COVID-19 vaccine short-term adverse events in the real-life family practice in Krakow, Poland.

BACKGROUND: In manufacturers' trials, vaccination against COVID-19 proved to be safe and effective. The officially reported frequency of vaccine adverse events (VAEs) in Poland is lower than that declared by the manufacturers. The anti-vaccination activists questioned the trustworthiness of official data. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to explore the real-life prevalence of VAEs in general practice settings and the factors that may influence it. METHODS: In this pragmatic, mixed prospective and retrospective study, patients vaccinated against COVID-19 between May and October 2021 in three GP practices in Krakow, Poland, were enrolled. Their demographic (age, sex, level of education) and clinical data (weight and height, smoking status, history of allergies, COVID-19 and chronic diseases) were collected. Then, they were interviewed about VAEs they experienced. RESULTS: Out of 1530 patients invited to participate, 1051 (69%) agreed and were eligible for analyses. Only 8.8% did not report any VAE. Pain at the injection site was the most frequently reported reaction (800, 76.2%). The most prevalent systemic ones were excessive fatigue/lethargy (527, 50.6%), sleep/circadian rhythm disturbances (433, 41.6%) and headache (399, 38.3%). Fifty required medical assistance - 39 experienced presyncope (3.7%) and 11 loss of consciousness (1.1%). Only two others were hospitalised. Females, younger adults, those with higher education and with a history of COVID-19 reported systemic VAEs more frequently, while those who were older and obese were less likely to report local reactions. CONCLUSION: Although more than 90% of patients vaccinated against COVID-19 in general practice settings may experience VAEs, in short-term observation, the vast majority are localised and mild.

Association between periodontal diseases and cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and respiratory diseases: Consensus report of the Joint Workshop by the European Federation of Periodontology (EFP) and the European arm of the World Organization of Family Doctors (WONCA Europe).

AIM: To explore the implications for dentists and family doctors of the association between periodontal and systemic diseases and the role of dentists and family doctors in managing non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and promoting healthy lifestyles. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The consensus reports of the previous Focused Workshops on the associations between periodontitis and diabetes (2017) and periodontitis and cardiovascular diseases (2019) formed the technical reviews to underpin discussions on both topics. For the association with respiratory diseases, a systematic review was specifically commissioned for the Workshop discussions. Working groups prepared proposals independently, and then the proposals were discussed and approved at plenary meetings. RESULTS: Periodontitis is independently associated with cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), obstructive sleep apnea and COVID-19 complications. Dentists and family doctors should collaborate in managing NCDs, implementing strategies for early detection of periodontitis in primary care centres and of cardiovascular diseases or diabetes in dental settings. Family doctors should be informed about periodontal diseases and their consequences, and oral health professionals (OHPs) should be informed about the relevance of NCDs and the associated risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Closer collaboration between OHPs and family doctors is important in the early detection and management of NCDs and in promoting healthy lifestyles. Pathways for early case detection of periodontitis in family medicine practices and of NCDs in dental practices should be developed and evaluated.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

COVID-19 outbreak has significantly changed all aspects of general practice in Europe. This article focuses on the academic challenges for the discipline, mainly in the field of education, research, and quality assurance. The efforts of the European Region of the World Organisation of National Colleges, Academies, and Academic Associations of General Practitioners/Family Physicians (WONCA Europe) to support academic sustainability of the discipline in the time of pandemic are presented. Medical education was affected by the pandemic, threatening both its productivity and quality. Emerging new educational methods might be promising, but the results of their rapid implementation remain uncertain. A relatively small number of publications related to COVID-19 and general practice is available in the medical literature. There is a shortage of original data from general practice settings. This contrasts with the crucial role of GPs in fighting a pandemic. COVID-19 outbreak has opened widely new research areas, which should be explored by GPs. Maintaining the quality of care and safety of all patients during the COVID-19 pandemic is the utmost priority. Many of them suffer from poor access or inadequate management of their problems. Rapid implementation of telemedicine brought both threats and opportunities. The COVID-19 pandemic also challenged doctors' safety and well-being. These aspects will require discussion and remedy to prevent deterioration of the quality of primary care. WONCA Europe is making a multi-faceted effort to support GPs in difficult times of the pandemic. It is ready to support future efforts to uphold the integrity of family medicine as an academic discipline.