Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36476628›Full record

ArticleArchives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique2022

Burden of COVID-19 on primary care in Belgium: a prospective nationwide observational study from March to August 2020.

Bert Vaes, Bénédicte Vos, Maxime Foidart, Robrecht De Schreye, Diego Schrans, Hilde Philips, Bert Aertgeerts, Kris Doggen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. How to ensure effective and sustainable ILI surveillance in Belgian general practices? : protocol.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026
    Article
  2. Development and early implementation of automated audit and feedback monitoring instruments in Belgian primary care: lessons for scalable systems.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2026
    Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Bert VaesDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33, Blok J, Louvain, Belgium. bert.vaes@kuleuven.be.
Bénédicte VosDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium.
Maxime FoidartDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33, Blok J, Louvain, Belgium.
Robrecht De SchreyeDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium.
Diego SchransDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Hilde PhilipsDepartment of Family Medicine and Population Health, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium.
Bert AertgeertsDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33, Blok J, Louvain, Belgium.
Kris DoggenDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium.
KU Leuven · BESciensano (Belgium) · BEGhent University · BEUniversity of Antwerp · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 outbreak had an important impact on general practice, for example the lack of personal protective equipment (PPE) and the switch to telephone consultations. We installed a monitoring instrument and reported the burden the COVID-19 pandemic placed on Belgian general practitioners (GPs) during the first wave of the pandemic.

methodsWe conducted an observational longitudinal prospective study from the 19

resultsA total of 3.769 different GP centres participated, which included more than 10.000 GPs. Throughout the first three weeks, 20% declared they had insufficient resources (personnel and material) for the following week. Approximately 10% continued to report this during the entire study. The majority reported being able to complete their daily tasks without loss of quality. During the first week, 30% indicated an increased workload. Afterwards, this number decreased and stabilized to an average of 10-20%. More than 70% of the consultations in March 2020 were conducted by telephone. This percentage declined in April and stabilized at approximately 30% in June 2020. Consultations due to respiratory symptoms peaked at 4000/100,000 inhabitants at the beginning of the outbreak, then decreased over time along with the COVID-19 incidence. We noticed a lack of disinfectant hand gel, surgical masks and FFP2 masks, the latter remaining problematic in the long term.

conclusionWe introduced an instrument in Belgian EMR systems to monitor the burden on GPs during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The lack of PPE and increased workload were considered to be the main obstacles. A large number of the GP offices switched to teleconsultations to provide healthcare. Our monitoring instrument provided information for policy makers to intervene on a local level.

Indexed as

COVID-19Electronic health recordsEpidemiological monitoringGeneral practicePersonal protective equipmentPolicyWorkload

Identifiers

PMID36476628
PMCPMC9730669
OpenAlexW4311280067

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.