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)

Moving forward after the COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons learned in primary care from the multi-country PRICOV-19 study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has accentuated the indispensable role of primary care. Objectives: Recognising this, the PRICOV-19 study investigated how 5,489 GP practices across 38 countries (Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Kosovo*, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Republic of Moldova, Netherlands, North Macedonia, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, and United Kingdom) adapted their care delivery during the pandemic.

METHODS

Based on a series of discussions on the results of the PRICOV-19 study group, eight recommendations to enhance primary care's preparedness for future crises were formulated and endorsed by EQuiP and WONCA Europe.

RESULTS

The recommendations underscore the importance of recognising and sustaining the substantial strides made in patient safety within GP practices during the pandemic in current daily practices; acknowledging and supporting the pivotal role of GP practices in addressing health inequalities during crises; adopting interprofessional care models to enhance practices' resilience and adaptability to change; supporting training practices; creating healthy working environments; investing in infrastructure that supports adequate and safe care; and increasing funding for research on patient safety and primary care quality to inform evidence-based health policies and fostering international knowledge exchange among healthcare professionals and policymakers.

CONCLUSION

Policymakers, primary care associations, and the broader healthcare system are urged to collaboratively take responsibility and increase support for GP practices to enhance their resilience, adaptability, and capacity to deliver safe and equitable healthcare during future crises.

Primary care team reorganisation after the SARS-COV-2 pandemic. Differences between Catalonia and Spain in the PRICOV study

BACKGROUND

Spanish primary care services are managed differently by each region's authorities. Catalonia started its services provision and design nearly two decades before other Spanish regions and developed nurses' roles and task shifting in primary care.

PURPOSE

This work identifies differences in the Europe PRICOV-19 study answers between Catalonia and those submitted from the rest of Spain regarding how primary care teams (PCT) were organised during the SARS-CoV-2-2019 pandemic, how tasks and roles changed, and the pandemic's impact on the care providers. Initially, we computed bivariate relationships and tested using contingency association and unpaired Wilcoxon.

ANALYSIS

Still, we estimated multiple linear regressions controlling with a list of individual and GP practice characteristics and clustering standard errors at the kind of location.

RESULTS

Main statistically significant differences were found in the adaptation to the new tasks, the ability to solve most health problems, and specific accessibilities to primary care. In Catalonia, satisfaction with the adaptation to the new tasks was higher (41.9% satisfied and 30.2% neutral) than in the rest of Spain (50.9% dissatisfaction). Also, GPs in Catalonia reported to a greater extent than the rest of Spain that chronic patients were listed for extensive follow-up. These differences may be related to Catalonia's strategy for empowering primary care professionals other than family doctors.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering future pandemics, demographic ageing, and professional shortages, we point out the potential benefits of these changes in PCT organisations and the need to review the centres's design.

GP access for inclusion health groups: perspectives and recommendations

BACKGROUND

General practice has seen the widespread adoption of remote consulting and triage systems. There is a lack of evidence exploring how inclusion health populations have been impacted by this transformation.

AIM

This study aimed to explore the post-pandemic GP access for inclusion health populations, through the lens of those with lived experience, and identify practical recommendations for improving access for this population.

DESIGN & SETTING

A mixed-methods study exploring the direct experience of people from inclusion health groups trying to access GP care in 13 practices in east London.

METHOD

A mystery shopper exercise involving 39 in-person practice visits and 13 phone calls were undertaken. The findings were reflected on by a multidisciplinary stakeholder group, which identified recommendations for improvements.

RESULTS

Only 31% of the mystery shopper visits (n = 8) resulted in registration and the offer of an appointment to see a GP for an urgent problem. None of the mystery shoppers was able to book an appointment over the phone but n = 10/13 felt that they would be able to register and make an appointment if they followed the receptionist's instructions. Most mystery shoppers felt respected, listened to, and understood the information provided to them. Just under half of the practices (46%, n = 6) received positive comments on how accessible and supportive their spaces felt. Practice- and system-level recommendations were identified by the stakeholder group.

CONCLUSION

Ongoing GP access issues persist for inclusion health populations. We identified practice- and system-level recommendations for improving access for this vulnerable population.

Recruitment, data collection, participation rate, and representativeness of the international cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study across 38 countries

BACKGROUND

Recruitment for surveys has been a great challenge, especially in general practice.

