Practice and System Factors Impact on Infection Prevention and Control in General Practice during COVID-19 across 33 Countries: Results of the PRICOV Cross-Sectional Survey

Self Cite

COVID-19 proved that primary care (PC) providers have an important role in managing health emergencies, such as epidemics. Little is known about the preparedness of primary care practice infrastructure to continue providing high quality care during this crisis. The aim of this paper is to describe the perceived limitations to the infrastructure of PC practices during COVID-19 and to determine the factors associated with a higher likelihood of infrastructural barriers in providing high quality care. This paper presents the results of an online survey conducted between November 2020 and November 2021 as a part of PRICOV-19 study. Data from 4974 practices in 33 countries regarding perceived limitations and intentions to make future adjustments to practice infrastructure as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic were collected. Approximately 58% of practices experienced limitations to the building or other practice infrastructure to provide high-quality and safe care during the COVID-19 pandemic, and in 54% making adjustments to the building or the infrastructure was considered. Large variations between the countries were found. The results show that infrastructure constraints were directly proportional to the size of the practice. Better pandemic infection control equipment, governmental support, and a fee-for-service payment system were found to be associated with a lower perceived need for infrastructural changes. The results of the study indicate the need for systematic support for the development of practice infrastructure in order to provide high-quality, safe primary care in the event of future crises similar to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Responding to COVID-19: The Suitability of Primary Care Infrastructure in 33 Countries

Windak

Nessler

Poel

et al. 2022

Self Cite

“…Per PC practice, one questionnaire was completed, preferably by a GP or by a staff member familiar with the practice organization. The overall response rate was 27.8% ranging from 1.55% in Denmark to 94.3% in Bulgaria [ 24 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety Culture and the Positive Association of Being a Primary Care Training Practice during COVID-19: The Results of the Multi-Country European PRICOV-19 Study

Silva

Adžić

Bussche

et al. 2022

Self Cite

The day-to-day work of primary care (PC) was substantially changed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Teaching practices needed to adapt both clinical work and teaching in a way that enabled the teaching process to continue, while maintaining safe and high-quality care. Our study aims to investigate the effect of being a training practice on a number of different outcomes related to the safety culture of PC practices. PRICOV-19 is a multi-country cross-sectional study that researches how PC practices were organized in 38 countries during the pandemic. Data was collected from November 2020 to December 2021. We categorized practices into training and non-training and selected outcomes relating to safety culture: safe practice management, community outreach, professional well-being and adherence to protocols. Mixed-effects regression models were built to analyze the effect of being a training practice for each of the outcomes, while controlling for relevant confounders. Of the participating practices, 2886 (56%) were non-training practices and 2272 (44%) were training practices. Being a training practice was significantly associated with a lower risk for adverse mental health events (OR: 0.83; CI: 0.70–0.99), a higher number of safety measures related to patient flow (Beta: 0.17; CI: 0.07–0.28), a higher number of safety incidents reported (RR: 1.12; CI: 1.06–1.19) and more protected time for meetings (Beta: 0.08; CI: 0.01–0.15). No significant associations were found for outreach initiatives, availability of triage information, use of a phone protocol or infection prevention measures and equipment availability. Training practices were found to have a stronger safety culture than non-training practices. These results have important policy implications, since involving more PC practices in education may be an effective way to improve quality and safety in general practice.

“…General practitioners (GPs) played a crucial role in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. However, they have experienced many barriers to fulfilling this role and many domains of quality of care have been affected [ 4 , 5 , 6 ]. For example, a scoping review revealed that healthcare access and utilization for both COVID and non-COVID-19 services decreased almost universally, across both higher- and lower-income countries [ 7 , 8 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Petrazzuoli

Collins

Poel

et al. 2023

Self Cite

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.