COVI-Prim survey: Challenges for Austrian and German general practitioners during initial phase of COVID-19

[Changes in the provision and utilization of health care in German primary care practices during the COVID-19 pandemic - A survey of patients in three federal states]

INTRODUCTION

During the COVID-19 pandemic general practitioners (GP) practice teams were temporally confronted with major challenges which were accompanied by changes in practice organization and service provision. So far, little has been known about the views of patients who visited the GP practice for other than COVID-related reasons with regard to provision and use of GP services, the adjustments in the practice and the work of the practice team members.

METHODS

The patient survey is a sub-study of the mixed-methods study VeCo-Praxis (GP healthcare for patients not suffering from COVID during the Corona pandemic) of the research practice network RESPoNsE (Research Practice Network East), which was conducted in the federal states of Berlin, Brandenburg and Thuringia. The questionnaire-based survey was carried out among patients who visited their GP practice in November 2022. The topics covered in the survey were developed by two focus groups consisting of 13 members of the RESPoNsE patient advisory board. The questionnaire was developed and piloted in a participatory approach with the RESPoNsE Patient Advisory Board. The results were analyzed descriptively using SPSS and discussed with the advisory board.

RESULTS

1,405 questionnaires from 37 practices were analyzed. 97% of respondents felt that the treatment they received at their GP practice during the COVID-19 pandemic was good. For the vast majority, appointments and acute consultations, prescriptions, laboratory tests, discussions of diagnostic results, routine follow-up check-ups and health checks were available to a sufficient extent. From the patients' perspective, the practices have successfully adapted to the challenges caused by COVID-19. Overall, the patients' trust in and their appreciation of the work of the practice staff have increased since the pandemic. Patients stated that GP practices should continue hygiene procedures, such as wearing a mask or keeping physical distance, in the future.

DISCUSSION

Despite multiple reports of a significant decline in both provision and utilization of standard care in GP practices during the pandemic, our survey showed that the majority of patients felt that they received adequate GP care and were highly satisfied. The results should be interpreted against the background of possible selection bias.

CONCLUSION

In this survey, GP patients were predominantly appreciative of GP care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The patients' assessment of the provision and use of GP services during the pandemic complements the corresponding perspective of GPs and medical practice assistants.

Predictors of adherence in Austrian employees during the COVID-19 pandemic: results of an online survey

Background

Since the beginning of the pandemic in December 2019, Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been a significant challenge to health care systems throughout the world. The introduction of measures to reduce the incidence of infection had a significant impact on the workplace. Overall, companies played a key and adaptive role in coping with the pandemic.

Methods

Cross-sectional data from an online-survey of 1,183 employees conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic in spring 2021 in Austria were used in the analyses. The influence of health beliefs (e.g., perceived severity), modifying factors (e.g., age) and time-dependent factors (e.g., corona fatigue) on individual adherence were evaluated. The conception of the questionnaire was based on the health belief model.

Results

The majority of respondents were female (58.3%), worked in companies with more than 250 employees (56.6%) and had been to an academic secondary school or had a university degree (58.3%). Overall, employees were adherent to most of the measures at their company (>80%), except for wearing FFP-2 masks when they were travelling in a car with coworkers (59.3, 95%CI 51.3-66.7%). Overall adherence was associated with high ratings for the meaningfulness of testing (OR: 2.06 95%CI: 1.00-4.22; p = 0.049), the extent to which social norms govern behavior (OR: 6.61 95%CI: 4.66-9.36; p < 0.001), lower perceived difficulties associated with the adoption of health-promoting measures (OR: 0.37 95%CI: 0.16-0.82; p = 0.015) and lower corona fatigue (OR: 0.23 95%CI: 0.10-0.52; p < 0.001). Adherence to four single measures was influenced by different predictors. The most important predictors (important for the adherence to three out of four single measures) were social norms and corona fatigue.

Conclusion

The importance attached to testing and social norms, as well as lower perceived barriers to health-promoting measures and low levels of corona fatigue all increase overall adherence to Covid-19 protective measures in companies. Strategies to improve adherence should be adapted depending on the aim (to raise overall adherence or adherence to individual measures) and on the group of persons that is being targeted.

