Academic general practice/family medicine in times of COVID-19 - Perspective of WONCA Europe

Outreach work in Belgian primary care practices during COVID-19: results from the cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study

BACKGROUND

General practitioners (GPs) have a vital role in reaching out to vulnerable populations during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Nonetheless, they experience many challenges to fulfill this role. This study aimed to examine associations between practice characteristics, patient population characteristics and the extent of deprivation of practice area on the one hand, and the level of outreach work performed by primary care practices (PCPs) during the COVID-19 pandemic on the other hand.

METHODS

Belgian data from the international PRICOV-19 study were analyzed. Data were collected between December 2020 and August 2021 using an online survey in PCPs. Practices were recruited through randomized and convenience sampling. Descriptive statistics and ordinal logistic regression analyses were performed. Four survey questions related to outreach work constitute the outcome variable. The adjusted models included four practice characteristics (practice type, being a teaching practice for GP trainees; the presence of a nurse or a nurse assistant and the presence of a social worker or health promotor), two patient population characteristics (social vulnerability and medical complexity) and an area deprivation index.

RESULTS

Data from 462 respondents were included. First, the factors significantly associated with outreach work in PCPs are the type of PCP (with GPs working in a group performing more outreach work), and the presence of a nurse (assistant), social worker or health promotor. Second, the extent of outreach work done by a PCP is significantly associated with the social vulnerability of the practice's patient population. This social vulnerability factor, affecting outreach work, differed with the level of medical complexity of the practice's patient population and with the level of deprivation of the municipality where the practice is situated.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, outreach work in PCPs during the COVID-19 pandemic is facilitated by the group-type cooperation of GPs and by the support of at least one staff member of the disciplines of nursing, social work, or health promotion. These findings suggest that improving the effectiveness of outreach efforts in PCPs requires addressing organizational factors at the practice level. This applies in particular to PCPs having a more socially vulnerable patient population.

Quality of care in Belgian general practices during the COVID-19 pandemic: results of the cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic immensely impacted care provision, including quality of care in general practice. This paper aimed: (1) to assess how Belgian general practices acted upon the six dimensions of quality of care during COVID-19; (2) to study differences between the three Belgian regions; and (3) to benchmark the performance of the Belgian practices against the performance in other European countries.

METHODS

The data collected from 479 Belgian practices during 2020-2021 using an online survey as part of the international cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study were analyzed.  Hereby, descriptive statistics, chi-squared tests, and binary logistic regression analyses were performed. Thirty-four survey questions related to the six dimensions of quality of care were selected as outcome variables. The adjusted regression models included four practice characteristics as covariates: practice type, being a teaching practice for GP trainees, multidisciplinarity of the team, and payment system.

RESULTS

Belgian practices made important organizational changes to deliver high-quality care during COVID-19. Most practices (n = 259; 56.1%) actively reached out to vulnerable patients. Limitations to the practice building or infrastructure threatened high-quality care in 266 practices (55.5%). Infection prevention measures could not always be implemented during COVID-19, such as using a cleaning protocol (n = 265; 57.2%) and providing a separate doctor bag for infection-related home visits (n = 130; 27.9%). Three hundred and sixty practices (82.0%) reported at least one safety incident related to a delayed care process in patients with an urgent condition. The adjusted regression analysis showed limited significant differences between the Belgian regions regarding the quality of care delivered. Belgian practices demonstrated varied performance compared to other European countries. For example, they excelled in always checking the feasibility of isolation at home but reported more patient safety incidents related to timely care than at least three-quarters of the other European countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Future studies using different design methods are crucial to investigate which country and practice characteristics are associated with delivering high-quality care.

Transitioning from face-to-face to distance education. Part 2: A qualitative study in the former Yugoslavia during COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Similar to other countries, Departments of Family Medicine in the former Yugoslavia had to transition from face-to-face to distance education during COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES

To elucidate obstacles and facilitators of the transition from face-to-face to distance education.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, multicentre, qualitative study design was used to analyse nine open-ended questions from an online survey using inductive thematic analysis. The questionnaire was distributed to 21 medical schools, inviting them to involve at least two teachers/students/trainees. Data were collected between December 2021 and March 2022.

