Rural-Urban Disparities in Hospital Admissions and Mortality Among Patients with COVID-19: Evidence from South Carolina from 2021 to 2022.

Although rural communities have been hard-hit by the COVID-19 pandemic, there is limited evidence on COVID-19 outcomes in rural America using up-to-date data. This study aimed to estimate the associations between hospital admissions and mortality and rurality among COVID-19 positive patients who sought hospital care in South Carolina. We used all-payer hospital claims, COVID-19 testing, and vaccination history data from January 2021 to January 2022 in South Carolina. We included 75,545 hospital encounters within 14 days after positive and confirmatory COVID-19 testing. Associations between hospital admissions and mortality and rurality were estimated using multivariable logistic regressions. About 42% of all encounters resulted in an inpatient hospital admission, while hospital-level mortality was 6.3%. Rural residents accounted for 31.0% of all encounters for COVID-19. After controlling for patient-level, hospital, and regional characteristics, rural residents had higher odds of overall hospital mortality (Adjusted Odds Ratio - AOR = 1.19, 95% Confidence Intervals - CI = 1.04-1.37), both as inpatients (AOR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.05-1.34) and as outpatients (AOR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.03-2.59). Sensitivity analyses using encounters with COVID-like illness as the primary diagnosis only and encounters from September 2021 and beyond - a period when the Delta variant was dominant and booster vaccination was available - yielded similar estimates. No significant differences were observed in inpatient hospitalizations (AOR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.75-1.33) between rural and urban residents. Policymakers should consider community-based public health approaches to mitigate geographic disparities in health outcomes among disadvantaged population subgroups.

Child and Adolescent Anxiety and Depression Prior to and During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States.

Childhood anxiety and depression have been increasing for years, and evidence suggests the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated this trend. However, research has examined anxiety and depression primarily as exclusive conditions, overlooking comorbidity. This study examined relationships between the COVID-19 pandemic and anxiety and depression to clarify risk factors for singular and comorbid anxiety and depression in children. Using 2018-2019 and 2020-2021 samples from the National Survey of Children's Health, a nationally representative survey of children aged 0-17 in the United States, associations between the COVID-19 pandemic and child anxiety and depression were examined via survey-weights' adjusted bivariate and multiple regression analyses, controlling for demographic characteristics. The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with higher odds of having comorbid anxiety and depression but not singular anxiety or depression. Female sex, older age, having special healthcare needs, more frequent inability to cover basic needs on family income, and poorer caregiver mental health were associated with having been diagnosed with singular and comorbid anxiety and depression. Children that witnessed or were victims of violence in the neighborhood were also more likely to have comorbid anxiety and depression. Implications for prevention, intervention, and policy are discussed.

Timing of last COVID-19 vaccine dose and SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections in fully (boosted) vaccinated healthcare personnel.

AIM: To estimate the incidence, timing, and severity of SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections in fully vaccinated healthcare personnel (HCP). METHODS: We prospectively studied 6496 fully vaccinated HCP from November 15, 2021 through April 17, 2022. Full COVID-19 vaccination was defined as a complete primary vaccination series followed by a booster dose at least six months later. RESULTS: A total of 1845 SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections occurred (28.4 episodes per 100 HCP), of which 1493 (80.9%) were COVID-19 cases and 352 (19.1%) were asymptomatic infections. Of the 1493 HCP with COVID-19, 4 were hospitalized for 3-6 days (hospitalization rate among HCP with COVID-19: 0.3%). No intubation or death occurred. SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections occurred at a mean of 16.2 weeks after the last vaccine dose. Multivariable regression analyses showed that among the 1845 HCP with a breakthrough infection, the administration of a COVID-19 vaccine dose >16.2 weeks before the infection was associated with an increased likelihood in developing COVID-19 rather than asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR: 1.58; 95% CI: 1.01-2.46; p-value=0.045) compared to administering a vaccine dose later. The likelihood of developing COVID-19 versus asymptomatic infection increased by 7% weekly after the last COVID-19 vaccine dose (OR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.03-1.11; p-value=0.001). CONCLUSION: SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections are common among fully (boosted) vaccinated HCP. However, full COVID-19 vaccination offered considerable protection against hospitalization. Our findings may contribute to defining the optimal timing for booster vaccinations. More efficient COVID-19 vaccines that will also confer protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection are urgently needed.

