Search

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused psychological distress to the population and healthcare workers. Physicians' well-being is essential and contributes significantly to overall health. This study aimed to assess the strain on Polish general practitioners from the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and to ascertain the potential predictors of their distress., Methods: Data was collected using a self-reported online questionnaire from 162 GPs in Poland between December 2020 and August 2021 as part of the international PRICOV-19 study. General practitioners' well-being was evaluated using the validated Mayo Clinic's expanded 9-item well-being index (eWBI). Spearman's correlation was used to measure the strength and direction of association between general practitioners' distress level and continuous variables, and for ordinal variables, Gamma correlation was recommended for many tide ranks. We also checked the association of the level of distress with continuous variables by categorizing them and applying the Kruskal-Wallis test likewise for a comparison of the distress in different practice locations., Results: A vast majority (80%) of respondents were considered at risk of distress during the COVID-19 outbreak, with an eWBI score of 2 or more. Higher distress scores were exhibited among general practitioners who reported increased responsibilities during the COVID-19 pandemic and perceived need for additional training. The experience of collaboration with neighbouring practices and the provision of adequate governmental support emerged as significant protective factors against distress. No correlation was observed between Polish general practitioners' distress level and years of professional experience, number of patients in the practice, number of doctors working there, the practice's location, or working with more vulnerable patient populations., Conclusions: Our findings proved that COVID-19 placed an extraordinary emotional burden on Polish general practitioners and highlighted the importance of targeted support services and resource allocation to primary healthcare in Poland in case of any potential future crisis similar to the COVID-19 pandemic., Competing Interests: Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: PRICOV-19 study received approval from the Research Ethics Committee at Ghent University Hospital (nr BC-07617). The Bioethics Committee at Jagiellonian University approved surveying Poland (nr 1072.6120.302.2020). The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki. All Polish participants had signed the informed consent. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Grant support: The PRICOV-19 data collection was undertaken without funding in individual countries. A small grant was received by Ghent University from the European General Practice Research Network (EGPRN) to cover data cleaning; no grant number applies. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The adoption of healthy self-care practices has proven necessary for professional life, as they often serve as a shield against stressors in the workplace. The COVID-19 pandemic created a high strain on general practitioners (GPs), contributing to increased workload, burnout, and anxiety. The present study aimed to identify self-care practices adopted by GPs amid the COVID-19 pandemic; and to explore the relationships between self-care practices and risk of distress., Methods: The current study utilized an online questionnaire arriving from the PRICOV-19 study, which was distributed among GP practices across 38 countries. The main focus was on the open-text responses where participants disclosed self-care practices employed to maintain mental health during COVID-19. The Six Domains of Self-Care theoretical framework was applied to investigate GP self-care practices across 6 domains including Physical, Professional, Relational, Emotional, Psychological, and Spiritual. The Mayo Clinic Well-Being Index (eWBI) was applied to assess mental well-being and risk of distress among GPs. The analysis was carried out using SPSS Statistics software., Results: In total, 2,949 GPs provided open-text responses on maintaining their mental health. 65.5% of GPs had an eWBI score of ≥ 2 and were considered at risk of distress. The majority of the participants prioritised physical (61.7%), followed by relational (38.0%) and psychological (34.6%) self-care practices to maintain their mental health during the pandemic. GPs who applied relational, physical, and professional self-care were significantly less likely to experience depression, stress, and emotional exhaustion, in comparison with the ones who did not apply these practices. GPs who practiced professional self-care practices had the lowest distress risk (eWBI = 1.99). Overall, 5% of GPs disclosed not applying any practices to maintain their mental health during the pandemic and were the most prone to mental health distress., Conclusions: GPs have navigated the pandemic uniquely, and despite applying self-care practices they faced some level of impact, hence self-care interventions for healthcare professionals should be regarded as essential rather than optional. A long-term investment in strategies focused on improving GPs' self-care is necessary to increase resilience among GPs and ensure their optimal well-being levels are achieved., Competing Interests: Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of Ghent University Hospital (project number BC-07617). Additional research ethical approval was obtained in participating countries if required in that country or by the participating institution’s policies. The responses were anonymous; however, all respondents provided informed consent at the start of the questionnaire. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has accentuated the indispensable role of primary care. Objectives: Recognising this, the PRICOV-19 study investigated how 5,489 GP practices across 38 countries (Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Kosovo*, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Republic of Moldova, Netherlands, North Macedonia, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, and United Kingdom) adapted their care delivery during the pandemic., Methods: Based on a series of discussions on the results of the PRICOV-19 study group, eight recommendations to enhance primary care's preparedness for future crises were formulated and endorsed by EQuiP and WONCA Europe., Results: The recommendations underscore the importance of recognising and sustaining the substantial strides made in patient safety within GP practices during the pandemic in current daily practices; acknowledging and supporting the pivotal role of GP practices in addressing health inequalities during crises; adopting interprofessional care models to enhance practices' resilience and adaptability to change; supporting training practices; creating healthy working environments; investing in infrastructure that supports adequate and safe care; and increasing funding for research on patient safety and primary care quality to inform evidence-based health policies and fostering international knowledge exchange among healthcare professionals and policymakers., Conclusion: Policymakers, primary care associations, and the broader healthcare system are urged to collaboratively take responsibility and increase support for GP practices to enhance their resilience, adaptability, and capacity to deliver safe and equitable healthcare during future crises.