Did the organization of primary care practices during the COVID-19 pandemic influence quality and safety? - an international survey.

BACKGROUND: Changes in demographics with an older population, the illness panorama with increasing prevalence of non-communicable diseases, and the shift from hospital care to home-based care place demand on primary health care, which requires multiprofessional collaboration and team-based organization of work. The COVID-19 pandemic affected health care in various ways, such as heightened infection control measures, changing work practices, and increased workload. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate the association between primary care practices' organization, and quality and safety changes during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Data were collected from 38 countries in a large online survey, the PRICOV-19 study. For this paper, the participating practices were categorized as "Only GPs", comprising practices with solely general practitioners (GPs) and/or GP trainees, without any other health care professionals (n = 1,544), and "Multiprofessional," comprising practices with at least one GP or GP trainee and one or more other health professionals (n = 3,936). RESULTS: Both categories of practices improved in infection control routines when compared before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. A larger proportion of the multiprofessional practices changed their routines to protect vulnerable patients. Telephone triage was used in more "Multiprofessional" practices, whereas "Only GPs" were more likely to perform video consultations as an alternative to physical visits. Both types of practices reported that the time to review new guidelines and scientific literature decreased during the pandemic. However, both had more meetings to discuss directives than before the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Multiprofessional teams were keener to introduce changes to the care organization to protect vulnerable patients. However, practices with only GPs were found to be more aligned with video consultations, perhaps reflecting the close patient-doctor relationship. In contrast, telephone triage was used more in multiprofessional teams.

Inequalities in the burden of non-communicable diseases across European countries: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease 2019 study.

BACKGROUND: Although overall health status in the last decades improved, health inequalities due to non-communicable diseases (NCDs) persist between and within European countries. There is a lack of studies giving insights into health inequalities related to NCDs in the European Economic Area (EEA) countries. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to quantify health inequalities in age-standardized disability adjusted life years (DALY) rates for NCDs overall and 12 specific NCDs across 30 EEA countries between 1990 and 2019. Also, this study aimed to determine trends in health inequalities and to identify those NCDs where the inequalities were the highest. METHODS: DALY rate ratios were calculated to determine and compare inequalities between the 30 EEA countries, by sex, and across time. Annual rate of change was used to determine the differences in DALY rate between 1990 and 2019 for males and females. The Gini Coefficient (GC) was used to measure the DALY rate inequalities across countries, and the Slope Index of Inequality (SII) to estimate the average absolute difference in DALY rate across countries. RESULTS: Between 1990 and 2019, there was an overall declining trend in DALY rate, with larger declines among females compared to males. Among EEA countries, in 2019 the highest NCD DALY rate for both sexes were observed for Bulgaria. For the whole period, the highest DALY rate ratios were identified for digestive diseases, diabetes and kidney diseases, substance use disorders, cardiovascular diseases (CVD), and chronic respiratory diseases - representing the highest inequality between countries. In 2019, the highest DALY rate ratio was found between Bulgaria and Iceland for males. GC and SII indicated that the highest inequalities were due to CVD for most of the study period - however, overall levels of inequality were low. CONCLUSIONS: The inequality in level 1 NCDs DALYs rate is relatively low among all the countries. CVDs, digestive diseases, diabetes and kidney diseases, substance use disorders, and chronic respiratory diseases are the NCDs that exhibit higher levels of inequality across countries in the EEA. This might be mitigated by applying tailored preventive measures and enabling healthcare access.

