Disaster Preparedness in Primary Care: Ready or Not?

The role of primary care during the pandemic: shared experiences from providers in five European countries

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated wide-ranging adaptations to the organisation of health systems, and primary care is no exception. This article aims to collate insights on the role of primary care during the pandemic. The gained knowledge helps to increase pandemic preparedness and resilience.

METHODS

The role of primary care during the pandemic in five European countries (Austria, Denmark, France, Hungary, Italy) was investigated using a qualitative approach, namely case study, based on document analysis and semi-structured interviews. In total, 31 interviews were conducted with primary care providers between June and August 2022. The five country case studies were subjected to an overarching analysis focusing on successful strategies as well as gaps and failures regarding pandemic management in primary care.

RESULTS

Primary care providers identified disruptions to service delivery as a major challenge emerging from the pandemic which led to a widespread adoption of telehealth. Despite the rapid increase in telehealth usage and efforts of primary care providers to organise face-to-face care delivery in a safe way, some patient groups were particularly affected by disruptions in service delivery. Moreover, primary care providers perceived a substantial propagation of misinformation about COVID-19 and vaccines among the population, which also threatened patient-physician relationships. At the same time, primary care providers faced an increased workload, had to work with insufficient personal protective equipment and were provided incongruous guidelines from public authorities. There was a consensus among primary care providers that they were mostly sidelined by public health policy in the context of pandemic management. Primary care providers tackled these problems through a diverse set of measures including home visits, implementing infection control measures, refurbishing used masks, holding internal meetings and relying on their own experiences as well as information shared by colleagues.

CONCLUSION

Primary care providers were neither well prepared nor the focus of initial policy making. However, they implemented creative solutions to the problems they faced and applying the learnings from the pandemic could help in increasing the resilience of primary care. Attributes of an integrated health system with a strong primary care component proved beneficial in addressing immediate effects of the pandemic.

German GPs' Self-Perceived Role in the COVID-19 Pandemic: Leadership, Participation in Regional Services and Preferences for Future Pandemic Preparedness

General practitioners (GPs) played a vital role during the COVID-19 pandemic. Little is known about GPs' view of their role, leadership, participation in regional services and preferences for future pandemic preparedness. This representative study of German GPs comprised a web-based survey and computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI). It addressed GPs' satisfaction with their role, self-perceived leadership (validated C-LEAD scale), participation in newly established health services, and preferences for future pandemic preparedness (net promotor score; NPS; range -100 to +100%). Statistical analyses were conducted using Spearman's correlation and Kruskal-Wallis tests. In total, 630 GPs completed the questionnaire and 102 GPs the CATI. In addition to their practice duties, most GPs (72.5%) participated in at least one regional health service, mainly vaccination centres/teams (52.7%). Self-perceived leadership was high with a C-LEAD score of 47.4 (max. 63; SD ± 8.5). Overall, 58.8% were not satisfied with their role which correlated with the feeling of being left alone (r = -0.349, p < 0.001). 77.5 % of respondents believed that political leaders underestimated GPs' potential contribution to pandemic control. Regarding regional pandemic services, GPs preferred COVID-19 focus practices (NPS +43.7) over diagnostic centres (NPS -31). Many GPs, though highly engaged regionally, were dissatisfied with their role but had clear preferences for future regional services. Future pandemic planning should integrate GPs' perspectives.

Building resilience in German primary care practices: a qualitative study

Background

In recent years, healthcare has faced many different crises around the world such as HIV-, Ebola- or H1N1-outbrakes, opioid addiction, natural disasters and terrorism attacks). In particular, the current pandemic of Covid-19 has challenged the resilience of health systems. In many healthcare systems, primary care practices play a crucial role in the management of crises as they are often the first point of contact and main health care provider for patients. Therefore, this study explored which situations are perceived as crises by primary care practice teams and potential strategies for crisis management.

Methods

A qualitative observational study was conducted. Data were collected in interviews and focus groups with experts from primary care practices and stakeholders focusing on primary care practices in Germany such as physicians, medical assistants, practice managers, quality managers, hygiene managers and institutions on health system level (politics, research and health insurance). All interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. A qualitative content analysis was performed using a rapid qualitative analysis approach first, followed by a thematic analysis.

Results

Two focus groups and 26 interviews including 40 participating experts were conducted. Many different situations were perceived as crises, varying from issues in the practice organization to problems on health system level and international disasters. Distinct aspects associated with the perception of a crisis situation by interviewees were the presence of emotional reactions, a need for organizational changes and a lack of necessary resources. A broad spectrum of possible strategies was discussed that could help to cope with or even prevent the emergence of an actual crisis. In particular, strengthening communication within practice teams and resilience among employees was perceived to be fundamental for improving responses to crises or preventing them.

Conclusions

The study provides perspectives of primary health care workers on crises in health, that could inform health policy regarding prevention and management of future crises in primary care facilities.

Preparedness of Primary Health Care Leaders During COVID-19 Outbreak, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: A Qualitative Study

Purpose

Our study aims to explore the preparedness of the frontline leaders of the primary health care (PHC) centres in dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic and to understand their experiences in implementing preventive interventions necessary to routinise health care service delivery.