Effectiveness of full (booster) COVID-19 vaccination against severe outcomes and work absenteeism in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 during the Delta and Omicron waves in Greece

Aim We estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of full (booster) vaccination against severe outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients during the Delta and Omicron waves. Methods The study extended from November 15, 2021 to April 17, 2022. Full vaccination was defined as a primary vaccination plus a booster ≥ 6 months later. Results We studied 1138 patients (mean age: 66.6 years), of whom 826 (72.6 %) had > 1 comorbidity. Of the 1138 patients, 75 (6.6 %) were admitted to intensive care unit (ICU), 64 (5.6 %) received mechanical ventilation, and 172 (15.1 %) died. There were 386 (33.9 %) fully vaccinated, 172 (15.1 %) partially vaccinated, and 580 (51 %) unvaccinated patients. Unvaccinated patients were absent from work for longer periods compared to partially or fully vaccinated patients (mean absence of 20.1 days versus 12.3 and 17.3 days, respectively;p-value = 0.03). Compared to unvaccinated patients, fully vaccinated patients were less likely to be admitted to ICU [adjusted relative risk (ARR: 0.49;95 % CI: 0.29–0.84)], mechanically ventilated (ARR: 0.43;95 % CI: 0.23–0.80), and die (ARR: 0.57;95 % CI: 0.42–0.78), while they were hospitalized for significantly shorter periods (ARR: 0.79;95 % CI: 0.70–0.89). The adjusted full VE was 48.8 % (95 % CI: 42.7 %-54.9 %) against ICU admission, 55.4 % (95 % CI: 52.0 %-56.2 %) against mechanical ventilation, and 22.6 % (95 % CI: 7.4 %-34.8 %) against death. For patients with ≥ 3 comorbidities, VE was 56.2 % (95 % CI: 43.9 %-67.1 %) against ICU admission, 60.2 % (95 % CI: 53.7 %-65.4 %) against mechanical ventilation, and 43.9 % (95 % CI: 19.9 %-59.7 %) against death. Conclusions Full (booster) COVID-19 vaccination conferred protection against severe outcomes, prolonged hospitalization, and prolonged work absenteeism.

Effectiveness of full (booster) COVID-19 vaccination against severe outcomes and work absenteeism in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 during the Delta and Omicron waves in Greece.

AIM: We estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of full (booster) vaccination against severe outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients during the Delta and Omicron waves. METHODS: The study extended from November 15, 2021 to April 17, 2022. Full vaccination was defined as a primary vaccination plus a booster ≥ 6 months later. RESULTS: We studied 1138 patients (mean age: 66.6 years), of whom 826 (72.6 %) had ≥ 1 comorbidity. Of the 1138 patients, 75 (6.6 %) were admitted to intensive care unit (ICU), 64 (5.6 %) received mechanical ventilation, and 172 (15.1 %) died. There were 386 (33.9 %) fully vaccinated, 172 (15.1 %) partially vaccinated, and 580 (51 %) unvaccinated patients. Unvaccinated patients were absent from work for longer periods compared to partially or fully vaccinated patients (mean absence of 20.1 days versus 12.3 and 17.3 days, respectively; p-value = 0.03). Compared to unvaccinated patients, fully vaccinated patients were less likely to be admitted to ICU [adjusted relative risk (ARR: 0.49; 95 % CI: 0.29-0.84)], mechanically ventilated (ARR: 0.43; 95 % CI: 0.23-0.80), and die (ARR: 0.57; 95 % CI: 0.42-0.78), while they were hospitalized for significantly shorter periods (ARR: 0.79; 95 % CI: 0.70-0.89). The adjusted full VE was 48.8 % (95 % CI: 42.7 %-54.9 %) against ICU admission, 55.4 % (95 % CI: 52.0 %-56.2 %) against mechanical ventilation, and 22.6 % (95 % CI: 7.4 %-34.8 %) against death. For patients with ≥ 3 comorbidities, VE was 56.2 % (95 % CI: 43.9 %-67.1 %) against ICU admission, 60.2 % (95 % CI: 53.7 %-65.4 %) against mechanical ventilation, and 43.9 % (95 % CI: 19.9 %-59.7 %) against death. CONCLUSIONS: Full (booster) COVID-19 vaccination conferred protection against severe outcomes, prolonged hospitalization, and prolonged work absenteeism.

