"What else to say?"-Primary health care in times of COVID-19 from the perspective of German general practitioners: An exploratory analysis of the open text field in the PRICOV-19 study.

BACKGROUND: The international collaboration study PRICOV-19 -Primary Health Care in times of COVID-19 aims to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the organisation of primary health care. The German part focuses on the subjective perceptions of general practitioners on primary health care and the impact of political measures during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Within this survey, the "open text field" of the questionnaire was utilised remarkably frequently and extensively by the respondents. It became clear that the content that was named needed to be analysed in an exploratory manner. Accordingly, this paper addresses the following question: What preoccupies general practitioners in Germany during COVID-19 that we have not yet asked them enough? METHODS: The data collection took place throughout Germany from 01.02.2021 to 28.02.2021with a quantitative online questionnaire consisting of 53 items arranged across six topics as well as an "open text field" for further comments. The questionnaire's open text field was analysed following the premises of the qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The topics discussed by the respondents were: insufficient support from health policies, not being prioritised and involved in the vaccination strategy, feeling insufficient prepared, that infrastructural changes and financial concerns threatened the practice, and perceiving the own role as important, as well as that health policies affected the wellbeing of the respondents. One of the main points was the way general practitioners were not sufficiently acknowledged for their contribution to ensuring high-quality care during the pandemic. DISCUSSION: German general practitioners perceived their work and role as highly relevant during the COVID-19 pandemic. In controversy with their perception, they described political conditions in which they were the ones who contributed significantly to the fight against the pandemic but were not given enough recognition.

Health Service Management and Patient Safety in Primary Care during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Kosovo.

BACKGROUND: Several changes must be made to the services to ensure patient safety and enable delivering services in environments where the danger of infection of healthcare personnel and patients in primary care (PC) institutions is elevated, i.e., during the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine patient safety and healthcare service management in PHC practices in Kosovo during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, data were collected using a self-reported questionnaire among 77 PHC practices. RESULTS: Our main finding reveals a safer organization of PC practices and services since the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the previous period before the pandemic. The study also shows a collaboration between PC practices in the close neighborhood and more proper human resource management due to COVID-19 suspicion or infection. Over 80% of the participating PC practices felt the need to introduce changes to the structure of their practice. Regarding infection protection measures (IPC), our study found that health professionals' practices of wearing a ring or bracelet and wearing nail polish improved during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic period. During the COVID-19 pandemic, PC practice health professionals had less time to routinely review guidelines or medical literature. Despite this, implementing triage protocols over the phone has yet to be applied at the intended level by PC practices in Kosovo. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care practices in Kosovo responded to the COVID-19 pandemic crisis by modifying how they organize their work, implementing procedures for infection control, and enhancing patient safety.

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.

Screening for and Disclosure of Domestic Violence during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Results of the PRICOV-19 Cross-Sectional Study in 33 Countries.

The COVID-19 pandemic left no one untouched, and reports of domestic violence (DV) increased during the crisis. DV victims rarely seek professional help, yet when they do so, they often disclose it to their general practitioner (GP), with whom they have a trusting relationship. GPs rarely screen and hence rarely take the initiative to discuss DV with patients, although victims indicate that offering this opportunity would facilitate their disclosure. This paper aims to describe the frequency of screening for DV by GPs and disclosure of DV by patients to the GP during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to identify key elements that could potentially explain differences in screening for and disclosure of DV. The PRICOV-19 data of 4295 GP practices from 33 countries were included in the analyses, with practices nested in countries. Two stepwise forward clustered ordinal logistic regressions were performed. Only 11% of the GPs reported (much) more disclosure of DV by patients during COVID-19, and 12% reported having screened for DV (much). Most significant associations with screening for and disclosure of DV concerned general (pro)active communication. However, (pro)active communication was performed less frequently for DV than for health conditions, which might indicate that GPs are insufficiently aware of the general magnitude of DV and its impact on patients and society, and its approach/management. Thus, professional education and training for GPs about DV seems highly and urgently needed.

The Organization of Outreach Work for Vulnerable Patients in General Practice during COVID-19: Results from the Cross-Sectional PRICOV-19 Study in 38 Countries.

The COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately affected vulnerable populations' access to health care. By proactively reaching out to them, general practices attempted to prevent the underutilization of their services. This paper examined the association between practice and country characteristics and the organization of outreach work in general practices during COVID-19. Linear mixed model analyses with practices nested in countries were performed on the data of 4982 practices from 38 countries. A 4-item scale on outreach work was constructed as the outcome variable with a reliability of 0.77 and 0.97 at the practice and country level. The results showed that many practices set up outreach work, including extracting at least one list of patients with chronic conditions from their electronic medical record (30.1%); and performing telephone outreach to patients with chronic conditions (62.8%), a psychological vulnerability (35.6%), or possible situation of domestic violence or a child-rearing situation (17.2%). Outreach work was positively related to the availability of an administrative assistant or practice manager (p < 0.05) or paramedical support staff (p < 0.01). Other practice and country characteristics were not significantly associated with undertaking outreach work. Policy and financial interventions supporting general practices to organize outreach work should focus on the range of personnel available to support such practice activities.

The response of primary care practices in rural and urban settings in Poland to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: In the wake of COVID-19 primary care practices have had to overcome and to adapt to several challenges in providing quality care. An international consortium led by Ghent University, Belgium, set up the PRICOV-19 project to study how primary care practices in 38 countries responded to the new challenges. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to describe how Covid-19 impacted the organisation of primary care practices in rural and urban environments in Poland, including the organisation of patient flows, infection prevention, information processing, and communication. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey among primary care practices. In Poland, the survey was distributed among primary care practices in 16 Polish regions. 180 practices participated in the study. In the analysis of the data U-Mann Whitney or t-test for independent groups, and Wilcoxon test were used to compare the organisation of care before and since the pandemic. RESULTS: Over two-thirds of practices made considerable changes in their structure due to COVID-19; over three-quarters introduced security procedures for phone registrations, but only a quarter still offered consultations without a prior appointment. The use of video consultation quadrupled, and teleconsultations became almost universal. Rural practices were significantly more likely to offer active care for deprived patient groups. A significant increase in infection prevention measures occurred in both urban and rural practices. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 brought challenges that spurred changes to the organisation of primary care practices as they sought to continue offering quality care. Despite these hardships, new opportunities for effective changes to clinical operations and organization have emerged and will benefit global health systems in the face of new crises.

Responding to COVID-19: The Suitability of Primary Care Infrastructure in 33 Countries.

COVID-19 proved that primary care (PC) providers have an important role in managing health emergencies, such as epidemics. Little is known about the preparedness of primary care practice infrastructure to continue providing high quality care during this crisis. The aim of this paper is to describe the perceived limitations to the infrastructure of PC practices during COVID-19 and to determine the factors associated with a higher likelihood of infrastructural barriers in providing high quality care. This paper presents the results of an online survey conducted between November 2020 and November 2021 as a part of PRICOV-19 study. Data from 4974 practices in 33 countries regarding perceived limitations and intentions to make future adjustments to practice infrastructure as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic were collected. Approximately 58% of practices experienced limitations to the building or other practice infrastructure to provide high-quality and safe care during the COVID-19 pandemic, and in 54% making adjustments to the building or the infrastructure was considered. Large variations between the countries were found. The results show that infrastructure constraints were directly proportional to the size of the practice. Better pandemic infection control equipment, governmental support, and a fee-for-service payment system were found to be associated with a lower perceived need for infrastructural changes. The results of the study indicate the need for systematic support for the development of practice infrastructure in order to provide high-quality, safe primary care in the event of future crises similar to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Has the COVID-19 Pandemic Led to Changes in the Tasks of the Primary Care Workforce? An International Survey among General Practices in 38 Countries (PRICOV-19).

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a large and varying impact on primary care. This paper studies changes in the tasks of general practitioners (GPs) and associated staff during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data from the PRICOV-19 study of 5093 GPs in 38 countries were used. We constructed a scale for task changes and performed multilevel analyses. The scale was reliable at both GP and country level. Clustering of task changes at country level was considerable (25%). During the pandemic, staff members were more involved in giving information and recommendations to patients contacting the practice by phone, and they were more involved in triage. GPs took on additional responsibilities and were more involved in reaching out to patients. Problems due to staff absence, when dealt with internally, were related to more task changes. Task changes were larger in practices employing a wider range of professional groups. Whilst GPs were happy with the task changes in practices with more changes, they also felt the need for further training. A higher-than-average proportion of elderly people and people with a chronic condition in the practice were related to task changes. The number of infections in a country during the first wave of the pandemic was related to task changes. Other characteristics at country level were not associated with task changes. Future research on the sustainability of task changes after the pandemic is needed.

