Project description:ObjectiveTo explore the impact of the measures taken to combat COVID-19 on the patterns of acute illness in children presenting to primary and secondary care for North West London.Design/setting/participantsRetrospective analysis of 8 309 358 primary and secondary healthcare episodes of children <16 years registered with a North West London primary care practice between 2015 and 2021.Main outcome measuresNumbers of primary care consultations, emergency department (ED) attendances and emergency admissions during the pandemic were compared with those in the preceding 5 years. Trends were examined by age and for International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems 10th Revision-coded diagnoses of: infectious diseases, and injuries and poisonings for admitted children.ResultsComparing 2020 to the 2015-2019 mean, primary care consultations were 22% lower, ED attendances were 38% lower and admissions 35% lower. Following the first national lockdown in April 2020, primary care consultations were 39% lower compared with the April 2015-2019 mean, ED attendances were 72% lower and unscheduled hospital admissions were 63% lower. Admissions >48 hours were on average 13% lower overall during 2020, and 36% lower during April 2020. The reduction in admissions for infections (61% lower than 2015-2019 mean) between April and August 2020 was greater than for injuries (31% lower).ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic was associated with an overall reduction in childhood illness presentations to health services in North West London, most prominent during periods of national lockdown, and with a greater impact on infections than injuries. These reductions demonstrate the impact on children of measures taken to combat COVID-19 across the health system.
Project description:BackgroundPrior to the COVID-19 pandemic there were many barriers to telemedicine primary care for adults ≥65 years including insurance coverage restrictions and having lower digital access and literacy. With the pandemic, insurance coverage broadened and many older adults utilized telemedicine creating an opportunity to learn from their experiences to inform future policy.MethodsBetween April 2020 and June 2021, we conducted a cross-sectional multimethod study of English-speaking, cognitively-intact, adults ≥65, who had a phone-only and/or video telemedicine visit with their primary care physician within one large Massachusetts health system (10 different practices) since March 2020. The study questionnaire asked participants their overall satisfaction with telemedicine (7-point scale) and to compare telemedicine with in-person care. We used linear regression to examine the association between participants' demographics, Charlson comorbidity score, and survey completion date with their satisfaction score. The questionnaire also included open-ended questions on perceptions of telemedicine; which were analyzed using qualitative methods.ResultsOf 278 eligible patients reached, 208 completed the questionnaire; mean age was 74.4 years (±4.4), 61.5% were female, 91.4% were non-Hispanic White, 64.4% had ≥1 comorbidity, and 47.2% had a phone-only visit. Regardless of their age, participants reported being satisfied with telemedicine; median score was 6.0 on the 7-point scale (25th percentile = 5.0 and 75th percentile = 7.0). Non-Whites satisfaction scores were on average 1 point lower than those of non-Hispanic Whites (p = 0.02). Those with comorbidity reported scores that on average were 0.5 points lower than those without comorbidity (p = 0.07). Overall, 39.5% felt their telemedicine visit was worse than in-person care; 4.9% thought it was better. Participants appreciated telemedicine's convenience but described frustrating technical challenges. While participants preferred in-person care, most wanted telemedicine to remain available.ConclusionsAdults ≥65 reported being satisfied with primary care telemedicine during the pandemic's first 14 months and wanted telemedicine to remain available.
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.
Project description:The pervasive effects of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) have put the world to test. Its effects permeate all facets of life including healthcare services and food supplies. However, most empirical studies failed to investigate its effects on the prices of food and healthcare services, which by all standards, are essential commodities. On this background, this study evaluates the impact of COVID-19 reported cases and lockdown stringency measures on the food and healthcare prices in the six (6) worst-affected countries. For empirical purposes, daily prices of food and healthcare services between 22nd January and 31st December 2020 were regressed against daily cases of COVID-19 and lockdown stringency measures within the dynamic autoregressive distributed lag procedure. Empirical evidences reveal that prices of healthcare and food are cointegrated with COVID-19 cases and lockdown measures in all the selected countries except Italy. Equally, healthcare and food prices reinforced itself in the long-run in the US, the UK and France. Furthermore, COVID-19 cases lead to significant increases in food and healthcare prices in the US, whereas, food and healthcare prices in France and UK declined significantly as COVID-19 cases mount. Conversely, food and healthcare prices declined significantly in the US and soar in France and the UK in reactions to COVID-19 new cases. Likewise, government stringency measures and containment health measures contributed significantly to healthcare and food price hike in the US and France respectively. Meanwhile, healthcare and food prices in the other selected countries remained unaffected even as the pandemic ravages. Following this empirical discoveries, relevant policy guidelines have been communicated.