METHODS

Here, we reported recruitment strategies, data collection, participation rates (PR) and representativeness of the PRICOV-19 study, an international comparative, cross-sectional, online survey among general practices (GP practices) in 37 European countries and Israel.

RESULTS

Nine (24%) countries reported a published invitation; 19 (50%) had direct contact with all GPs/GP practices; 19 (50%) contacted a sample of GPs /GP practices; and 7 (18%) used another invitation strategy. The median participation rate was 22% (IQR = 10%, 28%). Multiple invitation strategies (P-value 0.93) and multiple strategies to increase PR (P-value 0.64) were not correlated with the PR. GP practices in (semi-) rural areas, GP practices serving more than 10,000 patients, and group practices were over-represented (P-value < 0.001). There was no significant correlation between the PR and strength of the primary care (PC) system [Spearman's r 0.13, 95% CI (-0.24, 0.46); P-value 0.49]; the COVID-19 morbidity [Spearman's r 0.19, 95% CI (-0.14, 0.49); P-value 0.24], or COVID-19 mortality [Spearman's r 0.19, 95% CI (-0.02, 0.58); P-value 0.06] during the three months before country-specific study commencement.

CONCLUSION

Our main contribution here was to describe the survey recruitment and representativeness of PRICOV-19, an important and novel study.

Quality and safety actions in primary care practices in COVID-19 pandemic: the PRICOV-19 study in Spain

BACKGROUND

Primary Health Care (PHC) has been key element in detection, monitoring and treatment of COVID-19 cases in Spain. We describe how PHC practices (PCPs) organized healthcare to guarantee quality and safety and, if there were differences among the 17 Spanish regions according to the COVID-19 prevalence.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study through the PRICOV-19 European Online Survey in PCPs in Spain. The questionnaire included structure and process items per PCP. Data collection was due from January to May 2021. A descriptive and comparative analysis and a logistic regression model were performed to identify differences among regions by COVID-19 prevalence (low < 5% or high ≥5%).

RESULTS

Two hundred sixty-six PCPs answered. 83.8% of PCPs were in high prevalence regions. Over 70% PCPs were multi-professional teams. PCPs attended mainly elderly (60.9%) and chronic patients (53.0%). Regarding structure indicators, no differences by prevalence detected. In 77.1% of PCPs administrative staff were more involved in providing recommendations. Only 53% of PCPs had a phone protocol although 73% of administrative staff participated in phone triage. High prevalence regions offered remote assessment (20.4% vs 2.3%, p 0.004) and online platforms to download administrative documents more frequently than low prevalence (30% vs 4.7%, p < 0.001). More backup staff members were hired by health authorities in high prevalence regions, especially nurses (63.9% vs 37.8%, p < 0.001. OR:4.20 (1.01-8.71)). 63.5% of PCPs provided proactive care for chronic patients. 41.0% of PCPs recognized that patients with serious conditions did not know to get an appointment. Urgent conditions suffered delayed care in 79.1% of PCPs in low prevalence compared to 65.9% in high prevalence regions (p 0.240). A 68% of PCPs agreed on having inadequate support from the government to provide proper functioning. 61% of high prevalence PCPs and 69.5% of low ones (p: 0.036) perceived as positive the role of governmental guidelines for management of COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

Spanish PCPs shared a basic standardized PCPs' structure and common clinical procedures due to the centralization of public health authority in the pandemic. Therefore, no relevant differences in safety and quality of care between regions with high and low prevalence were detected. Nurses and administrative staff were hired efficiently in response to the pandemic. Delay in care happened in patients with serious conditions and little follow-up for mental health and intimate partner violence affected patients was identified. Nevertheless, proactive care was offered for chronic patients in most of the PCPs.

Strategies that facilitate the delivery of exceptionally good patient care in general practice: a qualitative study with patients and primary care professionals

BACKGROUND

In recent years, proactive strengths-based approaches to improving quality of care have been advocated. The positive deviance approach seeks to identify and learn from those who perform exceptionally well. Central to this approach is the identification of the specific strategies, behaviours, tools and contextual strategies used by those positive deviants to perform exceptionally well. This study aimed to: identify and collate the specific strategies, behaviours, processes and tools used to support the delivery of exceptionally good care in general practice; and to abstract the identified strategies into an existing framework pertaining to excellence in general practice; the Identifying and Disseminating the Exceptional to Achieve Learning (IDEAL) framework.

