Search

Background: To prevent the transmission of blood-borne infections and reach the elimination of viral hepatitis by 2030, the World Health Organization (WHO) has set the goal to distribute 300 sterile needles and syringes each year per person who injects drugs (PWID). We aimed to assess drug paraphernalia distribution in Germany in 2021, including the WHO indicator, and to analyse changes to the distribution measured in 2018., Methods: We conducted a repeated cross-sectional study of low-threshold drug services in Germany. We assessed type and quantity of distributed drug paraphernalia and the number of supplied PWID in 2021 using an online and paper-based questionnaire. We conducted a descriptive statistical analysis of data from 2021, assessed fulfillment of the WHO indicator and changes in services that participated 2021 and in the previous study 2018., Results: Five hundred and eighty-nine of 1760 distributed questionnaires were returned in 2021. 204 drug services from 15 out of 16 federal states confirmed drug paraphernalia distribution, covering 20% of Germany's rural and 51% of urban counties. 108 services had also participated in 2018. The most frequently distributed paraphernalia for injecting drug use in 2021 were syringes (97% of services), needles (96%) and vitamin C (90%). Pre-cut aluminium foil (79% of services) and pipes (28%) for inhaling, and sniff tubes (43%) for nasal use were distributed less frequently. We found a median reduction in distributed syringes by 18% and by 12% for needles compared to 2018. Of 15 states, two reached the 2030 WHO-target for needles and one for syringes., Conclusions: The current national estimates and changes from 2018 to 2021 for drug paraphernalia distribution seem far from meeting the WHO target. Reasons could include a change in drug consumption behaviour towards less injecting use and more inhaling, and effects of the COVID-19 pandemic (supply difficulties, social distancing, lockdown, reduced opening hours of services). We observed pronounced regional differences in drug paraphernalia distribution. To close existing gaps, Germany should expand its drug paraphernalia distribution programmes and other harm reduction services, such as drug consumption rooms. Further investigation of determinants for adequate distribution is essential to reduce blood-borne infections in this key population., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Background: The current paper analyzed the effect of the pandemic-induced lockdown on maternal mental health during the first 12 postpartum weeks in Germany., Methods: In this cohort study, we compared the participants' anamnestic backgrounds and the results of psychological tests, measuring stress levels, depressive symptoms and attachment. The 327 participants were divided into two groups with one representing the "pre-COVID" sample and the other the "lockdown" sample. We performed multiple comparisons, investigating the distribution of diagnoses and the correlating risk profiles between the two cohorts., Results: Our analysis showed a significant difference between the two cohorts, with a 13.2% increase in the prevalence of adjustment disorders (AD), but not postpartum depression (PPD), in the first 12 weeks postpartum. However, during the pandemic, women with AD had fewer risk factors compared to their pre-pandemic counterparts. In the "lockdown" cohort, a tendency toward higher stress and lower mother-child attachment was observed in AD., Conclusions: In sum, we observed some negative impact of the pandemic on maternal mental health. The lockdown might have contributed to an increase in the number of cases involving AD in the postpartum period. The prevalence of PPD (ca. 6-10%), on the other hand, was not affected by the lockdown. Thus, the effect of COVID-19 on maternal mental health might not, after all, have been as severe as assumed at the beginning of the pandemic., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Background: The international study PRICOV-19 aims to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the organisation of primary health care. The German part focuses on German general practitioners during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper addresses the following research questions: (1) How were changes in tasks on primary care and patient treatment perceived by GPs?, (2) What was the role of GPs during the pandemic, and how was their wellbeing?, (3) How did GPs perceive health policy measures?, and, (4) What influenced the attitudes of GPs on health policy measures? Methods: This study pursues a multi-country cross-sectional design. Data collection took place throughout Germany from 01.02. to 28.02.2021 with a quantitative online questionnaire consisting of 53 items. The questionnaire was analysed through descriptive and inferential analyses using correlation and multiple regression models. Results: The response rate was 20.4% (n = 349). The respondents were mainly GPs (59.6%) in single practices (62.5%) with a mean work experience of 15 to 20 years. GPs experienced a change in their work and practice organisation (80.3%). They felt a high responsibility (70.6%) and found their work has become more meaningful to them (76%). They also saw a lack of political support (75.2%) and that the measures taken by the government overburdened the daily practice (66.4%). Not many GPs were at risk of being distressed (53.4%) but rated the health policies rather negatively (60%). The multiple regression showed, the more GPs were exposed to risk of distress, the worse they assessed the government's measures. Conclusion: GPs perceived their work as relevant and felt confident they could fulfil their tasks, but noticed that health policy initially hardly supported the outpatient sector. Health policies should increase their competence in relation to primary care, ensure its needs and consider an active inclusion of GPs in preparedness plans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Given the nature of the spread of SARS-CoV-2, strong regional patterns in the fatal consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic related to local characteristics such as population and health care infrastructures were to be expected. In this paper we conduct a detailed examination of the spatial correlation of deaths in the first year of the pandemic in two neighbouring countries - Germany and Poland, which, among high income countries, seem particularly different in terms of the death toll associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. The analysis aims to yield evidence that spatial patterns of mortality can provide important clues as to the reasons behind significant differences in the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic in these two countries., Methods: Based on official health and population statistics on the level of counties, we explore the spatial nature of mortality in 2020 in the two countries - which, as we show, reflects important contextual differences. We investigate three different measures of deaths: the officially recorded COVID-19 deaths, the total values of excessive deaths and the difference between the two. We link them to important pre-pandemic regional characteristics such as population, health care and economic conditions in multivariate spatial autoregressive models. From the point of view of pandemic related fatalities we stress the distinction between direct and indirect consequences of COVID-19, separating the latter further into two types, the spatial nature of which is likely to differ., Results: The COVID-19 pandemic led to much more excess deaths in Poland than in Germany. Detailed spatial analysis of deaths at the regional level shows a consistent pattern of deaths officially registered as related to COVID-19. For excess deaths, however, we find strong spatial correlation in Germany but little such evidence in Poland., Conclusions: In contrast to Germany, for Poland we do not observe the expected spatial pattern of total excess deaths and the excess deaths over and above the official COVID-19 deaths. This difference cannot be explained by pre-pandemic regional factors such as economic and population structures or by healthcare infrastructure. The findings point to the need for alternative explanations related to the Polish policy reaction to the pandemic and failures in the areas of healthcare and public health, which resulted in a massive loss of life., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Nonspecific chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a complex symptom with numerous possible causes and influencing factors. Understanding how modifiable factors affect the course of CLBP is important for preventing progression. As the COVID-19 pandemic has changed the lifestyle of many people, this study paper assessed whether it also changed the influence of modifiable lifestyle factors (regular exercise and sedentary behaviour) and mental health factors (anxiety and depression) on CLBP pain intensity and disability by comparing the strength of these associations before and during the pandemic. We hypothesised that the importance of regular physical activity and good mental health for CLBP patients would increase during the pandemic., Methods: These questions were investigated in a cross-sectional study of insurance claims data and self-reported data from various questionnaires from 3,478 participants in a German CLBP health intervention (2014-2021) by calculating pre- and intra-pandemic odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each variable of interest and outcome. Potential confounders were also considered. Pandemic status was treated as an effect modifier. Based on the date of enrolment, participants were classified as "pre-pandemic" or "pandemic"., Results: Regularly exercising ≥ 4 h/week significantly reduced the odds of high disability for men (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.31 - 0.79, p = 0.003) and women (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.14 - 0.563, p = 0.002) and reduced the probability of severe pain in women (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.21 - 0.65, p < 0.001). Each one-point increase in PHQ-4 score for anxiety and depression increased the OR of high pain intensity by 1.25 points (95% CI 1.18 - 1.34, p < 0.001). A clear impact of COVID-19 lockdowns was observed. In individuals who exercised ≥ 4 h/week the OR of high disability was 0.57 (95% CI 0.36 - 0.92, p = 0.021) in the pre-pandemic group compared to 0.29 (95% CI 0.12 - 0.56, p = 0.002) in the pandemic group. The probability of high disability increased from an OR of 1.42 (95% CI 1.33 - 1.52, p < 0.001) per marginal increase in the PHQ-4 scale before the pandemic, to an OR of 1.73 (95% CI 1.58 - 1.89, p < 0.001) during the pandemic., Conclusions: The magnitude of association of the factors that influenced high pain intensity and disability increased during the pandemic. On the one hand, the protective effect of regular exercising was greater in participants surveyed during lockdown. On the other hand, a higher risk through anxiety or depression during the lockdown was identified. An additional study with objective measures of sedentary behaviour and physical activity is needed to validate these results. More in-depth investigation of lockdown-induced associations between reduced daily physical activity, increased levels of anxiety and depression, and their effects on CLPB could also be worthwhile., Trial Registration: This study used routinely collected data from a CLBP intervention that was previously evaluated and registered in the German Registry of Clinical Trials under DRKS00015463 (04/09/2018). The original ethics approval, informed consent and self-reported questionnaire have remained unchanged and are still valid., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Conspiracy beliefs have become widespread throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Previous studies have shown that endorsing conspiracy beliefs leads to lower protective guideline adherence (i.e., wearing face masks), posing a threat to public health measures. The current study expands this research across the lifespan, i.e., in a sample of adolescents with mental health problems. Here, we investigated the association between conspiracy beliefs and guideline adherence while also exploring the predictors of conspiracy beliefs. Methods: N = 93 adolescent psychiatric outpatients (57% female, mean age: 15.8) were assessed using anonymous paper–pencil questionnaires. Endorsement of generic and COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs was assessed, in addition to items measuring adherence to protective guidelines and mental health (stress, depressive symptoms, emotional/behavioral problems, and adverse childhood experiences). Multiple regressions and supervised machine learning (conditional random forests) were used for analyses. Results: Fourteen percent of our sample fully endorsed at least one COVID-19 conspiracy theory, while protective guidelines adherence was relatively high (M = 4.92, on a scale from 1 to 7). The endorsement of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs—but not of generic conspiracy beliefs—was associated with lower guideline adherence (β = − 0.32, 95% CI − 0.53 to − 0.11, p <.001). Conditional random forests suggested that adverse childhood experiences and peer and conduct problems were relevant predictors of both conspiracy belief categories. Conclusion: While a significant proportion of our sample of adolescents in psychiatric treatment endorsed conspiracy beliefs, the majority did not. Furthermore, and to some degree, contrary to public perception, we found that adolescents show relatively good adherence to public health measures—even while experiencing a high degree of mental distress. The predictive value of adverse childhood experiences and peer/conduct problems for conspiracy beliefs might be explained by compensatory mechanisms to ensure the safety, structure, and inclusion that conspiracies provide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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).

Background: Increased working from home has imposed new challenges on public service employees, while also granting opportunities for job crafting. Grounding on the Job Demands-Resources model and Hobfoll's Conservation of Resources theory this exploratory research aims to investigate the work-nonwork balance of employees one and a half years after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, the research focus lies on employees' job crafting strategies to optimize their working from home experience concerning boundary management and energy resource management. Methods: Twelve semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with public service employees from different sectors in Germany. The experiences were content analyzed using the software MaxQDA and inductive and deductive categories were derived. Results: Boundary management comprised different strategies such as communicative (e.g., negotiating work time), physical (e.g., going to the garden), temporal (e.g., logging off in between the work day) and behavioral (e.g., prioritizing tasks) strategies. The job crafting strategies regarding energy management included preventing exhaustion (e.g. taking breaks), healthy cooking and energy management in case of sickness (e.g. deciding on sick leave). Conclusions: This qualitative case study enriches research on job crafting by offering insights on boundary tactics and energy resources management strategies for remote working during the COVID-19 pandemic. The results point out different starting points for employees and decision makers, how a work-nonwork balance, energy management and thus employees' wellbeing may be increased when working from home in the future. Trial registration: The study design and methodology were approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Cologne and the study was prospectively registered (Ref No. 21-1417_1). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate the psychosocial burden in children and adolescents with juvenile rheumatic diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: As part of the multicentre observational KICK-COVID study linked to the National Pediatric Rheumatology Database, adolescents < 21 years and parents of children < 12 years with rheumatic diseases answered questions on perceptions of health risk (PHR) due to SARS-CoV2, stress, well-being (WHO-5) and symptoms of depression (PHQ-9) and anxiety (GAD-7). Data were collected at routine visits from June to December 2021 and assessed for association with demographic and clinical parameters, treatment and patient-reported outcomes by multivariable regression analyses. Results: Data from 1356 individuals (69% female, 50% adolescents) were included. Median PHR on a numeric rating scale (NRS, 0–10) was 4 (IQR 2–6), median perceived stress was 3 (IQR 1–6). Adolescents reported a worse well-being with a significantly lower median WHO-5-score (60, IQR 40–76) than parents reported for their children < 12 years (80, IQR 68–84). Moderate to severe symptoms of depression and anxiety were reported by 14.3% and 12.3% of the adolescents, respectively. PHR was significantly higher in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus, methotrexate or biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug therapy than in patients without these characteristics, whereas lower WHO-5 or higher PHQ-9 or GAD-7 scores were only associated with poorer patient-reported health status and physical functioning. Conclusion: The perception of health risk due to SARS-CoV2 infection was not paralleled by an impairment of mental health, which were, however, significantly correlated with self-rated health status and functional capacity, highlighting the importance of patient-reported outcome assessment. Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS), no. DRKS00027974. Registered on 27th of January 2022. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic restrictions posed challenges to maintaining healthy lifestyles and physical well-being. During the first mobility restrictions from March to mid-July 2020, the German population was advised to stay home, except for work, exercise, and essential shopping. Our objective was to comprehensively assess the impact of these restrictions on changes in physical activity and sedentary behavior to identify the most affected groups. Methods: Between April 30, 2020, and May 12, 2020, we distributed a COVID-19-specific questionnaire to participants of the German National Cohort (NAKO). This questionnaire gathered information about participants' physical activity and sedentary behavior currently compared to the time before the restrictions. We integrated this new data with existing information on anxiety, depressive symptoms, and physical activity. The analyses focused on sociodemographic factors, social relationships, physical health, and working conditions. Results: Out of 152,421 respondents, a significant proportion reported altered physical activity and sedentary behavioral patterns due to COVID-19 restrictions. Over a third of the participants initially meeting the WHO's physical activity recommendation could no longer meet the guidelines during the restrictions. Participants reported substantial declines in sports activities (mean change (M) = -0.38; 95% CI: -.390; -.378; range from -2 to + 2) and reduced active transportation (M = -0.12; 95% CI: -.126; -.117). However, they also increased recreational physical activities (M = 0.12; 95% CI:.117;.126) while engaging in more sedentary behavior (M = 0.24; 95% CI:.240;.247) compared to pre-restriction levels. Multivariable linear and log-binomial regression models indicated that younger adults were more affected by the restrictions than older adults. The shift to remote work, self-rated health, and depressive symptoms were the factors most strongly associated with changes in all physical activity domains, including sedentary behavior, and the likelihood to continue following the physical activity guidelines. Conclusions: Mobility patterns shifted towards inactivity or low-intensity activities during the nationwide restrictions in the spring of 2020, potentially leading to considerable and lasting health risks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study was to examine the Coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19) vaccine policies disparities and effectiveness in Germany, Denmark and Bulgaria, with a view to providing lessons for global vaccination and response to possible outbreak risks. Methods: This study analyzed big data through public information on the official websites of the Ministries of Health of the European Union, Germany, Denmark and Bulgaria and the official websites of the World Health Organization. We systematically summarized the COVID-19 vaccine policies of the three countries, and selected the following six indicators for cross-cutting vaccination comparisons: COVID-19 vaccine doses administered per 100 people, COVID-19 vaccination rate, the share of people with fully vaccinated, the share of people only partly vaccinated, cumulative confirmed COVID-19 cases per million, cumulative confirmed COVID-19 deaths per million. Meanwhile, we selected the following four indicators for measuring the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccine policy implementation: daily cases per million, daily deaths per million, the effective reproduction rate (Rt), the moving-average case fatality rate (CFR). Results: Although these three EU countries had the same start time for vaccination, and the COVID-19 vaccine supply was coordinated by the EU, there are still differences in vaccination priorities, vaccination types, and vaccine appointment methods. Compared to Germany and Denmark, Bulgaria had the least efficient vaccination efforts and the worst vaccination coverage, with a vaccination rate of just over 30% as of June 2023, and the maximum daily deaths per million since vaccination began in the country was more than three times that of the other two countries. From the perspective of implementation effect, vaccination has a certain effect on reducing infection rate and death rate, but the spread of new mutant strains obviously aggravates the severity of the epidemic and reduces the effectiveness of the vaccine. Among them, the spread of the Omicron mutant strain had the most serious impact on the three countries, showing an obvious epidemic peak. Conclusions: Expanding vaccination coverage has played a positive role in reducing COVID-19 infection and mortality rates and stabilizing Rt. Priority vaccination strategies targeting older people and at-risk groups have been shown to be effective in reducing COVID-19 case severity and mortality in the population. However, the emergence and spread of new variant strains, and the relaxation of epidemic prevention policies, still led to multiple outbreaks peaking. In addition, vaccine hesitancy, mistrust in government and ill-prepared health systems are hampering vaccination efforts. Among the notable ones are divergent types of responses to vaccine safety issue could fuel mistrust and hesitancy around vaccination. At this stage, it is also necessary to continue to include COVID-19 vaccination in priority vaccination plans and promote booster vaccination to prevent severe illness and death. Improving the fairness of vaccine distribution and reducing the degree of vaccine hesitancy are the focus of future vaccination work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While solidarity practices were important in mitigating the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, their limits became evident as the pandemic progressed. Taking