Globally, primary care changed dramatically as a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We aimed to understand the degree to which office and virtual primary care changed, and ...for which patients and physicians, during the initial months of the pandemic in Ontario, Canada.
This population-based study compared comprehensive, linked primary care physician billing data from Jan. 1 to July 28, 2020, with the same period in 2019. We identified Ontario residents with at least 1 office or virtual (telephone or video) visit during the study period. We compared trends in total physician visits, office visits and virtual visits before COVID-19 with trends after pandemic-related public health measures changed the delivery of care, according to various patient and physician characteristics. We used interrupted time series analysis to compare trends in the early and later halves of the COVID-19 period.
Compared with 2019, total primary care visits between March and July 2020 decreased by 28.0%, from 7.66 to 5.51 per 1000 people/day. The smallest declines were among patients with the highest expected health care use (8.3%), those who could not be attributed to a primary care physician (10.2%), and older adults (19.1%). In contrast, total visits in rural areas increased by 6.4%. Office visits declined by 79.1% and virtual care increased 56-fold, comprising 71.1% of primary care physician visits. The lowest uptake of virtual care was among children (57.6%), rural residents (60.6%) and physicians with panels of ≥ 2500 patients (66.0%).
Primary care in Ontario saw large shifts from office to virtual care over the first 4 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Total visits declined least among those with higher health care needs. The determinants and consequences of these major shifts in care require further study.
To reduce contagion of COVID-19, in March 2020 UK general practices implemented predominantly remote consulting via telephone, video, or online consultation platforms.
To investigate the rapid ...implementation of remote consulting and explore impact over the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Mixed-methods study in 21 general practices in Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire.
Longitudinal observational quantitative analysis compared volume and type of consultation in April to July 2020 with April to July 2019. Negative binomial models were used to identify if changes differed among different groups of patients. Qualitative data from 87 longitudinal interviews with practice staff in four rounds investigated practices' experience of the move to remote consulting, challenges faced, and solutions. A thematic analysis utilised Normalisation Process Theory.
There was universal consensus that remote consulting was necessary. This drove a rapid change to 90% remote GP consulting (46% for nurses) by April 2020. Consultation rates reduced in April to July 2020 compared to 2019; GPs and nurses maintained a focus on older patients, shielding patients, and patients with poor mental health. Telephone consulting was sufficient for many patient problems, video consulting was used more rarely, and was less essential as lockdown eased. SMS-messaging increased more than three-fold. GPs were concerned about increased clinical risk and some had difficulties setting thresholds for seeing patients face-to-face as lockdown eased.
The shift to remote consulting was successful and a focus maintained on vulnerable patients. It was driven by the imperative to reduce contagion and may have risks; post-pandemic, the model will need adjustment.
Providing increases in Medicaid reimbursements for primary care, a key provision of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), raised Medicaid payments to Medicare levels in 2013 and 2014 for selected services ...and providers. The federally funded increase in reimbursements was aimed at expanding access to primary care for the growing number of Medicaid enrollees. The reimbursement increase expired at the end of 2014 in most states before policymakers had much empirical evidence about its effects.
We measured the availability of and waiting times for appointments in 10 states during two periods: from November 2012 through March 2013 and from May 2014 through July 2014. Trained field staff posed as either Medicaid enrollees or privately insured enrollees seeking new-patient primary care appointments. We estimated state-level changes over time in a stable cohort of primary care practices that participated in Medicaid to assess whether willingness to provide appointments for new Medicaid enrollees was related to the size of increases in Medicaid reimbursements in each state.
The availability of primary care appointments in the Medicaid group increased by 7.7 percentage points, from 58.7% to 66.4%, between the two time periods. The states with the largest increases in availability tended to be those with the largest increases in reimbursements, with an estimated increase of 1.25 percentage points in availability per 10% increase in Medicaid reimbursements (P=0.03). No such association was observed in the private-insurance group. During the same periods, waiting times to a scheduled new-patient appointment remained stable over time in the two study groups.
