Sociodemographic characteristics and COVID-19 testing rates: spatiotemporal patterns and impact of test accessibility in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic testing is essential for disease surveillance and test-trace-isolate efforts. We aimed to investigate if residential area sociodemographic characteristics and test accessibility were associated with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) testing rates. METHODS: We included 426 224 patient-initiated COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction tests from Uppsala County in Sweden from 24 June 2020 to 9 February 2022. Using Poisson regression analyses, we investigated if postal code area Care Need Index (CNI; median 1.0, IQR 0.8-1.4), a composite measure of sociodemographic factors used in Sweden to allocate primary healthcare resources, was associated with COVID-19 daily testing rates after adjustments for community transmission. We assessed if the distance to testing station influenced testing, and performed a difference-in-difference-analysis of a new testing station targeting a disadvantaged neighbourhood. RESULTS: We observed that CNI, i.e. primary healthcare need, was negatively associated with COVID-19 testing rates in inhabitants 5-69 years. More pronounced differences were noted across younger age groups and in Uppsala City, with test rate ratios in children (5-14 years) ranging from 0.56 (95% CI 0.47-0.67) to 0.87 (95% CI 0.80-0.93) across three pandemic waves. Longer distance to the nearest testing station was linked to lower testing rates, e.g. every additional 10 km was associated with a 10-18% decrease in inhabitants 15-29 years in Uppsala County. The opening of the targeted testing station was associated with increased testing, including twice as high testing rates in individuals aged 70-105, supporting an intervention effect. CONCLUSIONS: Ensuring accessible testing across all residential areas constitutes a promising tool to decrease inequalities in testing.

Changes in reasons for visits to primary care after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic: An international comparative study by the International Consortium of Primary Care Big Data Researchers (INTRePID).

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has reshaped healthcare delivery worldwide. OBJECTIVE: To explore potential changes in the reasons for visits and modality of care in primary care settings through the International Consortium of Primary Care Big Data Researchers (INTRePID). METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, retrospective study from 2018-2021. We examined visit volume, modality, and reasons for visits to primary care in Argentina, Australia, Canada, China, Peru, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, and the USA. The analysis involved a comparison between the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. RESULTS: There were more than 215 million visits from over 38 million patients during the study period in INTRePID primary care settings. Most INTRePID countries experienced a decline in monthly visit rates during the first year of the pandemic, with rate ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) ranging from RR:0.57 (95%CI:0.49-0.66) to RR:0.90 (95%CI:0.83-0.98), except for in Canada (RR:0.99, 95%CI:0.94-1.05) and Norway (RR:1.00, 95%CI:0.92-1.10), where rates remained stable and in Australia where rates increased (RR:1.19, 95%CI:1.11-1.28). Argentina, China, and Singapore had limited or no adoption of virtual care, whereas the remaining INTRePID countries varied in the extent of virtual care utilization. In Peru, virtual visits accounted for 7.34% (95%CI:7.33%-7.35%) of all interactions in the initial year of the pandemic, dipping to 5.22% (95%CI:5.21%-5.23%) in the subsequent year. However, in Canada 75.30% (95%CI:75.20%-75.40%) of the visits in the first year were virtual, decreasing to 62.77% (95%CI:62.66%-62.88%) in the second year. Diabetes, hypertension and/or hyperlipidemia and general health exams were in the top 10 reasons for visits in 2019 for all countries. Anxiety, depression and/or other mental health related reasons were among the top 10 reasons for virtual visits in all countries that had virtual care. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic resulted in changes in reasons for visits to primary care, with virtual care mitigating visit volume disruptions in many countries.

Changes in primary care visits for respiratory illness during the COVID-19 pandemic: a multinational study by the International Consortium of Primary Care Big Data Researchers (INTRePID).