[General Practitioners' Experiences with COVID-19: a Survey After the First Wave of the Pandemic in March/April 2020]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (Mar-Apr 2020) posed significant challenges for primary care. The goal of this study was to analyse the burden of the crisis situation as experienced by the general practitioners (GPs) at its beginning and over the course of the pandemic and to identify factors predictive of the sense of being overburdened.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, a total of 6300 randomly selected GPs in four federal states of Germany were contacted per post in order to survey changes in health care they provided and their psychological burden in the context of the pandemic between August and October 2020.

RESULTS

The response rate was 23%; 46% of the participants were female. At the beginning of the pandemic, 40% of the participants experienced a high or a very high level of being overburdened; later on, it was only 10%. With increasing numbers of COVID patients, the sense of being overburdened increased, as also their perceived capability to care for COVID patients. Predictors of a sense of being overburdened were, among others, a high level of psychological stress, excessive organising efforts, poor capability to care for COVID patients, and scarce supply of protective equipment.

CONCLUSION

Despite a sense of being overburdened initially, GPs felt increasingly capable of caring for COVID patients. To help GPs in future crisis situations like this pandemic, organization of care should be simplified to the extent possible so that they can focus on patient care.

Barriers and Enablers Experienced by General Practitioners in Delivering Safe and Equitable Care during COVID-19: A Qualitative Investigation in Two Countries

Addressing equity in healthcare is fundamental for delivering safe care to vulnerable patients, especially during COVID-19. This paper aims to identify barriers and enabling factors for general practitioners (GPs) in delivering safe and equitable care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Semi-structured interviews took place during May-July 2020 among 18 Flemish and 16 Dutch GPs. Thematic analysis of the interviews demonstrated that while GPs acknowledged a smooth information flow by governments and professional organizations on care guidelines, the fast-changing information challenged them to stay up to date. Media communication facilitated information dissemination but also fueled misinformation and miscommunication, creating unrealistic patient expectations. Certain guidelines and patient reluctance delayed necessary care. A shortage of personal protective equipment made GPs concerned about patient safety during face-to-face contacts. Teleconsultations became a popular alternative, but posed increased patient safety risks. GPs struggled to identify and reach vulnerable patients. Equitable care was hindered by time constraints; thus, having the appropriate materials facilitated such care. An interprofessional collaboration involving paramedical, social, and city services benefited patient safety and equity in healthcare. However, limitations in this collaboration pressured GPs. The unprecedented and resource-constrained environment challenged GPs' capacity to provide the healthcare quality they aspired to deliver. A well-structured collaborative network involving all stakeholders could benefit safe and equitable care in future pandemics.

"The measures taken by the government overburdened the daily practice" - insights of the PRICOV-19 study on German general practitioners in times of COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The international study PRICOV-19 aims to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the organisation of primary health care. The German part focuses on German general practitioners during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper addresses the following research questions: (1) How were changes in tasks on primary care and patient treatment perceived by GPs?, (2) What was the role of GPs during the pandemic, and how was their wellbeing?, (3) How did GPs perceive health policy measures?, and, (4) What influenced the attitudes of GPs on health policy measures?

METHODS

This study pursues a multi-country cross-sectional design. Data collection took place throughout Germany from 01.02. to 28.02.2021 with a quantitative online questionnaire consisting of 53 items. The questionnaire was analysed through descriptive and inferential analyses using correlation and multiple regression models.

RESULTS

The response rate was 20.4% (n = 349). The respondents were mainly GPs (59.6%) in single practices (62.5%) with a mean work experience of 15 to 20 years. GPs experienced a change in their work and practice organisation (80.3%). They felt a high responsibility (70.6%) and found their work has become more meaningful to them (76%). They also saw a lack of political support (75.2%) and that the measures taken by the government overburdened the daily practice (66.4%). Not many GPs were at risk of being distressed (53.4%) but rated the health policies rather negatively (60%). The multiple regression showed, the more GPs were exposed to risk of distress, the worse they assessed the government's measures.

CONCLUSION

GPs perceived their work as relevant and felt confident they could fulfil their tasks, but noticed that health policy initially hardly supported the outpatient sector. Health policies should increase their competence in relation to primary care, ensure its needs and consider an active inclusion of GPs in preparedness plans.

The role of primary care during the pandemic: shared experiences from providers in five European countries

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated wide-ranging adaptations to the organisation of health systems, and primary care is no exception. This article aims to collate insights on the role of primary care during the pandemic. The gained knowledge helps to increase pandemic preparedness and resilience.

