Search

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic immensely impacted care provision, including quality of care in general practice. This paper aimed: (1) to assess how Belgian general practices acted upon the six dimensions of quality of care during COVID-19; (2) to study differences between the three Belgian regions; and (3) to benchmark the performance of the Belgian practices against the performance in other European countries. Methods: The data collected from 479 Belgian practices during 2020–2021 using an online survey as part of the international cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study were analyzed. Hereby, descriptive statistics, chi-squared tests, and binary logistic regression analyses were performed. Thirty-four survey questions related to the six dimensions of quality of care were selected as outcome variables. The adjusted regression models included four practice characteristics as covariates: practice type, being a teaching practice for GP trainees, multidisciplinarity of the team, and payment system. Results: Belgian practices made important organizational changes to deliver high-quality care during COVID-19. Most practices (n = 259; 56.1%) actively reached out to vulnerable patients. Limitations to the practice building or infrastructure threatened high-quality care in 266 practices (55.5%). Infection prevention measures could not always be implemented during COVID-19, such as using a cleaning protocol (n = 265; 57.2%) and providing a separate doctor bag for infection-related home visits (n = 130; 27.9%). Three hundred and sixty practices (82.0%) reported at least one safety incident related to a delayed care process in patients with an urgent condition. The adjusted regression analysis showed limited significant differences between the Belgian regions regarding the quality of care delivered. Belgian practices demonstrated varied performance compared to other European countries. For example, they excelled in always checking the feasibility of isolation at home but reported more patient safety incidents related to timely care than at least three-quarters of the other European countries. Conclusions: Future studies using different design methods are crucial to investigate which country and practice characteristics are associated with delivering high-quality care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) were adopted in Belgium in order to decrease social interactions between people and as such decrease viral transmission of SARS-CoV-2. With the aim to better evaluate the impact of NPIs on the evolution of the pandemic, an estimation of social contact patterns during the pandemic is needed when social contact patterns are not available yet in real time. Methods: In this paper we use a model-based approach allowing for time varying effects to evaluate whether mobility and pre-pandemic social contact patterns can be used to predict the social contact patterns observed during the COVID-19 pandemic between November 11, 2020 and July 4, 2022. Results: We found that location-specific pre-pandemic social contact patterns are good indicators for estimating social contact patterns during the pandemic. However, the relationship between both changes with time. Considering a proxy for mobility, namely the change in the number of visitors to transit stations, in interaction with pre-pandemic contacts does not explain the time-varying nature of this relationship well. Conclusion: In a situation where data from social contact surveys conducted during the pandemic are not yet available, the use of a linear combination of pre-pandemic social contact patterns could prove valuable. However, translating the NPIs at a given time into appropriate coefficients remains the main challenge of such an approach. In this respect, the assumption that the time variation of the coefficients can somehow be related to aggregated mobility data seems unacceptable during our study period for estimating the number of contacts at a given time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Belgium was one of the countries that was struck hard by COVID-19. Initially, the belief was that we were 'all in it together'. Emerging evidence showed however that deprived socioeconomic groups suffered disproportionally. Yet, few studies are available for Belgium. The main question addressed in this paper is whether excess mortality during the first COVID-19 wave followed a social gradient and whether the classic mortality gradient was reproduced. Methods: We used nationwide individually linked data from the Belgian National Register and the Census 2011. Age-standardized all-cause mortality rates were calculated during the first COVID-19 wave in weeks 11-20 in 2020 and compared with the rates during weeks 11-20 in 2015-2019 to calculate absolute and relative excess mortality by socioeconomic and -demographic characteristics. For both periods, relative inequalities in total mortality between socioeconomic and -demographic groups were calculated using Poisson regression. Analyses were stratified by age, gender and care home residence. Results: Excess mortality during the first COVID-19 wave was high in collective households, with care homes hit extremely hard by the pandemic. The social patterning of excess mortality was rather inconsistent and deviated from the usual gradient, mainly through higher mortality excesses among higher socioeconomic groups classes in specific age-sex groups. Overall, the first COVID-19 wave did not change the social patterning of mortality, however. Differences in relative inequalities between both periods were generally small and insignificant, except by household living arrangement. Conclusion: The social patterning during the first COVID-19 wave was exceptional as excess mortality did not follow the classic lines of higher mortality in lower classes and patterns were not always consistent. Relative mortality inequalities did not change substantially during the first COVID-19 wave compared to the reference period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]