ArticleBMJ open2025
Comparison of outpatient attendance, cardiovascular risk management and cardiovascular health across preCOVID-19, during and postCOVID-19 periods: a prospective cohort study.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Hybrid Care Modifications in the Delivery of Nonpandemic Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, a substantial decrease was observed in hospital admissions and in-hospital procedures for patients with acute cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). The extent to which measures to prevent COVID-19 transmission, for example, lockdowns, affected the outpatient care of patients at higher cardiovascular risk remains unclear. We aimed to compare outpatient department (OPD) attendance, cardiovascular risk management (CVRM) and cardiovascular health (CVH) of patients at higher cardiovascular risk referred to an OPD of a tertiary care centre between preCOVID-19, during and postCOVID-19 periods. DESIGN, SETTING AND
participantsWe included all adult patients at higher cardiovascular risk referred to the cardiology, vascular medicine, diabetology, geriatrics, nephrology or multidisciplinary vascular surgery OPDs of the University Medical Centre Utrecht, the Netherlands, between March 2019 and December 2022, in a prospective cohort study.
main outcome measuresWe assessed trends in the number of first and follow-up appointments and in the completeness of extractable CVRM indicators from the electronic health record (EHR) as a proxy for CVRM guideline adherence. CVH was determined using the Life's Essential 8 metric (score 0-100, the higher score, the better). We investigated whether CVH differed between COVID-19 periods compared with the reference period (ie, 2019) and stratified by OPDs, using multivariable linear regression, adjusted for age, gender, CVD history and whether the patient had a previous appointment before the reference period.
resultsAmong 15 143 patients, we observed a 33% reduction in the weekly number of first appointments during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the largest reductions in the cardiology and nephrology OPDs, with no differences between women and men. Follow-up appointments conducted remotely, compared with before the COVID-19 pandemic, increased significantly for all OPDs. CVRM indicators were up to 11% less extractable during the first lockdown yet returned to prepandemic levels directly after the first lockdown period. The CVH score of patients visiting the nephrology, vascular medicine and geriatrics OPDs during the first lockdown was 11.23 (95% CI 2.74 to 19.72), 5.68 (95% CI 0.82 to 10.54) and 5.66 (95% CI 0.01 to 11.31) points higher, respectively, compared with the prepandemic period. In between the second and third lockdowns, the CVH score was comparable to the preCOVID reference period, yet for the cardiology OPD it was significantly higher (5.54, 95% CI 2.04 to 9.05).
conclusionsDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, weekly numbers of first appointments to OPDs decreased, and a population with a higher CVH score (ie, better CVH) visited certain OPDs, especially during the first lockdown period. These suggest that patients with poorer CVH more often avoided or were unable to visit OPDs, which might have resulted in missed opportunities to control cardiovascular risk factors and potentially may have led to preventable disease outcomes. For future epidemics and pandemics, it seems vital to develop a strategy that includes an emphasis on seeking healthcare when needed, with specific attention to patients at higher CVD risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.