METHODS

The role of primary care during the pandemic in five European countries (Austria, Denmark, France, Hungary, Italy) was investigated using a qualitative approach, namely case study, based on document analysis and semi-structured interviews. In total, 31 interviews were conducted with primary care providers between June and August 2022. The five country case studies were subjected to an overarching analysis focusing on successful strategies as well as gaps and failures regarding pandemic management in primary care.

RESULTS

Primary care providers identified disruptions to service delivery as a major challenge emerging from the pandemic which led to a widespread adoption of telehealth. Despite the rapid increase in telehealth usage and efforts of primary care providers to organise face-to-face care delivery in a safe way, some patient groups were particularly affected by disruptions in service delivery. Moreover, primary care providers perceived a substantial propagation of misinformation about COVID-19 and vaccines among the population, which also threatened patient-physician relationships. At the same time, primary care providers faced an increased workload, had to work with insufficient personal protective equipment and were provided incongruous guidelines from public authorities. There was a consensus among primary care providers that they were mostly sidelined by public health policy in the context of pandemic management. Primary care providers tackled these problems through a diverse set of measures including home visits, implementing infection control measures, refurbishing used masks, holding internal meetings and relying on their own experiences as well as information shared by colleagues.

CONCLUSION

Primary care providers were neither well prepared nor the focus of initial policy making. However, they implemented creative solutions to the problems they faced and applying the learnings from the pandemic could help in increasing the resilience of primary care. Attributes of an integrated health system with a strong primary care component proved beneficial in addressing immediate effects of the pandemic.

German GPs' Self-Perceived Role in the COVID-19 Pandemic: Leadership, Participation in Regional Services and Preferences for Future Pandemic Preparedness

General practitioners (GPs) played a vital role during the COVID-19 pandemic. Little is known about GPs' view of their role, leadership, participation in regional services and preferences for future pandemic preparedness. This representative study of German GPs comprised a web-based survey and computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI). It addressed GPs' satisfaction with their role, self-perceived leadership (validated C-LEAD scale), participation in newly established health services, and preferences for future pandemic preparedness (net promotor score; NPS; range -100 to +100%). Statistical analyses were conducted using Spearman's correlation and Kruskal-Wallis tests. In total, 630 GPs completed the questionnaire and 102 GPs the CATI. In addition to their practice duties, most GPs (72.5%) participated in at least one regional health service, mainly vaccination centres/teams (52.7%). Self-perceived leadership was high with a C-LEAD score of 47.4 (max. 63; SD ± 8.5). Overall, 58.8% were not satisfied with their role which correlated with the feeling of being left alone (r = -0.349, p < 0.001). 77.5 % of respondents believed that political leaders underestimated GPs' potential contribution to pandemic control. Regarding regional pandemic services, GPs preferred COVID-19 focus practices (NPS +43.7) over diagnostic centres (NPS -31). Many GPs, though highly engaged regionally, were dissatisfied with their role but had clear preferences for future regional services. Future pandemic planning should integrate GPs' perspectives.

Gender Differences in Perceived Working Conditions of General Practitioners During the COVID-19 Pandemic-a Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has revealed gender-specific differences between general practitioners in adapting to the posed challenges. As primary care workforce is becoming increasingly female, in many countries, it is essential to take a closer look at gender-specific influences when the global health care system is confronted with a crisis.

OBJECTIVE

To explore gender-specific differences in the perceived working conditions and gender-specific differences in challenges facing GPs at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.

DESIGN

Online survey in seven countries.

PARTICIPANTS

2,602 GPs from seven countries (Austria, Australia, Switzerland, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Slovenia). Of the respondents, 44.4% (n = 1,155) were women.

MAIN MEASURES

Online survey. We focused on gender-specific differences in general practitioners' perceptions of working conditions at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.

KEY RESULTS

Female GPs rated their skills and self-confidence significantly lower than male GPs (f: 7.1, 95%CI: 6.9-7.3 vs. m: 7.6, 95%CI 7.4-7.8; p < .001), and their perceived risk (concerned about becoming infected or infecting others) higher than men (f: 5.7, 95%CI: 5.4-6.0 vs. m: 5.1, 95%CI: 4.8-5.5; p = .011). Among female GPs, low self-confidence in the treatment of COVID-19 patients appear to be common. Results were similar in all of the participating countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Female and male GPs differed in terms of their self-confidence when dealing with COVID-19-related issues and their perceptions of the risks arising from the pandemic. To ensure optimal medical care, it is important that GPs realistically assess their own abilities and overall risk.

