Describing the indirect impact of COVID-19 on healthcare utilisation using syndromic surveillance systems

Using a novel 'difference-in-differences' method and syndromic surveillance to estimate the change in local healthcare utilisation during periods of media reporting in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in England

OBJECTIVES

Syndromic surveillance supplements traditional laboratory reporting for infectious diseases monitoring. Prior to widespread COVID-19 community surveillance, syndromic surveillance was one of several systems providing real-time information on changes in healthcare-seeking behaviour. The study objective was to identify changes in healthcare utilisation during periods of high local media reporting in England using 'difference-in-differences' (DiD).

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective observational study was conducted using five media events in January-February 2020 in England on four routinely monitored syndromic surveillance indicators.

METHODS

Dates 'exposed' to a media event were estimated using Google Trends internet search intensity data (terms = 'coronavirus' and local authority [LA]). We constructed a negative-binomial regression model for each indicator and event time period to estimate a direct effect.

RESULTS

We estimated a four-fold increase in telehealth 'cough' calls and a 1.4-fold increase in emergency department (ED) attendances for acute respiratory illness in Brighton and Hove, when a so-called 'superspreading event' in this location was reported in local and national media. Significant decreases were observed in the Buxton (telehealth and ED attendance) and Wirral (ED attendance) areas during media reports of a returnee from an outbreak abroad and a quarantine site opening in the area respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We used a novel approach to directly estimate changes in syndromic surveillance reporting during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in England, providing contextual information on the interpretation of changes in health indicators. With careful consideration of event timings, DiD is useful in producing real-time estimates on specific indicators for informing public health action.

Determining the feasibility of calculating pancreatic cancer risk scores for people with new-onset diabetes in primary care (DEFEND PRIME): study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Worldwide, pancreatic cancer has a poor prognosis. Early diagnosis may improve survival by enabling curative treatment. Statistical and machine learning diagnostic prediction models using risk factors such as patient demographics and blood tests are being developed for clinical use to improve early diagnosis. One example is the Enriching New-onset Diabetes for Pancreatic Cancer (ENDPAC) model, which employs patients' age, blood glucose and weight changes to provide pancreatic cancer risk scores. These values are routinely collected in primary care in the UK. Primary care's central role in cancer diagnosis makes it an ideal setting to implement ENDPAC but it has yet to be used in clinical settings. This study aims to determine the feasibility of applying ENDPAC to data held by UK primary care practices.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This will be a multicentre observational study with a cohort design, determining the feasibility of applying ENDPAC in UK primary care. We will develop software to search, extract and process anonymised data from 20 primary care providers' electronic patient record management systems on participants aged 50+ years, with a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) test result of ≥48 mmol/mol (6.5%) and no previous abnormal HbA1c results. Software to calculate ENDPAC scores will be developed, and descriptive statistics used to summarise the cohort's demographics and assess data quality. Findings will inform the development of a future UK clinical trial to test ENDPAC's effectiveness for the early detection of pancreatic cancer.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This project has been reviewed by the University of Surrey University Ethics Committee and received a favourable ethical opinion (FHMS 22-23151 EGA). Study findings will be presented at scientific meetings and published in international peer-reviewed journals. Participating primary care practices, clinical leads and policy makers will be provided with summaries of the findings.

Comparison of surveillance systems for monitoring COVID-19 in England: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, cases were tracked using multiple surveillance systems. Some systems were completely novel, and others incorporated multiple data streams to estimate case incidence and prevalence. How well these different surveillance systems worked as epidemic indicators is unclear, which has implications for future disease surveillance and outbreak management. The aim of this study was to compare case counts, prevalence and incidence, timeliness, and comprehensiveness of different COVID-19 surveillance systems in England.

METHODS

For this retrospective observational study of COVID-19 surveillance systems in England, data from 12 surveillance systems were extracted from publicly available sources (Jan 1, 2020-Nov 30, 2021). The main outcomes were correlations between different indicators of COVID-19 incidence or prevalence. These data were integrated as daily time-series and comparisons undertaken using Spearman correlation between candidate alternatives and the most timely (updated daily, clinical case register) and the least biased (from comprehensive household sampling) COVID-19 epidemic indicators, with comparisons focused on the period of Sept 1, 2020-Nov 30, 2021.