RESULTS

In 17 medical schools, 23 students, 54 trainees and 40 teachers participated. The following themes were identified: facilitators and barriers of transition, innovations for enhancing distance education, convenience of distance education, classical teaching for better communication, the future of distance education, reaching learning outcomes and experience of online assessment. Innovations referred mainly to new online technologies for interactive education and communication. Distance education allowed for greater flexibility in scheduling and self-directed learning; however, participants felt that classical education allowed better communication and practical learning. Teachers believed knowledge-related learning outcomes could be achieved through distance education but not teaching clinical skills. Participants anticipated a future where a combination of teaching methods is used.

CONCLUSION

The transition to distance education was made possible thanks to its flexible scheduling, innovative tools and possibility of self-directed learning. However, face-to-face education was considered preferable for fostering interpersonal relations and teaching clinical skills. Educators should strive to strike a balance between innovative approaches and the preservation of personal experiences.

Transitioning from face-to-face to distance education. Part 1: A cross-sectional study in the former Yugoslavia during COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The countries of the former Yugoslavia have health and education systems with the same tradition but these have changed over the years. Little is known about how family medicine teaching transitioned from face-to-face to distance education during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES

to investigate student/teacher experience in transitioning from face-to-face to distance education.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, online survey was conducted among 21 medical schools of the former Yugoslavia between December 2021 and March 2022. Under/postgraduate teachers and students who taught/studied family medicine during the academic year 2020/2021 were invited to participate. Of 31 questions for students and 35 for teachers, all but nine open questions were analysed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Seventeen of 21 medical schools contributed data involving 117 participants representing all countries of the former Yugoslavia. At the beginning of the pandemic, 30%, 26% and 15% of teachers, students and trainees, respectively, received formal preparation in distance education. Of these, 92% of teachers and 58% of students/trainees felt they were not adequately prepared. Synchronous teaching was the main method used, with a third using hybrid methods. All participants were least confident about online assessment. More than 75% of respondents agreed that lectures could be kept online, not patient consultations or practical skills' classes.

CONCLUSION

Teachers used various old and new methods to provide learning opportunities despite COVID-19 constraints. Effective technology-based strategies are essential to ensure assessment integrity and enhance the learning environment.

Changes in work tasks and organization of general practice in Norway during the COVID-19 pandemic: results from a comparative international study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic led to huge and rapid changes in general practice in Norway as in the rest of Europe. This paper aims to explore to what extent the COVID-19 pandemic changed the work tasks and organization of Norwegian general practice.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

We analysed data from the Norwegian part of the international, cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study, collecting data from general practice via an online self-reported questionnaire. We included 130 Norwegian general practices, representing an estimated 520 Norwegian general practitioners (GPs). All Norwegian GPs were invited to participate. In the analyses, we focused on items related to the use of alternatives to face-to-face consultations, changes in the workload, tasks and delegated responsibilities of both the GPs and other personnel in the GP offices, adaptations in routines related to hygiene measures, triage of patients, and how the official rules and recommendations affected the practices.

RESULTS

There was a large and significant increase in the use of all forms of alternative consultation forms (digital text-based, video- and telephone consultations). The use of several different infection prevention measures were significantly increased, and the provision of hand sanitizer to patients increased from 29.6% pre-pandemic to 95.1% since the pandemic. More than half of the GPs (59.5%) reported that their responsibilities in the practice had increased, and 41% were happy with the task shift. 27% felt that they received adequate support from the government; however, 20% reported that guidelines from the government posed a threat to the well-being of the practice staff. We found no associations with the rurality of the practice location or size of the municipalities.

CONCLUSION

Norwegian GPs adapted well to the need for increased use of alternatives to face-to-face consultations, and reported a high acceptance of their increased responsibilities. However, only one in four received adequate support from the government, which is an important learning point for similar situations in the future.

Supporting primary care through symptom checking artificial intelligence: a study of patient and physician attitudes in Italian general practice

BACKGROUND

Rapid advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) have led to the adoption of AI-driven symptom checkers in primary care. This study aimed to evaluate both patients' and physicians' attitudes towards these tools in Italian general practice settings, focusing on their perceived utility, user satisfaction, and potential challenges.

