Dataset Information

The Impact of Covid-19 on Diabetes Care in Muscat Governorate: A Retrospective Cohort Study in Primary Care

ABSTRACT:

Background

COVID-19 pandemic has led to health service modification and temporary disruption of the routine care provided to patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) in primary care. This was done to minimize outpatient visits, permit physical distancing, and ensure patients’ and healthcare providers safety. There is no evidence that explored or measured the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on diabetes services and patients’ glycemic outcome in Oman.

Aim and Objectives

To explore the accessibility of DM services in primary care after COVID-19 pandemic announcement, and measure patients’ glycemic outcome.

Methods

Before and after, retrospective cohort study using Al-Shifa healthcare database in primary care. One thousand adult patients with diabetes who attended DM clinic before pandemic announcement in 2019 were randomly selected and followed up until end of 2020. Patients aged ≥18 years and had at least 2 visits in 2019 were included. Access to DM services was identified by number of patients received care, frequency of consultations, mode of consultation, and type of intervention given to patients. Patients’ glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and other glycemic parameters after pandemic announcement in 2020 were determined and compared with the same parameters before pandemic in 2019. Association between patients’ HbA1c and mode of consultation was measured using multivariable regression analysis.

Results

A total of 937 patients continued to follow and received DM care after pandemic announcement. Median number of consultations was 2 with interquartile range (IQR): 3-2. 57.4% had face-to-face alone, 32.4% had combined face to face and telephone consultation, and 10% had telephone consultation alone. Mean difference in HbA1c (%) before and after pandemic announcement was 0.2 ± 1.4 (95% CI: 0.1 to 0.3), P = .002. With multivariable linear regression, the mean difference in HbA1c was −0.3 (−2.3 to 1.5), P = .734 for telephone consultation alone, −0.5 (−2.4 to 1.4), P = .613 for face-to-face alone, and −0.5 (−2.4 to 1.3), P = .636 for combined consultations, compared to those who did not receive any formal consultation.

Conclusion

Despite service modification and disruption of comprehensive care in primary care after COVID-19 pandemic announcement, DM services were accessible as majority of patients maintained follow up. There was an overall increase in mean glycated hemoglobin, however, it was a less than 1 unit increase. After adjusting for multivariable, glycated hemoglobin was reduced among those who received consultation including telephone consultation compared to those who did not, however evidence was unconvincing.

SUBMITTER: Al Harthi T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8558604 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSeveral countries reported a substantial reduction in asthma exacerbations associated with COVID-19 pandemic-related restrictions. However, it is not known if these early reported declines were short-term and if these have rebounded to pre-pandemic levels following easing of lockdown restrictions.MethodsWe undertook a retrospective, cohort study of all asthma patients in a national primary care database of almost 10 million patients, Optimum Patient Care Database (OPCRD), identified from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2015, using a previously validated algorithm. We subsequently followed the identified cohort of asthma patients from January 1, 2016, to October 3, 2021, and identified every asthma exacerbation episode with a validated algorithm. To quantify any pandemic-related change in exacerbations, we created a control time-series (mean of 2016-2019) and then compared the change in exacerbation rate in 2020-2021 over quarterly periods when compared with the control period (the pre-pandemic period). We undertook overall and stratified analyses by age group, sex, and English region.FindingsWe identified 100,362 asthma patients (502,669 patient-years) from across England who experienced at least one exacerbation episode (298,390 exacerbation episodes during the entire follow-up). Except for the first quarter of 2020, the exacerbation rates were substantially lower (>25%) during all quarters in 2020-2021 when compared with the rates during 2016-2019 (39.7% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 34.6, 44.9) in quarter-2, 2020; 46.5% (95%CI: 36.7, 56.4) in quarter-3, 2020; 56.3% (95%CI: 48.7, 63.9) in quarter-4, 2020; 63.2% (95%CI: 53.9, 72.5) in quarter-1, 2021; 57.7% (95%CI: 52.9, 62.4) in quarter-2, 2021; 53.3% (95%CI: 43.8, 62.8) in quarter-3, 2021).InterpretationThere was a substantial and persistent reduction in asthma exacerbations across England over the first 18 months after the first lockdown. This is unlikely to be adequately explained by changes in health-seeking behaviour, pandemic-related healthcare service disruption, or any air-quality improvements.FundingAsthma UK, Health Data Research UK (HDR UK), Medical Research Council (MRC), National Institute for Health Research (NIHR).