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.

Distress and Wellbeing among General Practitioners in 33 Countries during COVID-19: Results from the Cross-Sectional PRICOV-19 Study to Inform Health System Interventions.

Emerging literature is highlighting the huge toll of the COVID-19 pandemic on frontline health workers. However, prior to the crisis, the wellbeing of this group was already of concern. The aim of this paper is to describe the frequency of distress and wellbeing, measured by the expanded 9-item Mayo Clinic Wellbeing Index (eWBI), among general practitioners/family physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic and to identify levers to mitigate the risk of distress. Data were collected by means of an online self-reported questionnaire among GP practices. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software using Version 7 of the database, which consisted of the cleaned data of 33 countries available as of 3 November 2021. Data from 3711 respondents were included. eWBI scores ranged from -2 to 9, with a median of 3. Using a cutoff of ≥2, 64.5% of respondents were considered at risk of distress. GPs with less experience, in smaller practices, and with more vulnerable patient populations were at a higher risk of distress. Significant differences in wellbeing scores were noted between countries. Collaboration from other practices and perception of having adequate governmental support were significant protective factors for distress. It is necessary to address practice- and system-level organizational factors in order to enhance wellbeing and support primary care physicians.

Practice and System Factors Impact on Infection Prevention and Control in General Practice during COVID-19 across 33 Countries: Results of the PRICOV Cross-Sectional Survey.

Infection prevention and control (IPC) is an evidence-based approach used to reduce the risk of infection transmission within the healthcare environment. Effective IPC practices ensure safe and quality healthcare. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for enhanced IPC measures and the World Health Organization (WHO) emphasized the need for strict adherence to the basic principles of IPC. This paper aims to describe the IPC strategies implemented in general practice during the COVID-19 pandemic and to identify the factors that impact their adoption. Data were collected by means of an online self-reported questionnaire among general practices. Data from 4466 practices in 33 countries were included in the analysis. Our results showed a notable improvement in IPC during COVID-19 with more practices reporting that staff members never wore nail polish (increased from 34% to 46.2%); more practices reporting that staff never wear a ring/bracelet (increased from 16.1% to 32.3%); and more practices using a cleaning protocol (increased from 54.9% to 72.7%). Practice population size and the practice payment system were key factors related to adoption of a) range of IPC measures including patient flow arrangements and infrastructural elements. An understanding of the interplay between policy, culture, systemic supports, and behavior are necessary to obtain sustained improvement in IPC measures.

COVID-19 fosters social accountability in medical education.

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted embedded inequities and fragmentation in our health systems. Traditionally, structural issues with health professional education perpetuate these. COVID-19 has highlighted inequities, but may also be a disruptor, allowing positive responses and system redesign. Examples from health professional schools in high and low- and middle-income countries illustrate pro-equity interventions of current relevance. We recommend that health professional schools and planners consider educational redesign to produce a health workforce well equipped to respond to pandemics and meet future need.

Distress and Wellbeing among General Practitioners in 33 Countries during COVID-19: Results from the Cross-Sectional PRICOV-19 Study to Inform Health System Interventions

Emerging literature is highlighting the huge toll of the COVID-19 pandemic on frontline health workers. However, prior to the crisis, the wellbeing of this group was already of concern. The aim of this paper is to describe the frequency of distress and wellbeing, measured by the expanded 9-item Mayo Clinic Wellbeing Index (eWBI), among general practitioners/family physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic and to identify levers to mitigate the risk of distress. Data were collected by means of an online self-reported questionnaire among GP practices. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software using Version 7 of the database, which consisted of the cleaned data of 33 countries available as of 3 November 2021. Data from 3711 respondents were included. eWBI scores ranged from −2 to 9, with a median of 3. Using a cutoff of ≥2, 64.5% of respondents were considered at risk of distress. GPs with less experience, in smaller practices, and with more vulnerable patient populations were at a higher risk of distress. Significant differences in wellbeing scores were noted between countries. Collaboration from other practices and perception of having adequate governmental support were significant protective factors for distress. It is necessary to address practice- and system-level organizational factors in order to enhance wellbeing and support primary care physicians.

