Novel coronavirus: A capsule review for primary care and acute care physicians

Infection prevention and control in Dutch general practices before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and its implications for pandemic preparedness and seasonal respiratory epidemics: a qualitative study on lessons learned

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted a re-evaluation of infection prevention and control (IPC) in general practices, highlighting the need for comprehensive IPC implementation. This study aimed to evaluate healthcare workers' (HCWs) experiences and perspectives regarding IPC in general practices before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, and its implications for post-pandemic IPC implementation.

METHODS

This qualitative study involved semi-structured, in-depth interviews during two time periods: (1) prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (July 2019-February 2020), involving 14 general practitioners (GPs) and medical assistants; and (2) during the COVID-19 pandemic (July 2022-February 2023), including 22 GPs and medical assistants. Data analysis included thematic analysis that addressed multiple system levels.

RESULTS

Findings indicated a shift towards comprehensive IPC implementation and organisation during the pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic period. Since the Omicron variant, some general practices maintained a broad set of IPC measures, while others released most measures. HCWs' future expectations on post-pandemic IPC implementation varied: some anticipated reduced implementation due to the desire to return to the pre-pandemic standard, while others expected IPC to be structurally scaled up during seasonal respiratory epidemics. Main contextual challenges included patient cooperation, staff shortages (due to infection), shortages of IPC materials/equipment, and frequently changing and ambiguous guidelines. Key lessons learned were enhanced preparedness (e.g., personal protective equipment supply), and a new perspective on care organisation (e.g., digital care). Main recommendations reported by HCWs were to strengthen regional collaboration within primary care, and between primary care, public health, and secondary care.

CONCLUSION

HCWs' experiences, perspectives and recommendations provide insights to enhance preparedness for future epidemics and pandemics, and sustain IPC in general practices. For IPC improvement strategies, adopting an integrated system-based approach that encompasses actions across multiple levels and engages multiple stakeholders is recommended.

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.

How did general practices organize care during the COVID-19 pandemic: the protocol of the cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study in 38 countries

BACKGROUND

General practitioners (GPs) play a crucial role in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic as the first point of contact for possibly infected patients and are responsible for short and long-term follow-up care of the majority of COVID-19 patients. Nonetheless, they experience many barriers to fulfilling this role. The PRICOV-19 study investigates how GP practices in 38 countries are organized during the COVID-19 pandemic to guarantee safe, effective, patient-centered, and equitable care. Also, the shift in roles and tasks and the wellbeing of staff members is researched. Finally, PRICOV-19 aims to study the association with practice- and health care system characteristics. It is expected that both characteristics of the GP practice and health care system features are associated with how GP practices can cope with these challenges. This paper describes the protocol of the study.

METHODS

Using a cross-sectional design, data are collected through an online questionnaire sent to GP practices in 37 European countries and Israel. The questionnaire is developed in multiple phases, including a pilot study in Belgium. The final version includes 53 items divided into six sections: patient flow (including appointments, triage, and management for routine care); infection prevention; information processing; communication; collaboration and self-care; and practice and participant characteristics. In the countries where data collection is already finished, between 13 and 636 GP practices per country participated in the study. Questionnaire data are linked with OECD and HSMR data regarding national policy responses to the pandemic and analyzed using multilevel models considering the system- and practice-level.

DISCUSSION

To the best of our knowledge, the PRICOV-19 study is the largest and most comprehensive study that examines how GP practices function during the COVID-19 pandemic. Its results can significantly contribute to better preparedness of primary health care systems across Europe for future major outbreaks of infectious diseases.

Humanitarian Surgical Missions in Times of COVID-19: Recommendations to Safely Return to a Sub-Saharan Africa Low-Resource Setting

Background

Since the declaration of the pandemic, humanitarian medicine has been discontinued. Until now, there have been no general recommendations on how humanitarian surgical missions should be organized.