a longitudinal approach, this study analyses German residents' changing perceptions of solidarity practices during the COVID-19 pandemic and examines potential reasons for these changes. Methods: Adults living in Germany were interviewed in April 2020 (n = 46), October 2020 (n = 43) and October 2021 (n = 40) as part of the SolPan Research Commons, a large-scale, international, qualitative, longitudinal study uniquely situated in a major global public health crisis. Interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis. Results: While solidarity practices were prominently discussed and positively evaluated in April 2020, this initial enthusiasm waned in October 2020 and October 2021. Yet, participants still perceived solidarity as important for managing the pandemic and called for institutionalized forms of solidarity in October 2020 and October 2021. Reasons for these changing perceptions of solidarity included (i) increasing personal and societal costs to act in solidarity, (ii) COVID-19 policies hindering solidarity practices, and (iii) a perceived lack of reciprocity as participants felt that solidarity practices from the state were not matching their individual efforts. Conclusions: Maintaining solidarity contributes to maximizing public health during a pandemic. Institutionalized forms of solidarity to support those most in need contribute to perceived reciprocity among individuals, which might increase their motivation to act in solidarity. Thus, rather than calling for individual solidarity during times of crisis, authorities should consider implementing sustaining solidarity-based social support systems that go beyond immediate crisis management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article. [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: As vaccines for COVID-19 became available, many countries introduced an obligation in 2021 for employees to prove their COVID-19 status at work, known in Germany as the 3G rule (vaccinated, recovered, tested). In view of the controversial debate, there was concern that employees might try to avoid providing mandatory COVID-19 certificates by taking sick leave. The aim of this study was to investigate whether mandatory COVID-19 tests in the workplace led to such an evasive response. Method: For an empirical panel analysis, we collected data from official sources and combined aggregated health insurance data on sick leave, epidemiological data on laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infections, and vaccination rates for the German states from September 2021 to January 2022. We used a regional panel data analysis to estimate the impact of the mandatory COVID-19 certificates at the workplace on workers' sick leave. The regional vaccination rate reflected differences in treatment intensity. Results: This study contributes to the limited evidence on the potential impact of introducing mandatory COVID-19 certificates at the workplace on sickness absence rates. In fact, our results showed that after controlling for infection rates, a one percentage point lower vaccination rate led to a 0.021 percentage point increase in the sickness absence rate when the 3G rule came into effect. This effect was measured with high statistical precision. In addition, in robustness checks, we controlled for a number of other possible influencing factors that may have affected sickness behaviours, such as time-varying labour market situations. However, the results remained robust. Conclusions: The results of our empirical panel analysis implied that mandatory COVID-19 certificates in the workplace led to evasive responses and to additional days of sick leave of a relevant magnitude. Testing obligations were meant to help contain the epidemic. However, when introducing controversial obligations, it is important to consider evasive responses and to design the rules appropriately and communicate them convincingly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Interruption of transmission chains has been crucial in the COVID-19 response. The Emergency Operations Centre (EOC) at the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) coordinated cross-border case and contact tracing activities at the national level by sharing data with German public health authorities (PHA) and other countries. Data on these activities were not collected in the national surveillance system, and thus were challenging to quantify. Our aim was to describe cross-border COVID-19 case and contact tracing activities including lessons learnt by PHA to adapt the procedures accordingly. Methods: Case and contact tracing events were recorded using unique identifiers. We collected data on cases, contacts, dates of exposure and/or SARS-CoV-2 positive test results and exposure setting. We performed descriptive analyses of events from 06.04.-31.12.2020. We conducted interviews with PHA to understand experiences and lessons learnt, applying a thematic approach for qualitative analysis. Results: From 06.04.-31.12.2020 data on 7,527 cross-border COVID-19 case and contact tracing activities were collected. Germany initiated communication 5,200 times, and other countries 2,327 times. Communication from other countries was most frequently initiated by Austria (n = 1,184, 50.9%), Switzerland (n = 338, 14.5%), and the Netherlands (n = 168, 7.2%). Overall, 3,719 events (49.4%) included information on 5,757 cases (median 1, range: 1–42), and 4,114 events (54.7%) included information on 13,737 contacts (median: 1, range: 1–1,872). The setting of exposure was communicated for 2,247 of the events (54.6%), and most frequently included private gatherings (35.2%), flights (24.1%) and work-related meetings (20.3%). The median time delay between exposure date and contact information receipt at RKI was five days. Delay between positive test result and case information receipt was three days. Main challenges identified through five interviews were missing data or delayed accessibility particularly from flights, and lack of clear and easy to use communication channels. More and better trained staff were mentioned as ideas for improving future pandemic response preparedness. Conclusion: Cross-border case and contact tracing data can supplement routine surveillance but are challenging to measure. We need improved systems for cross-border event management, by improving training and communication channels, that will help strengthen monitoring activities to better guide public health decision-making and secure a good future pandemic response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with acute COVID-19 can develop persistent symptoms (long/post COVID-19 syndrome). This study aimed to project the economic, health care, and pension costs due to long/post-COVID-19 syndrome with new onset in Germany in 2021. Methods: Using secondary data, economic costs were calculated based on wage rates and the loss of gross value-added. Pension payments were determined based on the incidence, duration, and amount of disability pensions. Health care expenditure was calculated based on rehabilitation expenses. Results: The analysis estimated a production loss of 3.4 billion euros. The gross value-added loss was calculated to be 5.7 billion euros. The estimated financial burden on the health care and pension systems due to SARS-CoV-2 infection was approximately 1.7 billion euros. Approximately 0.4 percent of employees are projected to be wholly or partially withdrawn from the labor market in the medium term due to long/post-COVID with new onset in 2021. Conclusion: Costs of long/post-COVID-19 syndrome with new onset in 2021 are not negligible for the German economy and health care and pension systems but may still be manageable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Debate over "social distancing" as a response to the pandemic includes the claim that disrupting clinical and public health programming dependent on human-to-human contact increased non-COVID-19 deaths. This claim warrants testing because novel pathogens will continue to emerge. Tests, however, appear frustrated by lack of a convention for estimating non-COVID-19 deaths that would have occurred had clinical and public health programming during the pre-vaccine pandemic remained as efficacious as in the pre-pandemic era. Intending to hasten the emergence of such a convention, we describe and demonstrate "new-signal, prior-response expectations" suggested by research and methods at the intersection of epidemiology and process control engineering. Methods: Using German data, we estimate pre-pandemic public health efficacy by applying Box-Jenkins methods to 271 weekly counts of all-cause deaths from December 29 2014 through March 8 2020. We devise new-signal, prior-response expectations by applying the model to weekly non-COVID-19 deaths from March 9 2020 through December 26 2020. Results: The COVID-19 pandemic did not coincide with more non-COVID-19 deaths than expected from the efficacy of responses to pre-pandemic all-cause deaths. Conclusions: New-signal, prior-response estimates can contribute to evaluating the efficacy of public health programming in reducing non-COVID-19 deaths during the pre-vaccine pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Social media offer women a space to discuss birth-related fears and experiences. This is particularly the case during the COVID-19 pandemic when measures to contain the spread of the virus and high rates of infection have had an impact on the delivery of care, potentially restricting women's rights and increasing the risk of experiencing different forms of mistreatment or violence. Through the lens of birth integrity, we focused on the experiences of women giving birth in Germany as shared on social media, and on what may have sheltered or violated their integrity during birth. Methods: Using thematic analysis, we identified key themes in 127 comments and associated reactions (i.e. "likes", emojis) posted on a Facebook public page in response to the dissemination of a research survey on maternity care in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: Women contributing to the dataset gave birth during March and December 2020. They were most negatively affected by own mask-wearing –especially during the active phase of labour, not being allowed a birth companion of choice, lack of supportive care, and exclusion of their partner from the hospital. Those topics generated the most reactions, revealing compassion from other women and mixed feelings about health measures, from acceptation to anger. Many women explicitly formulated how inhumane or disrespectful the care was. While some women felt restricted by the tight visiting rules, those were seen as positive by others, who benefited from the relative quiet of maternity wards and opportunities for postpartum healing and bonding. Conclusion: Exceptional pandemic circumstances have introduced new parameters in maternity care, some of which appear acceptable, necessary, or beneficial to women, and some of which can be considered violations of birth integrity. Our research calls for the investigation of the long-term impact of those violations and the reassessment of the optimal conditions of the delivery of respectful maternity during the pandemic and beyond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, children and adolescents worldwide have disproportionally been affected in their psychological health and wellbeing. We conducted a cohort study among German school children, aiming at assessing levels of general anxiety disorder (GAD) and identifying associated factors in the second pandemic year. Methods: A cohort of 660 students from 24 Berlin schools was recruited to fill in questionnaires including the GAD-7 tool on anxiety symptoms at three time points between June and September 2021. To adjust for non-random attrition, we applied inverse probability weighting. We describe reported GAD levels stratified by time point, sex, and school type and report odds ratios from univariate logistic regression. Results: In total, 551 participants (83%) filled in at least one questionnaire at any time point. At the first time point in June 2021, 25% of the children and adolescents reported anxiety symptoms with a GAD-7 score ≥ 5, decreasing to 16% in August 2021 directly after the summer holidays and rising again to 26% in September 2021. The majority of reported anxiety levels belonged to the least severe category. Being female, attending secondary school, coming from a household with lower education or with lower income level, and being vaccinated against COVID-19 were significantly linked with reporting anxiety symptoms. Preceding COVID-19 infection and anxiety were negatively associated. Conclusion: Overall, anxiety in school children was lower in mid-2021 than in the first pandemic year, but still double compared to pre-pandemic data. Reporting of anxiety symptoms during the second pandemic year was especially high in females and in secondary school students. Policy makers should pay additional attention to the mental health status of school children, even as the pandemic situation might stabilize. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Though evidence on the detrimental impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in nursing homes is vast, research focusing on general practitioners' (GP) care during the pandemic in nursing homes is still scarce. Methods: A retrospective online survey among 1,010 nursing home managers in Germany was conducted during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic between November 2020 and February 2021. Associations between perceived deficits in GP care (routine and acute visits) and both general and COVID-19-related characteristics of nursing homes were analysed using multiple logistic regression analyses. Results: The majority of nursing home managers reported no deficits in GP care (routine visits, 84.3%; acute visits, 92.9%). Logistic regression analyses revealed that deficits in GP care (routine visits) were significantly associated with visiting restrictions for GPs and nursing home size. Small nursing homes (1–50 residents) were significantly more likely to report deficits in GP care (routine visits) compared to medium (51–100 residents) and large nursing homes (> 100 residents). Further, deficits in GP care (acute visits) were significantly associated with dementia as a focus of care and the burden of insufficient testing for SARS-CoV-2 among residents. Moreover, visiting restrictions for GPs were significantly associated with dementia as the focus of care and the COVID-19 incidence at the federal state level. Finally, COVID-19 cases in nursing homes were significantly associated with size of nursing homes, COVID-19-incidence on the federal state level and the burden of insufficient testing capacities for SARS-CoV-2 among residents. Conclusion: We found structural factors associated with GP care deficits during the pandemic. New concepts for GP care should be implemented in pandemic preparedness plans to ensure high quality, consistent, and reliable GP care as well as effective infection prevention measures in nursing homes. [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: The Covid-19 pandemic led to increased work-related strain and psychosocial burden in nurses worldwide, resulting in high prevalences of mental health problems. Nurses in long-term care facilities seem to be especially affected by the pandemic. Nevertheless, there are few findings indicating possible positive changes for health care workers. Therefore, we investigated which psychosocial burdens and potential positive aspects nurses working in long-term care facilities experience during the Covid-19 pandemic. Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study among nurses and nursing assistants working in nursing homes in Germany. The survey contained the third German version of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ III). Using Welch’s t-tests, we compared the COPSOQ results of our sample against a pre-pandemic reference group of geriatric nurses from Germany. Additionally, we conducted semi-structured interviews with geriatric nurses with a special focus on psychosocial stress, to reach a deeper understanding of their experiences on work-related changes and burdens during the pandemic. Data were analysed using thematic coding (Braun and Clarke). Results: Our survey sample (n = 177) differed significantly from the pre-pandemic reference group in 14 out of 31 COPSOQ scales. Almost all of these differences indicated negative changes. Our sample scored significantly worse regarding the scales ‘quantitative demands’, ‘hiding emotions’, ‘work-privacy conflicts’, ‘role conflicts’, ‘quality of leadership’, ‘support at work’, ‘recognition’, ‘physical demands’, ‘intention to leave profession’, ‘burnout’, ‘presenteeism’ and ‘inability to relax’. The interviews (n = 15) revealed six main themes related to nurses’ psychosocial stress: ‘overall working conditions’, ‘concern for residents’, ‘management of relatives’, ‘inability to provide terminal care‘, ‘tensions between being infected and infecting others’ and ‘technicisation of care’. ‘Enhanced community cohesion’ (interviews), ‘meaning of work’ and ‘quantity of social relations’ (COPSOQ III) were identified as positive effects of the pandemic. Conclusions: Results clearly illustrate an aggravation of geriatric nurses’ situation and psychosocial burden and only few positive changes due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Pre-existing hardships seem to have further deteriorated and new stressors added to nurses’ strain. The perceived erosion of care, due to an overemphasis of the technical in relation to the social and emotional dimensions of care, seems to be especially burdensome to geriatric nurses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To mitigate the potential consequences of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on public life, the German Federal Government and Ministry of Health enacted a strict lockdown protocol on March 16, 2020. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on physical and mental health status and the supply of medical care and medications for people with epilepsy (PWE) in Germany. Methods: The Epi2020 study was a large, multicenter study focused on different healthcare aspects of adults with epilepsy. In addition to clinical and demographic characteristics, patients were asked to answer a questionnaire on the impact of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic between March and May 2020. Furthermore, the population-based number of epilepsy-related admissions in Hessen was evaluated for the January-June periods of 2017–2020 to detect pandemic-related changes. Results: During the first wave of the pandemic, 41.6% of PWE reported a negative impact on their mental health, while only a minority reported worsening of their seizure situation. Mental and physical health were significantly more negatively affected in women than men with epilepsy and in PWE without regular employment. Moreover, difficulties in ensuring the supply of sanitary products (25.8%) and antiseizure medications (ASMs; 19.9%) affected PWE during the first lockdown; no significant difference regarding these impacts between men and women or between people with and without employment was observed. The number of epilepsy-related admissions decreased significantly during the first wave. Conclusions: This analysis provides an overview of the general and medical care of epilepsy patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. PWE in our cohort frequently reported psychosocial distress during the first wave of the pandemic, with significant adverse effects on mental and physical health. Women and people without permanent jobs especially reported distress due to the pandemic. The COVID‐19 pandemic has added to the mental health burden and barriers to accessing medication and medical services, as self-reported by patients and verified in population-based data on hospital admissions. Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS), DRKS00022024. Registered October 2, 2020, http://www.drks.de/DRKS00022024 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many studies have previously compared the prevalence or sample means of distress and mental health problems from before to during the COVID-19 pandemic, while results on changes at the individual-level, and regarding multiple outcome measures are demanded. Methods: This online study investigated individual changes in stress and mental health from before the COVID-19 pandemic to the first lockdown in adults from Southeastern Germany. This region was selected as it was where SARS-CoV-2 was first documented in Germany, and also due to the implementation of strict stay-at-home orders and social contact prohibitions. From April 10–27, 2020, we collected state measures and their clinical relevance for the subareas of perceived stress: worries, tension, joy, and demands. We also collected information regarding the following mental health problems: depression, anxiety, pathological worry, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and health anxiety; as well as retrospective measures of how participants felt they have changed in comparison to before the pandemic, ranging from worse to better. Results: The analytical sample comprised 396 adult participants. On average, participants experienced increases in worries, tension, and lack of joy, and increases in mental health problems, but a decrease in demands. Perceived increases in symptoms of depression (26.0%) and PTSD (25.5%) were significantly more frequent than in symptoms of anxiety (particularly acute fear and panic) (5.6%), pathological worry (9.8%), and health anxiety (7.3%) (ps<.001). One per 10 participants (10.4%) reported an increase in depressive symptoms, and nearly two per 10 (18.4%) an increase in PTSD symptoms and additionally showed a clinically relevant symptom strain during lockdown. Interestingly, mainly non-specific PTSD symptoms associated with a general stress reaction were experienced to be increased. Conclusion: The findings suggest a dissociation of perceived changes in subareas of stress and mental health with a particular experience of increases in depressive and general stress symptoms and a decrease in external demands. This points to a need for a more differentiated view on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on stress and mental health, and for targeted interventions for mental health problems arising frequently during the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In Patients suffering from post-COVID syndrome, in addition to physical limitations, cognitive limitations, fatigue, dyspnea as well as depression and anxiety disorders may also be present. Up to now (as of May 2022), approx. 514 million people worldwide have been infected with SARS-CoV-2, in Germany this affects approx. 