METHODS

This study comprised a secondary analysis of data collected during semi-structured interviews with 33 purposively sampled patients, general practitioners, practice nurses, and practice managers. Discussions explored the key factors and strategies that support the delivery of exceptional care across five levels of the primary care system; the patient, provider, team, practice, and external environment. For analysis, a summative content analysis approach was undertaken whereby data were inductively analysed and summated to identify the key strategies used to achieve the delivery of exceptionally good general practice care, which were subsequently abstracted as a new level of the IDEAL framework.

RESULTS

In total, 222 individual factors contributing to exceptional care delivery were collated and abstracted into the framework. These included specific behaviours (e.g., patients providing useful feedback and personal history to the provider), structures (e.g., using technology effectively to support care delivery (e.g., electronic referrals & prescriptions)), processes (e.g., being proactive in managing patient flow and investigating consistently delayed wait times), and contextual factors (e.g., valuing and respecting contributions of every team member).

CONCLUSION

The addition of concrete and contextual strategies to the IDEAL framework has enhanced its practicality and usefulness for supporting improvement in general practices. Now, a multi-level systems approach is needed to embed these strategies and create an environment where excellence is supported. The refined framework should be developed into a learning tool to support teams in general practice to measure, reflect and improve care within their practice.

Characteristics of primary care practices associated with patient education during COVID-19: results of the cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study in 38 countries

BACKGROUND

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the World Health Organization established a number of key recommendations such as educational activities especially within primary care practices (PCPs) which are a key component of this strategy. This paper aims to examine the educational activities of PCPs during COVID-19 pandemic and to identify the factors associated with these practices across 38 countries.

METHODS

A "Patient Education (PE)" score was created based on responses to six items from the self-reported questionnaire among PCPs (n = 3638) compiled by the PRICOV-19 study. Statistical analyses were performed on 3638 cases, with PCPs with missing PE score values were excluded.

RESULTS

The PE score features a mean of 2.55 (SD = 0.68) and a median of 2.50 (2.16 - 3.00), with a maximum of 4.00, and varies quite widely between countries. Among all PCPs characteristics, these factors significantly increase the PE score: the payment system type (with a capitation payment system or another system compared to the fee for service), the perception of average PCP with patients with chronic conditions and the perception of adequate governmental support.

CONCLUSION

The model presented in this article is still incomplete and requires further investigation to identify other configuration elements favorable to educational activities. However, the results already highlight certain levers that will enable the development of this educational approach appropriate to primary care.

General practitioners' well-being in Belgium: results from the cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study

BACKGROUND

The mental health and well-being of GPs is a critical issue as they play a vital role in providing healthcare services to individuals and communities. Research has shown that GPs often face high levels of stress, burnout, and mental health problems due to their demanding work environment. During the COVID-19 pandemic, GPs faced additional challenges which further impacted their mental health and well-being. This study aims to investigate the impact of systemic work-related stressors on the level of well-being of GPs in Belgium during the pandemic, with a particular emphasis on identifying regional variations between Flanders, Wallonia, and Brussels-Capital.

METHODS

Data were collected with a self-reported online questionnaire from 479 GPs Belgian practices between December 2020 and August 2021 as part of the international PRICOV-19 study that explored the organization of general practices during COVID-19 in 38 countries to guarantee safe, effective, patient-centered, and equitable care. Well-being was evaluated by the Mayo Clinic's expanded 9-item well-being index.

RESULTS

The findings of this study reveal notable regional discrepancies in the degree of well-being experienced by Belgian GPs, with the Walloon region displaying the lowest level of well-being (37%) in a population highly susceptible to professional distress (57%). Among the key stressors contributing to such distress, financial difficulties among patients (p < 0.011), the fee-for-service payment system (p = 0.013), a lack of work-related purpose (p = 0.047), and inadequate work-life balance (p < 0.001) were identified as significant factors. When examining the influence of regional disparities, it was found that the sole significant interaction between work-related stressors and region regarding the probability of experiencing distress was related to the possibility of workload sharing among practice personnel.

CONCLUSION

The findings from this study underscore the imperative for more comprehensive research aimed at scrutinizing the differences in well-being across the three regions in Belgium and identifying the systemic factors that influence the practice environment, as opposed to exclusively concentrating on enhancing individual resilience.