Project description:BACKGROUND: Although the prevalence of type 2 diabetes in Oman is high and rising, information on how people were self-managing their disease has been lacking. The objective of this study was therefore to assess diabetes self-management and education (DSME) among people living with type 2 diabetes in Oman. METHODS: A questionnaire survey was conducted in public primary health care centres in Muscat. Diabetes self-management and education was assessed by asking how patients recognized and responded to hypo- and hyperglycaemia, and if they had developed strategies to maintain stable blood glucose levels. Patients' demographic information, self-treatment behaviours, awareness of potential long-term complications, and attitudes concerning diabetes management were also recorded. Associations between these factors and diabetes self-management and education were analysed. RESULTS: In total, 309 patients were surveyed. A quarter (26%, n?=?83) were unaware how to recognize hypoglycaemia or respond to it (26%, n?=?81). Around half (49%, n?=?151), could not recognize hyperglycaemia and more than half could not respond to it (60%, n?=?184). Twelve percent (n?=?37) of the patients did not have any strategies to stabilize their blood glucose levels. Patients with formal education generally had more diabetes self-management and education than those without (p<0.001), as had patients with longer durations of diabetes (p<0.01). Self-monitoring of blood glucose was practiced by 38% (n?=?117) of the patients, and insulin was used by 22% (n?=?67), of which about one third independently adjusted dosages. Patients were most often aware of complications concerning loss of vision, renal failure and cardiac problems. Many patients desired further health education. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients displayed dangerous diabetes self-management and education knowledge gaps. The findings suggest a need for improving knowledge transfer to people living with diabetes in the Omani clinical setting.

Project description:BackgroundTo date, research on the indirect impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the health of the population and the health-care system is scarce. We aimed to investigate the indirect effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on general practice health-care usage, and the subsequent diagnoses of common physical and mental health conditions in a deprived UK population.MethodsWe did a retrospective cohort study using routinely collected primary care data that was recorded in the Salford Integrated Record between Jan 1, 2010, and May 31, 2020. We extracted the weekly number of clinical codes entered into patient records overall, and for six high-level categories: symptoms and observations, diagnoses, prescriptions, operations and procedures, laboratory tests, and other diagnostic procedures. Negative binomial regression models were applied to monthly counts of first diagnoses of common conditions (common mental health problems, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and cancer), and corresponding first prescriptions of medications indicative of these conditions. We used these models to predict the expected numbers of first diagnoses and first prescriptions between March 1 and May 31, 2020, which were then compared with the observed numbers for the same time period.FindingsBetween March 1 and May 31, 2020, 1073 first diagnoses of common mental health problems were reported compared with 2147 expected cases (95% CI 1821 to 2489) based on preceding years, representing a 50·0% reduction (95% CI 41·1 to 56·9). Compared with expected numbers, 456 fewer diagnoses of circulatory system diseases (43·3% reduction, 95% CI 29·6 to 53·5), and 135 fewer type 2 diabetes diagnoses (49·0% reduction, 23·8 to 63·1) were observed. The number of first prescriptions of associated medications was also lower than expected for the same time period. However, the gap between observed and expected cancer diagnoses (31 fewer; 16·0% reduction, -18·1 to 36·6) during this time period was not statistically significant.InterpretationIn this deprived urban population, diagnoses of common conditions decreased substantially between March and May 2020, suggesting a large number of patients have undiagnosed conditions. A rebound in future workload could be imminent as COVID-19 restrictions ease and patients with undiagnosed conditions or delayed diagnosis present to primary and secondary health-care services. Such services should prioritise the diagnosis and treatment of these patients to mitigate potential indirect harms to protect public health.FundingNational Institute of Health Research.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Obesity is an epidemic in New York City, the global epicenter of the coronavirus pandemic. Previous studies suggest that obesity is a possible risk factor for adverse outcomes in COVID-19. OBJECTIVE:To elucidate the association between obesity and COVID-19 outcomes. DESIGN:Retrospective cohort study of COVID-19 hospitalized patients tested between March 10 and April 13, 2020. SETTING:SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, a COVID-only hospital in New York. PARTICIPANTS:In total, 684 patients were tested for COVID-19 and 504 were analyzed. Patients were categorized into three groups by BMI: normal (BMI 18.50-24.99), overweight (BMI 25.00-29.99), and obese (BMI???30.00). MEASUREMENTS:Primary outcome was 30-day in-hospital mortality, and secondary outcomes were intubation, acute kidney injury (AKI), acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and acute cardiac injury (ACI). RESULTS:There were 139 patients (27%) with normal BMI, 150 patients who were overweight (30%), and 215 patients with obesity (43%). After controlling for age, gender, diabetes, hypertension, and qSOFA score, there was a significantly increased risk of mortality in the overweight (RR 1.4, 95% CI 1.1-1.9) and obese groups (RR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0-1.7) compared with those with normal BMI. Similarly, there was a significantly increased relative risk for intubation in the overweight (RR 2.0, 95% CI 1.2-3.3) and obese groups (RR 2.4, 95% CI 1.5-4.0) compared with those with normal BMI. Obesity did not affect rates of AKI, ACI, or ARDS. Furthermore, obesity appears to significantly increase the risk of mortality in males (RR 1.4, 95% CI 1.0-2.0, P?=?0.03), but not in females (RR 1.2, 95% CI 0.77-1.9, P?=?0.40). CONCLUSION:This study reveals that patients with overweight and obesity who have COVID-19 are at increased risk for mortality and intubation compared to those with normal BMI. These findings support the hypothesis that obesity is a risk factor for COVID-19 complications and should be a consideration in management of COVID-19.