Provider Perspectives on Safety in Primary Care in Albania.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the safety attitudes of specialist physicians (SPs), general physicians (GPs), and nurses in primary care in Albania. DESIGN: The study was cross-sectional. It involved the SPs, GPs, and nurses from five districts in Albania. A demographic questionnaire and the adapted Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ)-Long Ambulatory Version A was used to gather critical information regarding the participant's profile, perception of management, working conditions, job satisfaction, stress recognition, safety climate, and perceived teamwork. METHODS: The onsite data collectors distributed questionnaires at the primary care clinics and then collected them. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the responses. The significance of mean difference among SPs, GPs, and nurses was tested using analysis of variance. FINDINGS: Five hundred twenty-three questionnaires were completed. The concept of patient safety in relation to job satisfaction received the highest ratings. Stress recognition had low ratings. There was a high level of teamwork in SPs, GPs, and nurses. Healthcare staff agreed that it was difficult to discuss errors in their primary healthcare center. Physicians in contrast to nurses were most likely to affirm that they do not make errors in hostile situations. CONCLUSIONS: Errors are difficult to discuss. It was clear that primary care staff, such as physicians, never considered the likelihood of errors occurring during tense situations. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Staff at primary healthcare centers are used to adverse events and errors. Despite the demand for safety improvement and the existing evidence on the epidemiology of outpatient medical errors, most research has only been conducted in hospital settings. Many patients are put at risk and some are harmed as a result of adverse events in primary care. Adequate communication and technical skills should be utilized by primary care providers (PCPs) for improvement of patient safety. The patient safety measures should include assessment of the safety attitudes of PCPs.

The mortality burden related to COVID-19 in 2020 and 2021 - years of life lost and excess mortality in 13 countries and sub-national regions in Southern and Eastern Europe, and Central Asia.

Introduction: Between 2021 and 2023, a project was funded in order to explore the mortality burden (YLL-Years of Life Lost, excess mortality) of COVID-19 in Southern and Eastern Europe, and Central Asia. Methods: For each national or sub-national region, data on COVID-19 deaths and population data were collected for the period March 2020 to December 2021. Unstandardized and age-standardised YLL rates were calculated according to standard burden of disease methodology. In addition, all-cause mortality data for the period 2015-2019 were collected and used as a baseline to estimate excess mortality in each national or sub-national region in the years 2020 and 2021. Results: On average, 15-30 years of life were lost per death in the various countries and regions. Generally, YLL rates per 100,000 were higher in countries and regions in Southern and Eastern Europe compared to Central Asia. However, there were differences in how countries and regions defined and counted COVID-19 deaths. In most countries and sub-national regions, YLL rates per 100,000 (both age-standardised and unstandardized) were higher in 2021 compared to 2020, and higher amongst men compared to women. Some countries showed high excess mortality rates, suggesting under-diagnosis or under-reporting of COVID-19 deaths, and/or relatively large numbers of deaths due to indirect effects of the pandemic. Conclusion: Our results suggest that the COVID-19 mortality burden was greater in many countries and regions in Southern and Eastern Europe compared to Central Asia. However, heterogeneity in the data (differences in the definitions and counting of COVID-19 deaths) may have influenced our results. Understanding possible reasons for the differences was difficult, as many factors are likely to play a role (e.g., differences in the extent of public health and social measures to control the spread of COVID-19, differences in testing strategies and/or vaccination rates). Future cross-country analyses should try to develop structured approaches in an attempt to understand the relative importance of such factors. Furthermore, in order to improve the robustness and comparability of burden of disease indicators, efforts should be made to harmonise case definitions and reporting for COVID-19 deaths across countries.

Differences between Rural and Urban Practices in the Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic: Outcomes from the PRICOV-19 Study in 38 Countries.

This paper explores the differences between rural and urban practices in the response to the COVID-19 pandemic, emphasizing aspects such as management of patient flow, infection prevention and control, information processing, communication and collaboration. Using a cross-sectional design, data were collected through the online PRICOV-19 questionnaire sent to general practices in 38 countries. Rural practices in our sample were smaller than urban-based practices. They reported an above-average number of old and multimorbid patients and a below-average number of patients with a migrant background or financial problems. Rural practices were less likely to provide leaflets and information, but were more likely to have ceased using the waiting room or to have made structural changes to their waiting room and to have changed their prescribing practices in terms of patients attending the practices. They were less likely to perform video consultations or use electronic prescription methods. Our findings show the existence of certain issues that could impact patient safety in rural areas more than in urban areas due to the underlying differences in population profile and supports. These could be used to plan the organization of care for similar future pandemic situations.