Primary care gatekeeping during the COVID-19 pandemic: a survey of 1234 Norwegian regular GPs

BACKGROUND

In the Nordic healthcare systems, GPs regulate access to secondary health services as gatekeepers. Limited knowledge exists about the gatekeeper role of GPs during public health crises seen from the perspective of GPs.

AIM

To document GPs' gatekeeper role and organisational changes during the initial COVID-19 lockdown in Norway.

DESIGN & SETTING

A cross-sectional online survey was addressed to all regular Norwegian GPs (n = 4858) during pandemic lockdown in spring 2020.

METHOD

Each GP documented how patients with potential COVID-19 disease were triaged and handled during a full regular workday. The survey also covered workload, organisational changes, and views on advice given by the authorities.

RESULTS

A total of 1234 (25.4%) of Norway's GPs participated. Together, they documented nearly 18 000 consultations, of which 65% were performed digitally (video, text, and telephone). Suspected COVID-19 symptoms were reported in 11% of the consultations. Nearly all these patients were managed in primary care, either in regular GP offices (55.7%) or GP-run municipal respiratory clinics (40.7%), while 3.7% (n = 73) were admitted to hospitals. The GPs proactively contacted an average of 0.8 at-risk patients per day. While 84% were satisfied with the information provided by the medical authorities, only 20% were able to reorganise their practice in accordance with national recommendations.

CONCLUSION

During the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic in Norway, the vast majority of patients with COVID-19-suspected symptoms were handled in primary care. This is likely to have protected secondary health services from potentially detrimental exposure to contagion and breakdown of capacity limits.

Quality of care in Belgian general practices during the COVID-19 pandemic: results of the cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic immensely impacted care provision, including quality of care in general practice. This paper aimed: (1) to assess how Belgian general practices acted upon the six dimensions of quality of care during COVID-19; (2) to study differences between the three Belgian regions; and (3) to benchmark the performance of the Belgian practices against the performance in other European countries.

METHODS

The data collected from 479 Belgian practices during 2020-2021 using an online survey as part of the international cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study were analyzed.  Hereby, descriptive statistics, chi-squared tests, and binary logistic regression analyses were performed. Thirty-four survey questions related to the six dimensions of quality of care were selected as outcome variables. The adjusted regression models included four practice characteristics as covariates: practice type, being a teaching practice for GP trainees, multidisciplinarity of the team, and payment system.

RESULTS

Belgian practices made important organizational changes to deliver high-quality care during COVID-19. Most practices (n = 259; 56.1%) actively reached out to vulnerable patients. Limitations to the practice building or infrastructure threatened high-quality care in 266 practices (55.5%). Infection prevention measures could not always be implemented during COVID-19, such as using a cleaning protocol (n = 265; 57.2%) and providing a separate doctor bag for infection-related home visits (n = 130; 27.9%). Three hundred and sixty practices (82.0%) reported at least one safety incident related to a delayed care process in patients with an urgent condition. The adjusted regression analysis showed limited significant differences between the Belgian regions regarding the quality of care delivered. Belgian practices demonstrated varied performance compared to other European countries. For example, they excelled in always checking the feasibility of isolation at home but reported more patient safety incidents related to timely care than at least three-quarters of the other European countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Future studies using different design methods are crucial to investigate which country and practice characteristics are associated with delivering high-quality care.

Behavioural determinants shaping infection prevention and control behaviour among healthcare workers in Dutch general practices: a qualitative study reflecting on pre-, during and post-COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Since the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, awareness of infection prevention and control (IPC) has increased in primary care settings. This study aimed to examine behavioural determinants shaping IPC behaviour pre-, during, and post-pandemic among healthcare workers (HCWs) in general practices, to inform optimised IPC in primary care.