25 million. In Germany, 2.5 million people could potentially be affected by post-COVID syndrome. Post-COVID is thus a highly relevant public health issue. So far, there is no specific causal therapy for the post-COVID syndrome, but with multimodal symptom-oriented rehabilitation, the course can be favourably influenced. However, there is no study yet that focuses on patients in different rehabilitation indications and compares the focal symptomatology and coping strategies as well as the patients' benefit per indication. Methods/design: As first objective, pulmonal, cardiac, neurological, cognitive or/and psychological functional impairments in rehabilitation patients after COVID-19 disease will be described. The second objective is the differentiated review of the specific rehabilitation measures, in the short term and in the longer term for the purpose of future prognoses and optimisation of therapeutic interventions. This prospective, non-randomised, controlled longitudinal study, plus multi-group comparisons will take place in seven rehabilitation clinics of different specialisations: cardiological rehab, pneumological rehab, neurological rehab, psychosomatic rehab. Within 12 months, 1000 cases across all participating centres will be included. Somatic and psychological testing will be conducted at three measurement points: Admission (t0), discharge (t1), 6-montas Catamnesis (t2). The patients receive the usual care according to the respective rehabilitation priorities, adapted to the special challenges of post-COVID symptoms. Patients of the post-COVID outpatient clinic without rehabilitation will be used as a control group. Discussion: This study will precisely assess the extent to which subclinical neurological or/and psychological impairments are present in post-COVID-19 rehabilitation and the results will help, developing, providing and evaluating appropriate treatment concepts. This may also have relevant implications for the improvement of physical ability and quality of life in post-COVID-19 patients and increase the probability of return to work. Trial registration Z-2022-1749-8, registered 03. February 2022, https://studienanmeldung.zks-regensburg.de [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The individualized clinical and public health management of the COVID-19 pandemic have changed over time, including care of people with PD. The objective was to investigate whether in-hospital COVID-19 outcomes and hospital care utilization of people with PD differed between the first two pandemic waves (W) 2020 in Germany. Methods: We conducted a nationwide cross-sectional study of inpatients with confirmed COVID-19 and PD between March 1 and May 31 (W1), and October 1 and December 31 (W2), 2020 and 2019, using an administrative database. Outcomes were in-hospital mortality, ICU admission rate, change in hospital care utilization, demographical data, PD clinical characteristics, and selected comorbidities. Differences were assessed between waves, PD/non-PD groups, and years. Results: We identified 2600 PD COVID-19 inpatients in W2 who in total showed higher in-hospital mortality rates and lower ICU admission rates, compared to both W1 (n = 775) and W1/W2 non-PD COVID-19 inpatients (n = 144,355). Compared to W1, W2 inpatients were more long-term care-dependent, older, more of female sex, and had less advanced disease. During both waves, PD inpatients were older, more frequently male and long-term care-dependent, and showed more risk comorbidities than non-PD COVID-19 inpatients. Decreases in hospital care utilization were stronger than average for PD inpatients but relatively weaker during W2. Non-COVID-19 PD inpatients showed poorer in-hospital outcomes in 2020 than in 2019 with better outcomes during W2. Conclusions: In-hospital COVID-19 outcomes and hospital care utilization of PD patients in Germany differed between the two pandemic waves in 2020 with increased in-hospital mortality for PD COVID-19. Overall hospital care utilization for PD was increased during W2. Trial registration: No trial registration or ethical approval was required because data were publicly available, anonymized, and complied with the German data protection regulations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Corona-Vakzin-Konsortium project (CoVaKo) analyses the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in a real-world setting, as well as breakthrough infections in Bavaria, Germany. A subproject of CoVaKo aims to identify adverse reactions of the COVID-19 vaccine and compare these to adverse reactions of other vaccines in an online survey. In a preceding feasibility study, the study materials were tested for comprehensibility, visual design, and motivation to participate, as well as for their ability to be implemented and carried out in primary care practices and vaccination centres. Methods: We used a mixed-methods research design. First, three focus groups consisting of general population participants were organised to evaluate the study materials and survey. Second, a test roll-out was conducted in vaccination centres and primary care practices that involved implementing and quantitatively evaluating the online survey. Third, interviews were conducted with participating general practitioners and heads of vaccination centres four weeks after the test roll-out. Results: Parts of the information and registration form proved incomprehensible, specifically regarding the recruitment material and/or online survey. For example, headings were misleading given that, relative to other vaccinations, the COVID-19 vaccination was overemphasised in the title. Participants requested additional information regarding the procedure and completion time. Within 31 days, 2199 participants, who received either a COVID-19 vaccination (99%) or at least one of the control vaccinations (1%), registered for the study. Participants (strongly) agreed that the registration process was easy to understand, that the completion time was reasonable, and that the technical setup was straightforward. Physicians and heads of the vaccination centres perceived the study as easy to integrate into their workflow. The majority expressed willingness to participate in the main study. Conclusions: Our study indicated that identifying and documenting adverse reactions following vaccinations using an online survey is feasible. Testing materials and surveys provided valuable insight, enabling subsequent improvements. Participation from health professionals proved essential in ensuring the practicality of procedures. Lastly, adapting the study's organisation to external fluctuating structures and requirements confirmed necessary for a successful implementation, especially due to dynamic changes in the nation's COVID-19 vaccination strategies. Trial registration: The trial was retrospectively registered at the "Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien" (DRKS-ID: DRKS00025881) on Oct 14, 2021. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Psychosocial stress during the COVID-19 pandemic is increasing particularly in parents. Although being specifically vulnerable to negative environmental exposures, research on psychosocial stress factors in infants' and toddlers' families during the pandemic is so far sparse. The CoronabaBY study investigates the perceived pandemic burden, parenting stress and parent and child mental health problems in families with children aged 0–3 years in Bavaria, Southern Germany. Further, the relationships between these psychosocial stressors are examined and sociodemographic characteristics that may be predictive of these factors will be explored. Methods: Participants were cross-sectionally surveyed via smartphone app. Standardized questionnaires on perceived pandemic burden, parenting stress, parental symptoms of depression and anxiety, infants' crying, sleeping and feeding problems or toddlers' emotional and behavioral problems were applied. Results: N = 991 parents (Mage = 33.7 years, SD = 4.5; 93.7% mothers, 91.5% born in Germany) with infants (n = 554; Mage = 5.9 months, SD = 3.0) or toddlers (n = 435; Mage = 25.9 months, SD = 6.5) participated in the first half-year of 2021. Sixty-five percent of the parents perceived a high pandemic burden, 37.7% experienced parenting stress and 24.1% showed affective symptoms (anxiety: 30.1%, depression: 18.5%). Feeding problems, crying/ sleeping problems and multiple regulatory problems were found in 34.8%, 26.2% and 13.5% of the infants, respectively. Amongst toddlers, 8.5% showed noticeable behavior and emotional problems. Children's mental health problems correlated moderately with parenting stress and parental affective symptoms and weakly with perceived pandemic burden. A lower financial status, higher parental education and increasing child age were significant but weak predictors for higher parenting stress, affective symptoms and higher psychological problems in children. Conclusions: A majority of the surveyed families with infants and toddlers experience the pandemic as stressful. The main challenges are parental affective symptoms and limited resources for childcare due to parenting stress. Overall, infants and toddlers show similar levels of mental health problems when being compared to pre-pandemic studies, but staggered detrimental effects on children's mental health might occur if the stressful conditions persist. This is already indicated by correlations between parental and child psychosocial stress factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: COVID-19 continues to disrupt social lives and the economy of many countries and challenges their healthcare capacities. Looking back at the situation in Germany in 2020, the number of cases increased exponentially in early March. Social restrictions were imposed by closing e.g. schools, shops, cafés and restaurants, as well as borders for travellers. This reaped success as the infection rate descended significantly in early April. In mid July, however, the numbers started to rise again. Of particular reasons was that from mid June onwards, the travel ban has widely been cancelled or at least loosened. We aim to measure the impact of travellers on the overall infection dynamics for the case of (relatively) few infectives and no vaccinations available. We also want to analyse under which conditions political travelling measures are relevant, in particular in comparison to local measures. By travel restrictions in our model we mean all possible measures that equally reduce the possibility of infected returnees to further spread the disease in Germany, e.g. travel bans, lockdown, post-arrival tests and quarantines. Methods: To analyse the impact of travellers, we present three variants of an susceptible–exposed–infected–recovered–deceased model to describe disease dynamics in Germany. Epidemiological parameters such as transmission rate, lethality, and detection rate of infected individuals are incorporated. We compare a model without inclusion of travellers and two models with a rate measuring the impact of travellers incorporating incidence data from the Johns Hopkins University. Parameter estimation was performed with the aid of the Monte–Carlo-based Metropolis algorithm. All models are compared in terms of validity and simplicity. Further, we perform sensitivity analyses of the model to observe on which of the model parameters show the largest influence the results. In particular, we compare local and international travelling measures and identify regions in which one of these shows larger relevance than the other. Results: In the comparison of the three models, both models with the traveller impact rate yield significantly better results than the model without this rate. The model including a piecewise constant travel impact rate yields the best results in the sense of maximal likelihood and minimal Bayesian Information Criterion. We synthesize from model simulations and analyses that travellers had a strong impact on the overall infection cases in the considered time interval. By a comparison of the reproductive ratios of the models under traveller/no-traveller scenarios, we found that higher traveller numbers likely induce higher transmission rates and infection cases even in the further course, which is one possible explanation to the start of the second wave in Germany as of autumn 2020. The sensitivity analyses show that the travelling parameter, among others, shows a larger impact on the results. We also found that the relevance of travel measures depends on the value of the transmission parameter: In domains with a lower transmission parameter, caused either by the current variant or local measures, it is found that handling the travel parameters is more relevant than those with lower value of the transmission. Conclusions: We conclude that travellers is an important factor in controlling infection cases during pandemics. Depending on the current situation, travel restrictions can be part of a policy to reduce infection numbers, especially when case numbers and transmission rate are low. The results of the sensitivity analyses also show that travel measures are more effective when the local transmission is already reduced, so a combination of those two appears to be optimal. In any case, supervision of the influence of travellers should always be undertaken, as another pandemic or wave can happen in the upcoming years and vaccinations and basic hygiene rules alone might not be able to prevent further infection waves. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In mid-March 2020, the coronavirus pandemic led to a national lockdown in Germany. Face-to-face teaching was cancelled in universities for the 2020 summer semester. Teaching moved online with no prior IT testing and lecturer training. The study analyses experiences of the suspension of face-to-face teaching and the move to digitalised learning for students and lecturers of dentistry at Kiel. Methods: In summer 2020, qualitative guided interviews were conducted with students (4th, 6th, 8th, and 10th semesters), and lecturers. Deductive and inductive qualitative content analysis of the results was carried out. Results: Thirty-nine students (69% female) and 19 lecturers (32% female) were interviewed. Reactions to the changes in teaching were observed. Feelings ranged from an essentially positive attitude, through insecurity and uncertainty to a failure to fully appreciate the situation. The loss of social contact was lamented. Digitalisation was associated with technological challenges and additional work. However, it also fostered learning independent of time and place, and encouraged autonomy. Negative aspects of digitalisation included a lack of feedback and loss of interaction. Conclusion: The introduction of ad hoc digitalisation challenged both students and lecturers alike. Dealing with lockdown and the changes in teaching and studying required significant flexibility. [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: COVID-19 vaccine hesistancy is a serious policy issue in Germany as vaccinations have stagnated at low levels compared to most other European countries. In this context, we study whether and how health workers can be leveraged to promote the COVID-19 vaccination campaign.Methods: We employed an information experiment with health workers in Germany to quantify how access to information related to (i) AstraZeneca's vaccine safety, (ii) misinformation, (iii) individual health risks, and (iv) public health risks can sway health workers' recommendations for any of the following vaccines: AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, Moderna, Pfizer/BioNTech, Sinopharm, and Sputnik-V. The information experiment was conducted as a randomized controlled trial with four treatment arms and was embedded in an online survey.Results: Health workers reduce their willingness to recommend four out of six vaccines once they learn about different statements of European and German health authorities with respect to the safety of the AstraZeneca vaccine. Consistent with the discussion on AstraZeneca's safety focusing on possible side effects among younger women, we find that especially female health workers become less likely to recommend the majority of COVID-19 vaccines. Lastly, we show that health workers vaccine recommendations are not affected by misinformation and appeals to individual or public health.Conclusion: In order to mobilize health workers in the fight against vaccine hesitancy, information campaigns need to be tailor-made for the target audience. In particular, health workers react to different types of information than the general public. As with the general public, we provide suggestive evidence that health workers require unambigious messages from drug authorities in order to support vaccination efforts. We believe that a more coordinated and coherent approach of public authorities can reduce the amount of mixed signals that health workers receive and therefore contribute to health workers engagement in the outroll of mass COVID-19 vaccination campaigns.Trial Registration: The trial was registered retrospectively with the repository of the Open Science Framework (OSF) under the number osf.io/qa4n2 . [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: The first analyses of the various consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic show that the risk to nurses' psychological well-being is particularly high. As the pandemic and the demands imposed on nurses are not yet fully understood, there is a need to seek buffering factors to protect nurses' psychological health. In line with the earliest evidence, we hypothesize pandemic-related increases in perceived stress and decreases in the frequency of flow experiences, likewise in satisfaction with work, life, work performance, and well-being. As protective factors while dealing with pandemic-related stress, we suggest an individual's sense of humor and perceived appreciation. Methods: In June/July 2020 – during the first lockdown in Germany – participants completed an online-survey in which they were asked to rate their situation before the pandemic (retrospectively) and during the pandemic. Our sample consisted of 174 registered nurses (161 females, 13 males, Mage = 40.52), of whom 85 worked as public health nurses and 89 as geriatric nurses. Results: During the pandemic, nurses felt more stressed, had fewer flow experiences, and were less satisfied with their work, life, work-performance, and well-being than before the pandemic. In addition, nurses felt more appreciation from society but less from their patients. Sense of humor and the perceived appreciation of society and patients were confirmed as buffers of negative pandemic-related effects. Conclusion: Our study contributes to the so far scarce knowledge on nurses' pandemic-related stress and well-being in combination with their resources. Moreover, we were able to identify sense of humor and appreciation as protective factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in substantial disruptions to the daily lives of young people. Yet knowledge is lacking about changes in mental well-being among young adults, whether those from ethnic minorities were more adversely impacted by the pandemic than the ethnic majority, and the extent to which pandemic-related stressors contributed to any declines in mental well-being. Methods: We draw on nationally representative German CILS4COVID data, collected early in the pandemic (N = 3517, Mage = 25). Respondents provided information on mental well-being (psychosomatic complaints, anxiety, depression, life satisfaction) and exposure to pandemic-related stressors (financial worries, health worries, discrimination, contact with COVID-19). Responses on mental well-being were matched to responses from two pre-pandemic waves. Individual fixed effects regressions examined ethnic group differences in changes in mental well-being prior to, and at the early stage of, the pandemic. Path analysis tested the role of pandemic-related stressors in declines in mental well-being. Results: Overall, young adults' mental well-being had improved at the pandemic assessment compared to pre-pandemic assessments, and few ethnic group differences in changes were found. However, greater pandemic-related stressors were associated with worsened mental well-being at the pandemic assessment. Among Asian minorities, indirect effects were found on anxiety via health worries, and on depression via health worries and discrimination. For Turkish, Middle Eastern and African minorities, indirect effects on anxiety and depression were found via health worries. Conclusions: We did not find widespread declines in mental well-being among young adults at the early stage of the pandemic, and changes in mental well-being prior to and at the early stage of the pandemic were mostly similar across ethnic German and minority groups. Nevertheless, pandemic-related stressors posed risks for young adults' mental well-being, particularly increased discrimination and health worries among Asian minorities, and health worries among Turkish, Middle Eastern and African minorities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: International healthcare systems face the challenge that waiting times may create barriers to accessing medical care, and that those barriers are unequally distributed between different patient groups. The disruption of healthcare systems caused by the COVID-19 pandemic could exacerbate this already strained demand situation. Using the German healthcare system as an example, this study aims to analyze potential effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on waiting times for outpatient specialist care and to evaluate differences between individual patient groups based on their respective insurance status and the level of supply.Methods: We conducted an experiment in which we requested appointments by telephone for different insurance statuses in regions with varying levels of supply from 908 outpatient specialist practices in Germany before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data from 589 collected appointments were analyzed using a linear mixed effect model.Results: The data analysis revealed two main counteracting effects. First, the average waiting time has decreased for both patients with statutory (mandatory public health insurance) and private health insurance. Inequalities in access to healthcare, however, remained and were based on patients' insurance status and the regional level of supply. Second, the probability of not receiving an appointment at all significantly increased during the pandemic.Conclusions: Patient uncertainty due to the fear of a potential COVID-19 infection may have freed up capacities in physicians' practices, resulting in a reduction of waiting times. At the same time, the exceptional situation caused by the pandemic may have led to uncertainty among physicians, who might thus have allocated appointments less frequently. To avoid worse health outcomes in the long term due to a lack of physician visits, policymakers and healthcare providers should focus more on regular care in the current COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: COVID-19 has a direct impact on the employment of older people. This adds to the challenge of ageism. The World Health Organization has started a worldwide campaign to combat ageism and has called for more research and evidence-based strategies that have the potential to be scaled up. This study specifically aims to identify solutions to combat the adverse effects of COVID-19 on the global ageing workforce. Methods: We present 15 case studies from different countries and report on what those countries are doing or not doing to address the impact of COVID-19 on ageing workers. Results: We provide examples of how COVID-19 influences older people's ability to work and stay healthy, and offer case studies of what governments, organizations or individuals can do to help ensure older people can obtain, maintain and, potentially, expand their current work. Case studies come from Australia, Austria, Canada, China, Germany, Israel, Japan, Nigeria, Romania, Singapore, Sweden, South Korea, Thailand, United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US). Across the countries, the impact of COVID-19 on older workers is shown as widening inequalities. A particular challenge has arisen because of a large proportion of older people, often with limited education and working in the informal sector within rural areas, e.g. in Nigeria, Thailand and China. Remedies to the particular disadvantage experienced by older workers in the context of COVID are presented. These range from funding support to encouraging business continuity, innovative product and service developments, community action, new business models and localized, national and international actions. The case studies can be seen as frequently fitting within strategies that have been proven to work in reducing ageism within the workplace. They include policy and laws that have increased benefits to workers during lockdowns (most countries); educational activities such as coaching seniorpreneurship (e,g, Australia); intergenerational contact interventions such as younger Thai people who moved back to rural areas and sharing their digital knowledge with older people and where older people reciprocate by teaching the younger people farming knowledge. Conclusion: Global sharing of this knowledge among international, national and local governments and organizations, businesses, policy makers and health and human resources experts will further understanding of the issues that are faced by older workers. This will facilitate the replication or scalability of solutions as called for in the WHO call to combat ageism in 2021. We suggest that policy makers, business owners, researchers and international organisations build on the case studies by investing in evidence-based strategies to create inclusive workplaces. Such action will thus help to challenge ageism, reduce inequity, improve business continuity and add to the quality of life of older workers. [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]