Project description:BackgroundHow international migrants access and use primary care in England is poorly understood. We aimed to compare primary care consultation rates between international migrants and non-migrants in England before and during the COVID-19 pandemic (2015-2020).MethodsUsing data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) GOLD, we identified migrants using country-of-birth, visa-status or other codes indicating international migration. We linked CPRD to Office for National Statistics deprivation data and ran a controlled interrupted time series (ITS) using negative binomial regression to compare rates before and during the pandemic.FindingsIn 262,644 individuals, pre-pandemic consultation rates per person-year were 4.35 (4.34-4.36) for migrants and 4.60 (4.59-4.60) for non-migrants (RR:0.94 [0.92-0.96]). Between 29 March and 26 December 2020, rates reduced to 3.54 (3.52-3.57) for migrants and 4.2 (4.17-4.23) for non-migrants (RR:0.84 [0.8-0.88]). The first year of the pandemic was associated with a widening of the gap in consultation rates between migrants and non-migrants to 0.89 (95% CI 0.84-0.94) times the ratio before the pandemic. This widening in ratios was greater for children, individuals whose first language was not English, and individuals of White British, White non-British and Black/African/Caribbean/Black British ethnicities. It was also greater in the case of telephone consultations, particularly in London.InterpretationMigrants were less likely to use primary care than non-migrants before the pandemic and the first year of the pandemic exacerbated this difference. As GP practices retain remote and hybrid models of service delivery, they must improve services and ensure primary care is accessible and responsive to migrants' healthcare needs.FundingThis study was funded by the Medical Research Council (MC_PC 19070 and MR/V028375/1) and a Wellcome Clinical Research Career Development Fellowship (206602).
Project description:ObjectiveThe first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic had a major impact on healthcare utilisation. The aim of this retrospective review was to quantify how utilisation of non-COVID care changed during this time so as to gain insight and inform planning of future services during potential second and subsequent waves.Methods and analysisA longitudinal design was used to analyse anonymous private UK health insurer datasets covering the period of January 2018 to August 2020. Taken as a measure of healthcare utilisation in the UK, incidence rates of claims broken down by service area and condition were calculated alongside overall monthly totals and costs. Pre-COVID-19 years were compared with the current year.ResultsHealthcare utilisation during the first wave of COVID-19 decreased by as much as 70% immediately after lockdown measures were implemented. After 2 months, the trend reversed and claims steadily began to increase, but did not reach rates seen from previous years by the end of August 2020. Assessment by service and diagnostic category showed that most areas, especially those highly reliant on in-person treatment, reflected the same pattern (ie, rapid drop followed by a steady recovery). The provision of mental health services differed from this observed trend, where utilisation increased by 20% during the first wave of COVID-19, in comparison to pre-COVID-19 years. The utilisation of maternity services and the treatment of existing cancers also stayed stable, or increased slightly, during this time.ConclusionsHealthcare utilisation in a UK-based privately insured population decreased dramatically during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, being over 70% lower at its height. However, mental health services remained resilient during this time, possibly due to greater virtualisation of diagnostics and care.
Project description:BackgroundOlder people have increasingly complex healthcare needs, often requiring appropriate access to diagnostic imaging, an essential component of their health and disease management planning. Ultrasound is a safe imaging tool used to diagnose several conditions commonly experienced by older people such as deep vein thrombosis.PurposeTo evaluate the utilisation of major ultrasound services by Australians ≥ 65 years old between 2009- and 2019.MethodsThis population-based and yearly cross-sectional study of ultrasound utilisation per 1,000 Australians ≥ 65 years old was conducted using publicly available data sources. Overall, examination site and age- and sex-specific incidence rate (IR) of ultrasound per 1,000 people, adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using negative binomial regression models.ResultsOver the study period, the crude utilisation of ultrasound increased by 83% in older Australians. Most ultrasound examinations were conducted on extremities (39%) and the chest (21%), with 25% of all ultrasounds investigating the vascular system. More men than women use ultrasounds of the chest (184/1,000 vs 268/1,000 people), particularly echocardiograms (177/1,000 vs 261/1,000 people), and abdomen (88/1,000 vs 92/1,000 people), especially in those ≥ 85 years old. Hip and pelvic ultrasound were used more by women than men (212/1,000 vs 182/1,000 people). There were increases in vascular abdominal (IRR:1.07, 95%CI:1.06-1.08) and extremeties (IRR:1.06, 95%CI:1.05-1.07) ultrasounds over the study period, particularly in ≥ 75 years old men.ConclusionsUltrasound is a common and increasingly used diagnostic tool for conditions commonly experienced by older Australians.
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic as a public health issue has spread to the rest of the world. Although the wellbeing and emotional resilience of healthcare professionals are key components of continuing healthcare services during the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare professionals have been observed in this period to experience serious psychological problems and to be at risk in terms of mental health. Therefore, this study aims to probe psychological resilience of healthcare workers. The findings of this study showed that in order to raise psychological resilience of healthcare professionals working during the COVID-19 pandemic their quality of sleep, positive emotions and life satisfaction need to be enhanced. Psychological resilience levels of healthcare workers in their later years were found to be higher. Doctors constitute the group with the lowest levels of psychological resilience among healthcare workers. The current study is considered to have contributed to the literature in this regard. Primary needs such as sleep which are determinants of quality of life, life satisfaction and psychological resilience should be met.