Methods

A qualitative exploratory study was conducted using in-depth interviews with the participants in English. The interviews were transcribed verbatim, and inductive coding followed by thematic analysis was performed using NVivo version 12.

Participants

Six participants in charge of managing their respective primary health care settings were included in the study. Purposive sampling was used to identify participants until saturation was reached. After agreement, the interviews were scheduled as per availability.

Results

The results were grouped into three major themes and nine subthemes. Most leaders reported that they were trained in pandemic preparedness, but there was a lack of focused readiness to handle a massive-scale, infectious disease outbreak or pandemic. The initial lack of guidelines specific to COVID-19 was a barrier in making decisions related to staff and patient care. Services were interrupted initially and there was lack of staff since many acquired COVID-19 and were isolated. The shortage of the staff was delt by repurposing staff from other departments to the essential care services. Fears related to pandemic was one of the main concerns reported among staff and patients. Several initiatives were taken to ensure staff safety and uninterrupted service delivery to patients. The use of technology was an effective mechanism in preparing for the pandemic.

Conclusion

This qualitative study helped in understanding the experiences of primary health care leaders during the COVID-19 pandemic. The facilities lacked overall preparedness at the beginning of the pandemic; however, many initiatives were taken in course of time to ensure smooth operations and continued service delivery to the patients.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Rheumatology Practice in Latin America

OBJECTIVE

To describe the effect of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on Latin American rheumatologists from a professional, economic, and occupational point of view.

METHODS

We conducted an observational cross-sectional study using an online survey sent to rheumatologists of each non-English-speaking country member of the Pan American League of Rheumatology Associations (PANLAR). A specific questionnaire was developed.

RESULTS

Our survey included 1097 rheumatologists from 19 Latin American countries. Median (IQR) age of respondents was 48 (40-59) years and 618 (56.3%) were female. Duration of practice since graduation as a rheumatologist was 17 years, and 585 (53.3%) were aged < 50 years. Most rheumatologists worked in private practice (81.8%) and almost half worked in institutional outpatient centers (55%) and inpatient care (49.9%). The median number of weekly hours (IQR) of face-to-face practice before the pandemic was 27 (15-40) hours, but was reduced to 10 (5-20) hours during the pandemic. Telehealth was used by 866 (78.9%) respondents during the pandemic. Most common methods of communication were video calls (555; 50.6%), telephone calls (499; 45.5%), and WhatsApp voice calls (423; 38.6%). A reduction in monthly wages was reported by 946 (86.2%) respondents. Consultation fees also were reduced and 88 (8%) rheumatologists stated they had lost their jobs. A reduction in patient adherence to medication was reported by nearly 50% of respondents. Eighty-one (7.4%) rheumatologists received a COVID-19 diagnosis and 7 (8.6%) of them were hospitalized.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic has reshaped rheumatology practice in Latin America and has had a profound effect on rheumatologists' behaviors and clinical practice.

Framework for obstetrics and gynecology department change management in response to COVID-19 pandemic: A tertiary center experience

Coronavirus (cov) disease 2019 pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome cov 2 has imposed significant demands on healthcare systems across the world. These demands were more significant on obstetrics and gynecology (obgyn) patients, who required services that had to continue despite the closure of other services. This paper describes the change management of an obgyn department at a tertiary health-care center. That experience resulted in a complete management shift in the institution and the formation of an infectious disease epidemic plan for respiratory infections. Description of the change management performed, difficulties encountered, and achievements obtained can assist other departments change management when they face similar situations.

COVID-19 Needs Assessment and Support for Primary Care Practices in Western North Carolina

BACKGROUND

It is critical to ensure that Primary Care Providers (PCPs) have adequate personal protective equipment (PPE), supplies, training, staffing, and contingency planning during pandemics, particularly in rural areas. In March 2020, during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Mountain Area Health Education Center (MAHEC), in collaboration with the Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research at UNC Chapel Hill, rapidly created and conducted a needs assessment of PCPs in western North Carolina (WNC).

METHODS

A group of twenty volunteers conducted a telephone survey of PCPs in a 16 county region of WNC. Practices were asked about their COVID-19 testing and telehealth offerings, PPE adequacy, and capacity to continue serving patients. The survey's emergency alert feature linked practices to immediate support. Descriptive data were generated to identify regional needs.

RESULTS

Out of 110 practices, 48 (43.6%) offered COVID-19 testing, with testing more common in rural counties (56.3% vs 33.9%). Telehealth services, including phone-only visits, were offered by almost all practices (91.8%). PPE needs included N-95 respirators (49.1%), face shields (45.5%), and staff gowns (38.2%). Rural practices were more likely to report the need for PPE. Assistance was requested for staff member childcare (34.5%) and providing or billing for telehealth (31.8%). The most urgent practice requests were related to finances, PPE, and telehealth. MAHEC's Practice Support team linked practices to virtual coaching, tip sheets, case-based video didactics and communication forums, and newsletters.

CONCLUSION

During a pandemic, it is crucial to ensure that PCPs can continue to serve their patients. A rapid needs assessment of PCPs can allow for immediate and ongoing support that matches regional and practice-specific needs. Rural practices may require more assistance than their urban counterparts. Our rapid survey process jumpstarted a statewide system for enhanced communications with PCPs to better prepare for future emergencies.