Dataset Information

Public Perspectives on Decisions About Emergency Care Seeking for Care Unrelated to COVID-19 During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Delaying critical care for treatable conditions owing to fear of contracting COVID-19 in the emergency department (ED) is associated with avoidable morbidity and mortality.

Objective

To assess and quantify how people decided whether to present to the ED during the COVID-19 pandemic for care unrelated to COVID-19 using conjoint analysis, a form of trade-off analysis that examines how individuals make complex decisions.

Design, setting, and participants

This cross-sectional survey study was conducted using a nationwide sample from June 1, 2020, during the initial peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Included participants were adults aged 18 years or older in the US who self-reported that they had not tested positive for COVID-19. Data were analyzed from July 2020 through May 2021.

Exposures

Participants completed a self-administered online survey.

Main outcomes and measures

Using a choice-based conjoint analysis survey, the relative importance was assessed for the following attributes for individuals in deciding whether to seek ED care for symptoms consistent with myocardial infarction or appendicitis: reduction in chance of dying because of ED treatment, crowdedness of ED with other patients, and chance of contracting COVID-19 in the ED. We also performed latent class analyses using conjoint data to identify distinct segments of the respondent population with similar choice patterns. Logistic regression was then used to explore whether patient sociodemographics and political affiliations were factors associated with decision-making.

Results

Among 1981 individuals invited to participate, 933 respondents (47.1%) completed the survey; participants' mean (SD) age was 40.1 (13.0) years, and 491 (52.6%) were women. In latent class analyses, 158 individuals (16.9%) with symptoms of myocardial infarction and 238 individuals (25.5%) with symptoms of appendicitis prioritized avoidance of COVID-19 exposure in the ED (ie, chance of contracting COVID-19 in the ED or crowdedness of ED with other patients) over seeking appropriate care for symptoms. Having a usual source of care was a factor associated with lower odds of prioritizing avoidance of COVID-19 exposure (myocardial infarction scenario: adjusted odds ratio, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.32-0.76]; P = .001; appendicitis scenario: adjusted odds ratio, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.40-0.82]; P = .003), but most sociodemographic factors and political affiliations were not factors associated with decision-making.

Conclusions and relevance

This study found that up to one-quarter of individuals were willing to forgo potentially life-saving ED care to avoid exposure to COVID-19. These findings suggest that health care systems and public health organizations should develop effective communications for patients and the community at large that reassure and encourage timely health care for critical needs during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and other scenarios.

SUBMITTER: Gale R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8377572 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBetween March and June 2020, closing dental clinics during the COVID-19 pandemic except for emergency dental care was recommended. It is documented that health-seeking behaviors change during pandemics. The objective of this study was to examine social determinants associated with decisions to seek dental care in Saudi Arabia during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsA total of 4372 participants were invited to this cross-sectional web-based survey distributed from April 21 to June 20, 2020. The survey included a list of emergency, urgent, and routine dental procedures. Participants were asked if they would seek dental care for these conditions during the pandemic, and what pain severity would make them seek dental treatment. Logistic regression models were performed for predicting variables that explain the decision to go or not to go to the dental clinic during the pandemic for each dental condition.ResultsA total of 3443 responded to this survey. The emergency dental situation participants were most willing to go to the dental clinic for was trauma involving facial bones compromising the airway (94.5%). Only 65.8% were willing to seek care for facial cellulitis compromising the airway. On average 35.2% reported seeking teleconsultation as the first step. Eighteen percent of participants were still willing to go to the dental clinic during the pandemic for routine dental procedures. Multiple logistic regression showed that females (Odds Ratio (OR): 1.6, OR 95% CI 1.3, 1.9), people who had never visited a dentist (OR: 1.8, OR 95% CI 1.3, 2.5), and people living in metropolitan regions (OR: 1.8, OR 95%: 1.4, 2.3) had higher odds for not seeking emergency dental care during this pandemic. The pain threshold for seeking dental care during the pandemic was 7 out of 10. Female, those who never visited a dentist, and those from urban regions reported higher pain threshold before seeking dental care (P value < 0.001).ConclusionSocial disparities were found in emergency dental care seeking decision-making in Saudi Arabia during the COVID-19 pandemic. It was alarming that some people were afraid to seek dental care for life-threatening dental emergencies as cellulitis during this pandemic. This reflects the importance of increasing public health awareness and governmental regulations.

Project description:BackgroundPrimary care attachment improves health care access and health outcomes, but many Canadians are unattached, seeking a provider via provincial wait-lists. This Nova Scotia-wide cohort study compares emergency department utilization and hospital admission associated with insufficient primary care management among patients on and off a provincial primary care wait-list, before and during the first waves of the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe linked wait-list and Nova Scotian administrative health data to describe people on and off wait-list, by quarter, between Jan. 1, 2017, and Dec. 24, 2020. We quantified emergency department utilization and ambulatory care sensitive condition (ACSC) hospital admission rates by wait-list status from physician claims and hospital admission data. We compared relative differences during the COVID-19 first and second waves with the previous year.ResultsDuring the study period, 100 867 people in Nova Scotia (10.1% of the provincial population) were on the wait-list. Those on the wait-list had higher emergency department utilization and ACSC hospital admission. Emergency department utilization was higher overall for individuals aged 65 years and older, and females; lowest during the first 2 COVID-19 waves; and differed more by wait-list status for those younger than 65 years. Emergency department contacts and ACSC hospital admissions decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic relative to the previous year, and for emergency department utilization, this difference was more pronounced for those on the wait-list.InterpretationPeople in Nova Scotia seeking primary care attachment via the provincial wait-list use hospital-based services more frequently than those not on the wait-list. Although both groups have had lower utilization during COVID-19, existing challenges to primary care access for those actively seeking a provider were further exacerbated during the initial waves of the pandemic. The degree to which forgone services produces downstream health burden remains in question.

Project description:BackgroundThe emergence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) forced many eye care providers to implement telehealth services while in-person visits were reserved for essential and/or emergency eye care.ObjectiveThis study documents how an optometry group successfully implemented telehealth to care for patients during the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.DesignRetrospective, comparative case series.MethodsRecords were reviewed for patients seen in an academic optometry clinic from 23 March through 7 April 2020, the period of the Massachusetts stay-at-home advisory issued in response to COVID-19. Patients who completed telehealth visits were compared with those who received in-person care. Services delivered by telehealth included a check of symptoms, medication refills, health education, and assurance of future follow up. The study took into account the reason for each visit, as well as the rate of scheduled and completed follow-up appointments. Patient satisfaction with in-person care was evaluated by Press Ganey patient experience surveys.ResultsOut of 855 patients scheduled, 421 patients completed telehealth encounters (49%), and 46 patients completed in-clinic visits (5.4%). A further 272 patients canceled appointments (32%), 123 patients were unable to be contacted (14%), and 8 patients declined care offered by telehealth (0.94%). Most patients who were cared for by telehealth returned to see optometrists (88%). By contrast, most patients who required in-person visits during this period were subsequently seen by ophthalmologists (58%, p < 0.001). Patient satisfaction remained high for in-person visits that took place during the COVID-19-related emergency, with improvements noted in patient satisfaction regarding 'information about delays' (47 % versus 100%, p = 0.007) and 'concern for questions or worries' (76% versus 100%, p = 0.037) compared with the same period 1 year prior.ConclusionOptometrists rapidly embraced telehealth to deliver eye care to their patients during the COVID-19 public health emergency. Most eye issues were able to be addressed through telehealth; urgent eye problems were triaged and referred to the optometry clinic, when appropriate.

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.