Changes in primary care visits for respiratory illness during the COVID-19 pandemic: a multinational study by the International Consortium of Primary Care Big Data Researchers (INTRePID).

Objectives: The majority of patients with respiratory illness are seen in primary care settings. Given COVID-19 is predominantly a respiratory illness, the INTernational ConsoRtium of Primary Care BIg Data Researchers (INTRePID), assessed the pandemic impact on primary care visits for respiratory illnesses. Design: Definitions for respiratory illness types were agreed on collectively. Monthly visit counts with diagnosis were shared centrally for analysis. Setting: Primary care settings in Argentina, Australia, Canada, China, Norway, Peru, Singapore, Sweden and the United States. Participants: Over 38 million patients seen in primary care settings in INTRePID countries before and during the pandemic, from January 1st, 2018, to December 31st, 2021. Main outcome measures: Relative change in the monthly mean number of visits before and after the onset of the pandemic for acute infectious respiratory disease visits including influenza, upper and lower respiratory tract infections and chronic respiratory disease visits including asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, respiratory allergies, and other respiratory diseases. Results: INTRePID countries reported a marked decrease in the average monthly visits for respiratory illness. Changes in visits varied from -10.9% [95% confidence interval (CI): -33.1 to +11.3%] in Norway to -79.9% (95% CI: -86.4% to -73.4%) in China for acute infectious respiratory disease visits and - 2.1% (95% CI: -12.1 to +7.8%) in Peru to -59.9% (95% CI: -68.6% to -51.3%) in China for chronic respiratory illness visits. While seasonal variation in allergic respiratory illness continued during the pandemic, there was essentially no spike in influenza illness during the first 2 years of the pandemic. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic had a major impact on primary care visits for respiratory presentations. Primary care continued to provide services for respiratory illness, although there was a decrease in infectious illness during the COVID pandemic. Understanding the role of primary care may provide valuable information for COVID-19 recovery efforts and planning for future global emergencies.

Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health visits in primary care: an interrupted time series analysis from nine INTRePID countries.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted mental health disorders, affecting both individuals with pre-existing conditions and those with no prior history. However, there is limited evidence regarding the pandemic's impact on mental health visits to primary care physicians. The International Consortium of Primary Care Big Data Researchers (INTRePID) explored primary care visit trends related to mental health conditions in Argentina, Australia, Canada, China, Norway, Peru, Singapore, Sweden, and the USA. Methods: We conducted an interrupted time series analysis in nine countries to examine changes in rates of monthly mental health visits to primary care settings from January 1st, 2018, to December 31st, 2021. Sub-group analysis considered service type (in-person/virtual) and six categories of mental health conditions (anxiety/depression, bipolar/schizophrenia/other psychotic disorders, sleep disorders, dementia, ADHD/eating disorders, and substance use disorder). Findings: Mental health visit rates increased after the onset of the pandemic in most countries. In Argentina, Canada, China, Norway, Peru, and Singapore, this increase was immediate ranged from an incidence rate ratio of 1·118 [95% CI 1.053-1.187] to 2.240 [95% CI 2.057-2.439] when comparing the first month of pandemic with the pre-pandemic trend. Increases in the following months varied across countries. Anxiety/depression was the leading reason for mental health visits in most countries. Virtual visits were reported in Australia, Canada, Norway, Peru, Sweden, and the USA, accounting for up to 40% of the total mental health visits. Interpretation: Findings suggest an overall increase in mental health visits, driven largely by anxiety/depression. During the COVID-19 pandemic, many of the studied countries adopted virtual care in particular for mental health visits. Primary care plays a crucial role in addressing mental ill-health in times of crisis. Funding: Canadian Institutes of Health Research grant #173094 and the Rathlyn Foundation Primary Care EMR Research and Discovery Fund.

Global impacts of COVID-19 pandemic on sexual and reproductive health services: An international comparative study on primary care from the INTRePID Consortium.

OBJECTIVE: To understand how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted sexual and reproductive health (SRH) visits. DESIGN: An ecological study comparing SRH services volume in different countries before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. SETTING: Seven countries from the INTernational ConsoRtium of Primary Care BIg Data Researchers (INTRePID) across four continents. POPULATION: Over 3.8 million SRH visits to primary care physicians in Australia, China, Canada, Norway, Singapore, Sweden and the USA. METHODS: Difference in average SRH monthly visits before and during the pandemic, with negative binomial regression modelling to compare predicted and observed number of visits during the pandemic for SRH visits. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Monthly number of visits to primary care physicians from 2018 to 2021. RESULTS: During the pandemic, the average volume of monthly SRH visits increased in Canada (15.6%, 99% CI 8.1-23.0%) where virtual care was pronounced. China, Singapore, Sweden and the USA experienced a decline (-56.5%, 99% CI -74.5 to -38.5%; -22.7%, 99% CI -38.8 to -6.5%; -19.4%, 99% CI -28.3 to -10.6%; and -22.7%, 99% CI -38.8 to -6.5%, respectively); while Australia and Norway showed insignificant changes (6.5%, 99% CI -0.7 to -13.8% and 1.7%, 99% CI -6.4 to -9.8%). The countries that maintained (Australia, Norway) or surpassed (Canada) pre-pandemic visit rates had the greatest use of virtual care. CONCLUSIONS: In-person SRH visits to primary care decreased during the pandemic. Virtual care seemed to counterbalance that decline. Although cervical cancer screening appeared insensitive to virtual care, strategies such as incorporating self-collected samples for HPV testing may provide a solution in a future pandemic.

