Search

Background: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic various ambulatory health care models (SARS-CoV-2 contact points: Subspecialised Primary Care Practices, Fever Clinics, and Special Places for Corona-Testing) were organised in a short period in Baden-Wuerttemberg, a region in Southern Germany. The aim of these SARS-CoV-2 contact points was to ensure medical treatment for patients with (suspected) and without SARS-CoV-2 infection. The present study aimed to assess the beliefs and practices of primary care physicians who either led a Subspecialised Primary Care Practice or a Primary Care Practice providing care as usual in Baden-Wuerttemberg during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This cross-sectional study was based on a paper-based questionnaire in primary care physicians during the first wave of the pandemic. Participants were identified via the web page of the Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians Baden-Wuerttemberg. The questionnaire was distributed in June and July 2020. It measured knowledge, practices, self-efficacy and fears towards SARS-CoV-2, using newly developed questions. Data was descriptively analysed. Results: One hundred fifty-five participants (92 leads of SARS-CoV-2 contact points/ 63 leads of primary care practices) completed the questionnaire. Out of 92 leads of SARS-CoV-2 contact points 74 stated to lead n Subspecialised Primary Care Practices. About half participants of both groups did not fear an own infection with the novel virus (between 50.8% and 62.2%), however about 75% feared financial loss. Knowledge was gained using various sources; main sources were the Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (between 82.5% and 83.8%) and the German Society for Hygiene and Microbiology (RKI) (between 88.9% and 95.9%). Leads of Subspecialised Primary Care Practice felt more confident to perform anamnestic/diagnostic procedures (p < 0.001). The same was found for the confidence level regarding decision-making concerning the further treatment (p < 0.001). Several prevention measures to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2 were adopted. Subspecialised Primary Care Practice had treated on average more patients with (suspected) COVID-19 (mean 408.12) than primary care practices (mean 83.8) (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that the Subspecialised Primary Care Practice that were implemented during the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic contributed containment of the pandemic. Leads of Subspecialised Primary Care Practice indicated that physical separation of patients with potential SARS-CoV-2 infection was easier compared to those who continued working in their own practice. Additionally, leads of Subspecialised Primary Care Practice felt more confident in dealing with patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Trial registration: The study has been prospectively registered at the German Clinical Trial Register (DRKS00022224). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), global researchers were confronted with major challenges. The German National Pandemic Cohort Network (NAPKON) was launched in fall 2020 to effectively leverage resources and bundle research activities in the fight against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We analyzed the setup phase of NAPKON as an example for multicenter studies in Germany, highlighting challenges and optimization potential in connecting 59 university and nonuniversity study sites. We examined the ethics application process of 121 ethics submissions considering durations, annotations, and outcomes. Study site activation and recruitment processes were investigated and related to the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections. For all initial ethics applications, the median time to a positive ethics vote was less than two weeks and 30 of these study sites (65%) joined NAPKON within less than three weeks each. Electronic instead of postal ethics submission (9.5 days (Q1: 5.75, Q3: 17) vs. 14 days (Q1: 11, Q3: 26), p value = 0.01) and adoption of the primary ethics vote significantly accelerated the ethics application process. Each study center enrolled a median of 37 patients during the 14-month observation period, with large differences depending on the health sector. We found a positive correlation between recruitment performance and COVID-19 incidence as well as hospitalization incidence. Our analysis highlighted the challenges and opportunities of the federated system in Germany. Digital ethics application tools, adoption of a primary ethics vote and standardized formal requirements lead to harmonized and thus faster study initiation processes during a pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Routinely collected health data from ambulatory care providers offer a wide range of research opportunities. However, the access is often (e.g., technically) hindered, particularly in Germany. In the following, we describe the development of an infrastructure for the analysis of pseudonymized routine data extracted from primary care practices in Germany. Further, we analyze the impact of the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 on the utilization of primary care services for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM type 2). Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, routine data were extracted from nine private primary care practices before and since the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 in Germany. The sample consisted of patients who were treated between 2016 and 2022 in one of the participating practices. The effects of the outbreak on the frequency of practice visits and the disease course of DM type 2 patients were analyzed by means of bivariate and multivariate analyses. Results: The developed infrastructure offers an analysis of routine data from outpatient care within 24 h. In total, routine data of 30,734 patients could be processed for the analyses with 4182 (13.6%) patients having a diagnosed DM type 2 and 59.0% of these patients were enrolled in a disease management program (DMP). In the multivariate analysis, there was a significant negative effect of the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak on utilization of outpatient services of patients with DM type 2 disease. This decrease was less pronounced among DMP patients. The glycated haemoglobin level (HbA1c) has not changed significantly. Conclusions: The study showed that the analysis of routine data from outpatient care in Germany is possible in a timely manner using a special developed electronic health record system and corresponding software. The significantly negative effect of the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak on utilization of outpatient services of patients with DM type 2 disease was less pronounced among DMP patients. Two years after the start of the Covid pandemic a significantly worsened course of illness cannot be observed. However, it must be taken into account that the observation period for clinically relevant outcomes is still relatively short. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite the vaccination process in Germany, a large share of the population is still susceptible to SARS-CoV-2. In addition, we face the spread of novel variants. Until we overcome the pandemic, reasonable mitigation and opening strategies are crucial to balance public health and economic interests.Methods: We model the spread of SARS-CoV-2 over the German counties by a graph-SIR-type, metapopulation model with particular focus on commuter testing. We account for political interventions by varying contact reduction values in private and public locations such as homes, schools, workplaces, and other. We consider different levels of lockdown strictness, commuter testing strategies, or the delay of intervention implementation. We conduct numerical simulations to assess the effectiveness of the different intervention strategies after one month. The virus dynamics in the regions (German counties) are initialized randomly with incidences between 75 and 150 weekly new cases per 100,000 inhabitants (red zones) or below (green zones) and consider 25 different initial scenarios of randomly distributed red zones (between 2 and 20% of all counties). To account for uncertainty, we consider an ensemble set of 500 Monte Carlo runs for each scenario.Results: We find that the strength of the lockdown in regions with out of control virus dynamics is most important to avoid the spread into neighboring regions. With very strict lockdowns in red zones, commuter testing rates of twice a week can substantially contribute to the safety of adjacent regions. In contrast, the negative effect of less strict interventions can be overcome by high commuter testing rates. A further key contributor is the potential delay of the intervention implementation. In order to keep the spread of the virus under control, strict regional lockdowns with minimum delay and commuter testing of at least twice a week are advisable. If less strict interventions are in favor, substantially increased testing rates are needed to avoid overall higher infection dynamics.Conclusions: Our results indicate that local containment of outbreaks and maintenance of low overall incidence is possible even in densely populated and highly connected regions such as Germany or Western Europe. While we demonstrate this on data from Germany, similar patterns of mobility likely exist in many countries and our results are, hence, generalizable to a certain extent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Care homes were hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic. Although high levels of psychosocial burden (i.e., anxiety, depression and stress) during the pandemic have been described for healthcare workers in hospitals, evidence on the psychosocial burden for nurses in care homes during the pandemic is scarce. Methods: A total of 811 nurses participated in a retrospective online survey between November 2020 and February 2021. Information about the COVID-19 situation (i.e., working demands, COVID-19 cases in their facility, and COVID-19-related burden) of nurses in German care homes during the first wave of the pandemic (March 2020 to June 2020) was gathered. The Stress Scale of the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scales (SDASS-21), the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-2 (GAD-2), the Patients-Health-Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2), and the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ) were used to screen for psychosocial burden. Results: Among nurses, 94.2% stated that working demands since the COVID-19 pandemic increased. Further, 59.1% showed clinically relevant levels of either stress, anxiety, and/or depression. Multiple regression analysis showed significant associations between COVID-19-related burden and qualification (p <.01), dissatisfaction with COVID-19 management of care home manager (p <.05), COVID-19-related anxiety (p <.001), and dementia as a focus of care (p <.05). Stress, depression, and anxiety showed associations with COVID-19 related burden at work (p <.01), COVID-19-related anxiety (p <.001), social support (p <.01), and sense of community (p <.05). Stress was also associated with COVID-19 cases among residents (p <.05), and size of care home (p <.05). Conclusion: Short- and long-term strategies (i.e., psychosocial counseling, mandatory team meetings, more highly qualified