Project description:ObjectivesTo investigate how the COVID-19 pandemic affected the number of people aged 50+ years presenting to primary care with features that could potentially indicate cancer, and to explore how reporting differed by patient characteristics and in face-to-face vs remote consultations.Design, setting and participantsA retrospective cohort study of general practitioner (GP), nurse and paramedic primary care consultations in 21 practices in South-West England covering 123 947 patients. The models compared potential cancer indicators reported in April-July 2019 with April-July 2020.Main outcome measuresPotential indicators of cancer were identified using code lists for symptoms, signs, test results and diagnoses listed in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence suspected cancer referral guidance (NG12).ResultsDuring April-July 2019, 17% of registered patients aged 50+ years reported a potential cancer indicator in a consultation with a GP or nurse. During April-July 2020, this reduced to 11% (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.64, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.67, p<0.001). Reductions in potential cancer indicators were stable across age group, sex, ethnicity, index of multiple deprivation quintile and shielding status, but less marked in patients with mental health conditions than without (IRR 0.75, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.79, interaction p<0.001). Proportions of GP consultations with potential indicators of cancer reduced between 2019 and 2020 for face-to-face consultations (IRR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.92, p<0.001) and increased for remote consultations (IRR 1.17, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.29, p=0.001), although it remained lower in remote consulting than face-to-face in April-July 2020. This difference was greater for nurse/paramedic consultations (face-to-face: IRR 0.61, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.83, p=0.002; remote: IRR 1.60, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.333, p=0.014).ConclusionThe number of patients consulting with presentations that could potentially indicate cancer reduced during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients should be encouraged to continue contacting primary care for persistent signs and symptoms, and GPs and nurses should be encouraged to probe patients for further information during remote consulting, in the absence of non-verbal cues.

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted health-care systems, leading to concerns about its subsequent impact on non-COVID disease conditions. The diagnosis and management of cancer is time sensitive and is likely to be substantially affected by these disruptions. We aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care in India.MethodsWe did an ambidirectional cohort study at 41 cancer centres across India that were members of the National Cancer Grid of India to compare provision of oncology services between March 1 and May 31, 2020, with the same time period in 2019. We collected data on new patient registrations, number of patients visiting outpatient clinics, hospital admissions, day care admissions for chemotherapy, minor and major surgeries, patients accessing radiotherapy, diagnostic tests done (pathology reports, CT scans, MRI scans), and palliative care referrals. We also obtained estimates from participating centres on cancer screening, research, and educational activities (teaching of postgraduate students and trainees). We calculated proportional reductions in the provision of oncology services in 2020, compared with 2019.FindingsBetween March 1 and May 31, 2020, the number of new patients registered decreased from 112 270 to 51 760 (54% reduction), patients who had follow-up visits decreased from 634 745 to 340 984 (46% reduction), hospital admissions decreased from 88 801 to 56 885 (36% reduction), outpatient chemotherapy decreased from 173634 to 109 107 (37% reduction), the number of major surgeries decreased from 17 120 to 8677 (49% reduction), minor surgeries from 18 004 to 8630 (52% reduction), patients accessing radiotherapy from 51 142 to 39 365 (23% reduction), pathological diagnostic tests from 398 373 to 246 616 (38% reduction), number of radiological diagnostic tests from 93 449 to 53 560 (43% reduction), and palliative care referrals from 19 474 to 13 890 (29% reduction). These reductions were even more marked between April and May, 2020. Cancer screening was stopped completely or was functioning at less than 25% of usual capacity at more than 70% of centres during these months. Reductions in the provision of oncology services were higher for centres in tier 1 cities (larger cities) than tier 2 and 3 cities (smaller cities).InterpretationThe COVID-19 pandemic has had considerable impact on the delivery of oncology services in India. The long-term impact of cessation of cancer screening and delayed hospital visits on cancer stage migration and outcomes are likely to be substantial.FundingNone.TranslationFor the Hindi translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.