METHODS

For this qualitative study, semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted during two study periods: (1) pre-COVID-19 pandemic: July 2019-February 2020, with 14 general practitioners (GPs) and medical assistants, and (2) during the COVID-19 pandemic: July 2022-February 2023, with 22 GPs and medical assistants. The design was informed by behaviour change theories. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Main themes were: (1) risk perception and IPC awareness, (2) attitudes towards IPC and professional responsibility, (3) decision-making process and risk considerations for IPC adherence, (4) social norm and social influence in GP practice team, and (5) environmental context and resource availability in GP practice. During the pandemic, risk perception and awareness of the importance of IPC increased compared to the pre-pandemic period. A consistent belief emerged that IPC is part of professional responsibility, while needing to be balanced with other aspects of patient care. Decision-making is dependent on the individual GP and mainly influenced by risk assessments and sustainability considerations. The social context in the practice team can reinforce IPC behaviours. GP practice building and layout, and limited IPC resource and material availability were reported as main barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

The theory-informed insights of this study can be used for targeted interventions to optimise IPC behaviour in general practices. Adopting multifaceted strategies to target the various determinants is recommended to sustain IPC, by implementing continuous education using tailored communication, integrating IPC in work routines and organisational workflows, refining existing IPC protocols by incorporating decision-making tools for HCWs, fostering a culture of IPC through knowledge-sharing and teamwork, and addressing GP practice physical environment and IPC resource barriers.

Influence of practice location on prescribing, diabetes care, and colorectal cancer screening among Czech general practitioners during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVES

The provision of primary health care was not interrupted during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Czechia, although the capacity and resources of providers changed. We examined how the pandemic affected individual general practices throughout 2017-2021, focusing on differences between urban and rural practices.

METHODS

We analysed data from the largest health insurance company in Czechia, which provides care to 4.5 million people (60% of the population). We evaluated the prescription volume, diabetes care procedures, and faecal immunochemical test (FIT) in preventive care and new pandemic-related procedures (remote consultations, testing, and vaccinations). For the spatial distribution of practices, we adapted the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development typology.

RESULTS

We observed minimal declines in 2020 in the rate of prescribing (-1.0%) and diabetes care (-5.1%), with a rapid resumption in 2021, but a substantial decline in FIT (-17.8% in 2020) with slow resumption. Remote consultations were used by 94% of all practices regardless of location, with testing and vaccinations more commonly performed by rural general practitioners (GPs).

CONCLUSIONS

Primary care in Czechia rose to the challenge of the COVID-19 pandemic, as shown by the finding that the volume of healthcare services provided through primary care did not decrease across most of the monitored parameters. This study also confirmed that rural GPs provide more care in-house, both in terms of prescribing and procedures performed in their practices. Future studies will need to focus on preventive care, which the pandemic has dampened in GP practices in Czechia.

The Predominance of the Health-Promoting Patterns of Work Behavior and Experience in General Practice Teams-Results of the IMPROVEjob Study

This study aims to identify the distribution of the "Work-related behavior and experience patterns" (Arbeitsbezogenes Verhaltens-und Erlebnismuster, AVEM) in general practitioners and their teams by using baseline data of the IMPROVEjob study. Members of 60 general practices with 84 physicians in a leadership position, 28 employed physicians, and 254 practice assistants participated in a survey in 2019 and 2020. In this analysis, we focused on AVEM variables. Age, practice years, work experience, and working time were used as control variables in the Spearman Rho correlations and analysis of variance. The majority of the participants (72.1%) revealed a health-promoting pattern (G or S). Three of eleven AVEM dimensions were above the norm for the professional group "employed physicians". The AVEM dimensions "striving for perfection" (p < 0.001), "experience of success at work" (p < 0.001), "satisfaction with life" (p = 0.003), and "experience of social support" (p = 0.019) differed significantly between the groups' practice owners and practice assistants, with the practice owners achieving the higher values, except for experience of social support. Practice affiliation had no effect on almost all AVEM dimensions. We found a high prevalence of AVEM health-promoting patterns in our sample. Nearly half of the participants in all professional groups showed an unambitious pattern (S). Adapted interventions for the represented AVEM patterns are possible and should be utilized for maintaining mental health among general practice teams.

Opportunities for healthcare digitalization in Europe: Comparative analysis of inequalities in access to medical services

Digitalization of healthcare systems is a great opportunity to address inequalities in access to healthcare in the European Union. There is an urgent need to build on what we learned from the COVID-19 pandemic, where digital health technologies were integrated swiftly to limit challenges in healthcare delivery. We created a database for the 27 European Union countries from the European Health Interview Survey (EHIS), the Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI), and other Eurostat databases. We performed k-means cluster analysis to group EU countries along two dimensions: inequalities in access to medical services and level of digitalization. We identified five distinct clusters: two clusters with high, two clusters with moderate, and one cluster with low unmet need for healthcare. Regarding digitalization, only one cluster comprising the Nordic countries, Spain and Cyprus exhibit high digital readiness. A cluster comprising the most developed countries in Western Europe represents moderate levels of both unmet need for healthcare and digitalization. For most EU countries, there is still a need to build digital infrastructure for the healthcare industry, which in the long term may increase the number of digital solutions used by both patients and healthcare professionals. Policy makers across the EU need to consider investing in initiatives that would support digital health solutions as an effective means of healthcare provision and healthcare management.

