Dataset Information

Describing the indirect impact of COVID-19 on healthcare utilisation using syndromic surveillance systems

ABSTRACT:

Background

Since the end of January 2020, the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has been responsible for a global health crisis. In England a number of non-pharmaceutical interventions have been introduced throughout the pandemic, including guidelines on healthcare attendance (for example, promoting remote consultations), increased handwashing and social distancing. These interventions are likely to have impacted the incidence of non–COVID-19 conditions as well as healthcare seeking behaviour. Syndromic Surveillance Systems offer the ability to monitor trends in healthcare usage over time.

Methods

This study describes the indirect impact of COVID-19 on healthcare utilisation using a range of syndromic indicators including eye conditions, mumps, fractures, herpes zoster and cardiac conditions. Data from the syndromic surveillance systems monitored by Public Health England were used to describe the number of contacts with NHS 111, general practitioner (GP) In Hours (GPIH) and Out-of-Hours (GPOOH), Ambulance and Emergency Department (ED) services over comparable periods before and during the pandemic.

Results

The peak pandemic period in 2020 (weeks 13–20), compared to the same period in 2019, displayed on average a 12% increase in NHS 111 calls, an 11% decrease in GPOOH consultations, and a 49% decrease in ED attendances. In the GP In Hours system, conjunctivitis consultations decreased by 64% and mumps consultations by 31%. There was a 49% reduction in attendance at EDs for fractures, and there was no longer any weekend increase in ED fracture attendances, with similar attendance patterns observed across each day of the week. There was a decrease in the number of ED attendances with diagnoses of myocardial ischaemia.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic drastically impacted healthcare utilisation for non-COVID-19 conditions, due to a combination of a probable decrease in incidence of certain conditions and changes in healthcare seeking behaviour. Syndromic surveillance has a valuable role in describing and understanding these trends.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-021-12117-5.

SUBMITTER: Ferraro C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8571013 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the impact of COVID-19 on pregnancy-related healthcare utilisation and differences across social groups.DesignNationwide longitudinal prospective registry-based study.SettingNorway.ParticipantsFemale residents aged 15-50 years (n=1 244 560).Main outcome measuresPregnancy-related inpatient, outpatient and primary care healthcare utilisation before the COVID-19 pandemic (prepandemic: 1 January to 11 March 2020), during the initial lockdown (first wave: 12 March to 3 April 2020), during the summer months of low restrictions (summer period: 4 April to 31 August 2020) and during the second wave to the end of the year (second wave: 1 September to 31 December 2020). Rates were compared with the same time periods in 2019.ResultsThere were 130 924 inpatient specialist care admissions, 266 015 outpatient specialist care consultations and 2 309 047 primary care consultations with pregnancy-related diagnostic codes during 2019 and 2020. After adjusting for time trends and cofactors, inpatient admissions were reduced by 9% (adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR)=0.91, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.95), outpatient consultations by 17% (aIRR=0.83, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.86) and primary care consultations by 10% (aIRR=0.90, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.91) during the first wave. Inpatient care remained 3%-4% below prepandemic levels throughout 2020. Reductions according to education, income and immigrant background were also observed. Notably, women born in Asia, Africa or Latin America had a greater reduction in inpatient (aIRR=0.87, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.97) and outpatient (aIRR 0.90, 95% CI 0.86 to 0.95) care during the first wave, compared with Norwegian-born women. We also observed that women with low education had a greater reduction in inpatient care during summer period (aIRR=0.88, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.92), compared with women with high educational attainment.ConclusionFollowing the introduction of COVID-19 mitigation measures in Norway in March 2020, there were substantial reductions in pregnancy-related healthcare utilisation, especially during the initial lockdown and among women with an immigrant background.

Project description:BackgroundSyndromic surveillance provides public health intelligence to aid in early warning and monitoring of public health impacts (e.g. seasonal influenza), or reassurance when an impact has not occurred. Using information collected during routine patient care, syndromic surveillance can be based on signs/symptoms/preliminary diagnoses. This approach makes syndromic surveillance much timelier than surveillance requiring laboratory confirmed diagnoses. The provision of healthcare services and patient access to them varies globally. However, emergency departments (EDs) exist worldwide, providing unscheduled urgent care to people in acute need. This provision of care makes ED syndromic surveillance (EDSyS) a potentially valuable tool for public health surveillance internationally. The objective of this study was to identify and describe the key characteristics of EDSyS systems that have been established and used globally.MethodsWe systematically reviewed studies published in peer review journals and presented at International Society of Infectious Disease Surveillance conferences (up to and including 2017) to identify EDSyS systems which have been created and used for public health purposes. Search criteria developed to identify "emergency department" and "syndromic surveillance" were applied to NICE healthcare, Global Health and Scopus databases.ResultsIn total, 559 studies were identified as eligible for inclusion in the review, comprising 136 journal articles and 423 conference abstracts/papers. From these studies we identified 115 EDSyS systems in 15 different countries/territories across North America, Europe, Asia and Australasia. Systems ranged from local surveillance based on a single ED, to comprehensive national systems. National EDSyS systems were identified in 8 countries/territories: 2 reported inclusion of ≥85% of ED visits nationally (France and Taiwan).ConclusionsEDSyS provides a valuable tool for the identification and monitoring of trends in severe illness. Technological advances, particularly in the emergency care patient record, have enabled the evolution of EDSyS over time. EDSyS reporting has become closer to 'real-time', with automated, secure electronic extraction and analysis possible on a daily, or more frequent basis. The dissemination of methods employed and evidence of successful application to public health practice should be encouraged to support learning from best practice, enabling future improvement, harmonisation and collaboration between systems in future.Prospero numberCRD42017069150 .