The impact of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic on outpatient epilepsy care: An analysis of physician practices in Germany.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To gain insight into epilepsy care during coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, we analyzed prescription data of a large cohort of persons with epilepsy (PWE) during lockdown in Germany.Methods
Information was obtained from the Disease Analyzer database, which collects anonymous demographic and medical data from practice computer systems of general practitioners (GP) and neurologists (NL) throughout Germany. We retrospectively compared prescription data for anti-seizure medication (ASM) and physicians' notes of "known" and "new" PWE from January 2020 until May 2020 with the corresponding months in the three preceding years 2017-2019. Adherence was estimated by calculating the proportion of patients with follow-up prescriptions within 90 days after initial prescriptions in January or February. We additionally analyzed hospital referrals of PWE. The significance level was set to 0.01 to adjust for multiple comparisons.Results
A total of 52,844 PWE were included. Anti-seizure medication prescriptions for known PWE increased in March 2020 (GP + 36%, NL + 29%; P < 0.01). By contrast, a decrease in prescriptions to known and new PWE was observed in April and significantly in May 2020 ranging from -16% to -29% (P < 0.01). The proportion of PWE receiving follow-up prescriptions was slightly higher in 2020 (73.5%) than in 2017-2019 (70.7%, P = 0.001). General practitioners and NL referred fewer PWE to hospitals in March 2020 (GP: -30%, P < 0.01; NL: -12%), April 2020 (GP: -29%, P < 0.01; NL: -37%), and May 2020 (GP: -24%, P < 0.01; NL: -16%).Conclusion
Adherence of known PWE to ASM treatment appeared to remain stable during lockdown in Germany. However, this study revealed findings which point to reduced care for newly diagnosed PWE as well as fewer hospital admissions. These elements may warrant consideration during future lockdown situations.
SUBMITTER: Mueller TM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7895474 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:To understand and analyse the global impact of COVID-19 on outpatient services, inpatient care, elective surgery, and perioperative colorectal cancer care, a DElayed COloRectal cancer surgery (DECOR-19) survey was conducted in collaboration with numerous international colorectal societies with the objective of obtaining several learning points from the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on our colorectal cancer patients which will assist us in the ongoing management of our colorectal cancer patients and to provide us safe oncological pathways for future outbreaks.
| 2346925 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has challenged health care systems worldwide. In Germany, patients in a palliative care setting have the opportunity to receive treatment by a specialised mobile outpatient palliative care team (OPC). The given retrospective single centre analysis describes the use of OPC structures for terminally ill COVID-19 patients during the height of the pandemic in Germany and aims to characterise this exceptional OPC patient collective.MethodsFirst, death certificates were analysed in order to collect data about the place of death of all deceased COVID-19 patients (n = 471) within our local governance district. Second, we investigated whether advance care planning structures were established in local nursing homes (n = 30) during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Third, we examined patient characteristics of COVID-19 negative (n = 1579) and COVID-19 positive (n = 28) patients treated by our tertiary care centre guided OPC service.ResultsThe analysis of death certificates in our local district revealed that only 2.1% of all deceased COVID-19 patients had succumbed at their home address (n = 10/471). In contrast, 34.0% of COVID-19 patients died in nursing homes (n = 160/471), whereas 63.5% died in an inpatient hospital setting (n = 299/471). A large proportion of these hospitalised patients died on non-intensive care unit wards (38.8%). Approximately 33.0% of surveyed nursing homes had a palliative care council service and 40.0% of them offered advance care planning (ACP) structures for their nursing home residents. In our two OPC collectives we observed significant differences concerning clinical characteristics such as the Index of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG] (p = 0.014), oncologic comorbidity (p = 0.004), as well as referrer and primary patient location (p = 0.001, p = 0.033).ConclusionsMost COVID-19 patients in our governance district died in an inpatient setting. However, the highest number of COVID-19 patients in our governance district who died in an outpatient setting passed away in nursing homes where palliative care structures should be further expanded. COVID-19 patients who died under the care of our OPC service had considerably fewer oncologic comorbidities. Finally, to relieve conventional health care structures, we propose the expansion of established OPC structures for treating terminally ill COVID-19 patients.