Association between COVID-19 vaccination status, time elapsed since the last vaccine dose, morbidity, and absenteeism among healthcare personnel: A prospective, multicenter study.

AIM: We assessed the impact of COVID-19 vaccination status and time elapsed since the last vaccine dose on morbidity and absenteeism among healthcare personnel (HCP) in the context of a mandatory vaccination policy. METHODS: We followed 7592 HCP from November 15, 2021 through April 17, 2022. Full COVID-19 vaccination was defined as a primary vaccination series plus a booster dose at least six months later. RESULTS: There were 6496 (85.6 %) fully vaccinated, 953 (12.5 %) not fully vaccinated, and 143 (1.9 %) unvaccinated HCP. A total of 2182 absenteeism episodes occurred. Of 2088 absenteeism episodes among vaccinated HCP with known vaccination status, 1971 (94.4 %) concerned fully vaccinated and 117 (5.6 %) not fully vaccinated. Fully vaccinated HCP had 1.6 fewer days of absence compared to those not fully vaccinated (8.1 versus 9.7; p-value < 0.001). Multivariable regression analyses showed that full vaccination was associated with shorter absenteeism compared to not full vaccination (OR: 0.56; 95 % CI: 0.36-0.87; p-value = 0.01). Compared to a history of ≤ 17.1 weeks since the last dose, a history of > 17.1 weeks since the last dose was associated with longer absenteeism (OR: 1.22, 95 % CI:1.02-1.46; p-value = 0.026) and increased risk for febrile episode (OR: 1.33; 95 % CI: 1.09-1.63; p-value = 0.004), influenza-like illness (OR: 1.53, 95 % CI: 1.02-2.30; p-value = 0.038), and COVID-19 (OR: 1.72; 95 % CI: 1.24-2.39; p-value = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic continues to impose a considerable impact on HCP. The administration of a vaccine dose in less than four months before significantly protected against COVID-19 and absenteeism duration, irrespective of COVID-19 vaccination status. Defining the optimal timing of boosters is imperative.

COVID-19 Vaccination and Mental Health Outcomes among Greek Adults in 2021: Preliminary Evidence.

Existing research on the association between COVID-19 vaccination and quantitatively measured mental health outcomes is scarce. We conducted a cross-sectional telephone survey on a random sample of 1039 adult Greek citizens in June 2021. Among the participants, 39.6% were vaccinated with two doses, 23.1% with one dose, 21.4% were planning to become vaccinated later, and 8.1% refused vaccination. Compared to those fully vaccinated, those against vaccination ("deniers") and those who planned to do so later on ("not vaccinated yet") had significantly higher scores across three stress, anxiety, and depression construct scales. Our findings suggest an association between COVID-19 vaccination status and mental health.

COVID-19 psychological impact, knowledge and perceptions of healthcare professionals in Greece: A nationwide cross-sectional study