METHODS

This feasibility study involved ten general practitioners (GPs) and patients visiting GP offices. The patients used a chatbot-based symptom checker before their medical visit and conducted anamnestic screening for COVID-19 and a medical history algorithm concerning the current medical problem. The entered data were forwarded to the GP as medical history aid. After the medical visit, both physicians and patients evaluated their respective symptoms. Additionally, physicians performed a final overall evaluation of the symptom checker after the conclusion of the practice phase.

RESULTS

Most patients did not use symptom checkers. Overall, 49% of patients and 27% of physicians reported being rather or very satisfied with the symptom checker. The most frequent patient-reported reasons for satisfaction were ease of use, precise and comprehensive questions, perceived time-saving potential, and encouragement of self-reflection. Every other patient would consider at-home use of the symptom checker for the first appraisal of health problems to save time, reduce unnecessary visits, and/or as an aid for the physician. Patients' attitudes towards the symptom checker were not significantly associated with age, sex, or level of education. Most patients (75%) and physicians (84%) indicated that the symptom checker had no effect on the duration of the medical visit. Only a few participants found the use of the symptom checker to be disruptive to the medical visit or its quality.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest a positive reception of the symptom checker, albeit with differing focus between patients and physicians. With the potential to be integrated further into primary care, these tools require meticulous clinical guidance to maximize their benefits.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was not registered, as it did not include direct medical intervention on human participants.

In search of a fix to the primary health care chasm in India: can institutionalizing a public health cadre and inducting family physicians be the answer?

India's woes with an underprioritized and hence underfunded and understaffed public health system continue to plague public healthcare delivery. Though the need for appropriately qualified public health cadre to lead public health programmes is well established, a well-meaning conducive approach to implementing this is lacking. As the COVID-19 pandemic brought back the focus on India's fragmented health system and primary healthcare deficiencies, we discuss the primary healthcare conundrum in India in search of a quintessential fix. We argue for instituting a well-thought and inclusive public health cadre to lead preventive and promotive public health programmes and manage public health delivery. With the aim being to increase community confidence in primary health care, along with the need to augment primary healthcare infrastructure, we argue for a need to augment primary healthcare with physicians trained in family medicine. Provisioning medical officers and general practitioners trained in family medicine can salvage community's confidence in primary care, increase primary healthcare utilization, stymie over-specialization of care, channelize and prioritize referrals, and guarantee competence in healthcare quality for rural communities.

Differences between Rural and Urban Practices in the Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic: Outcomes from the PRICOV-19 Study in 38 Countries

This paper explores the differences between rural and urban practices in the response to the COVID-19 pandemic, emphasizing aspects such as management of patient flow, infection prevention and control, information processing, communication and collaboration. Using a cross-sectional design, data were collected through the online PRICOV-19 questionnaire sent to general practices in 38 countries. Rural practices in our sample were smaller than urban-based practices. They reported an above-average number of old and multimorbid patients and a below-average number of patients with a migrant background or financial problems. Rural practices were less likely to provide leaflets and information, but were more likely to have ceased using the waiting room or to have made structural changes to their waiting room and to have changed their prescribing practices in terms of patients attending the practices. They were less likely to perform video consultations or use electronic prescription methods. Our findings show the existence of certain issues that could impact patient safety in rural areas more than in urban areas due to the underlying differences in population profile and supports. These could be used to plan the organization of care for similar future pandemic situations.

Medical students' adoption and evaluation of a completely digital general practice clerkship - cross-sectional survey and cohort comparison with face-to-face teaching

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the University of Leipzig completely switched to online teaching. Thus, we developed a practice-oriented digital substitute for a two-week mandatory general practice (GP) clerkship. Main components were processing of clinical cases and additional GP topics, visual diagnoses, information and examination videos, and regular remote exchanges with associated GP teachers. We took the chance to comprehensively evaluate the new teaching formats (acceptance, use, working enjoyment, learning gain, practical relevance, insights into general practice) and to compare evaluations with two previous semesters to gain insights for future blended learning concepts.

METHODS

Cross-sectional post-hoc online evaluation among fourth year (of six) medical students participating in the digital mandatory 2-week GP clerkship during summer semester 2020; additional cohort comparison with two previous semesters (face-to-face clerkship).