Triage of patients and remote consultations in primary care facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic in France (PRICOV-19 study)

Introduction

PRICOV-19 is a European cross-sectional study based on an online questionnaire, describing the impact of the pandemic on primary care structures (PCS). In France, PCS are solo practices (SP), single or multi-professional group practices (GP), coordinated practice structures (CPS): health houses and health centers. Triage, whether it is digital (TD), by telephone (TT) or at the reception (TR), is essential to reduce the risk of infection, and is part of recommended organizational practices.

Purpose of research

Based on French data from the PRICOV-19 study, the objective is to describe the frequency and factors associated with triage in PCSs during the COVID 19 pandemic.

Results

1100 structures responded to the survey. The TD was implemented in 64% of PCSs (53.3% of SPs, 64.9% of GPs, 73.2% of CPSs). The TT was implemented in 76% of structures (72.7% of SPs, 75.4% of GPs and 81% of CPSs). Finally, TR was implemented in 52% of structures (37.7% of SPs, 52% of GPs and 67% of CPSs). The other positively associated factors are the urban territory and the lower workload for the TD, and the presence of a receptionist for the TR.

Conclusions

Triage practices seem to be clearly associated with the organization and working conditions in the PCSs, and first and foremost with the type of structure.

Changes in work tasks and organization of general practice in Norway during the COVID-19 pandemic: results from a comparative international study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic led to huge and rapid changes in general practice in Norway as in the rest of Europe. This paper aims to explore to what extent the COVID-19 pandemic changed the work tasks and organization of Norwegian general practice.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

We analysed data from the Norwegian part of the international, cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study, collecting data from general practice via an online self-reported questionnaire. We included 130 Norwegian general practices, representing an estimated 520 Norwegian general practitioners (GPs). All Norwegian GPs were invited to participate. In the analyses, we focused on items related to the use of alternatives to face-to-face consultations, changes in the workload, tasks and delegated responsibilities of both the GPs and other personnel in the GP offices, adaptations in routines related to hygiene measures, triage of patients, and how the official rules and recommendations affected the practices.

RESULTS

There was a large and significant increase in the use of all forms of alternative consultation forms (digital text-based, video- and telephone consultations). The use of several different infection prevention measures were significantly increased, and the provision of hand sanitizer to patients increased from 29.6% pre-pandemic to 95.1% since the pandemic. More than half of the GPs (59.5%) reported that their responsibilities in the practice had increased, and 41% were happy with the task shift. 27% felt that they received adequate support from the government; however, 20% reported that guidelines from the government posed a threat to the well-being of the practice staff. We found no associations with the rurality of the practice location or size of the municipalities.

CONCLUSION

Norwegian GPs adapted well to the need for increased use of alternatives to face-to-face consultations, and reported a high acceptance of their increased responsibilities. However, only one in four received adequate support from the government, which is an important learning point for similar situations in the future.

"The measures taken by the government overburdened the daily practice" - insights of the PRICOV-19 study on German general practitioners in times of COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The international study PRICOV-19 aims to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the organisation of primary health care. The German part focuses on German general practitioners during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper addresses the following research questions: (1) How were changes in tasks on primary care and patient treatment perceived by GPs?, (2) What was the role of GPs during the pandemic, and how was their wellbeing?, (3) How did GPs perceive health policy measures?, and, (4) What influenced the attitudes of GPs on health policy measures?

METHODS

This study pursues a multi-country cross-sectional design. Data collection took place throughout Germany from 01.02. to 28.02.2021 with a quantitative online questionnaire consisting of 53 items. The questionnaire was analysed through descriptive and inferential analyses using correlation and multiple regression models.