[Medical care in GP practices during the Covid-19 pandemic: A questionnaire-based survey among general practitioners and medical practice assistants asking for their opinion about changes, needs and burdens]

INTRODUCTION

The coronavirus pandemic did not only result in changes in the provision and utilization of health care services in general practice but also in an increased workload for physicians and medical practice assistants. The VeCo practice study retrospectively explores the experiences of both professional groups two years after the start of the pandemic.

METHODS

In March and April 2022, general practitioners and medical practice assistants in the three German federal states of Berlin, Brandenburg and Thuringia were asked to complete a paper-based questionnaire.

RESULTS

657 general practitioners and 762 medical practice assistants completed the questionnaire. Both professional groups agreed to statements indicating a reduction in regular health care provisions. Nevertheless, 74% of the physicians and 82.9% of the medical practice assistants considered the health care provided to their patients during the pandemic as good. This was only possible through considerable additional effort and stress. While more than half of both groups reported that work was still enjoyable, three quarters of both groups stated that the challenges arising from the pandemic outstripped their capacity. Both groups would like to receive more recognition from society (medical practice assistants 93.2%, general practitioners 85.3%) and from their patients (87.7% and 69.9%, respectively).

DISCUSSION

General practitioners and medical practice assistants reduced regular health care provision but were still able to maintain a good quality of care for their patients during the pandemic. It became clear that more appreciation and adequate financial compensation are necessary to ensure long-term sustainability of GP care.

CONCLUSION

The subjective view of general practitioners and medical practice assistants on their health care provision shows that appreciation and adequate financial renumeration, particularly when working under most difficult conditions, are necessary to increase the attractiveness of a career in general practice, for both physicians and medical practice assistants.

Changes to utilization and provision of health care in German GP practices during the COVID 19-pandemic: Protocol for a mixed methods study on the viewpoint of GPs, medical practice assistants, and patients

INTRODUCTION

During the COVID-19 pandemic, general practitioners (GPs) continued to be a main point of contact for patients. For GP practices, it was and still is a challenge to meet constantly changing requirements due to the various phases of the pandemic. The aim of the study is to explore retrospectively the subjective experience with supply and utilization of health care services from the perspective of general practitioners, medical practice assistants and patients, in particular regarding instances of underutilization of services for non-Covid related conditions, adjustments due to the pandemic, and the appropriateness of care.

METHODS

The study is carried out within the RESPoNsE research practice network in three of Germany's federal states: Berlin, Brandenburg, and Thuringia (RESPoNsE-Research practice network east). The study follows a convergent mixed method design, and consists of the following sections: a) two anonymous paper-based questionnaires filled out by GPs and medical practice assistants (MPAs), at an interval of 12 to 18 months; b) in-depth qualitative interviews conducted among a subgroup of GPs and MPAs; c) anonymous paper-based questionnaires among patients of participating practices. The idea for the study was derived from discussions with the practice advisory board of the RESPoNsE network. The themes and issues to be explored in the surveys and interviews are developed and discussed in the practice advisory board, the patient advisory board, and with interested MPAs. The questionnaires will be analyzed descriptively, exploring the effect of demographic variables. Qualitative content analysis is used to analyze the data from the interviews and focus groups.

DISCUSSION

The study focuses on the conditions of GP care during the COVID-19 pandemic. A broad insight is provided as GPs and MPAs, as well as patients, are involved. It provides the opportunity to express needs and concerns. The results can support future discussions on lessons learned from the pandemic and necessary changes in health care delivery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial registration at the German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00028095.

COVI-Prim international: Similarities and discrepancies in the way general practices from seven different countries coped with the COVID-19 pandemic

Objectives

General practitioners (GPs) are frequently patients' first point of contact with the healthcare system and play an important role in identifying, managing and monitoring cases. This study investigated the experiences of GPs from seven different countries in the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Design

International cross-sectional online survey.

Setting

General practitioners from Australia, Austria, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Slovenia and Switzerland.

Participants

Overall, 1,642 GPs completed the survey.