RESULTS

Out of 192 participants in the digital clerkship, 99 completed our questionnaire (response rate = 51.6%). Results were compared with 277 previous evaluations (face-to-face semesters). Most participants reported having enjoyed the online-based clerkship (87.9%), having learned a lot (89.9%), having gained insights into general practice (76.8%), and perceived high practical relevance (90.9%). Implementing the new teaching formats into future face-to-face clerkships was welcomed by 65.6%. Clinical cases, visual diagnoses, examination videos and communication with GP teachers were rated best regarding working enjoyment, learning gain, practical relevance and insights into a GP's work. Cohort comparison revealed somewhat better evaluations regarding knowledge transfer for the digital clerkship while imparting of skills and attitudes was reportedly worse.

CONCLUSIONS

Students welcomed the digital content and perceived relevant learning gain. Our results may help to develop future blended learning concepts. Clinical cases, examination videos and visual diagnoses appear to be particularly suitable as useful online complements which could enrich face-to-face teaching. As students especially valued the exclusive time for exchanges with their preceptor, this should be facilitated in face-to-face clerkships.

Challenges and experiences of general practitioners during the course of the Covid-19 pandemic: a northern Italian observational study-cross-sectional analysis and comparison of a two-time survey in primary care

BACKGROUND

General practitioners (GPs) have been among the frontline workers since the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic. Reflecting and analyzing the ongoing pandemic response of general practice provides essential information and serves as a precondition for outlining future health policy strategies.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of the pandemic on GPs' daily work and well-being and to describe needs for improvement in primary care highlighted by the pandemic.

METHODS

A 2-time cross-sectional online survey involving GPs in a northern Italian region was conducted in September 2020 and March/April 2021.

RESULTS

Eighty-four GPs (29.6% of invited GPs) participated in the first survey, and 41 GPs (14.4%) in the second survey. Most GPs experienced a notable workload increase which was tendentially higher during the advanced stages of the pandemic. A notable increase between the first and the second survey was noted regarding the frequency of Covid-related patient contacts and phone calls. Communication with health authorities and hospitals was rated as improvable. Psychological distress among GPs tended to increase over time; female GPs were more affected in the first survey. Most practices introduced major changes in their workflow, mainly appointment-based visits and separating Covid-19-suspected patients. Availability of protective equipment considerably increased over time. In the second survey, the GPs felt more prepared to self-protection and outpatient treatment of Covid-affected patients.

CONCLUSION

The work of GPs has been substantially impacted by the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic. Efforts should be undertaken to efficiently strengthen primary care which plays an important role in pandemic events.

The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary care physicians in Israel, with comparison to an international cohort: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic had a major impact on primary care and primary care physicians (PCPs) in Israel and around the world. There is paucity of information regarding treatment of patients with COVID-19 in the community, since most research was performed in hospitals. The aim of this study was to describe the Israeli PCPs' experience.

METHODS

This study is a part of an international cross-sectional study, the PRICOV-19. A translated version of the questionnaire was distributed among Israeli PCPs from December 2020 to July 2021. In this study, we describe the Israeli results and compare them to the international results.

RESULTS

5,961 respondents from 29 countries answered the questionnaire, 94 from Israel, with an Israeli response rate of 16%. Israeli PCPs reported an increase in use of telemedicine from 11 to 49% during the COVID epidemic. PCPs also reported a decline in their wellbeing; absence of secured time slots for keeping updated; perception that the Ministry of Health guidelines were a threat to the staff wellbeing and organization of practice and delays in the examination of non-COVID urgent cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study raise concerns regarding the PCPs experience and may form the basis for an improved process of care. Guidelines for proper usage of telemedicine, substitutes for the physical examination and procedures for minimizing delayed patient examination for urgent conditions should be developed. Government directives and clinical guidelines should be communicated in a timely manner, with secured timeslots for physicians' self-learning or updating. Ensuring physicians' well-being in general should be an organization priority.