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of healthcare professionals is currently under research and prevalence of mental health symptoms across the world vary a lot. Moreover, knowledge and perceptions of healthcare professionals towards the new coronavirus is yet to be explored since very few data have been published to date. Thus, we decided to conduct a cross-sectional, web-based survey to measure the levels of depressive, anxiety and stress symptoms using the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale-21. The knowledge and perceptions of healthcare professionals towards the new coronavirus were also examined with a self-constructed questionnaire. Data were collected between April 19th and May 31st 2020. In total, 1484 professionals participated in the survey and 1064 completed it in full;60.8% were females, 66.5% were physicians and 24.3% were first-line healthcare workers. The prevalence of at least moderate symptoms was 13% for depression, 11.9% for anxiety, and 11.3% for stress. Women, younger participants, residents in urban areas, having lower income and worse self-reported health status had higher scores in all outcomes. First-line healthcare workers also indicated higher anxiety scores compared to those who were not first responders. Regarding knowledge and perceptions, most participants agreed with the asymptomatic nature of the virus and its heightened danger for older individuals and those with underlying health conditions. Different views were expressed regarding the possibility of airborne transmission, its similarity to common flu, and the statements that the new coronavirus is manufactured and serves a specific purpose and that it is out of control. In conclusion, the results of our study suggest that the prevalence of depressive, anxiety and stress symptoms in Greek health-care professionals is placed in the lower end of the range reported from various recent studies across the world. Nevertheless, professionals at risk should be monitored closely and supported when needed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Frequency and factors associated with foregone and delayed medical care due to COVID-19 among nonelderly US adults from August to December 2020.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the frequency and factors associated with foregone and delayed medical care attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic among nonelderly adults from August to December 2020 in the United States. METHODS: We used three survey waves from the Urban Institute's Household Pulse Survey (HPS) collected between August 19-31, October 14-26 and December 9-21. The final sample included 155,825 nonelderly (18-64) respondents representing 135,835,598 million individuals in the United States. We used two multivariable logistic regressions to estimate the association between respondents' characteristics and foregone and delayed care. RESULTS: The frequency of foregone and delayed medical care was 26.9% and 35.9%, respectively. Around 60% of respondents reported difficulties in paying for usual household expenses in the last 7 days. More than half reported several days of mental health issues. The regression results indicated that foregone or delayed care were significantly associated with difficulties in paying usual household expenses (p < 0.001), worse self-reported health status (p < 0.001), increased mental health problems (p < 0.001), Veterans Affairs (p <0.001) or Medicaid (p = 0.003) coverage compared to private healthcare coverage, and older age groups. Individuals who participated in the latter two waves of the survey (October, December) were less likely to report foregone and delayed care compared to those who participated in Wave 1 (August). CONCLUSION: Overall, the frequency of foregone and delayed medical care remained high from August to December 2020 among nonelderly US adults. Our findings highlight that pandemic-induced access barriers are major drivers of reduced healthcare provision during the second half of the pandemic and highlight the need for policies to support patients in seeking timely care.

COVID-19 vaccination significantly reduces morbidity and absenteeism among healthcare personnel: A prospective multicenter study.

AIM: Healthcare personnel (HCP) are prioritized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination to protect them and non-disruptive provision of healthcare services. We assessed the impact of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine on morbidity and absenteeism among HCP. METHODS: We studied 7445 HCP in five tertiary-care hospitals in Greece from November 15, 2020 through April 18, 2021. RESULTS: A total of 910 episodes of absenteeism and 9695 days of absence were recorded during the entire study period. Starting from January 4, 2021, 4823/7445 HCP (64.8%) were fully or partially vaccinated. Overall, 535 episodes of absenteeism occurred from January 4, 2021 through April 18, 2021, including 309 (57.76%) episodes among 2622 unvaccinated HCP and 226 (42.24%) episodes among 4823 vaccinated HCP (11.8 versus 4.7 episodes of absenteeism per 100 HCP, respectively; p-value < 0.001). The mean duration of absenteeism was 11.9 days among unvaccinated HCP compared with 6.9 days among vaccinated HCP (p-value < 0.001). Unvaccinated HCP more frequently developed acute respiratory infection, influenza-like illness, and COVID-19 (p-values < 0.001 for all comparisons). Vaccine effectiveness for fully vaccinated HCP was estimated at 94.16% [confidence interval (CI): 88.50%-98.05%) against COVID-19, 83.62% (CI: 73.36%-90.38%) against SARS-CoV-2 infection (asymptomatic or COVID-19), and 66.42% (CI: 56.86%-74.15%) against absenteeism. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic had a considerable impact on healthcare workforce. The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine significantly reduced morbidity, COVID-19, absenteeism and duration of absenteeism among HCP during a period of high SARS-CoV-2 circulation in the community. It is expected that HCP vaccination will protect them and healthcare services and contain healthcare costs.