nurses, additional training) in the work environment of nursing, in crises, but beyond, should be encouraged to reduce the burden on nursing staff in care homes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, German early childhood education and care (ECEC) centres organised children's attendance in different ways, they reduced opening hours, provided emergency support for a few children, or closed completely. Further, protection and hygiene measures like fixed children-staff groups, ventilation and surface disinfection were introduced in ECEC centres. To inform or modify public health measures in ECEC, we investigate the occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 infections among children and staff in ECEC centres in light of social determinants (i.e. the socioeconomic status of the children) and recommended structural and hygiene measures. We focus on the question if the relevant factors differ between the 2nd (when no variant of concern (VOC) circulated) and the 3rd wave (when VOC B.1.1.7 (Alpha) predominated).Methods: Based on panel data from a weekly online survey of ECEC centre managers (calendar week 36/2020 to 22/2021, ongoing) including approx. 8500 centres, we estimate the number of SARS-CoV-2 infections in children and staff using random-effect-within-between (REWB) panel models for count data in the 2nd and 3rd wave.Results: ECEC centres with a high proportion of children with low socioeconomic status (SES) have a higher risk of infections in staff and children. Strict contact restrictions between groups like fixed group assignments for children and fixed staff assignments to groups prevent infections. Both effects tend to be stronger in the 3rd wave.Conclusion: ECEC centres with a large proportion of children with a low SES background and lack of using fixed child/staff cohorts experience higher COVID-19 rates. Over the long run, centres should be supported in maintaining recommended measures. Preventive measures such as the vaccination of staff should be prioritised in centres with large proportions of low SES children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research has shown that the risk for a severe course of COVID-19 is increased in the elderly population and among patients with chronic conditions. The aim of this study was to provide estimates of the size of vulnerable populations at high risk for a severe COVID-19 course in Germany based on the currently available risk factor data.Methods: We used nationwide outpatient claims data from the years 2010 to 2019 collected according to § 295 of the Code of Social Law V, covering data for all statutory health insurees (SHI) which is nearly 87% of the entire German population. We considered 15 chronic disorders based on the current state of knowledge about clinically relevant risk factors. Three risk groups for a severe COVID-19 course were defined: 1. individuals in the age group 15 to 59 years with at least two comorbid disorders; 2. individuals aged 60 to 79 years with at least one disorder and 3. all individuals 80 years and older irrespective of the presence of chronic conditions. Regional analysis was conducted at the level of administrative districts (n = 401).Results: Overall, 26% of individuals over 15 years were at high risk for a severe COVID-19 course in 2019 amounting to a total number of nearly 18.5 million individuals in Germany. This included 3.8 million individuals in risk group 1, 9.2 million in risk group 2, and 5.4 million in risk group 3, corresponding to 8, 50 and 100% of German inhabitants in the respective age groups. On the level of the 17 administrative regions formed by the Association of SHI Physicians (ASHIP regions), the proportion of individuals at high risk ranged between 21% in Hamburg and 35% in Saxony-Anhalt. Small-area estimates varied between 18% in Freiburg (Baden-Württemberg) and 39% in the district Elbe-Elster (Brandenburg).Conclusions: The present study provides small-area estimates of populations at high risk for a severe COVID-19 course. These data are of particular importance for planning of preventive measures such as vaccination.Trial Registration: not applicable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Evidence on socioeconomic inequalities in infections with the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) is still limited as most of the available studies are ecological in nature and individual-level data is sparse. We therefore analysed individual-level data on socioeconomic differences in the prevalence and perceived dangerousness of SARS-CoV-2 infections in local populations. Data were obtained from a population-based seroepidemiological study of adult individuals in two early German SARS-CoV-2 hotspots (n = 3903). Infection was determined by IgG antibody ELISA, RT-PCR testing and self-reports on prior positive PCR tests. The perceived dangerousness of an infection and socioeconomic position (SEP) were assessed by self-reports. Logistic and linear regression were applied to examine associations of multiple SEP measures with infection status and perceptions of dangerousness. Results: We found no evidence of socioeconomic inequalities in SARS-CoV-2 infections by education, occupation, income and subjective social status. Participants with lower education and lower subjective social status perceived an infection as more dangerous than their better-off counterparts. In successfully contained local outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 in Germany, infections may have been equally distributed across the socioeconomic spectrum. But residents in disadvantaged socioeconomic groups might have experienced a higher level of mental distress due to the higher perceived dangerousness of an infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]