Safety Culture and the Positive Association of Being a Primary Care Training Practice during COVID-19: The Results of the Multi-Country European PRICOV-19 Study

The day-to-day work of primary care (PC) was substantially changed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Teaching practices needed to adapt both clinical work and teaching in a way that enabled the teaching process to continue, while maintaining safe and high-quality care. Our study aims to investigate the effect of being a training practice on a number of different outcomes related to the safety culture of PC practices. PRICOV-19 is a multi-country cross-sectional study that researches how PC practices were organized in 38 countries during the pandemic. Data was collected from November 2020 to December 2021. We categorized practices into training and non-training and selected outcomes relating to safety culture: safe practice management, community outreach, professional well-being and adherence to protocols. Mixed-effects regression models were built to analyze the effect of being a training practice for each of the outcomes, while controlling for relevant confounders. Of the participating practices, 2886 (56%) were non-training practices and 2272 (44%) were training practices. Being a training practice was significantly associated with a lower risk for adverse mental health events (OR: 0.83; CI: 0.70-0.99), a higher number of safety measures related to patient flow (Beta: 0.17; CI: 0.07-0.28), a higher number of safety incidents reported (RR: 1.12; CI: 1.06-1.19) and more protected time for meetings (Beta: 0.08; CI: 0.01-0.15). No significant associations were found for outreach initiatives, availability of triage information, use of a phone protocol or infection prevention measures and equipment availability. Training practices were found to have a stronger safety culture than non-training practices. These results have important policy implications, since involving more PC practices in education may be an effective way to improve quality and safety in general practice.

Changes in primary care visits arising from the COVID-19 pandemic: an international comparative study by the International Consortium of Primary Care Big Data Researchers (INTRePID)

INTRODUCTION

Through the INTernational ConsoRtium of Primary Care BIg Data Researchers (INTRePID), we compared the pandemic impact on the volume of primary care visits and uptake of virtual care in Australia, Canada, China, Norway, Singapore, South Korea, Sweden, the UK and the USA.

METHODS

Visit definitions were agreed on centrally, implemented locally across the various settings in INTRePID countries, and weekly visit counts were shared centrally for analysis. We evaluated the weekly rate of primary care physician visits during 2019 and 2020. Rate ratios (RRs) of total weekly visit volume and the proportion of weekly visits that were virtual in the pandemic period in 2020 compared with the same prepandemic period in 2019 were calculated.

RESULTS

In 2019 and 2020, there were 80 889 386 primary care physician visits across INTRePID. During the pandemic, average weekly visit volume dropped in China, Singapore, South Korea, and the USA but was stable overall in Australia (RR 0.98 (95% CI 0.92 to 1.05, p=0.59)), Canada (RR 0.96 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.03, p=0.24)), Norway (RR 1.01 (95% CI 0.88 to 1.17, p=0.85)), Sweden (RR 0.91 (95% CI 0.79 to 1.06, p=0.22)) and the UK (RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.03, p=0.11)). In countries that had negligible virtual care prepandemic, the proportion of visits that were virtual were highest in Canada (77.0%) and Australia (41.8%). In Norway (RR 8.23 (95% CI 5.30 to 12.78, p<0.001), the UK (RR 2.36 (95% CI 2.24 to 2.50, p<0.001)) and Sweden (RR 1.33 (95% CI 1.17 to 1.50, p<0.001)) where virtual visits existed prepandemic, it increased significantly during the pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

The drop in primary care in-person visits during the pandemic was a global phenomenon across INTRePID countries. In several countries, primary care shifted to virtual visits mitigating the drop in in-person visits.

General Practice/Family Medicine Research During the Pandemic: Showing The Links to the EGPRN Research Strategy

General Practice/Family Medicine is at the forefront of the clinical response to the COVID-19 crisis just as it is known to be a critical component of healthcare systems globally. A large number of COVID-19 related papers have been published and dedicated funding calls were available in many countries and across the European Union. However, General Practice/Family Medicine does not feature as strongly as it should in COVID-19 high impact publications or successful funding applications. In this paper, we take a look at the findings on which the recommendations of the “European General Practice Research Network (EGPRN) Research Strategy for General Practice in Europe 2021” are based and highlight how these align with the COVID-19 experience of General Practice/Family research. To elaborate on this, the issues identified and the recommendations of the EGPRN Research Strategy are grouped into three broad areas on which we need to focus – capacity, collaboration, and complexity (3-Cs). Apparent or presumed deficiencies in these 3-Cs are possibly why the General Practice/Family research impact during COVID-19 does not match its position on the ground in fighting the pandemic and supporting patients. The EGPRN Research Strategy identifies how we might work to position ourselves better in the future and gain the recognition deserved, in terms of publications, research funding, and prominence. Keywords: general practice, research, pandemics, publications, financing

How did general practices organize care during the COVID-19 pandemic: the protocol of the cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study in 38 countries