FINDINGS

Spearman statistic correlations during the full focus period between the least biased indicator (from household surveys) and other epidemic indicator time-series were 0·94 (95% CI 0·92 to 0·95; clinical cases, the most timely indicator), 0·92 (0·90 to 0·94; estimates of incidence generated after incorporating information about self-reported case status on the ZoeApp, which is a digital app), 0·67 (95% CI 0·60 to 0·73, emergency department attendances), 0·64 (95% CI 0·60 to 0·68, NHS 111 website visits), 0·63 (95% CI 0·56 to 0·69, wastewater viral genome concentrations), 0·60 (95% CI 0·52 to 0·66, admissions to hospital with positive COVID-19 status), 0·45 (95% CI 0·36 to 0·52, NHS 111 calls), 0·08 (95% CI -0·03 to 0·18, Google search rank for "covid"), -0·04 (95% CI -0·12 to 0·05, in-hours consultations with general practitioners), and -0·37 (95% CI -0·46 to -0·28, Google search rank for "coronavirus"). Time lags (-14 to +14 days) did not markedly improve these rho statistics. Clinical cases (the most timely indicator) captured a more consistent proportion of cases than the self-report digital app did.

INTERPRETATION

A suite of monitoring systems is useful. The household survey system was the most comprehensive and least biased epidemic monitor, but not very timely. Data from laboratory testing, the self-reporting digital app, and attendances to emergency departments were comparatively useful, fairly accurate, and timely epidemic trackers.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Protection Research Unit in Emergency Preparedness and Response, a partnership between the UK Health Security Agency, King's College London, and the University of East Anglia.

The Epidemiology of Chickenpox in England, 2016-2022: An Observational Study Using General Practitioner Consultations

Chickenpox is a common childhood disease caused by varicella-zoster virus (VZV). VZV vaccination is not part of the UK childhood immunisation programme, but its potential inclusion is regularly assessed. It is therefore important to understand the ongoing burden of VZV in the community to inform vaccine policy decisions. General practitioner (GP) chickenpox consultations were studied from 1 September 2016 to 9 December 2022. Over the study period, the mean weekly chickenpox consultation rate per 100,000 population in England was 3.4, with a regular peak occurring between weeks 13 and 15. Overall, rates decreased over time, from a mean weekly rate of 5.5 in 2017 to 4.2 in 2019. The highest mean weekly rates were among children aged 1-4 years. There was no typical epidemic peak during the COVID-19 pandemic, but in 2022, rates were proportionally higher among children aged < 1 year old compared to pre-pandemic years. Chickenpox GP consultation rates decreased in England, continuing a longer-term decline in the community. The COVID-19 pandemic impacted rates, likely caused by the introduction of non-pharmaceutical interventions to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission. The lasting impact of the interruption of typical disease transmission remains to be seen, but it is important to monitor the chickenpox burden to inform decisions on vaccine programmes.

Prevalence and healthcare utilization in managing herpes zoster in primary care: a retrospective study in an Asian urban population

Herpes zoster (HZ) causes significant morbidity, particularly in older adults. With the advent of a recombinant zoster vaccine, HZ is potentially preventable. However, data on HZ burden and healthcare utilization in primary care populations remains scarce. This study described the prevalence and healthcare utilization in managing HZ in a developed community. A retrospective database review was conducted across a cluster of 8 public primary care clinics in urban Singapore. Data of multi-ethnic Asian patients with a diagnosis code of "herpes zoster" from 2018 to 2020 was extracted from their electronic medical records. Socio-demographic, clinical, visitation, medical leave, prescription, and referral data were analyzed. A total of 2,987 out of 737,868 individuals were diagnosed with HZ over 3 years. The mean age was 59.9 (SD + 15.5) years; 49.2% were male; 78.5% Chinese, 12.2% Malay, and 4.1% Indian. The prevalence was 221, 224, 203 per 100,000 persons in 2018, 2019, and 2020, respectively. The 70 to 79-year age group had the highest prevalence (829/100,000) across 3 years. Oral acyclovir (median daily dose 4,000 mg; median duration 7 days) and topical acyclovir were prescribed in 71.6 and 47.6%, respectively. Analgesia prescribed were gabapentin (41.0%), paracetamol combinations (30.1%), oral NSAIDs (23.7%), opioids (6.0%), and tricyclic antidepressants (1.9%). Most individuals consulted only once (84.3%); 32.7% of them required medical leave and 5.6% had more than 7 days of absenteeism. HZ-related referrals to the hospital were required in 8.9% (4.9% emergency, 2.8% ophthalmology). The findings of this study suggest a need for HZ vaccination among older age groups. Visitation and referral rates were low. The use of topical acyclovir was uncovered, and further research should evaluate the underlying reasons, benefits, and harms of such practice. The use of analgesia combinations may be explored further.

