Covi-Prim international

Similarities and discrepancies in the way general practices from seven different countries coped with the Covid-19 pandemic

Bibliographic Data

ID22077751
AuthorsAndrea Siebenhofer (0000-0002-6980-2103, Goethe University Frankfurt), Anna Mae Scott (0000-0002-0109-9001, Bond University), Alexander Avian (0000-0003-1084-5763, Medical University of Graz, corresponding author), András Terebessy (0000-0001-6080-8114, Semmelweis University), Karola Mergenthal (0000-0002-0534-9389, Goethe University Frankfurt), Dagmar Schaffler‐Schaden (0000-0002-9311-7413, Paracelsus Medical University), Dagmar Schaffler-Schaden, Herbert Bachler (0000-0001-5859-206X, Innsbruck Medical University), Sebastian Huter (0000-0002-6632-6834, Paracelsus Medical University), Erika Zelko (0000-0002-2730-9118, Johannes Kepler University of Linz), Amanda Murray, Amanda M Murray (Bond University), Michelle Guppy (0000-0001-7256-4938, University of New England), Giuliano Piccoliori (0000-0003-1974-4184), Sven Streit (0000-0002-3813-4616, University of Bern), Klaus Jeitler (0000-0002-1520-8061, Medical University of Graz), Maria Flamm (0000-0003-0816-6657, Paracelsus Medical University)
Year2022
Volume10
Pages1072515-1072515
Publication date2022-12-06
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueFrontiers in Public Health (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2296-2565 • E-ISSN: 2296-2565
PublisherFrontiers Media SA (PUBLISHER • CH)
DOI10.3389/fpubh.2022.1072515
PMID36600939
OpenAlexW4312047899
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited48

Objectives: General practitioners (GPs) are frequently patients' first point of contact with the healthcare system and play an important role in identifying, managing and monitoring cases. This study investigated the experiences of GPs from seven different countries in the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. Design: International cross-sectional online survey. Setting: General practitioners from Australia, Austria, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Slovenia and Switzerland. Participants: Overall, 1,642 GPs completed the survey. Main outcome measures: We focused on how well-prepared GPs were, their self-confidence and concerns, efforts to control the spread of the disease, patient contacts, information flow, testing procedures and protection of staff. Results: GPs gave high ratings to their self-confidence (7.3, 95% CI 7.1-7.5) and their efforts to control the spread of the disease (7.2, 95% CI 7.0-7.3). A decrease in the number of patient contacts (5.7, 95% CI 5.4-5.9), the perception of risk (5.3 95% CI 4.9-5.6), the provision of information to GPs (4.9, 95% CI 4.6-5.2), their testing of suspected cases (3.7, 95% CI 3.4-3.9) and their preparedness to face a pandemic (mean: 3.5; 95% CI 3.2-3.7) were rated as moderate. GPs gave low ratings to their ability to protect staff (2.2 95% CI 1.9-2.4). Differences were identified in all dimensions except protection of staff, which was consistently low in all surveyed GPs and countries. Conclusion: Although GPs in the different countries were confronted with the same pandemic, its impact on specific aspects differed. This partly reflected differences in health care systems and experience of recent pandemics. However, it also showed that the development of structured care plans in case of future infectious diseases requires the early involvement of primary care representatives

Confidence interval · Cross-sectional study · Disease · Family medicine · Global Positioning System · Health care · Medical emergency · Pandemic · Pathology · Political science · Preparedness · Computer Science · COVID-19 and healthcare impacts · COVID-19 and Mental Health · Demography · Disaster Response and Management · Medicine · Nursing · Internal Medicine