BACKGROUND

General practitioners (GPs) play a crucial role in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic as the first point of contact for possibly infected patients and are responsible for short and long-term follow-up care of the majority of COVID-19 patients. Nonetheless, they experience many barriers to fulfilling this role. The PRICOV-19 study investigates how GP practices in 38 countries are organized during the COVID-19 pandemic to guarantee safe, effective, patient-centered, and equitable care. Also, the shift in roles and tasks and the wellbeing of staff members is researched. Finally, PRICOV-19 aims to study the association with practice- and health care system characteristics. It is expected that both characteristics of the GP practice and health care system features are associated with how GP practices can cope with these challenges. This paper describes the protocol of the study.

METHODS

Using a cross-sectional design, data are collected through an online questionnaire sent to GP practices in 37 European countries and Israel. The questionnaire is developed in multiple phases, including a pilot study in Belgium. The final version includes 53 items divided into six sections: patient flow (including appointments, triage, and management for routine care); infection prevention; information processing; communication; collaboration and self-care; and practice and participant characteristics. In the countries where data collection is already finished, between 13 and 636 GP practices per country participated in the study. Questionnaire data are linked with OECD and HSMR data regarding national policy responses to the pandemic and analyzed using multilevel models considering the system- and practice-level.

DISCUSSION

To the best of our knowledge, the PRICOV-19 study is the largest and most comprehensive study that examines how GP practices function during the COVID-19 pandemic. Its results can significantly contribute to better preparedness of primary health care systems across Europe for future major outbreaks of infectious diseases.

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.

COVID-19 disruption to family medicine residency curriculum: results from a 2020 US programme directors survey

Objective

This research project examined the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the required curriculum in graduate medical education for family medicine residencies.

Design

Our questions were part of a larger omnibus survey conducted by the Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance. Data were collected from 23 September to 16 October 2020.

Setting

This study was set in the USA.

Participants

Emails were sent to 664 family medicine programme directors in the USA. Of the 312 surveys returned, 35 did not answer our questions and were excluded, a total of 277 responses (44%) were analysed.

Results

The level of disruption varied by discipline and region. Geriatrics had the highest reported disruption (median=4 on a 5-point scale) and intensive care unit had the lowest (median=1 on a 5-point scale). There were no significant differences for disruption by type of programme or community size.

Conclusion

Programme directors reported moderate disruption in family medicine resident education in geriatrics, gynaecology, surgery, musculoskeletal medicine, paediatrics and family medicine site during the pandemic. We are limited in generalisations about how region, type of programme, community size or number of residents influenced the level of disruption, as less than 50% of programme directors completed the survey.

Changes in the top 25 reasons for primary care visits during the COVID-19 pandemic in a high-COVID region of Canada

Purpose

We aimed to determine the degree to which reasons for primary care visits changed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

We used data from the University of Toronto Practice Based Research Network (UTOPIAN) to compare the most common reasons for primary care visits before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on the number of visits and the number of patients seen for each of the 25 most common diagnostic codes. The proportion of visits involving virtual care was assessed as a secondary outcome.

Results

UTOPIAN family physicians (N = 379) conducted 702,093 visits, involving 264,942 patients between March 14 and December 31, 2019 (pre-pandemic period), and 667,612 visits, involving 218,335 patients between March 14 and December 31, 2020 (pandemic period). Anxiety was the most common reason for visit, accounting for 9.2% of the total visit volume during the pandemic compared to 6.5% the year before. Diabetes and hypertension remained among the top 5 reasons for visit during the pandemic, but there were 23.7% and 26.2% fewer visits and 19.5% and 28.8% fewer individual patients accessing care for diabetes and hypertension, respectively. Preventive care visits were substantially reduced, with 89.0% fewer periodic health exams and 16.2% fewer well-baby visits. During the pandemic, virtual care became the dominant care format (77.5% virtual visits). Visits for anxiety and depression were the most common reasons for a virtual visit (90.6% virtual visits).

Conclusion

The decrease in primary care visit volumes during the COVID-19 pandemic varied based on the reason for the visit, with increases in visits for anxiety and decreases for preventive care and visits for chronic diseases. Implications of increased demands for mental health services and gaps in preventive care and chronic disease management may require focused efforts in primary care.