Our study provides early evidence that increased Medicaid reimbursement to primary care providers, as mandated in the ACA, was associated with improved appointment availability for Medicaid enrollees among participating providers without generating longer waiting times. (Funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.).
Abstract Purpose This study was a systematic review with a quantitative synthesis of the literature examining the overall effect size of practice facilitation and possible moderating factors. The ...primary outcome was the change in evidence-based practice behavior calculated as a standardized mean difference. Methods In this systematic review, we searched 4 electronic databases and the reference lists of published literature reviews to find practice facilitation studies that identified evidence-based guideline implementation within primary care practices as the outcome. We included randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies published from 1966 to December 2010 in English language only peer-reviewed journals. Reviews of each study were conducted and assessed for quality; data were abstracted, and standardized mean difference estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Publication bias, influence, subgroup, and meta-regression analyses were also conducted. Results Twenty-three studies contributed to the analysis for a total of 1,398 participating practices: 697 practice facilitation intervention and 701 control group practices. The degree of variability between studies was consistent with what would be expected to occur by chance alone (I2 = 20%). An overall effect size of 0.56 (95% CI, 0.43-0.68) favored practice facilitation (z = 8.76; P <.001), and publication bias was evident. Primary care practices are 2.76 (95% CI, 2.18-3.43) times more likely to adopt evidence-based guidelines through practice facilitation. Meta-regression analysis indicated that tailoring (P = .05), the intensity of the intervention ( P = .03), and the number of intervention practices per facilitator (P = .004) modified evidence-based guideline adoption. Conclusions Practice facilitation has a moderately robust effect on evidence-based guideline adoption within primary care. Implementation fidelity factors, such as tailoring, the number of practices per facilitator, and the intensity of the intervention, have important resource implications.
Current and expected problems such as ageing, increased prevalence of chronic conditions and multi-morbidity, increased emphasis on healthy lifestyle and prevention, and substitution for care from ...hospitals by care provided in the community encourage countries worldwide to develop new models of primary care delivery. Owing to the fact that many tasks do not necessarily require the knowledge and skills of a doctor, interest in using nurses to expand the capacity of the primary care workforce is increasing. Substitution of nurses for doctors is one strategy used to improve access, efficiency, and quality of care. This is the first update of the Cochrane review published in 2005.
Our aim was to investigate the impact of nurses working as substitutes for primary care doctors on:• patient outcomes;• processes of care; and• utilisation, including volume and cost.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), part of the Cochrane Library (www.cochranelibrary.com), as well as MEDLINE, Ovid, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and EbscoHost (searched 20.01.2015). We searched for grey literature in the Grey Literature Report and OpenGrey (21.02.2017), and we searched the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov trial registries (21.02.2017). We did a cited reference search for relevant studies (searched 27.01 2015) and checked reference lists of all included studies. We reran slightly revised strategies, limited to publication years between 2015 and 2017, for CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and CINAHL, in March 2017, and we have added one trial to 'Studies awaiting classification'.
Randomised trials evaluating the outcomes of nurses working as substitutes for doctors. The review is limited to primary healthcare services that provide first contact and ongoing care for patients with all types of health problems, excluding mental health problems. Studies which evaluated nurses supplementing the work of primary care doctors were excluded.
Two review authors independently carried out data extraction and assessment of risk of bias of included studies. When feasible, we combined study results and determined an overall estimate of the effect. We evaluated other outcomes by completing a structured synthesis.