Objectives: The majority of patients with respiratory illness are seen in primary care settings. Given COVID-19 is predominantly a respiratory illness, the INTernational ConsoRtium of Primary Care BIg Data Researchers (INTRePID), assessed the pandemic impact on primary care visits for respiratory illnesses. Design: Definitions for respiratory illness types were agreed on collectively. Monthly visit counts with diagnosis were shared centrally for analysis. Setting: Primary care settings in Argentina, Australia, Canada, China, Norway, Peru, Singapore, Sweden and the United States. Participants: Over 38 million patients seen in primary care settings in INTRePID countries before and during the pandemic, from January 1st, 2018, to December 31st, 2021. Main outcome measures: Relative change in the monthly mean number of visits before and after the onset of the pandemic for acute infectious respiratory disease visits including influenza, upper and lower respiratory tract infections and chronic respiratory disease visits including asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, respiratory allergies, and other respiratory diseases. Results: INTRePID countries reported a marked decrease in the average monthly visits for respiratory illness. Changes in visits varied from -10.9% [95% confidence interval (CI): -33.1 to +11.3%] in Norway to -79.9% (95% CI: -86.4% to -73.4%) in China for acute infectious respiratory disease visits and - 2.1% (95% CI: -12.1 to +7.8%) in Peru to -59.9% (95% CI: -68.6% to -51.3%) in China for chronic respiratory illness visits. While seasonal variation in allergic respiratory illness continued during the pandemic, there was essentially no spike in influenza illness during the first 2 years of the pandemic. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic had a major impact on primary care visits for respiratory presentations. Primary care continued to provide services for respiratory illness, although there was a decrease in infectious illness during the COVID pandemic. Understanding the role of primary care may provide valuable information for COVID-19 recovery efforts and planning for future global emergencies.

Introduction of specialized heart failure nurses in primary care and its impact on readmissions.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) has a 2% prevalence in the population and is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Multiple efforts have been made worldwide to improve quality of care and decrease unplanned readmissions for HF patients, one of which has been the introduction of specialist HF nurses (HFN) in primary health care. The present evidence on the benefits of HFN is contradicting. This study aims to evaluate the impact of a quality improvement intervention, availability of a HFN in Swedish primary care, on hospital readmissions. METHODS: All patients over the age of 65 with a HF diagnosis and with complete information on availability of a HFN were included in this retrospective register-based study. Using propensity score matching (PSM) techniques, two comparable groups of 128 patients each were created according to the exposure status, availability or no availability of a HFN. The rate of readmission was compared between the groups. RESULTS: Using PSM, 256 patients were matched, 128 in the HFN group and 128 in the no-HFN group. A total of 50% and 46.09% of patients in the HFN and no-HFN groups were readmitted, respectively. Mean number of readmissions per patient was 1.19 (SD 0.61) in the HFN group and 1.10 (SD 0.44) in the no-HFN group. Patients in the HFN had 17.6% higher odds of being readmitted during the study period, OR: 1.176 (CI: 0.716-1.932), and 3.8% lower odds of being readmitted within 30 days, OR: 0.962 (CI: 0.528-1.750). CONCLUSIONS: Availability of a HFN in primary care was not significantly associated with reduced readmissions for the patients included in this study. Further investigations are warranted looking at the impacts of availability and access to a HFN in primary care on readmissions and other patient outcomes.

An Integrated Care Strategy for Pre-schoolers with Suspected Developmental Disorders: The Optimus Co-design Project that has Made it to Regular Care.

INTRODUCTION: Multiple neurodevelopmental problems affect 7-8% of children and require evaluation by more than one profession, posing a challenge to care systems. DESCRIPTION: The local problem comprised distressed parents, diagnostic processes averaging 36 months and 28 visits with 42% of children >4 years at referral to adequate services, and no routines for patient involvement. The co-design project was developed through a series of workshops using standard quality improvement methodology, where representatives of all services, as well as parents participated.The resulting integrated care model comprises a team of professionals who evaluate the child during an average of 5.4 appointments (N = 95), taking 4.8 weeks. Parents were satisfied with the holistic service model and 70% of children were under 4 at referral (p < 0.05). While 75% of children were referred, 25% required further follow-up by the team. DISCUSSION: The Optimus model has elements of vertical, clinical and service integration. Reasons for success included leadership support, buy-in from the different organisations, careful process management, a team co-ordinator, and insistent user involvement. CONCLUSION: Evaluating multiple neurodevelopmental problems in children requires an integrated care approach. The Optimus care model is a relevant showcase for how people-initiated integrated care reforms can make it into usual care.