The Organization of Outreach Work for Vulnerable Patients in General Practice during COVID-19: Results from the Cross-Sectional PRICOV-19 Study in 38 Countries.

The COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately affected vulnerable populations' access to health care. By proactively reaching out to them, general practices attempted to prevent the underutilization of their services. This paper examined the association between practice and country characteristics and the organization of outreach work in general practices during COVID-19. Linear mixed model analyses with practices nested in countries were performed on the data of 4982 practices from 38 countries. A 4-item scale on outreach work was constructed as the outcome variable with a reliability of 0.77 and 0.97 at the practice and country level. The results showed that many practices set up outreach work, including extracting at least one list of patients with chronic conditions from their electronic medical record (30.1%); and performing telephone outreach to patients with chronic conditions (62.8%), a psychological vulnerability (35.6%), or possible situation of domestic violence or a child-rearing situation (17.2%). Outreach work was positively related to the availability of an administrative assistant or practice manager (p < 0.05) or paramedical support staff (p < 0.01). Other practice and country characteristics were not significantly associated with undertaking outreach work. Policy and financial interventions supporting general practices to organize outreach work should focus on the range of personnel available to support such practice activities.

The Burden of Disease due to COVID-19 (BoCO-19): A study protocol for a secondary analysis of surveillance data in Southern and Eastern Europe, and Central Asia.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has had an extensive impact on public health worldwide. However, in many countries burden of disease indicators for COVID-19 have not yet been calculated or used for monitoring. The present study protocol describes an approach developed in the project "The Burden of Disease due to COVID-19. Towards a harmonization of population health metrics for the surveillance of dynamic outbreaks" (BoCO-19). The process of data collection and aggregation across 14 different countries and sub-national regions in Southern and Eastern Europe and Central Asia is described, as well as the methodological approaches used. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study implemented in BoCO-19 is a secondary data analysis, using information from national surveillance systems as part of mandatory reporting on notifiable diseases. A customized data collection template is used to gather aggregated data on population size as well as COVID-19 cases and deaths. Years of life lost (YLL), as one component of the number of Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALY), are calculated as described in a recently proposed COVID-19 disease model (the 'Burden-EU' model) for the calculation of DALY. All-cause mortality data are collected for excess mortality sensitivity analyses. For the calculation of Years lived with disability (YLD), the Burden-EU model is adapted based on recent evidence. Because Covid-19 cases vary in terms of disease severity, the possibility and suitability of applying a uniform severity distribution of cases across all countries and sub-national regions will be explored. An approach recently developed for the Global Burden of Disease Study, that considers post-acute consequences of COVID-19, is likely to be adopted. Findings will be compared to explore the quality and usability of the existing data, to identify trends across age-groups and sexes and to formulate recommendations concerning potential improvements in data availability and quality. DISCUSSION: BoCO-19 serves as a collaborative platform in order to build international capacity for the calculation of burden of disease indicators, and to support national experts in the analysis and interpretation of country-specific data, including their strengths and weaknesses. Challenges include inherent differences in data collection and reporting systems between countries, as well as assumptions that have to be made during the calculation process.

Out of pocket payments and access to NCD medication in two regions in Albania.

OBJECTIVE: The financial burden from noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) is a threat worldwide, alleviated only when good social protection schemes are in place. Albeit the Government in Albania has committed to Universal Healthcare Coverage (UHC), Out-of-Pockets (OOPs) persist. Through this study, we aimed to assess the OOPs related to consultations, diagnostic tests, and medicine prescriptions as self-reported by people suffering from NCDs. METHODS: A household survey was conducted in two regions of Albania. The present analysis includes respondents who suffered from chronic health conditions and consulted a health care provider within the last 8 weeks (n = 898). Mixed logistic regression models with random intercepts at the level of communities were employed in order to assess the association of OOPs with age, gender, urban vs. rural residency, health insurance, marital status, barriers experienced, type of chronic condition(s) and region. RESULTS: Of those who consulted a provider, 95% also received a drug prescription. Among them, 94% were able to obtain all the drugs prescribed. Out-of-pocket payments occurred throughout the NCD treatment process; specifically, for consultation (36%), diagnostic tests (33%), and drugs purchased (88%). Drug expenditures accounted for 62% of all household expenditures. Respondents with health insurance were less likely to pay for consultation and drugs. The elderly (patients above 60 years old) were less likely to pay for consultations and tests. Those who lived in urban areas were less likely to pay for drugs and consultations. Patients encountering any form of barrier when seeking care had increased odds of OOPs for consultations (OR; 2.25 95%-CI; 1.57; 3.23) and tests (OR; 1.71 95%-CI; 1.19; 2.45). CONCLUSION: Out-of-pocket payments by NCD patients principally made up through the purchase of prescribed drugs, remain important. Tackling the high costs of drugs will be important to accelerate the UHC agenda. Here, it is important to raise the population's awareness on patients' knowledge of their entitlements to health insurance, and on the current health reforms.