For this review, we identified 18 randomised trials evaluating the impact of nurses working as substitutes for doctors. One study was conducted in a middle-income country, and all other studies in high-income countries. The nursing level was often unclear or varied between and even within studies. The studies looked at nurses involved in first contact care (including urgent care), ongoing care for physical complaints, and follow-up of patients with a particular chronic conditions such as diabetes. In many of the studies, nurses could get additional support or advice from a doctor. Nurse-doctor substitution for preventive services and health education in primary care has been less well studied.Study findings suggest that care delivered by nurses, compared to care delivered by doctors, probably generates similar or better health outcomes for a broad range of patient conditions (low- or moderate-certainty evidence):• Nurse-led primary care may lead to slightly fewer deaths among certain groups of patients, compared to doctor-led care. However, the results vary and it is possible that nurse-led primary care makes little or no difference to the number of deaths (low-certainty evidence).• Blood pressure outcomes are probably slightly improved in nurse-led primary care. Other clinical or health status outcomes are probably similar (moderate-certainty evidence).• Patient satisfaction is probably slightly higher in nurse-led primary care (moderate-certainty evidence). Quality of life may be slightly higher (low-certainty evidence).We are uncertain of the effects of nurse-led care on process of care because the certainty of this evidence was assessed as very low.The effect of nurse-led care on utilisation of care is mixed and depends on the type of outcome. Consultations are probably longer in nurse-led primary care (moderate-certainty evidence), and numbers of attended return visits are slightly higher for nurses than for doctors (high-certainty evidence). We found little or no difference between nurses and doctors in the number of prescriptions and attendance at accident and emergency units (high-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in the number of tests and investigations, hospital referrals and hospital admissions between nurses and doctors (low-certainty evidence).We are uncertain of the effects of nurse-led care on the costs of care because the certainty of this evidence was assessed as very low.
This review shows that for some ongoing and urgent physical complaints and for chronic conditions, trained nurses, such as nurse practitioners, practice nurses, and registered nurses, probably provide equal or possibly even better quality of care compared to primary care doctors, and probably achieve equal or better health outcomes for patients. Nurses probably achieve higher levels of patient satisfaction, compared to primary care doctors. Furthermore, consultation length is probably longer when nurses deliver care and the frequency of attended return visits is probably slightly higher for nurses, compared to doctors. Other utilisation outcomes are probably the same. The effects of nurse-led care on process of care and the costs of care are uncertain, and we also cannot ascertain what level of nursing education leads to the best outcomes when nurses are substituted for doctors.
Nearly all European countries have been affected by the economic crisis that began in 2007, but the consequences have been among the worst in Spain. We investigated the associations of the recession ...on the frequency of mood, anxiety, somatoform, alcohol-related and eating disorders among those visiting Spanish primary care settings.
Primary care physicians selected randomized samples of patients attending primary care centres representing Spain's consulting populations. A total of 7940 patients in 2006-07 and 5876 in 2010-11 were administered the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders (PRIME-MD) instrument to diagnose mental disorders. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to quantify overall changes in the frequency of mental disorders, adjusting for potential socio-demographic differences in consulting populations unrelated to economic factors.
Compared with the pre-crisis period of 2006, the 2010 survey revealed substantial and significant increases in the proportion of patients with mood (19.4% in major depression), anxiety (8.4% in generalized anxiety disorder), somatoform (7.3%) and alcohol-related disorders (4.6% in alcohol dependence), all significant at P < 0.001, but not in eating disorders (0.15%, P = 0.172). Independent of observed risks of unemployment odds ratio (OR) = 1.72, P < 0.001, we observed a significantly elevated risk of major depression associated with mortgage repayment difficulties (OR = 2.12, P < 0.001) and evictions (OR = 2.95, P < 0.001). About one-third of the overall risk in the consulting population's attendance with mental health disorders could be attributed to the combined risks of household unemployment and mortgage payment difficulties.
Recession has significantly increased the frequency of mental health disorders and alcohol abuse among primary care attendees in Spain, particularly among families experiencing unemployment and mortgage payment difficulties.
Even though there is general agreement that primary care is the linchpin of effective health care delivery, to date no efforts have been made to systematically review the scientific evidence ...supporting this supposition. The aim of this study was to examine the breadth of primary care by identifying its core dimensions and to assess the evidence for their interrelations and their relevance to outcomes at (primary) health system level.