Main outcome measures

We focused on how well-prepared GPs were, their self-confidence and concerns, efforts to control the spread of the disease, patient contacts, information flow, testing procedures and protection of staff.

Results

GPs gave high ratings to their self-confidence (7.3, 95% CI 7.1-7.5) and their efforts to control the spread of the disease (7.2, 95% CI 7.0-7.3). A decrease in the number of patient contacts (5.7, 95% CI 5.4-5.9), the perception of risk (5.3 95% CI 4.9-5.6), the provision of information to GPs (4.9, 95% CI 4.6-5.2), their testing of suspected cases (3.7, 95% CI 3.4-3.9) and their preparedness to face a pandemic (mean: 3.5; 95% CI 3.2-3.7) were rated as moderate. GPs gave low ratings to their ability to protect staff (2.2 95% CI 1.9-2.4). Differences were identified in all dimensions except protection of staff, which was consistently low in all surveyed GPs and countries.

Conclusion

Although GPs in the different countries were confronted with the same pandemic, its impact on specific aspects differed. This partly reflected differences in health care systems and experience of recent pandemics. However, it also showed that the development of structured care plans in case of future infectious diseases requires the early involvement of primary care representatives.

Experiences and management strategies of Norwegian GPs during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal interview study

OBJECTIVE

When the COVID-19 pandemic reached Norway, primary health care had to reorganize to ensure safe patient treatment and maintain infection control. General practitioners (GPs) are key health care providers in the municipalities. Our aim was to explore the experiences and management strategies of Norwegian GPs during the COVID-19 pandemic - over time, and in the context of a sudden organizational change.

DESIGN

Longitudinal qualitative interview study with two interview rounds. The first round of interviews was conducted from September-December 2020, the second round from January-April 2021. In the first interview round, we performed eight semi-structured interviews with GPs from eight municipalities in Norway. In the second round, five of the GPs were re-interviewed. Consecutive interviews were performed 2-4 months apart. To analyze the data, we used thematic analysis.

RESULTS

The COVID-19 pandemic required GPs to balance several concerns, such as continuity of care and their own professional efforts. Several GPs experienced challenges in the collaboration with the municipality and in relation to defining their own professional position. Guided by The Norwegian Association of General practitioners, The Norwegian College of General Practice and collegial support, they found viable solutions and ended up with a feeling of having adapted to a new normal.

CONCLUSIONS

Although our study demonstrates that the GPs adapted to the changing conditions, the current municipal health care models are not ideal. There is a need for clarification of responsibilities between GPs and the municipality to facilitate a more coordinated future pandemic response.Key PointsFacing the COVID-19 pandemic, the primary health care service in Norway had to reorganize to ensure safe patient treatment and maintain infection control.Several GPs experienced challenges in collaboration with the municipalities.There is a need for clarification of responsibilities between GPs and the municipality.

Changes of working conditions and job-related challenges due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic for medical assistants in general practices in Germany: a qualitative study

Background

In Germany, general practices are usually contacted first by patients with health complaints, including symptoms characteristic of SARS-CoV-2. Within general practices, medical assistants (MAs) are the first contact person for patients and perform various tasks in close physical patient contact. Working conditions of MAs have been characterized as challenging, e.g., due to low salaries, a high workload, time pressure and frequent interruptions. The potential changes of working conditions and job-related challenges experienced by MAs due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic have not been fully explored. We aimed to address this knowledge gap among MAs working in general practices in Germany.

Methods

Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted between March and April 2021 with 24 MAs. Medical assistants of legal age, who worked in general practices in Germany, and who were continuously employed and without change of employer in 2020 were eligible for participation. Interview recordings were transcribed verbatim and content-analyzed using MAXQDA, using deductive and inductive coding.

Results

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic posed great challenges for MAs, including a dramatic increase in workload, changes in occupational tasks, increased hygiene measures, rearrangements of work organization, childcare issues, and structural and personnel challenges within their practice. Participants described both improved but also worsened collaboration with their employers and colleagues due to the pandemic. Many MAs complained about issues regarding SARS-CoV-2-related billing processes and an increase in unpleasant patient behavior, including disregard of practice rules or frequent verbal insults. Many also did not feel adequately appreciated by politics, media, or society for their efforts during the pandemic. Positive changes were perceived to be the expansion of digital communication channels and a growing social cohesiveness of practice teams.