Assessing forgetfulness and polypharmacy and their impact on health-related quality of life among patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia in Greece during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: We estimate the association between forgetfulness to take medications as prescribed and polypharmacy and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among a cohort of patients with hypertension, dyslipidemia or both in Greece during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A telephone survey of 1018 randomly selected adults was conducted in Greece in June 2020. Participants were included in the survey, if they (a) had a diagnosis of hypertension, dyslipidemia or both and (b) were on prescription treatment for these conditions. HRQoL was calculated using the short form (SF) -12 Patient Questionnaire. A multivariable generalized linear regression model (GLM) was used to estimate the association between forgetfulness and polypharmacy and HRQoL, controlling for sociodemographic and health-related covariates. RESULTS: Overall, 351 respondents met the inclusion criteria, of whom 28 did not fully complete the questionnaire (response rate: 92%, n = 323). Of those, 37% were diagnosed with hypertension only, 28% with dyslipidemia only, and 35% with both. Most reported good to average physical (64.1%) and mental health (48.6%). Overall, 25% indicated that they sometimes forget to take their prescribed medications, and 12% took two or more pills multiple times daily. Total HRQoL score was 68.9% (s.d. = 18.0%). About 10% of participants reported paying less attention to their healthcare condition during the pandemic. Estimates of multivariable analyses indicated a negative association between forgetfulness (- 9%, adjusted ß: - 0.047, 95% confidence interval - 0.089 to - 0.005, p = 0.029), taking two or more pills multiple times daily compared to one pill once a day (- 16%, adjusted ß: - 0.068, 95% confidence interval - 0.129 to - 0.008, p = 0.028) and total HRQoL. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that among adult patients with hypertension, dyslipidemia or both in Greece, those who forget to take their medications and those with more complex treatment regimens had lower HRQoL. Such patients merit special attention and require targeted approaches by healthcare providers to improve treatment compliance and health outcomes.

Mandatory vaccination support and intentions to get vaccinated for COVID-19: Results from a nationally representative general population survey in October 2020 in Greece.

OBJECTIVES: To explore rates and factors associated with mandatory vaccination support overall and intentions to get vaccinated specifically for COVID-19 among individuals in Greece. METHODS: Using data from a nationally representative cross-sectional survey conducted in October 2020 among 855 adults (≥18 years) in Greece, we estimated support rates for mandatory vaccination and respondents' intention to get vaccinated for COVID-19 as well as associations thereof with individual sociodemographic, clinical and contextual characteristics. RESULTS: About 74% of respondents supported mandatory vaccination and 62% intended to get vaccinated for COVID-19. The most prevalent reasons against COVID-19 vaccination were safety concerns related to the duration of clinical trials and potential side effects. Individuals who reported increased trust in healthcare authorities' recommendations, who revealed that their trust in the State increased due to the way the COVID-19 pandemic was handled, who used preventive services more often, and those with higher income were more likely to both support mandatory vaccination and to indicate intention to get vaccinated for COVID-19. Participants with worse or better self-reported health status (compared to average), younger adults, and females were less likely to intend to get vaccinated for COVID-19. CONCLUSION: The survey revealed that the majority of the Greek citizens favour mandatory vaccination overall and intend to get vaccinated for COVID-19, driven mostly by utilization of preventive services and trust in healthcare authorities. However, intention to get vaccinated for COVID-19 was lower relative to mandatory vaccination support. This suggests a need to intensify evidence-based yet simplified messaging by esteemed healthcare providers to inform the public on the risks and benefits of vaccines.

"Public Health Behaviors during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Greece and Associated Factors: A Nationwide Cross-sectional Survey".