Health Seeking Behavior Among Adults and Elderly With Chronic Health Condition(s) in Albania.

Aim: Assess the use of different health care service providers by adults (aged 18-59) and elderly (aged > =60) who suffer from non-communicable disease (NCD) and explore relationships between sociodemographic variables and care-seeking behaviors. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in the districts of Diber and Fier in December 2018, using random cluster sampling. Descriptive statistics were used to compare the care-seeking behaviors of adults and elderly people. We employed binary and multinomial logistic regression to assess factors associated with the type of health service provider used. Analyses were adjusted for clustering within districts of residence. Results: Out of 3,799 respondents, 1,116 (29.4%) suffered from an NCD. Of these, 95% sought to obtain care for their chronic condition through public healthcare providers. The elderly were more likely to use primary healthcare services (PHC) to initiate care when facing health problems (56%), compared to those aged 18-59 years (49%, p < 0,001). Over the last 8 weeks, 82% (914/1,116) of participants sought care. Binary and multinomial logistic regression analyses, adjusted for socio-demographic variables, showed that the elderly were more likely to choose PHC services (OR 1.56; 95% CI: 1.04; 2.35). Moreover, individuals who suffered from hypertension used PHC services more frequently than hospitals (OR 1.94; 95% CI: 1.32; 2.85). A positive association was found between living in an urban area and seeking care for NCDs at polyclinics (OR 10.1; 95% CI: 2.1; 50.1). There was no significant gender difference observed with regard to the type of provider consulted. Conclusion: Public facilities were reported as the main providers for initiating care and the main providers used in the 8 weeks prior to the interview. While a majority of elderly people visited a PHC to initiate treatment (and follow up) on their chronic conditions, a substantial proportion of adults (aged 18-59) initiated and sought regular NCD care at a hospital. Educating patients and caregivers on active participation in NCD prevention, management, and control through the PHC level should be a long-term effort, along with the establishment of well-structured referral mechanisms and integrated care systems.

Factors associated with the utilisation of primary care services: a cross-sectional study in public and private facilities in Albania.

OBJECTIVES: To identify key factors influencing the utilisation of governmental and private primary healthcare services in Albania. DESIGN: A cross-sectional health facility survey using a 4-point Likert scale questionnaire to rank the importance of factors driving services utilisation. SETTING: Exit interviews with patients who consulted one of 23 primary care providers (18 public and 5 private) in Fier district of Albania from the period of July-August 2018. PARTICIPANTS: Representative sample of 629 adults ≥18 years of age. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: (1) Factors influencing the decision to visit a governmental or private primary care provider and (2) the association of sociodemographic characteristics and patients' decision to attend a given provider. Data were analysed using mixed logistic regression models. RESULTS: Nearly half of the participants in this study were older than 60 years (45%). The majority (63%) reported to suffer from a chronic condition. Prevailing determinants for choosing a provider were 'quality of care' and 'healthcare professionals' attitudes. Solely looking at patients using a public provider, 'geographical proximity' was the most important factor guiding the decision (85% vs 11%, p<0.001). For private provider's patients, the 'availability of diagnostic devices' was the most important factor (69% vs 9%, p<0.001). The odds of using public facilities were significantly higher among the patients who perceived their health as poor (OR 5.59; 95% CI 2.62 to 11.92), suffered from chronic conditions (OR 3.13; 95% CI 1.36 to 7.24) or were benefiting from a socioeconomic aid scheme (OR 3.52; 95% CI 1.64 to 7.56). CONCLUSION: The use of primary healthcare is strongly influenced by geographical and financial access for public facility users and availability of equipment for private users. This study found that aspects of acceptability and adequacy of services are equally valued. Additional commitment to further develop primary care through engagement of local decision-makers and professional associations is needed.

