Making sense of and working with COVID-19 related guidelines and information in Danish general practice-A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Attempts to manage the COVID-19 pandemic have involved a massive flow of guidelines and information to health professionals on how to reorganize clinical work and handle patients with COVID-19. The aim of this paper is to investigate how Danish general practitioners (GPs) made sense of and worked with guidelines and associated information on COVID-19 in the first months of the pandemic. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with 13 GPs in the beginning of the pandemic and again approximately three months later. Between the two interviews, they wrote daily notes for 20 days. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed, and the material was analyzed using thematic network analysis. RESULTS: The interviewed GPs found the situation urgent and serious, and they spent a lot of time reading and working with COVID-19 related guidelines and associated information. Keeping up-to-date with and implementing guidelines was challenging due to the many sources of information and the constant guideline revisions. The GPs were able to assess patients' risk status but were challenged by the changing guidelines regarding this. The GPs found that deciding whether a COVID-19 patient needed to be admitted to hospital was relatively straightforward. An important final challenge was discrepancies between the government's public announcements regarding which patients could be tested for COVID-19, the guidelines provided to GPs, and the local testing capacities, which gave GPs extra work. CONCLUSION: In an urgent situation like the COVID-19 pandemic it is crucial to secure good communication between the government, health authorities, professional medical societies, and health professionals. Improved practices of collaboration between health authorities and professional societies could improve communication in future health crises and relieve GPs of some of the work involved in keeping up-to-date with information flows, constantly reviewing new guidelines, and dealing with communicative inconsistencies.

Depression and anxiety symptoms in pregnant women in Denmark during COVID-19.

AIMS: Maternal mental distress in pregnancy can be damaging to the mother's and child's physical and mental health. This study aimed to provide an insight into mental well-being of pregnant women in Denmark during COVID-19 by assessing symptoms of depression and anxiety. METHODS: Data from two cohorts of pregnant women recruited from Danish general practice were compared. A COVID-19 lockdown cohort (N=330) completed questionnaires between 8 April and 6 May. Responses were compared to those from a control cohort of women from 2016 (N=1428). Mental well-being was measured with the Major Depression Inventory (MDI) and the Anxiety Symptom Scale (ASS). RESULTS: Questionnaires were returned by 83% of the COVID-19 lockdown cohort and by 93% of the control cohort. Multivariable analysis controlling for age, cohabitation status, occupation, smoking, alcohol use, chronic disease, fertility treatment, parity and children living at home showed no difference in depressive symptoms (MDI). Anxiety symptoms (ASS) were slightly worse in the COVID-19 lockdown cohort (mean difference=1.4 points), mainly driven by questions concerning general anxiety. The largest differences in anxiety were seen in first trimester (adjusted mean difference=4.0 points). CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women questioned during the COVID-19 pandemic showed no change in symptoms of depression and only a modest elevation of anxiety when compared to pregnant women questioned during a non-pandemic period in 2016.

Use of alternative consultation forms in Danish general practice in the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Attempts to manage the COVID-19 pandemic have led to radical reorganisations of health care systems worldwide. General practitioners (GPs) provide the vast majority of patient care, and knowledge of their experiences with providing care for regular health issues during a pandemic is scarce. Hence, in a Danish context we explored how GPs experienced reorganising their work in an attempt to uphold sufficient patient care while contributing to minimizing the spread of COVID-19. Further, in relation to this, we examined what guided GPs' choices between telephone, video and face-to-face consultations. METHODS: This study consisted of qualitative interviews with 13 GPs. They were interviewed twice, approximately three months apart in the initial phase of the pandemic, and they took daily notes for 20 days. All interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and inductively analysed. RESULTS: The GPs re-organised their clinical work profoundly. Most consultations were converted to video or telephone, postponed or cancelled. The use of video first rose, but soon declined, once again replaced by an increased use of face-to-face consultations. When choosing between consultation forms, the GPs took into account the need to minimise the risk of COVID-19, the central guidelines, and their own preference for face-to-face consultations. There were variations over time and between the GPs regarding which health issues were dealt with by using video and/or the telephone. For some health issues, the GPs generally deemed it acceptable to use video or telephone, postpone or cancel appointments for a short term, and in a crisis situation. They experienced relational and technical limitations with video consultation, while diagnostic uncertainty was not regarded as a prominent issue CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates how the GPs experienced telephone and video consultations as being useful in a pandemic situation when face-to-face consultations had to be severely restricted. The GPs did, however, identify several limitations similar to those known in non-pandemic times. The weighing of pros and cons and their willingness to use these alternatives shifted and generally diminished when face-to-face consultations were once again deemed viable. In case of future pandemics, such alternatives seem valuable, at least for a short term.

Pregnant women's concerns and antenatal care during COVID-19 lock-down of the Danish society.

INTRODUCTION: Pandemics are known to cause stress and anxiety in pregnant women. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdown of the Danish society, pregnant women were considered to be at increased risk, and access to antenatal care changed. METHODS: On 8 April 2020A, a questionnaire was sent to 332 pregnant women previously sampled by general practitioners in two Danish regions. The women were contacted via secured e-mail (e-Boks), and questionnaires were returned until 6 May. RESULTS: The questionnaire was returned by 257 women (77%). More than half believed that they were at a high risk of infection with COVID-19, and a third of the women were concerned about the risk of serious disease - especially for their unborn child. Almost 90% isolated at home most of the time. The majority were worried about possible consequences of the pandemic for antenatal care, but very few had actually missed a scheduled preventive consultation with their general practitioner, and only 15% had missed an appointment with their midwife. The majority of the women preferred normal consultations and found no added safety in shifting the consultation from the normal clinical setting. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown have had a major impact on Danish pregnant women. Even so, concerns were more focused on access to care than on the risk of COVID-19 infection. Contacts with the antenatal healthcare system have only been moderately affected. FUNDING: TRYG Foundation and KEU, Region Copenhagen. TRIAL REGISTRATION: not relevant.