A systematic review of the primary care literature was carried out, restricted to English language journals reporting original research or systematic reviews. Studies published between 2003 and July 2008 were searched in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, King's Fund Database, IDEAS Database, and EconLit.
Eighty-five studies were identified. This review was able to provide insight in the complexity of primary care as a multidimensional system, by identifying ten core dimensions that constitute a primary care system. The structure of a primary care system consists of three dimensions: 1. governance; 2. economic conditions; and 3. workforce development. The primary care process is determined by four dimensions: 4. access; 5. continuity of care; 6. coordination of care; and 7. comprehensiveness of care. The outcome of a primary care system includes three dimensions: 8. quality of care; 9. efficiency care; and 10. equity in health. There is a considerable evidence base showing that primary care contributes through its dimensions to overall health system performance and health.
A primary care system can be defined and approached as a multidimensional system contributing to overall health system performance and health.
The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the psychological health and health service utilisation of older adults with multimorbidity, who are particularly vulnerable.
To describe changes in loneliness, ...mental health problems, and attendance to scheduled medical care before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Telephone survey on a pre-existing cohort of older adults with multimorbidity in primary care.
Mental health and health service utilisation outcomes were compared with the outcomes before the onset of the COVID-19 outbreak in Hong Kong using paired
-tests, Wilcoxon's signed-rank test, and McNemar's test. Loneliness was measured by the De Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale. The secondary outcomes (anxiety, depression, and insomnia) were measured by the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire, the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder tool, and the Insomnia Severity Index. Appointments attendance data were extracted from a computerised medical record system. Sociodemographic factors associated with outcome changes were examined by linear regression and generalised estimating equations.
Data were collected from 583 older (≥60 years) adults. There were significant increases in loneliness, anxiety, and insomnia, after the onset of the COVID-19 outbreak. Missed medical appointments over a 3-month period increased from 16.5% 1 year ago to 22.0% after the onset of the outbreak. In adjusted analysis, being female, living alone, and having >4 chronic conditions were independently associated with increased loneliness. Females were more likely to have increased anxiety and insomnia.
Psychosocial health of older patients with multimorbidity markedly deteriorated and missed medical appointments substantially increased after the COVID-19 outbreak.
The 4-year, multipayer Comprehensive Primary Care Initiative was started in October 2012 to determine whether several forms of support would produce changes in care delivery that would improve the ...quality and reduce the costs of care at 497 primary care practices in seven regions across the United States. Support included the provision of care-management fees, the opportunity to earn shared savings, and the provision of data feedback and learning support.
We tracked changes in the delivery of care by practices participating in the initiative and used difference-in-differences regressions to compare changes over the first 2 years of the initiative in Medicare expenditures, health care utilization, claims-based measures of quality, and patient experience for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries attributed to initiative practices and a group of matched comparison practices.
During the first 2 years, initiative practices received a median of $115,000 per clinician in care-management fees. The practices reported improvements in approaches to the delivery of primary care in areas such as management of the care of high-risk patients and enhanced access to care. Changes in average monthly Medicare expenditures per beneficiary did not differ significantly between initiative and comparison practices when care-management fees were not taken into account (-$11; 95% confidence interval CI, -$23 to $1; P=0.07; negative values indicate less growth in spending at initiative practices) or when these fees were taken into account ($7; 95% CI, -$5 to $19; P=0.27). The only significant differences in other measures were a 3% reduction in primary care visits for initiative practices relative to comparison practices (P<0.001) and changes in two of the six domains of patient experience--discussion of decisions regarding medication with patients and the provision of support for patients taking care of their own health--both of which showed a small improvement in initiative practices relative to comparison practices (P=0.006 and P<0.001, respectively).
Midway through this 4-year intervention, practices participating in the initiative have reported progress in transforming the delivery of primary care. However, at this point these practices have not yet shown savings in expenditures for Medicare Parts A and B after accounting for care-management fees, nor have they shown an appreciable improvement in the quality of care or patient experience. (Funded by the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02320591.).
PDF