Perspectives of Public and Private Primary Healthcare Users in Two Regions of Albania on Non-Clinical Quality of Care.

BACKGROUND: Aiming to tackle the rise of non-communicable diseases and an ageing population, Albania is engaged in boosting primary healthcare services and quality of care. The patients' perspectives on their experience with public and private providers are, however, missing, although their viewpoints are critical while shaping the developing services. Consequently, we analyze perceptions of users of primary healthcare as it relates to non-clinical quality of care and the association to sociodemographic characteristics of patients and the type of provider. METHODS: A facility-based survey was conducted in 2018 using the World Health Organization responsiveness questionnaire which is based on a 4-point scale along with 8 non-clinical domains of quality of care. The data of 954 patients were analyzed through descriptive statistics and linear mixed regression models. RESULTS: Similar mean values were reported on total scale of the quality of care for private and public providers, also after sociodemographic adjustments. The highest mean score was reported for the domain "communication" (3.75) followed by "dignity" (3.65), while the lowest mean scores were given for "choice" (2.89) and "prompt attention" (3.00). Urban governmental PHC services were rated significantly better than private outpatient clinics in "coordination of care" (2.90 vs 2.12, P < .001). In contrast, private outpatient clinics were judged significantly better than urban PHC clinics in "confidentiality" (3.77 vs 3.38, P = .04) and "quality of basic amenities" (3.70 vs 3.02, P < .001). "Autonomy" was reported as least important attribute of quality. CONCLUSION: While the perception of non-clinical care quality was found to be high and similar for public and private providers, promptness and coordination of care require attention to meet patient's expectations on good quality of care. There is a need to raise the awareness on autonomy and the involvement of patients' aspects concerning their health.

Application of the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ) in Albanian hospitals: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To establish the reliability and validity of the translated version of the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ) by evaluating its psychometric properties and to determine possible differences among nurses and physicians regarding safety attitudes. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study utilising the Albanian version of the SAQ and a demographic questionnaire. SETTING: Four regional hospitals in Albania. PARTICIPANTS: 341 healthcare providers, including 132 nurses and 209 doctors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The translation, construct validity and internal validity of the SAQ. The SAQ includes six scales and 30 items. RESULTS: A total of 341 valid questionnaires were returned, for a response rate of 70%. The confirmatory factor analysis and its goodness-of-fit indices (standardised root mean square residual 0.075, root mean square error of approximation 0.044 and comparative fit index 0.97) showed good model fit. The Cronbach's α values for each of the scales of the SAQ ranged from 0.64 to 0.82. The percentage of hospital healthcare workers who had a positive attitude was 60.3% for the teamwork climate, 57.2% for the safety climate, 58.4% for job satisfaction, 37.4% for stress recognition, 59.3% for the perception of management and 49.5% for working conditions. Intercorrelations showed that the subscales had moderate-to-high correlations with one another. Nurses were more hesitant to admit and report errors; only 55% of physicians and 44% of nurses endorsed this statement (χ(2)=4.9, p=0.02). Moreover, nurses received lower scores on team work compared with doctors (N 45.7 vs D 52.3, p=0.01). Doctors denied the effects of stress and fatigue on their performance (N 46.7 vs D 39.5, p<0.01), neglecting the workload. CONCLUSIONS: The SAQ is a useful tool for evaluating safety attitudes in Albanian hospitals. In light of the health workforce's poor recognition of stress, establishing patient safety programmes should be a priority among policymakers in Albania.