RESULTS

The response rate was 20.4% (n = 349). The respondents were mainly GPs (59.6%) in single practices (62.5%) with a mean work experience of 15 to 20 years. GPs experienced a change in their work and practice organisation (80.3%). They felt a high responsibility (70.6%) and found their work has become more meaningful to them (76%). They also saw a lack of political support (75.2%) and that the measures taken by the government overburdened the daily practice (66.4%). Not many GPs were at risk of being distressed (53.4%) but rated the health policies rather negatively (60%). The multiple regression showed, the more GPs were exposed to risk of distress, the worse they assessed the government's measures.

CONCLUSION

GPs perceived their work as relevant and felt confident they could fulfil their tasks, but noticed that health policy initially hardly supported the outpatient sector. Health policies should increase their competence in relation to primary care, ensure its needs and consider an active inclusion of GPs in preparedness plans.

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.

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.

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.

COVID-19 Continues to Burden General Practitioners: Impact on Workload, Provision of Care, and Intention to Leave

General practitioners (GPs), already in a profession with a high workload, have been at the frontline of providing COVID-19-related healthcare in addition to routine care. Our study examined the impact of pandemic-related consultations and changes in practice organization on GPs' current workload and provision of healthcare in summer 2021 (May 2021-July 2021) and early 2022 (January 2022-February 2022). In total, 143 German GPs participated in an online survey in the summer of 2021. Of these, 51 GPs participated in the follow-up survey in 2022. Most GPs perceived an increase in consultation frequency, consultation times, and workload since the pandemic outbreak. Increased consultation times were related to the reduced provision of medical care to other patients with chronic diseases. More SARS-CoV-2 vaccination consultations were associated with reduced home visits, acute consultation times, and cancer screenings. A quarter of GPs considered leaving their job. Pandemic-related bureaucracy, restricted access to therapy and rehabilitation services specialized on COVID-19, unreliable vaccine deliveries, mandatory telematics-infrastructure implementation, and frequent changes in official regulations were the main reasons reported for dissatisfaction. Our results provide insights into how the pandemic continues to burden GPs' work routines and how better working conditions in times of high demand could be achieved in future pandemics.

French General Practitioners' Adaptations for Patients with Suspected COVID-19 in May 2020

In France, towards the end of the first lockdown, COVID-19 management was largely transferred from hospitals to primary care. Primary care actors adapted their practices to ensure patients' access to care, while limiting contamination. In this study, we aimed to identify patterns of adaptations implemented by French general practitioners (GPs) in May 2020 for outpatients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19, and factors associated with these adaptions. A French survey concerning care organization adaptations, and individual, organizational, and territorial characteristics, was sent to GPs. Data were analyzed by multiple correspondence analysis followed by agglomerative hierarchical clustering to identify GPs' adaptation clusters. A multinomial logistic regression model estimated the associations between clusters and individual, organizational, and territorial factors. Finally, 3068 surveys were analyzed (5.8% of French GPs). Four GPs' adaptation clusters were identified: autonomous medical reorganization (64.2% of responders), interprofessional reorganization (15.9%), use of hospital (5.1%), and collaboration with COVID-19 outpatient centers (14.8%). Age, practice type and size, and territorial features were significantly associated with adaptation clusters. Our results suggest that healthcare systems should consider organizational features of primary care to effectively deal with future challenges, including healthcare crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, but also those linked to epidemiologic and societal changes.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Primary Care: A Scoping Review

The COVID-19 pandemic had a severe impact on various aspects of everyday life, including healthcare provision. The aim of the scoping review was to collate, summarize, and discuss this literature, in light of the impact COVID-19 had on Primary care. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) four-stage process framework for reporting was followed. A total of 31 studies were included in this review. Based upon our review we found COVID-19 pandemic on Primary Care, has made significant effects on 1) service redesign, 2) long-term illness care provision, 3) healthcare staff well-being and 4) the post-pandemic future of Primary Care. The COVID-19 outbreak has demonstrated, how a pandemic can drastically change the process of healthcare provision within the community, as evidenced by the change in consultation styles with patients, the impact on the physical and mental wellbeing of health workers, a shift from isolated practice to teamwork, as well as the ability of healthcare workers to seek prompt help with their health. Studies have demonstrated progress in knowledge and experience gained by healthcare workers when tackling COVID-19, and how these can be implemented in possible future pandemics affecting Primary Care, however, further research is required within this sphere.