Methods

Based on our experience in the field of humanitarian surgical missions to Sub-Saharan Africa, a panel of recommendations in times of COVID-19 was developed. The fields under study were as follows: (1) Planning of a multidisciplinary project; (2) Organization of the infrastructure; (3) Screening, management and treatment of SARS-COV-2; (4) Diagnostic tests for SARS-COV-2; (5) Surgical priorization and (6) Context of patients during health-care assistance. We applied a risk bias measurement to obtain a consensus among humanitarian health-care providers with experience in this field.

Results

A total of 94.36% of agreement were reached for the approval of the recommendations. Emergency surgery must be a priority, and elective surgery adapted. For emergency surgery, we established a priority level 1a (< 24 h) and 1b (< 72 h). For an elective procedure, according our American College of Surgeon adaptation score, process with more than 60 points should be reconsidered. Due to the low life expectancy in many African countries, we consider 45–50 years as age of risk. In case of SARS-COV-2 active infection or high clinical suspicion, the screening, management and treatment should be following the international guidelines adapted to duration of the stay, available infrastructure, size of the cooperation team and medical resources.

Conclusions

Humanitarian surgical mission in times of COVID-19 is a challenge that must extrapolate the established recommendations to the local cooperation environment.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at (10.1007/s00268-021-06001-x).

Impact of personal protective equipment on the effectiveness of chest compression - A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of personal protective equipment (PPE) on different aspects of chest compression (CC) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation, we conducted this study.

METHODS

This systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA. We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science from inception to June-6, 2020, limiting to the studies that reported the comparison of the effectiveness of CC in terms of CC rate, CC depth, the proportion of adequate CC rate, the proportion of adequate CC depth or proportion of adequate recoil; in study arms with or without PPE. Risk of bias was assessed by the ROB-2 and ROBINS-I tool. Quantitative data synthesis was done using the generic inverse variance method and the fixed-effects model.

RESULTS

Five simulation-based studies were finally included. A Significant decrease in CC rate (SMD: -0.28, 95%CI: -0.47 to -0.10) and CC depth (SMD: -0.26, 95%CI: -0.44 to -0.07) were observed in the PPE arm as compared to the no-PPE arm. The difference in CC rate was more prominently seen in adult CPR than in paediatric CPR. Without PPE, the proportion of adequate CC rate delivered was 0.74, which reduced significantly to 0.60 after use of PPE (p - 0.035). Similarly, the proportion of adequate CC depth was significantly lesser (p - 0.001) in PPE arm (0.55), as compared to that of the no-PPE arm (0.78).

CONCLUSION

The use of PPE compromises the quality of CC during CPR significantly, and newer ways to deliver chest compression has to be investigated. This study was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020192031).

Lung sonographic findings in COVID-19 patients

Objective

The objective of this study was to describe the lung sonographic findings of COVID-19 patients prospectively and investigate its association with disease severity.

Methods

This study was conducted in an emergency department and included consecutively enrolled laboratory confirmed COVID-19 patients. Lung sonography findings were described in all the included patients and analysed with respect to the clinical severity of the patients.

Results

106 patients were included in the study. Common sonographic findings in COVID-19 patients were pleural line irregularity or shredding (70% of patients), followed by B – profile (59%), pleural line thickening (33%), occasional B – lines (26%), sub-pleural consolidations (35%), deep consolidations (6%), spared areas (13%), confluent B – lines or waterfall sign (14%) and pleural effusion (9%). These findings tended to be present more bilaterally and in lower lung zones. Sonographic characteristics like bilateral lung involvement, B – profile, spared areas and confluent B – lines or waterfall sign were significantly associated (p < 0.01) with clinical severity (more frequent with increasing disease severity).

Conclusion

The lung sonographic findings of COVID-19 were found more bilaterally and in lower lung zones, and specific findings like B – profile, pleural thickening, spared areas and confluent B – lines or waterfall sign were associated with severe COVID-19.