Changes in emergency department utilisation in Germany before and during different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, using data from a national surveillance system up to June 2021

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic and associated public health and social measures, decreasing patient numbers have been described in various healthcare settings in Germany, including emergency care. This could be explained by changes in disease burden, e.g. due to contact restrictions, but could also be a result of changes in utilisation behaviour of the population. To better understand those dynamics, we analysed routine data from emergency departments to quantify changes in consultation numbers, age distribution, disease acuity and day and hour of the day during different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We used interrupted time series analyses to estimate relative changes for consultation numbers of 20 emergency departments spread throughout Germany. For the pandemic period (16-03-2020 - 13-06-2021) four different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic were defined as interruption points, the pre-pandemic period (06-03-2017 - 09-03-2020) was used as the reference.

RESULTS

The most pronounced decreases were visible in the first and second wave of the pandemic, with changes of - 30.0% (95%CI: - 32.2%; - 27.7%) and - 25.7% (95%CI: - 27.4%; - 23.9%) for overall consultations, respectively. The decrease was even stronger for the age group of 0-19 years, with - 39.4% in the first and - 35.0% in the second wave. Regarding acuity levels, consultations assessed as urgent, standard, and non-urgent showed the largest decrease, while the most severe cases showed the smallest decrease.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of emergency department consultations decreased rapidly during the COVID-19 pandemic, without extensive variation in the distribution of patient characteristics. Smallest changes were observed for the most severe consultations and older age groups, which is especially reassuring regarding concerns of possible long-term complications due to patients avoiding urgent emergency care during the pandemic.

Cardiovascular Health Care Implications of the COVID-19 pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has challenged the capacity of health care systems around the world, including substantial disruptions to cardiovascular care across key areas of health care delivery. In this narrative review, we examine the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic for cardiovascular health care, including excess cardiovascular mortality, acute and elective cardiovascular care, and disease prevention. Additionally, we consider the long-term public health consequences of disruptions to cardiovascular care across both primary and secondary care settings. Finally, we review health care inequalities and their driving factors, as highlighted by the pandemic, and consider their importance in the context of cardiovascular health care.

Decrease of cancer diagnosis during COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Many health services, including cancer care, have been affected by the COVID-19 epidemic. This study aimed at providing a systematic review of the impact of the epidemic on cancer diagnostic tests and diagnosis worldwide. In our systematic review and meta-analysis, databases such as Pubmed, Proquest and Scopus were searched comprehensively for articles published between January 1st, 2020 and December 12th, 2021. Observational studies and articles that reported data from single clinics and population registries comparing the number of cancer diagnostic tests and/or diagnosis performed before and during the pandemic, were included. Two pairs of independent reviewers extracted data from the selected studies. The weighted average of the percentage variation was calculated and compared between pandemic and pre-pandemic periods. Stratified analysis was performed by geographic area, time interval and study setting. The review was registered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42022314314). The review comprised 61 articles, whose results referred to the period January-October 2020. We found an overall decrease of - 37.3% for diagnostic tests and - 27.0% for cancer diagnosis during the pandemic. For both outcomes we identified a U-shaped temporal trend, with an almost complete recovery for the number of cancer diagnosis after May 2020. We also analyzed differences by geographic area and screening setting. We provided a summary estimate of the decrease in cancer diagnosis and diagnostic tests, during the first phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. The delay in cancer diagnosis could lead to an increase in the number of avoidable cancer deaths. Further research is needed to assess the impact of the pandemic measures on cancer treatment and mortality.

