Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39218918›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience2024

Outpatient mental health care during high incidence phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany - changes in utilization, challenges and post-COVID care.

Mandy Fehr, Sabine Köhler, Christa Roth-Sackenheim, Katharina Geschke, Oliver Tüscher, Kristina Adorjan, Klaus Lieb, Lars P Hölzel, Hauke F Wiegand

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

9 authors.

Mandy FehrDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Untere Zahlbacher Straße 8, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Sabine KöhlerBerufsverband Deutscher Nervenärzte, Berlin, Germany.
Christa Roth-SackenheimBerufsverband Deutscher Nervenärzte, Berlin, Germany.
Katharina GeschkeDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Untere Zahlbacher Straße 8, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Oliver TüscherDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Untere Zahlbacher Straße 8, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Kristina AdorjanDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Klaus LiebDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Untere Zahlbacher Straße 8, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Lars P HölzelDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Untere Zahlbacher Straße 8, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Hauke F WiegandDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Untere Zahlbacher Straße 8, 55131, Mainz, Germany. Haukefelix.wiegand@unimedizin-mainz.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4411-3424

Funding

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung 01KX2121
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs only a few studies have examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health outpatient system so far, the aim of the COVID Ψ Outpatient Survey was to gain insight from outpatient providers in Germany regarding changes in utilization; associated problems and challenges; telemedicine services; interactions with inpatient and nursing home services; and experiences with post-COVID syndromes.

methodsBetween July and September 2021, we invited 351 randomly selected outpatient mental health specialists to take part in the online survey via e-mail. Additionally, we extended an invitation to professional associations to encourage their members to participate. N = 105 physicians of most regions of Germany took part in the survey.

resultsSurvey participants reported changes in utilization during the high incidence phases (HIP) of the pandemic using pre-formulated categories: For the first HIP in spring 2020, 31% of the survey participants reported a decrease > 20% and 5% an increase > 20% of patient contacts. For the third HIP in spring 2021, 4% reported a decrease > 20% of contacts, while 30% an increase > 20%. Participants chose "patient's fears of infection" and "providers protection measures" as reasons for decreases, and "pandemic related anxieties", "economic stressors", and "capacity reductions of the inpatient system" as reasons for increases of patient contact. Many providers introduced telemedicine services. A majority reported consultations for post-COVID syndromes already in spring 2021.

conclusionsThe survey hinted at changes in utilization, multiple problems but as well good-practice-solutions in the mental health outpatient system during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Indexed as

Ambulatory CareCOVID-19Mental Health ServicesTelemedicineAdultFemaleGermanyHumansIncidenceMaleMental DisordersMiddle AgedOutpatientsSurveys and QuestionnairesCOVID-19Mental health careOutpatient carePost-COVIDTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID39218918
PMCPMC11579151

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.