Conclusions

Our study suggests that the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic posed great challenges for MAs. The pandemic seems to have worsened MAs’ working conditions, which had been described as challenging already prior to the pandemic. In order to improve job satisfaction and to prevent loss of healthcare personnel, measures must be taken to improve working conditions of MAs in general practices.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-022-01880-y.

An analysis of the causes of exhaustion among physicians working in family physician teams during the COVID-19 pandemic in Lithuania

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic had a severe impact on public life around the world, influencing medicine and health, the economy, employment, science, and education. Health care specialists are key workers who faced extreme challenges posed by the pandemic, including threats to their own lives due to the rapid spread of the virus, a huge increase in workload, and professional burnout syndrome. Analysis of the factors that physicians found most exhausting during the pandemic could lay the groundwork for the effective management of future crises.

Objective

To identify the factors that physicians working in family physician (family and internal medicine) teams found most exhausting during the COVID-19 pandemic in Lithuania and assess their causes.

Methods

An anonymous survey of physicians (n = 191) working in family physician teams was carried out from 21 June 2021 to 17 September 2021. Physicians signed an informed consent form prior to completion of the questionnaire. Mixed data analysis was performed, consisting of statistical analysis using the SPSS 27 software and a qualitative causal analysis.

Results

During the pandemic, physicians were most exhausted by: chaotic vaccination priorities (44.5%); unsatisfied patients (52.4%); constantly changing legislation (71.7%); the large workload (75.9%); and the malfunctioning of online systems (81.2%).

Conclusions

Physicians in family physician teams indicated the following aspects that require improvement: service provision; effective work organization for physicians; and the satisfaction of patients with decisions made during the pandemic.

A crisis like no other? Unmet needs in healthcare during the first wave of the COVID-19 crisis in Austria

Background

Many patients experienced restricted access to healthcare during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study is among the first to provide systematic evidence on the existence of subjective unmet needs (SUN) in different population groups during the pandemic.

Methods

Using data on individuals aged 20–64 and living in Austria from the AKCOVID survey (June 2020) and the ‘European Social Survey’ (2015), SUN were compared between 2015 and 2020, either related to the pandemic (fear of infection, provider closed or treatment postponed) or not (barriers related to knowledge, affordability, time and reachability). Multinomial logistic regression models identified determinants of SUN during the pandemic, adjusting for socio-demographics, socio-economic status and self-reported health.

Results

Shares of the population with SUN in 2020 substantially exceeded SUN in 2015. Excess unmet needs were mostly attributable to the pandemic. Postponed treatments and closed providers were the most important reasons for SUN in June 2020. Older age groups (50–64 years), inactive and retired people were most likely to report pandemic-related SUN. We did not find socio-economic differences in pandemic-related SUN.

Conclusions

The pandemic resulted in a supply-side shock to healthcare, with vulnerabilities emerging especially among older people, people with poor health and/or people no longer active on the labour market. Further research could focus on health system resilience and the possibilities to improve management of healthcare services during pandemics without widening inequalities while maintaining population health.

COVI-Prim Longitudinal Survey: Experiences of Primary Care Physicians During the Early Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background

General practitioners (GPs) are the mainstay of primary care and play a critical role in pandemics. During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, this international study aimed to explore changes in the workload of general practitioners, as well as their interactions with patients and colleagues, and their self-confidence and concerns.

Methods

An online survey was conducted among GPs in Austria and Germany. Participants were asked to answer a basic questionnaire and participate in a subsequent longitudinal survey containing closed and open-ended items. All data were pseudonymized.

Results

Overall, 723 general practitioners from Austria and Germany took part in the longitudinal survey over a period of 12 weeks (April 3–July 2, 2020). The majority of GPs had less direct contact with patients at the beginning of the survey (96 vs. 49% at the end of the study period). At first, doctors were mainly concerned with pandemic-related issues and had to care for the patients of GP colleagues that were in quarantine, which meant they had less time for routine work such as screenings and treating chronic diseases. Over the survey period, GPs' self-confidence increased and their concerns about income loss decreased.

Conclusions

Following a difficult initial phase when protective equipment and information were lacking, physicians in primary care adapted quickly to new situations. Experience with telemedicine should help them face future challenges and may help prevent a decline in the delivery of routine health care and care for chronically ill patients.

Registration

Trial registration at the German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00021231.

