Hospitalization deficit of in‐ and outpatient cases with cardiovascular diseases and utilization of cardiological interventions during the <scp>COVID</scp>‐19 pandemic: Insights from the German‐wide helios hospital network

König, Sebastian; Ueberham, Laura; Pellissier, Vincent; Hohenstein, Sven; Meier‐Hellmann, Andreas; Thiele, Holger; Ahmadli, Vusal; Borger, Michael A.; Kuhlen, Ralf; Hindricks, Gerhard; Bollmann, Andreas

doi:10.1002/clc.23549

Cited by 21 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 47 publications

(55 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Single‐centre and nationwide cohort studies showed that COVID‐19 affected referral and hospitalizations of patients with acute HF and that HF was associated with high mortality. 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 Yet, the impact of COVID‐19 on HF patients and vice versa the relevance of HF events during COVID‐19 in a multicentre international cohort is unknown. 19 , 20 Therefore, the Postgraduate Course in Heart Failure (PCHF) group built an international multicentre registry for hospitalized COVID‐19 patients with CV diseases and/or risk factors (CVDRF).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Heart failure in COVID‐19: the multicentre, multinational PCHF‐COVICAV registry

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims We assessed the outcome of hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) patients with heart failure (HF) compared with patients with other cardiovascular disease and/or risk factors (arterial hypertension, diabetes, or dyslipidaemia). We further wanted to determine the incidence of HF events and its consequences in these patient populations. Methods and results International retrospective Postgraduate Course in Heart Failure registry for patients hospitalized with COVID‐19 and CArdioVascular disease and/or risk factors (arterial hypertension, diabetes, or dyslipidaemia) was performed in 28 centres from 15 countries (PCHF‐COVICAV). The primary endpoint was in‐hospital mortality. Of 1974 patients hospitalized with COVID‐19, 1282 had cardiovascular disease and/or risk factors (median age: 72 [interquartile range: 62–81] years, 58% male), with HF being present in 256 [20%] patients. Overall in‐hospital mortality was 25% ( n = 323/1282 deaths). In‐hospital mortality was higher in patients with a history of HF (36%, n = 92) compared with non‐HF patients (23%, n = 231, odds ratio [OR] 1.93 [95% confidence interval: 1.44–2.59], P < 0.001). After adjusting, HF remained associated with in‐hospital mortality (OR 1.45 [95% confidence interval: 1.01–2.06], P = 0.041). Importantly, 186 of 1282 [15%] patients had an acute HF event during hospitalization (76 [40%] with de novo HF), which was associated with higher in‐hospital mortality (89 [48%] vs. 220 [23%]) than in patients without HF event (OR 3.10 [2.24–4.29], P < 0.001). Conclusions Hospitalized COVID‐19 patients with HF are at increased risk for in‐hospital death. In‐hospital worsening of HF or acute HF de novo are common and associated with a further increase in in‐hospital mortality.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Heart failure in COVID‐19: the multicentre, multinational PCHF‐COVICAV registry

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On March 4, 2020, a supplement to the national pandemic plan regarding COVID-19 was published [ 26 ]. On March 13, 2020, the national pandemic plan has been activated [ 27 ]. In addition, the Kassenärztliche Bundesvereingung (German Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians) had published a document regarding influenza pandemic "Risk Management in Medical Practices" in 2008, which is specifically aimed at the outpatient sector [ 28 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stockpiled personal protective equipment and knowledge of pandemic plans as predictors of perceived pandemic preparedness among German general practitioners

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The COVID-19 pandemic significantly changed the work of general practitioners (GPs). At the onset of the pandemic in March 2020, German outpatient practices had to adapt quickly. Pandemic preparedness (PP) of GPs may play a vital role in their management of a pandemic. Objectives The study aimed to examine the association in the stock of seven personal protective equipment (PPE) items and knowledge of pandemic plans on perceived PP among GPs. Methods Three multivariable linear regression models were developed based on an online cross-sectional survey for the period March–April 2020 (the onset of the pandemic in Germany). Data were collected using self-developed items on self-assessed PP and knowledge of a pandemic plan and its utility. The stock of seven PPE items was queried. For PPE items, three different PPE scores were compared. Control variables for all models were gender and age. Results In total, 508 GPs were included in the study; 65.16% believed that they were very poorly or poorly prepared. Furthermore, 13.83% of GPs were aware of a pandemic plan; 40% rated those plans as beneficial. The stock of FFP-2/3 masks, protective suits, face shields, safety glasses, and medical face masks were mostly considered completely insufficient or insufficient, whereas disposable gloves and disinfectants were considered sufficient or completely sufficient. The stock of PPE was significantly positively associated with PP and had the largest effect on PP; the association of the knowledge of a pandemic plan was significant but small. PPE scores did not vary considerably in their explanatory power. The assessment of a pandemic plan as beneficial did not significantly affect PP. Conclusion The stock of PPE seems to be the determining factor for PP among German GPs; for COVID-19, sufficient masks are the determining factor. Knowledge of a pandemic plans play a secondary role in PP.

show abstract

“…Regarding outpatient activity, 18 indicators were identified from 8 articles (49,60,62,81,(116)(117)(118)(119). Most of the indicators concerned only to in-person outpatient activity.…”

Section: Outpatient Activity Volumementioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospital services for patients with cardiac diseases: a scoping review

Lange

Carvalho

Fernandes

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimTo assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospital care for cardiac patients.Methods and resultsScoping review, including studies with empirical data on changes in the use of health services measured by performance indicators during January - June 2020. Database searches yielded 6277 articles, of which 838 articles met the inclusion criteria during initial screening. After full-text screening, 94 articles were considered for data extraction. In total, 1637 indicators were retrieved, showing large variation in the indicators and their definitions. Most of the indicators that provided information on changes in number of admissions (n=118, 88%) signalled a decrease in admissions; 88% (n=15) of the indicators showed patients’ delayed presentation and 40% (n=54) showed patients in a worse clinical condition. A reduction in diagnostic and treatment procedures was signalled by 95% (n=18) and 81% (n=64) of the indicators reporting on cardiac procedures, respectively. Length of stay decreased in 58% (n=21) of the indicators and acute coronary syndromes treatment times increased in 61% (n=65) of the indicators. Outpatient activity decreased in 94% (n=17) of the indicators related with outpatient care, whereas telehealth utilization increased in 100% (n=6). Outcomes worsened in 40% (n=35) of the indicators, and mortality rates increased in 52% (n=31).ConclusionAll phases of the hospital cardiac care pathway were affected. This information could support the planning of care during the ongoing pandemic and in future events. Furthermore, to ensure continuity of care during crises, fostering the use of standardised indicators is paramount.

show abstract

Hospitalization deficit of in‐ and outpatient cases with cardiovascular diseases and utilization of cardiological interventions during the COVID‐19 pandemic: Insights from the German‐wide helios hospital network

Cited by 21 publications

References 47 publications

Heart failure in COVID‐19: the multicentre, multinational PCHF‐COVICAV registry

Heart failure in COVID‐19: the multicentre, multinational PCHF‐COVICAV registry

Stockpiled personal protective equipment and knowledge of pandemic plans as predictors of perceived pandemic preparedness among German general practitioners

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospital services for patients with cardiac diseases: a scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About