Indirect impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the incidence of non-COVID-19 infectious diseases: a region-wide, patient-based database study in Japan

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic has forced people to change many behaviours, including physical distancing, hygiene measures and lifestyles. This study aimed to evaluate the indirect impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the incidence of non-COVID-19 infections and medical care costs/visits using health insurance claims.

STUDY DESIGN

This was an observational study using patient-based administrative claims covering approximately 800,000 insured persons and their dependents in the Mie Prefecture in Japan.

METHODS

This study identified non-COVID-19 infectious disease incidences, number of outpatient visits and healthcare costs between 2017 and 2021. Each year was divided into quarters. The adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRRs) during the pandemic (January 2020 to September 2021) and during the prepandemic period (January 2017 to December 2019) were determined using Poisson regression.

RESULTS

The adjusted influenza IRRs from April 2020 were close to zero. The incidence of upper respiratory tract infections and bacterial pneumonia was significantly reduced (IRRs range: 0.39-0.73 and 0.43-0.84, respectively). Gastrointestinal and urinary tract infection incidences decreased by approximately 30% and 10%, respectively. In contrast, sexually transmitted infections (STIs), including syphilis, gonococcal infection and Chlamydia trachomatis infection, did not decrease during the pandemic but increased significantly between April and June 2021 (adjusted IRR, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-1.60). The adjusted IRRs for outpatient visits and healthcare costs were 0.86-0.93 and 0.91-0.97, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to other infections, STIs did not decrease during the COVID-19 pandemic. The IRR of STIs during the pandemic period is an area of public health concern. Appropriate screening and medical consultations are strongly recommended.

Type 2 diabetes

Type 2 diabetes accounts for nearly 90% of the approximately 537 million cases of diabetes worldwide. The number affected is increasing rapidly with alarming trends in children and young adults (up to age 40 years). Early detection and proactive management are crucial for prevention and mitigation of microvascular and macrovascular complications and mortality burden. Access to novel therapies improves person-centred outcomes beyond glycaemic control. Precision medicine, including multiomics and pharmacogenomics, hold promise to enhance understanding of disease heterogeneity, leading to targeted therapies. Technology might improve outcomes, but its potential is yet to be realised. Despite advances, substantial barriers to changing the course of the epidemic remain. This Seminar offers a clinically focused review of the recent developments in type 2 diabetes care including controversies and future directions.

Changing temporal trends in patient volumes in a pediatric emergency department during a COVID-19 pandemic lockdown: A retrospective cohort study

Objective

Emergency department (ED) teams have had to adjust limited staffing resources to meet the fluctuating levels of patient volume and acuity during the COVID-19 pandemic. Historically, Mondays have had the highest reported ED volumes. We are unaware of any studies reporting on the change of this Monday effect during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

This retrospective, observational study of a single pediatric ED compared a pandemic lockdown period (3/23/2020-11/1/2020) with a seasonally comparative period (3/25/2019-11/3/2019). We compared the mean number of patients who arrived on Monday versus any other specific weekday (Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday) and the aggregate of other weekdays (Tuesday to Friday) for both study periods. Secondary analyses investigated overall mean volumes, admission rates, and differences in triage acuity levels.

Results

There were 31,377 and 18,098 patients in the comparative and pandemic periods. The mean number of ED visits on Mondays in the comparative period was significantly more than any other weekday and the aggregate of weekdays (latter p<0.001). In contrast, there were no significant differences in the mean number of ED visits on Mondays in the pandemic period relative to any other weekday and the aggregate of weekdays (all p>0.05). The pandemic period had significantly lower mean volumes, higher admission rates, and more patients with higher acuity levels.

Conclusion

The previously experienced Monday effect of increased relative ED patient volumes was not seen during the pandemic period. This change has operational implications for scheduling ED staffing resources. Larger database studies are needed to determine the generalizability of these findings.