"I was prepared to become infected as a frontline medical staff": a survey of Australian emergency department staff experiences during COVID-19

Objective

To identify challenges faced by Australian hospital healthcare staff during the COVID‐19 pandemic.

Methods

We conducted an online survey (30 June–15 August 2020) of healthcare staff from Australian emergency and infectious disease departments. Participants were contacted via professional organisations and asked about preparedness, personal protective equipment (PPE), information flow, patient care, infection concerns, workload and mental health. We calculated the proportion of answers to yes/no and Likert‐style questions; free‐text responses were analysed thematically.

Results

Respondents (n = 162) were 23–67 years old, 98% worked in EDs, 68% were female, 87% from Queensland, and most worked as nurses (46%) or specialists (31%). Respondents felt their workplace was prepared for the pandemic (79%), had sufficient information about PPE (83%); none were sent home because of PPE shortages. Eighty‐five percent received sufficient information from official bodies and 50% were aware of the National COVID‐19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce guidelines. Most (83%) had sufficient information to provide optimal patient care, but 24% experienced unfair/abusive patient behaviour. Most (76%) were concerned about becoming infected by patients, 67% about infecting patients, and 78% about infecting someone at home. Workload decreased for 82% but 42% looked after more patients. Fifty‐seven percent experienced additional work‐related stress: 60% reporting experiencing anxiety and 53% experiencing burnout, with 36% and 46% continuing to experience these, respectively. Key challenges included: emotional, workplace/organisational, family/loved ones and PPE factors.

Conclusion

The Australian system provided sufficient information and PPE. Staff experienced considerable stress, infection concerns and emotional challenges, which merit consideration in preparing for the future.

We surveyed Australian hospital healthcare staff during the second wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic. Majority felt they had sufficient information and amounts of PPE and knew enough to provide optimal care to patients. However, many reported concerns about becoming infected with and transmitting COVID‐19, half suffered from additional stress, and many continue to experience burnout and anxiety.

[Experiences with Regional Medical Coordinators in Ambulatory Care in the Early COVID-19 Phase 2020 in Bavaria: Survey of Regional Ambulatory Coordinators and General Practitioners]

BACKGROUND

During the state of emergency in Bavaria in the early Corona phase 2020, some physicians in ambulatory care were appointed as regional medical coordinators (RMCs). The aim of the present study was to evaluate this newly introduced but temporary position.

METHODS

In November 2020, a paper-based questionnaire was sent out to all 85 RMCs who could be identified through an internet research and to all 197 teaching practices of the Institute of General Practice and Health Services Research at the Technical University of Munich. The data analysis was descriptive and anonymised.

RESULTS

Overall, 75 (88%) RMCs and 156 (79%) general practitioners (GPs) were included. 97% of the RMCs and 67% of the GPs assessed the introduction of RMCs in ambulatory care as reasonable, but also as an intervention concerning the self-administration of physicians (RMCs: 59% and GPs: 42%). 37% of the GPs stated that RMCs should be avoided as far as possible in future pandemic situations. Overall, GPs with more intensive contact to an RMC showed higher levels of agreement. Both groups rated the collaboration and communication strategies of politics, authorities and the Bavarian Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians as difficult and often contradictory. However, most of the RMCs assessed the cooperation with politics and authorities at the local level as positive. The lack of medical protective equipment at the beginning of the pandemic was judged critically by both groups of the respondents.

CONCLUSIONS

The establishment of RMCs in the early Corona phase 2020 in Bavaria was considered sensible by almost all RMCs and the majority of the surveyed GPs. For the future, it seems necessary to involve primary care physicians more intensively and permanently in decision-making processes and to strengthen existing structures.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Clinical Pathways for Non-SARS-CoV-2 Related Diseases in the Lazio Region, Italy