Background: This article investigates the research problem of digital solutions to overcome the pandemic, more closely examining the limited effectiveness and scope of the governmental COVID-19 tracing apps, using the German COVID-19 tracing app (Corona-Warn-App) as an example. A well-designed and effective instrument in the technological toolbox is of utmost importance to overcome the pandemic.Method: A multi-methodological design science research approach was applied. In three development and evaluation cycles, we presented, prototyped, and tested user-centered ideas of functional and design improvement. The applied procedure contains (1) a survey featuring 1993 participants from Germany for evaluating the current app, (2) a gathering of recommendations from epidemiologists and from a focus group discussion with IT and health experts identifying relevant functional requirements, and (3) an online survey combined with testing our prototype with 53 participants to evaluate the enhanced tracing app.Results: This contribution presents 14 identified issues of the German COVID-19 tracing app, six meta-requirements, and three design principles for COVID-19 tracing apps and future pandemic apps (e.g., more user involvement and transparency). Using an interactive prototype, this study presents an extended pandemic app, containing 13 potential front-end (i.e., information on the regional infection situation, education and health literacy, crowd and event notification) and six potential back-end functional requirements (i.e., ongoing modification of risk score calculation, indoor versus outdoor). In addition, a user story approach for the COVID-19 tracing app was derived from the findings, supporting a holistic development approach.Conclusion: Throughout this study, practical relevant findings can be directly transferred to the German and other international COVID-19 tracing applications. Moreover, we apply our findings to crisis management theory-particularly pandemic-related apps-and derive interdisciplinary learnings. It might be recommendable for the involved decision-makers and stakeholders to forego classic application management and switch to using an agile setup, which allows for a more flexible reaction to upcoming changes. It is even more important for governments to have a well-established, flexible, design-oriented process for creating and adapting technology to handle a crisis, as this pandemic will not be the last one. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: It can be suspected that work in child care facilities is associated with an elevated exposure risk towards SARS-CoV-2 infections. It is still unclear under which conditions employees in those facilities can safely pursue their work. Preventive workplace-related measures to reduce transmission dynamics in this work environment need to be developed. These measures need to build on a solid scientific foundation and be ready for practical use at the same time. Therefore, the aim of the study is to present a participatory approach to identify, minimize, and eliminate workplace-specific COVID-19 transmission within child care. The approach presented combines quantitative as well as qualitative elements and includes a screening of critical workplace conditions and the development of preventive measures to foster a safe workplace design. Methods: First, 428 employees of different child care facilities in a large German city reported their subjective risk of infection, fear of infection, and support received by the employer. Second, the participants commented in detail about high risk conditions during work. Third, employees provided suggestions for preventive measures. We conducted a qualitative analysis of free text answers to evaluate which aspects are perceived as critical from an employee perspective. Results: Participants provided valuable and practicable ideas on how to design and improve preventive measures to reduce COVID-19 transmission in child care dealing with structural conditions, the interaction with the parents, the implementation of preventive measures and recommendations for policy makers. Conclusions: These new insights help to organize pandemic risk management in order to align theoretical based measures with the practical realization. We encourage researchers to adapt the approach presented to other work areas in order to foster participation of employees in work design to reduce COVID-19 transmission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The aims of our study were to describe the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown on primary care in Germany regarding the number of consultations, the prevalence of specific reasons for consultation presented by the patients, and the frequency of specific services performed by the GP. Methods: We conducted a longitudinal observational study based on standardised GP interviews in a quota sampling design comparing the time before the COVID-19 pandemic (12 June 2015 to 27 April 2017) with the time during lockdown (21 April to 14 July 2020). The sample included GPs in urban and rural areas 120 km around Hamburg, Germany, and was stratified by region type and administrative districts. Differences in the consultation numbers were analysed by multivariate linear regressions in mixed models adjusted for random effects on the levels of the administrative districts and GP practices. Results: One hundred ten GPs participated in the follow-up, corresponding to 52.1% of the baseline. Primary care practices in 32 of the 37 selected administrative districts (86.5%) could be represented in both assessments. At baseline, GPs reported 199.6 ± 96.9 consultations per week, which was significantly reduced during COVID-19 lockdown by 49.0% to 101.8 ± 67.6 consultations per week (p < 0.001). During lockdown, the frequency of five reasons for consultation (-43.0% to -31.5%) and eleven services (-56.6% to -33.5%) had significantly decreased. The multilevel, multivariable analyses showed an average reduction of 94.6 consultations per week (p < 0.001). Conclusions: We observed a dramatic reduction of the number of consultations in primary care. This effect was independent of age, sex and specialty of the GP and independent of the practice location in urban or rural areas. Consultations for complaints like low back pain, gastrointestinal complaints, vertigo or fatigue and services like house calls/calls at nursing homes, wound treatments, pain therapy or screening examinations for the early detection of chronic diseases were particularly affected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While the relation between care involvement of informal caregivers and caregiver burden is well-known, the additional psychosocial burden related to care involvement during the COVID-19 pandemic has not yet been investigated.Methods: A total of 1000 informal caregivers, recruited offline, participated in a cross-sectional online survey from April 21 to May 2, 2020. Questionnaires were used to assess COVID-19-specific changes in the care situation, negative feelings in the care situation, problems with implementation of COVID-19 measures, concerns/excessive demands, loss of support, change in informal caregivers' own involvement in care and problems with provision, comprehension & practicability of COVID-19 information, and to relate these issues to five indicators of care involvement (i.e., being the main caregiver, high expenditure of time, high level of care, dementia, no professional help). Binomial and multiple regression analyses were applied.Results: Across indicators of care involvement, 25.5-39.7% reported that the care situation rather or greatly worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially for those caring for someone with dementia or those usually relying on professional help. In a multiple regression model, the mean number of involvement indicators met was associated with age (β = .18; CI .10-.25), excessive demands (β = .10, CI .00-.19), problems with implementation of COVID-19 measures (β = .11, CI .04-.19), an increase in caregiving by the informal caregivers themselves (β = .14, CI .03-.24) as well as with no change in the amount of caregiving (β = .18, CI .07-.29) and loss of support (β = -.08, CI -.16-.00). No significant associations with the mean number of involvement indicators met were found for gender, educational level, change in the care situation, negative feelings, and provision, comprehension & practicability of COVID-19 information.Conclusion: Those caregivers who perceived extensive care burden were those who suffered most during the pandemic, calling for structural support by the healthcare system now and in the future.Trial Registration: This article does not report the results of a health care intervention on human participants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Our research summarized policy disparities in response to the first wave of COVID-19 between China and Germany. We look forward to providing policy experience for other countries still in severe epidemics. Methods: We analyzed data provided by National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China and Johns Hopkins University Coronavirus Resource Center for the period 10 January 2020 to 25 May 252,020. We used generalized linear model to evaluate the associations between the main control policies and the number of confirmed cases and the policy disparities in response to the first wave of COVID-19 between China and Germany. Results: The generalized linear models show that the following factors influence the cumulative number of confirmed cases in China: the Joint Prevention and Control Mechanism; locking down the worst-hit areas; the highest level response to public health emergencies; the expansion of medical insurance coverage to suspected patients; makeshift hospitals; residential closed management; counterpart assistance. The following factors influence the cumulative number of confirmed cases in Germany: the Novel Coronavirus Crisis Command; large gathering cancelled; real-time COVID-19 risk assessment; the medical emergency plan; schools closure; restrictions on the import of overseas epidemics; the no-contact protocol. Conclusions: There are two differences between China and Germany in non-pharmaceutical interventions: China adopted the blocking strategy, and Germany adopted the first mitigation and then blocking strategy; China's goal is to eliminate the virus, and Germany's goal is to protect high-risk groups to reduce losses. At the same time, the policies implemented by the two countries have similarities: strict blockade is a key measure to control the source of infection, and improving medical response capabilities is an important way to reduce mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Characteristics of COVID-19 patients have mainly been reported within confirmed COVID-19 cohorts. By analyzing patients with respiratory infections in the emergency department during the first pandemic wave, we aim to assess differences in the characteristics of COVID-19 vs. Non-COVID-19 patients. This is particularly important regarding the second COVID-19 wave and the approaching influenza season.Methods: We prospectively included 219 patients with suspected COVID-19 who received radiological imaging and RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2. Demographic, clinical and laboratory parameters as well as RT-PCR results were used for subgroup analysis. Imaging data were reassessed using the following scoring system: 0 - not typical, 1 - possible, 2 - highly suspicious for COVID-19.Results: COVID-19 was diagnosed in 72 (32,9%) patients. In three of them (4,2%) the initial RT-PCR was negative while initial CT scan revealed pneumonic findings. 