| S-EPMC9371950 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about the COVID-19 pandemic impact on the provision of diagnostic imaging and physician visits at cancer diagnosis.MethodsWe used administrative databases from Ontario, Canada, to identify MRI/CT/ultrasound scans and in-person/virtual physician visits conducted with cancer patients within 91 days around the date of diagnosis in 2016-2020. In separate segmented regression procedures, we assessed the trends in weekly volume of these services per thousand cancer patients in prepandemic (June 26, 2016 to March 14, 2020), the change in mean volume at the start of the pandemic, and the additional change in weekly volume during the pandemic (March 15, 2020, to September 26, 2020).ResultsTotally, 403,561 cancer patients were included. On March 15, 2020 (COVID-19 arrived), mean scan volume decreased by 12.3% (95% CI: 6.4%-17.9%) where ultrasound decreased the most by 31.8% (95% CI: 23.9%-37.0%). Afterward, the volume of all scans increased further by 1.6% per week (95% CI: 1.3%-2.0%), where ultrasound increased the fastest by 2.4% (95% CI: 1.8%-2.9%). Mean in-person visits dropped by 47.4% when COVID-19 started (95% CI: 41.6%-52.6%) while virtual visits rose by 55.15-fold (95% CI: 4927%-6173%). In the pandemic (until September 26, 2020), in-person visits increased each week by 2.6% (95% CI: 2.0%-3.2%), but no change was observed for virtual visits (p -value = 0.10).ConclusionsProvision of diagnostic imaging and virtual visits at cancer diagnosis has been increasing since the start of COVID-19 and has exceeded prepandemic utilization levels. Future work should monitor the impact of these shifts on quality of delivered care.
| S-EPMC10028129 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected the care of all patients around the world. The International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) COVID-19 and Telemedicine Task Forces examined, through surveys to people with epilepsy (PWE), caregivers, and health care professionals, how the pandemic has affected the well-being, care, and services for PWE. The ILAE included a link on their website whereby PWE and/or their caregivers could fill out a survey (in 11 languages) about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, including access to health services and impact on mental health, including the 6-item Kessler Psychological Distress Scale. An anonymous link was also provided whereby health care providers could report cases of new-onset seizures or an exacerbation of seizures in the context of COVID-19. Finally, a separate questionnaire aimed at exploring the utilization of telehealth by health care professionals since the pandemic began was available on the ILAE website and also disseminated to its members. Seventeen case reports were received; data were limited and therefore no firm conclusions could be drawn. Of 590 respondents to the well-being survey (422 PWE, 166 caregivers), 22.8% PWE and 27.5% caregivers reported an increase in seizure frequency, with difficulty in accessing medication and health care professionals reported as barriers to care. Of all respondents, 57.1% PWE and 21.5% caregivers had severe psychological distress (k score >13), which was significantly higher among PWE than caregivers (p<0.01). An increase in telemedicine use during the COVID-19 pandemic was reported by health care professionals, with 40% of consultations conducted by this method. Although 74.9% of health care providers thought that this impacted positively, barriers to care were also identified. As we move forward, there is a need to ensure ongoing support and care for PWE to prevent a parallel pandemic of unmet health care needs.
| S-EPMC8652685 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo quantitatively assess the early impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on in-person outpatient care utilisation worldwide, as well as across categories of services, types of care and medical specialties.DesignRapid review.MethodA search of MEDLINE and Embase was conducted to identify studies published from 1 January 2020 to 12 February 2021, which quantitatively reported the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the amount of outpatient care services delivered (in-person visits, diagnostic/screening procedures and treatments). There was no restriction on the type of medical care (emergency/primary/specialty care) or target population (adult/paediatric). All articles presenting primary data from studies reporting on outpatient care utilisation were included. Studies describing conditions requiring hospitalisation or limited to telehealth services were excluded.ResultsA total of 517 articles reporting 1011 outpatient care utilisation measures in 49 countries worldwide were eligible for inclusion. Of those, 93% focused on the first semester of 2020 (January to June). The reported results showed an almost universal decline in in-person outpatient care utilisation, with a 56% overall median relative decrease. Heterogeneity across countries was high, with median decreases ranging from 10% to 91%. Diagnostic and screening procedures (-63%), as well as in-person visits (-56%), were more affected than treatments (-36%). Emergency care showed a smaller relative decline (-49%) than primary (-60%) and specialty care (-58%).ConclusionsThe provision of in-person outpatient care services has been strongly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, but heterogeneously across countries. The long-term population health consequences of the disruption of outpatient care service delivery remain currently unknown and need to be studied.Prospero registration numberCRD42021237366.