Clinical pathways (CPs) are multidisciplinary clinical governance tools necessary for the care management of the patients, whose aim is to outline the best practicable path within a health organization related to an illness or to a complex clinical situation. The COVID-19 pandemic emergency has created the need for an organizational renewal of care pathways based on the principles of “primary health care” recommended by the WHO. In Italy, the Hospitals and Local Health Authorities (ASL) have tried to guarantee the continuity of non-deferrable treatments and the maximum safety of both patients and health professionals. This study analyzes the organizational and managerial responses adopted in pathology-specific care pathways to assess how CPs as diagnostic tools responded to the COVID-19 pandemic in the first two waves. Twenty-four referents of Operational Units (UU OO) from Hospitals (AO) and Local Health Authorities (ASL) of the Lazio Region (Central Italy) that apply four different CPs responded to a survey, which analyzes the managerial and organizational responses of CPs in regard to different contexts. Results show that the structural and organizational adjustments of the CPs have made it possible to maintain an adequate level of care for specific treatment processes, with some common critical aspects that require improvement actions. The adjustments found could be useful for dealing with new outbreaks and/or new epidemics in order to try to mitigate the potential negative impact, especially on the most vulnerable patient categories.

Healthcare professionals' perceptions of impacts of the Covid-19-pandemic on outpatient care in rural areas: a qualitative study

Background

Measures to manage the COVID-19 pandemic have led to impacts on healthcare systems and providers worldwide. Outpatient healthcare professionals (HCPs) provide the majority of patient care. Insight into their experiences during a pandemic is rare. Therefore, we explored how primary and secondary care HCPs in a rural area in Germany experienced their work during the pandemic and what health-related outcomes they perceived in their patients. In this context, we also examined the impact on access to and utilization of healthcare and working conditions.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative interview study with outpatient HCPs. We recruited by e-mail, telephone, professional networks and personal contacts. Data were collected between August 2020 and January 2021. All interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analysed using qualitative content analysis.

Results

Our sample consisted of 28 HCPs (15 family physicians, 7 cardiologists, and 6 non-physician assistants, 12 female) from Saxony-Anhalt, Germany. HCPs experienced fewer consultations as well as cancellations by hospitals and secondary care physicians, especially at the beginning of the Covid-19-pandemic, while they continued throughout to provide outpatient care. They quickly adopted changes in practice organisation and healthcare provision. There was a shift towards telephone consultations, home visits as well as unconventional consultations e.g. through the practice window. Family physicians used personal relationships to support utilization of healthcare and to avoid health-related effects. Social tension and burden seemed to interact with a perceived lack of preparedness, the pandemic-related changes in their working condition as well as access to and utilization of healthcare. Chronic disease monitoring was postponed, which could have consequences in the course of disease of patients. HCPs experienced effects on patients’ psychological well-being.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrates the impacts of Covid-19-pandemic on outpatient care in rural areas and emphasizes its importance. HCPs experienced impacts on access to and utilization of healthcare, working conditions and health-related outcomes. Health policy should create a framework for healthcare to support outpatient care in rural areas with a looming undersupply of primary and secondary care in order to maintain healthcare and reduce pandemic impacts.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-07261-y.

Stockpiled personal protective equipment and knowledge of pandemic plans as predictors of perceived pandemic preparedness among German general practitioners

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic significantly changed the work of general practitioners (GPs). At the onset of the pandemic in March 2020, German outpatient practices had to adapt quickly. Pandemic preparedness (PP) of GPs may play a vital role in their management of a pandemic.

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to examine the association in the stock of seven personal protective equipment (PPE) items and knowledge of pandemic plans on perceived PP among GPs.

METHODS

Three multivariable linear regression models were developed based on an online cross-sectional survey for the period March-April 2020 (the onset of the pandemic in Germany). Data were collected using self-developed items on self-assessed PP and knowledge of a pandemic plan and its utility. The stock of seven PPE items was queried. For PPE items, three different PPE scores were compared. Control variables for all models were gender and age.

RESULTS

In total, 508 GPs were included in the study; 65.16% believed that they were very poorly or poorly prepared. Furthermore, 13.83% of GPs were aware of a pandemic plan; 40% rated those plans as beneficial. The stock of FFP-2/3 masks, protective suits, face shields, safety glasses, and medical face masks were mostly considered completely insufficient or insufficient, whereas disposable gloves and disinfectants were considered sufficient or completely sufficient. The stock of PPE was significantly positively associated with PP and had the largest effect on PP; the association of the knowledge of a pandemic plan was significant but small. PPE scores did not vary considerably in their explanatory power. The assessment of a pandemic plan as beneficial did not significantly affect PP.

CONCLUSION

The stock of PPE seems to be the determining factor for PP among German GPs; for COVID-19, sufficient masks are the determining factor. Knowledge of a pandemic plans play a secondary role in PP.