111 (50,7%) patients, 61 of them (55,0%) COVID-19 positive, had evidence of pneumonia. Patients with COVID-19 pneumonia showed higher body temperature (37,7 ± 0,1 vs. 37,1 ± 0,1 °C; p = 0.0001) and LDH values (386,3 ± 27,1 vs. 310,4 ± 17,5 U/l; p = 0.012) as well as lower leukocytes (7,6 ± 0,5 vs. 10,1 ± 0,6G/l; p = 0.0003) than patients with other pneumonia. Among abnormal CT findings in COVID-19 patients, 57 (93,4%) were evaluated as highly suspicious or possible for COVID-19. In patients with negative RT-PCR and pneumonia, another third was evaluated as highly suspicious or possible for COVID-19 (14 out of 50; 28,0%). The sensitivity in the detection of patients requiring isolation was higher with initial chest CT than with initial RT-PCR (90,4% vs. 79,5%).Conclusions: COVID-19 patients show typical clinical, laboratory and imaging parameters which enable a sensitive detection of patients who demand isolation measures due to COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: SARS-CoV-2 has induced a worldwide pandemic and subsequent non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to control the spread of the virus. As in many countries, the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Germany has led to a consecutive roll-out of different NPIs. As these NPIs have (largely unknown) adverse effects, targeting them precisely and monitoring their effectiveness are essential. We developed a compartmental infection dynamics model with specific features of SARS-CoV-2 that allows daily estimation of a time-varying reproduction number and published this information openly since the beginning of April 2020. Here, we present the transmission dynamics in Germany over time to understand the effect of NPIs and allow adaptive forecasts of the epidemic progression.Methods: We used a data-driven estimation of the evolution of the reproduction number for viral spreading in Germany as well as in all its federal states using our model. Using parameter estimates from literature and, alternatively, with parameters derived from a fit to the initial phase of COVID-19 spread in different regions of Italy, the model was optimized to fit data from the Robert Koch Institute.Results: The time-varying reproduction number (Rt) in Germany decreased to <1 in early April 2020, 2-3 weeks after the implementation of NPIs. Partial release of NPIs both nationally and on federal state level correlated with moderate increases in Rt until August 2020. Implications of state-specific Rt on other states and on national level are characterized. Retrospective evaluation of the model shows excellent agreement with the data and usage of inpatient facilities well within the healthcare limit. While short-term predictions may work for a few weeks, long-term projections are complicated by unpredictable structural changes.Conclusions: The estimated fraction of immunized population by August 2020 warns of a renewed outbreak upon release of measures. A low detection rate prolongs the delay reaching a low case incidence number upon release, showing the importance of an effective testing-quarantine strategy. We show that real-time monitoring of transmission dynamics is important to evaluate the extent of the outbreak, short-term projections for the burden on the healthcare system, and their response to policy changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As of 13 July 2020, 12.9 million COVID-19 cases have been reported worldwide. Prior studies have demonstrated that local socioeconomic and built environment characteristics may significantly contribute to viral transmission and incidence rates, thereby accounting for some of the spatial variation observed. Due to uncertainties, non-linearities, and multiple interaction effects observed in the associations between COVID-19 incidence and socioeconomic, infrastructural, and built environment characteristics, we present a structured multimethod approach for analysing cross-sectional incidence data within in an Exploratory Spatial Data Analysis (ESDA) framework at the NUTS3 (county) scale. Methods: By sequentially conducting a geospatial analysis, an heuristic geographical interpretation, a Bayesian machine learning analysis, and parameterising a Generalised Additive Model (GAM), we assessed associations between incidence rates and 368 independent variables describing geographical patterns, socioeconomic risk factors, infrastructure, and features of the build environment. A spatial trend analysis and Local Indicators of Spatial Autocorrelation were used to characterise the geography of age-adjusted COVID-19 incidence rates across Germany, followed by iterative modelling using Bayesian Additive Regression Trees (BART) to identify and measure candidate explanatory variables. Partial dependence plots were derived to quantify and contextualise BART model results, followed by the parameterisation of a GAM to assess correlations. Results: A strong south-to-north gradient of COVID-19 incidence was identified, facilitating an empirical classification of the study area into two epidemic subregions. All preliminary and final models indicated that location, densities of the built environment, and socioeconomic variables were important predictors of incidence rates in Germany. The top ten predictor variables' partial dependence exhibited multiple non-linearities in the relationships between key predictor variables and COVID-19 incidence rates. The BART, partial dependence, and GAM results indicate that the strongest predictors of COVID-19 incidence at the county scale were related to community interconnectedness, geographical location, transportation infrastructure, and labour market structure. Conclusions: The multimethod ESDA approach provided unique insights into spatial and aspatial non-stationarities of COVID-19 incidence in Germany. BART and GAM modelling indicated that geographical configuration, built environment densities, socioeconomic characteristics, and infrastructure all exhibit associations with COVID-19 incidence in Germany when assessed at the county scale. The results suggest that measures to implement social distancing and reduce unnecessary travel may be important methods for reducing contagion, and the authors call for further research to investigate the observed associations to inform prevention and control policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Approximately 8 - 10 % of COVID-19 patients present with a serious clinical course and need for hospitalization, 8% of hospitalized patients need ICU-treatment. Currently, no causal therapy is available and treatment is purely supportive. The main reason for death in critically ill patients is acute respiratory failure. However, in a number of patients a severe hyperinflammatory response with excessively elevated proinflammatory cytokines causes vasoplegic shock resistant to vasopressor therapy. A new polystyrene-based hemoadsorber (CytoSorb®, Cytosorbents Inc., New Jersey, USA) has been shown to adsorb effectively cytokines and other middle molecular weight toxins this way reducing their blood concentrations. This has been routinely used in clinical practice in the EU for other conditions where a cytokine storm occurs and an observational study has just been completed on COVID-19 patients. We hypothesized that the extracorporeal elimination of cytokines in critically ill COVID-19 patients with suspected hyperinflammation and shock may stabilize hemodynamics and improve outcome. The primary endpoint is time until resolution of vasoplegic shock, which is a well implemented, clinically relevant endpoint in critical care studies.Trial Design: Phase IIb, multicenter, prospective, open-label, randomized, 1:1 parallel group pilot study comparing the additional use of "CytoSorb" to standard of care without "CytoSorb".Participants: Patients are recruited from the Intensive Care Units (ICUs) of 7 participating centers in Germany (approximately 10 ICUs). All patients aged 18- 80 with positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test for SARS-CoV-2, a C-reactive protein (CRP) ≥ 100 mg/l, a Procalcitonin (PCT) < 2 ng/l, and suspected cytokine storm defined via a vasoplegic shock (Norepinephrine > 0.2 μg/min/kg to achieve a Mean Arterial Pressure ≥ 65mmHg). Patients are included irrespective of indication for renal replacement therapy. Suspected or proven bacterial cause for vasoplegic shock is a contraindication.Intervention and Comparator: Within 24 hours after meeting the inclusion criteria patients will be randomized to receive either standard of care or standard of care and additional "CytoSorb" therapy via a shaldon catheter for 3-7 days. Filter exchange is done every 24 hours. If patients receive antibiotics, an additional dose of antibiotics is administered after each change of "CytoSorb" filter in order to prevent underdosing due to "CytoSorb" treatment.Main Outcomes: Primary outcome is time to resolution of vasoplegic shock (defined as no need for vasopressors for at least 8 hours in order to sustain a MAP ≥ 65mmHg) in days. Secondary outcomes are 7 day mortality after fulfilling the inclusion criteria, mortality until hospital discharge, Interleukin-6 (IL-6) measurement on day 1 and 3, need for mechanical ventilation, duration of mechanical ventilation, duration of ICU-stay, catecholamine dose on day 1/2/3 after start of "CytoSorb" and acute kidney injury.Randomization: An electronic randomization will be performed using the study software secuTrial® administered by the Clinical Study Center (CSC) of the Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany. Randomization is done in blocks by 4 stratified by including center.Blinding (masking): The trial will be non-blinded for the clinicians and patients. The statistician will receive a blinded data set, so that all analyses will be conducted blinded.Numbers To Be Randomized (sample Size): As this is a pilot study with the goal to examine the feasibility of the study design as well as the intervention effect, no formal sample size calculation was conducted. A total number of approximately 80-100 patients is planned (40-50 patients per group). Safety assessment is done after the inclusion of each 10 patients per randomization group.Trial Status: Please see the study protocol version from April 24 2020. Recruitment of patients is still pending.Trial Registration: The study was registered on April 27 2020 in the German Registry of Clinical Trials (DRKS) under the number DRKS00021447.Full Protocol: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]