Experience of discrimination during COVID-19 pandemic: the impact of public health measures and psychological distress among refugees and other migrants in Europe.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a disproportionately hard impact on refugees and other migrants who are often exposed to the virus with limited means to protect themselves. We tested the hypothesis that during the COVID-19 pandemic, refugees and other migrants have suffered a negative impact on mental health and have been unjustly discriminated for spreading the disease in Europe (data collection from April to November 2020). METHODS: Participants in the ApartTogether Survey (N = 8297, after listwise deletion of missing items final N = 3940) provided data regarding to their difficulties to adhere to preventive recommendations against COVID-19 infection (CARE), self-perceived stigmatization (SS), and psychological distress (PD). Structural Equation Modeling was used to investigate PD as a mediator in the pathway linking CARE to SS, while adjusting for the housing and residence status. To improve confidence in the findings, single hold-out sample cross-validation was performed using a train/test split ratio of 0.8/0.2. RESULTS: In the exploratory set (N = 3159) SS was associated with both CARE (B = 0.200, p < 0.001) and PD (B = 0.455, p < 0.001). Moreover, PD was also associated with CARE (B = 0.094, p = 0.001) and mediated the effect of CARE on SS (proportion mediated = 17.7%, p = 0.001). The results were successfully replicated in the confirmation set (N = 781; total effect = 0.417, p < 0.001; proportion mediated = 29.7%, p < 0.001). Follow-up analyses also found evidence for an opposite effect (i.e., from SS to CARE, B = 0.132; p < 0.001), suggesting that there might be a vicious circle between the self-perceived stigmatization and the access to health care and the use of preventive measures against COVID-19 infection. CONCLUSIONS: Refugees and other migrants who had more difficulties in accessing health care and preventive measures against COVID-19 infection experienced worse mental health and increased discrimination. These negative effects appeared to be stronger for those with more insecure housing and residence status, highlighting from one side the specific risk of insecure housing in the impact of COVID-19 upon mental health and infection protection, and for another side the need to proper housing as a strategy to prevent both COVID-19 and mental distress.

Snelle aanpassing praktijkorganisatie tijdens de coronapandemie

Samenvatting Huisartsenpraktijken pasten tijdens de coronapandemie hun organisatie aan, mede op basis van informatie en adviezen van hun beroepsorganisaties. De aanpassingen waren noodzake-lijk om de zorg voor patiënten zo veel en zo veilig mogelijk doorgang te laten vinden, vaak op afstand. De pandemie zelf, de zorg op afstand en de strakkere geleiding van de patiëntenstroom zetten de kwaliteit van zorg en de patiëntveiligheid onder druk. De toegankelijkheid van de praktijken was soms beperkt, in de beleving van patiënten was dat sterker dan in werkelijkheid.

Understanding Trustful Relationships between Community Health Workers and Vulnerable Citizens during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Realist Evaluation.

(1) Background: Community health workers (CHWs) are an essential public health workforce defined by their trustful relationships with vulnerable citizens. However, how trustful relationships are built remains unclear. This study aimed to understand how and under which circumstances CHWs are likely to build trust with their vulnerable clients during the COVID-19 pandemic. (2) Methods: We developed a program theory using a realist research design. Data were collected through focus groups and in-depth interviews with CHWs and their clients. Using a grounded theory approach, we aimed to unravel mechanisms and contextual factors that determine the trust in a CHW program offering psychosocial support to vulnerable citizens during the COVID-19 pandemic. (3) Results: The trustful relationship between CHWs and their clients is rooted in three mental models: recognition, equality, and reciprocity. Five contextual factors (adopting a client-centered attitude, coordination, temporariness, and link with primary care practice (PCP)) enable the program mechanisms to work. (4) Conclusions: CHWs are a crucial public health outreach strategy for PCP and complement and enhance trust-building by primary care professionals. In the process of building trustful relationships between CHWs and clients, different mechanisms and contextual factors play a role in the trustful relationship between primary care professionals and patients. Future research should assess whether these findings also apply to a non-covid context, to the involvement of CHWs in other facets of primary healthcare (e.g., prevention campaigns, etc.), and to a low- and middle-income country (LMIC) setting. Furthermore, implementation research should elaborate on the integration of CHWs in PCP to support CHWs in developing the mental models leading to build trust with vulnerable citizens and to establish the required conditions.

The Magnification of Health Disparities During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Coronavirus disease 2019 has created and amplified racial health disparities. This has been particularly noticeable in populations with asthma. There is no one simple reason for this occurrence, but rather a complex interaction of biological, structural, and socioeconomic factors. This article will highlight reasons why the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has been particularly impactful among minority populations throughout the world and will also offer potential solutions to help overcome health disparities.