 at Johns Hopkins. During that same interval, televisits accounted for approximately 21% of all ambulatory care at both institutions. Although surgical and ambulatory volumes recovered in the second half of 2020, annual surgical volumes in 2020 were significantly lower than 2019 at both institutions (p<0.05) and 2020 ambulatory volumes remained significantly lower at Johns Hopkins (p = .0006). Overall, revenues in 2020 were 91% of 2019 revenues for both institutions.

conclusionsObstetrical and gynecologic ambulatory visits and gynecologic surgeries were sharply reduced during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although care volumes returned to 2019 levels in late 2020, we observed an overall reduction in the volume of care provided and a 9% reduction in professional revenue for both institutions.

Indexed as

COVID-19TelemedicineAmbulatory CareAmbulatory Care FacilitiesFemaleHumansPandemicsPregnancySARS-CoV-2United States

Identifiers

PMID35709084
PMCPMC9202837
OpenAlexW4282982760

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.