| S-EPMC8895419 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Outpatient care patterns have changed markedly during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this population-based retrospective cohort study, we compared the frequency of outpatient care (whether in-person or virtual) and continuity of care for all community-dwelling adults in Alberta between March 1, 2019 and February 29, 2020 (pre-pandemic) versus March 1, 2020 to February 28, 2021 (pandemic). We calculated provider continuity using Breslau's Usual Provider Continuity (UPC) for patients with at least 2 outpatient encounters. In 2019-20, 594,350 (98.4%) of 603,877 community-dwelling adults with ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSC) had [Formula: see text] 1 outpatient visit (median 8 visits, mean UPC score 0.61, SD 0.23), compared to 566,569 (98.6%) of 574,613 (median 8 visits, mean UPC score 0.67, SD 0.23) during the first year of the pandemic. Similar patterns were seen for adults without ACSC: 2,207,710 (93.9%) of 2,350,147 had [Formula: see text] 1 outpatient visit (median 3 visits, mean UPC score 0.61, SD 0.24) pre-pandemic compared to 2,113,239 (93.5%, median 4 visits, mean UPC 0.67, SD 0.24) in the first year of the pandemic. Thus, the COVID-19 pandemic did not impact frequency of follow-up while continuity of care improved both for patients with or without ACSC in Alberta, Canada.
| S-EPMC10514193 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn order to contain the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, Germany has implemented drastic restrictions on public or social life, while health institutions are invoked to postpone elective procedures. Although urologists are less involved in the direct treatment of COVID-19 patients, the current situation strongly affects the urological work routine.ObjectiveTo analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on various aspects of work and personal life among urologists in Germany.Design, setting, and participantsA total of 589 urologists in Germany participated in an online survey between March 27 and April 11, 2020.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisParticipants were stratified into subgroups according to professional characteristics.Results and limitationsMost urologists rated Germany as "well prepared" and the increasing restrictions of social life as "very positive." Routine operation was more restricted in hospitals than in the outpatient sector (p = 0.046). Moreover, urologists from the outpatient sector felt significantly less prepared for the COVID-19 pandemic (p = 0.001), reported a higher shortage of protective medical equipment (p < 0.001), and described a tendency toward a higher level of threat (p = 0.054). Although restrictions regarding telemedicine approaches were reported by 60% of participants, the outpatient sector used telehealth more frequently than hospitals (25.5% vs 17.0%, p < 0.001). Limitations include the national design and the restricted survey period.ConclusionsThis survey systematically evaluates the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on personal and professional aspects of German urologists. We identified several issues, such as a higher shortage of medical protective equipment in the outpatient sector that could trigger specific measures to further improve the quality of urological care in Germany.Patient summaryWe evaluated a potential impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on professional and personal aspects of the urologists in Germany. Our results suggest that the outpatient sector should receive specific attention as, for example, shortage of protective equipment was more common.
| S-EPMC7834409 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDuring the early phase of the Covid-19 pandemic, reductions of hospital admissions with a focus on emergencies have been observed for several medical and surgical conditions, while trend data during later stages of the pandemic are scarce. Consequently, this study aims to provide up-to-date hospitalization trends for several conditions including cardiovascular, psychiatry, oncology and surgery cases in both the in- and outpatient setting.Methods and findingsUsing claims data of 86 Helios hospitals in Germany, consecutive cases with an in- or outpatient hospital admission between March 13, 2020 (the begin of the "protection" stage of the German pandemic plan) and December 10, 2020 (end of study period) were analyzed and compared to a corresponding period covering the same weeks in 2019. Cause-specific hospitalizations were defined based on the primary discharge diagnosis according to International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10) or German procedure classification codes for cardiovascular, oncology, psychiatry and surgery cases. Cumulative hospitalization deficit was computed as the difference between the expected and observed cumulative admission number for every week in the study period, expressed as a percentage of the cumulative expected number. The expected admission number was defined as the weekly average during the control