The objective of this cross-sectional survey was to estimate the association between multiple socioeconomic, and health-related characteristics, COVID-19 related attitudes and adoption of public health preventive behaviors. A national cross-sectional survey among 1205 adults was conducted in April 2020 in Greece. Multivariable ordered logistic regression models were used to estimate the association between COVID-19 related attitudes and knowledge and adoption of preventive behaviors, controlling for socioeconomic and health-related characteristics. A total of 923 individuals fully completed the survey. Individuals who believed that the virus is out of control, is transmitted through the air, and is not similar to the common flu were more likely to adopt public health preventive behaviors more frequently, particularly wearing masks in public spaces, washing their hands, and spending fewer hours out of their homes. Uncertainty about the virus symptomatology was associated with less frequent mask-wearing and handwashing. Increased social support, frequent media use for COVID-19 updates, trust to authorities, older age, worse health status, female gender and being a healthcare professional were also associated with uptake of some preventive health behaviors. Attitudinal and socioeconomic determinants critically affect public engagement in preventive behaviors. Health policy initiatives should focus on community outreach approaches to raise awareness and to strengthen social support mechanisms by integrating multiple stakeholders.

Trends in outpatient emergency department visits during the COVID-19 pandemic at a large, urban, academic hospital system.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has critically affected healthcare delivery in the United States. Little is known on its impact on the utilization of emergency department (ED) services, particularly for conditions that might be medically urgent. The objective of this study was to explore trends in the number of outpatient (treat and release) ED visits during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, retrospective study of outpatient emergency department visits from January 1, 2019 to August 31, 2020 using data from a large, urban, academic hospital system in Utah. Using weekly counts and trend analyses, we explored changes in overall ED visits, by patients' area of residence, by medical urgency, and by specific medical conditions. RESULTS: While outpatient ED visits were higher (+6.0%) in the first trimester of 2020 relative to the same period in 2019, the overall volume between January and August of 2020 was lower (-8.1%) than in 2019. The largest decrease occurred in April 2020 (-30.4%), followed by the May to August period (-12.8%). The largest declines were observed for visits by out-of-state residents, visits classified as non-emergent, primary care treatable or preventable, and for patients diagnosed with hypertension, diabetes, headaches and migraines, mood and personality disorders, fluid and electrolyte disorders, and abdominal pain. Outpatient ED visits for emergent conditions, such as palpitations and tachycardia, open wounds, syncope and collapse remained relatively unchanged, while lower respiratory disease-related visits were 67.5% higher in 2020 relative to 2019, particularly from March to April 2020. However, almost all types of outpatient ED visits bounced back after May 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Overall outpatient ED visits declined from mid-March to August 2020, particularly for non-medically urgent conditions which can be treated in other more appropriate care settings. Our findings also have implications for insurers, policymakers, and other stakeholders seeking to assist patients in choosing more appropriate setting for their care during and after the pandemic.

Improved strategies to counter the COVID-19 pandemic: Lockdowns vs. primary and community healthcare.

COVID-19 pandemic mitigation strategies are mainly based on social distancing measures and healthcare system reinforcement. However, many countries in Europe and elsewhere implemented strict, horizontal lockdowns because of extensive viral spread in the community which challenges the capacity of the healthcare systems. However, strict lockdowns have various untintended adverse social, economic and health effects, which have yet to be fully elucidated, and have not been considered in models examining the effects of various mitigation measures. Unlike commonly suggested, the dilemma is not about health vs wealth because the economic devastation of long-lasting lockdowns will definitely have adverse health effects in the population. Furthermore, they cannot provide a lasting solution in pandemic containment, potentially resulting in a vicious cycle of consecutive lockdowns with in-between breaks. Hospital preparedness has been the main strategy used by governments. However, a major characteristic of the COVID-19 pandemic is the rapid viral transmission in populations with no immunity. Thus, even the best hospital system could not cope with the demand. Primary, community and home care are the only viable strategies that could achieve the goal of pandemic mitigation. We present the case example of Greece, a country which followed a strategy focused on hospital preparedness but failed to reinforce primary and community care. This, along with strategic mistakes in epidemiological surveillance, resulted in Greece implementing a second strict, horizontal lockdown and having one of the highest COVID-19 death rates in Europe during the second wave. We provide recommendations for measures that will reinstate primary and community care at the forefront in managing the current public health crisis by protecting hospitals from unnecessary admissions, providing primary and secondary prevention services in relation to COVID-19 and maintaining population health through treatment of non-COVID-19 conditions. This, together with more selective social distancing measures (instead of horizontal lockdowns), represents the only viable and realistic long-term strategy for COVID-19 pandemic mitigation.