COPD Population in US Primary Care: Data From the Optimum Patient Care DARTNet Research Database and the Advancing the Patient Experience in COPD Registry.

PURPOSE: To describe demographic and clinical characteristics of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients managed in US primary care. METHODS: This was an observational registry study using data from the Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Optimum Patient Care DARTNet Research Database from which the Advancing the Patient Experience COPD registry is derived. Registry patients were aged ≥35 years at diagnosis. Electronic health record data were collected from both registries, supplemented with patient-reported information/outcomes from the Advancing the Patient Experience registry from 5 primary care groups in Texas, Ohio, Colorado, New York, and North Carolina (June 2019 through November 2020). RESULTS: Of 17,192 patients included, 1,354 were also in the Advancing the Patient Experience registry. Patients were predominantly female (56%; 9,689/17,192), White (64%; 9,732/15,225), current/ex-smokers (80%; 13,784/17,192), and overweight/obese (69%; 11,628/16,849). The most commonly prescribed maintenance treatments were inhaled corticosteroid with a long-acting ß2-agonist (30%) and inhaled corticosteroid with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (27%). Although 3% (565/17,192) of patitents were untreated, 9% (1,587/17,192) were on short-acting bronchodilator monotherapy, and 4% (756/17,192) were on inhaled corticosteroid monotherapy. Despite treatment, 38% (6,579/17,192) of patients experienced 1 or more exacerbations in the last 12 months. These findings were mirrored in the Advancing Patient Experience registry with many patients reporting high or very high impact of disease on their health (43%; 580/1,322), a breathlessness score 2 or more (45%; 588/1,315), and 1 or more exacerbation in the last 12 months (50%; 646/1,294). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the high exacerbation, symptom, and treatment burdens experienced by COPD patients managed in US primary care, and the need for more real-life effectiveness trials to support decision making at the primary care level.

Variation in Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Patients with COPD Receiving Care in US Primary Care: Data from the Advancing the Patient EXperience (APEX) in COPD Registry.

Introduction: Little is known about the variability in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management and how it may be affected by patient characteristics across different healthcare systems in the US. This study aims to describe demographic and clinical characteristics of people with COPD and compare management across five primary care medical groups in the US. Methods: This is a retrospective observational registry study utilizing electronic health records stored in the Advancing the Patient Experience (APEX) COPD registry. The APEX registry contains data from five US healthcare organizations located in Texas, Ohio, Colorado, New York, and North Carolina. Data on demographic and clinical characteristics of primary care patients with COPD between December 2019 and January 2020 were extracted and compared. Results: A total of 17,192 patients with COPD were included in analysis: Texas (n = 811), Ohio (n = 8722), Colorado (n = 472), New York (n = 1149) and North Carolina (n = 6038). The majority of patients at each location were female (>54%) and overweight/obese (>60%). Inter-location variabilities were noted in terms of age, race/ethnicity, exacerbation frequency, treatment pattern, and prevalence of comorbid conditions. Patients from the Colorado site experienced the lowest number of exacerbations per year while those from the New York site reported the highest number. Hypertension was the most common co-morbidity at 4 of 5 sites with the highest prevalence in New York. Depression was the most common co-morbidity in Ohio. Treatment patterns also varied by site; Colorado had the highest proportion of patients not on any treatment. ICS/LABA was the most commonly prescribed treatment except in Ohio, where ICS/LABA/LAMA was most common. Conclusions and Relevance: Our data show heterogeneity in demographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics of patients diagnosed with COPD who are managed in primary care across different healthcare organizations in the US.

Advancing the Patient EXperience (APEX) in COPD Registry: Study Design and Strengths.

The Advancing the Patient Experience (APEX) in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) registry (https://www.apexcopd.org/) is the first primary care health system-based COPD registry in the United States. While its ultimate goal is to improve the care of patients diagnosed with COPD, the registry is also designed to describe real-life experiences of people with COPD, track key outcomes longitudinally, and assess the effectiveness of interventions. It will retrospectively and prospectively collect information from 3000 patients enrolled in 5 health care organizations. Information will be obtained from electronic health records, and from extended annual and brief questionnaires completed by patients before clinic visits. Core variables to be collected into the APEX COPD registry were agreed on by Delphi consensus and fall into 3 domains: demographics, COPD monitoring, and treatment. Main strengths of the registry include: 1) its size and scope (in terms of patient numbers, geographic spread and use of multiple information sources including patient-reported information); 2) collection of variables which are clinically relevant and practical to collect within primary care; 3) use of electronic data capture systems to ensure high-quality data and minimization of data-entry requirements; 4) inclusion of clinical, database development, management and communication experts; 5) regular sharing of key findings, both at international/national congresses and in peer-reviewed publications; and 6) a robust organizational structure to ensure continuance of the registry, and that research outputs are ethical, relevant and continue to bring value to both patients and physicians.