period. A total of 1,493,915 hospital admissions (723,364 during the study and 770,551 during the control period) were included. At the end of the study period, total cumulative hospitalization deficit was -10% [95% confidence interval -10; -10] for cardiovascular and -9% [-10; -9] for surgical cases, higher than -4% [-4; -3] in psychiatry and 4% [4; 4] in oncology cases. The utilization of inpatient care and subsequent hospitalization deficit was similar in trend with some variation in magnitude between cardiovascular (-12% [-13; -12]), psychiatry (-18% [-19; -17]), oncology (-7% [-8; -7]) and surgery cases (-11% [-11; -11]). Similarly, cardiovascular and surgical outpatient cases had a deficit of -5% [-6; -5] and -3% [-4; -3], respectively. This was in contrast to psychiatry (2% [1; 2]) and oncology cases (21% [20; 21]) that had a surplus in the outpatient sector. While in-hospital mortality, was higher during the Covid-19 pandemic in cardiovascular (3.9 vs. 3.5%, OR 1.10 [95% CI 1.06-1.15], P<0.01) and in oncology cases (4.5 vs. 4.3%, OR 1.06 [95% CI 1.01-1.11], P<0.01), it was similar in surgical (0.9 vs. 0.8%, OR 1.06 [95% CI 1.00-1.13], P = 0.07) and in psychiatry cases (0.4 vs. 0.5%, OR 1.01 [95% CI 0.78-1.31], P<0.95).ConclusionsThere have been varying changes in care pathways and in-hospital mortality in different disciplines during the Covid-19 pandemic in Germany. Despite all the inherent and well-known limitations of claims data use, this data may be used for health care surveillance as the pandemic continues worldwide. While this study provides an up-to-date analysis of utilization of hospital care in the largest German hospital network, short- and long-term consequences are unknown and deserve further studies.
| S-EPMC7993839 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Care4PD study examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the care situation of people (PwP) with Parkinson's disease in Germany. A comprehensive, nationwide, anonymous questionnaire for PwP was distributed by the members' journal of the German Parkinson's Disease Association and in several PD specialized in- and outpatient institutions. PwP subjectively evaluated their general care situation and individual impairments during the pandemic. We analyzed 1269 eligible out of 1437 returned questionnaires (88.3%) and compared PwP with (p-LTC) and without (np-LTC) professional long-term care. Both groups rated the general pandemic-related consequences as being rather mild to moderate (e.g., worsening of symptom or concerns). However, familial/social contact restrictions were indicated as most compromising, whereas access to outpatient professional health care providers was less affected. PwP with professional LTC reported more impairment than those without. COVID-19 vaccination rates and acceptance were generally high (p-LTC: 64.3%, np-LTC: 52.3%) at the time of the study, but realization of sanitary measures-especially wearing masks as a patient during care sessions-still needs to be improved. Technical options for telemedicine were principally available but only rarely used. Altogether, during the COVID-19 pandemic, PwP in Germany seemed to have a relatively stable health care access, at least in outpatient settings, while mainly social isolation compromised them. The p-LTC group was more impaired in everyday live compared with the np-LTC group.
| S-EPMC8773478 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on epilepsy care across Japan was investigated by conducting a multicenter retrospective cohort study.MethodsThis study included monthly data on the frequency of (1) visits by outpatients with epilepsy, (2) outpatient electroencephalography (EEG) studies, (3) telemedicine for epilepsy, (4) admissions for epilepsy, (5) EEG monitoring, and (6) epilepsy surgery in epilepsy centers and clinics across Japan between January 2019 and December 2020. We defined the primary outcome as epilepsy-center-specific monthly data divided by the 12-month average in 2019 for each facility. We determined whether the COVID-19 pandemic-related factors (such as year [2019 or 2020], COVID-19 cases in each prefecture in the previous month, and the state of emergency) were independently associated with these outcomes.ResultsIn 2020, the frequency of outpatient EEG studies (-10.7%, p<0.001) and cases with telemedicine (+2,608%, p=0.031) were affected. The number of COVID-19 cases was an independent associated factor for epilepsy admission (-3.75*10-3 % per case, p<0.001) and EEG monitoring (-3.81*10-3 % per case, p = 0.004). Further, the state of emergency was an independent factor associated with outpatient with epilepsy (-11.9%, p<0.001), outpatient EEG (-32.3%, p<0.001), telemedicine for epilepsy (+12,915%, p<0.001), epilepsy admissions (-35.3%; p<0.001), EEG monitoring (-24.7%: p<0.001), and epilepsy surgery (-50.3%, p<0.001).SignificanceWe demonstrated the significant impact that the COVID-19 pandemic had on epilepsy care. These results support those of previous studies and clarify the effect size of each pandemic-related factor on epilepsy care.
| S-EPMC9348370 | biostudies-literature