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic posed severe challenges to delivery of services at Primary Care level and for achieving follow-up of patients with chronic diseases., Objectives: We analysed data from the PRICOV-19 study to explore determinants of active follow-up for chronic disease patients in seven Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries during the pandemic., Methods: Pricov-19 was a cross-sectional study conducted within PC (Primary Care) practices in 37 European countries. We analysed data from 7 CEE countries (Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Moldova, Romania, Ukraine) collected between November 2020 and December 2021. Practices were recruited through random or convenience sampling and participation of practices was voluntary. We performed descriptive statistics to identify the level of follow-up of chronic disease and what health system and practice-specific factors were associated with better follow-up. We used logistic regression and meta-analysis techniques to explore associations and heterogeneity between countries., Results: 67.8% out of 978 practices reported actively following up chronic patients. Positive associations were found between active follow-up and such as having more GPs (aOR = 1.18, p-value = 0.005), an above-average chronic patient population (aOR = 3.13, p-value = 0.006), adequate government support (aOR = 2.35, p-value = 0.001), and GPs having time for guideline reading (aOR = 0.008, p-value = 1.71)., Conclusions: Patient follow-up, was influenced by different health system and practice-specific factors. The implications suggest the need for government support to enhance PC practice organisation during crises and solutions to decrease GP workload and provide tailored care for patients with chronic disease.

Background: This article aims to examine patient safety in general practice during COVID-19., Methods: In total, 5489 GP practices from 37 European countries and Israel filled in the online self-reported PRICOV-19 survey between November 2020 and December 2021. The outcome measures include 30 patient safety indicators on structure, process, and outcome., Results: The data showed that structural problems often impeded patient safety during COVID-19, as 58.6% of practices (3209/5479) reported limitations related to their building or infrastructure. Nevertheless, GP practices rapidly changed their processes, including the appointment systems. Implementation proved challenging as, although 76.1% of practices (3751/4932) developed a protocol to answer calls from potential COVID patients, only 34.4% (1252/3643) always used it. The proportion of practices reported having sufficient protected time in general practitioners' schedules to review guidelines remained consistent when comparing the pre-COVID (34.2%,1647/4813) with the COVID period (33.2%,1600/4813). Overall, 42.8% of practices (1966/4590) always informed home care services when patients were diagnosed with COVID-19, while this decreased to 30.1% for other major infectious diseases (1341/4458). Most practices reported at least one incident of delayed care in patients with an urgent condition, most often because the patient did not come to the practice sooner (60.4%, 2561/4237). Moreover, 31.1% of practices (1349/4199) always organized a team discussion when incidents happened. Overall, large variations were found across countries and patient safety indicators., Conclusions: The results demonstrated that European GP practices adopted numerous measures to deliver safe care during COVID-19. However, multilayered interventions are needed to improve infection control and GP practice accessibility in future pandemics., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Recruitment for surveys has been a great challenge, especially in general practice., Methods: Here, we reported recruitment strategies, data collection, participation rates (PR) and representativeness of the PRICOV-19 study, an international comparative, cross-sectional, online survey among general practices (GP practices) in 37 European countries and Israel., Results: Nine (24%) countries reported a published invitation; 19 (50%) had direct contact with all GPs/GP practices; 19 (50%) contacted a sample of GPs /GP practices; and 7 (18%) used another invitation strategy. The median participation rate was 22% (IQR = 10%, 28%). Multiple invitation strategies (P-value 0.93) and multiple strategies to increase PR (P-value 0.64) were not correlated with the PR. GP practices in (semi-) rural areas, GP practices serving more than 10,000 patients, and group practices were over-represented (P-value < 0.001). There was no significant correlation between the PR and strength of the primary care (PC) system [Spearman's r 0.13, 95% CI (-0.24, 0.46); P-value 0.49]; the COVID-19 morbidity [Spearman's r 0.19, 95% CI (-0.14, 0.49); P-value 0.24], or COVID-19 mortality [Spearman's r 0.19, 95% CI (-0.02, 0.58); P-value 0.06] during the three months before country-specific study commencement., Conclusion: Our main contribution here was to describe the survey recruitment and representativeness of PRICOV-19, an important and novel study., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Changes in demographics with an older population, the illness panorama with increasing prevalence of non-communicable diseases, and the shift from hospital care to home-based care place demand on primary health care, which requires multiprofessional collaboration and team-based organization of work. The COVID-19 pandemic affected health care in various ways, such as heightened infection control measures, changing work practices, and increased workload., Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the association between primary care practices' organization, and quality and safety changes during the COVID-19 pandemic., Design: Data were collected from 38 countries in a large online survey, the PRICOV-19 study. For this paper, the participating practices were categorized as "Only GPs", comprising practices with solely general practitioners (GPs) and/or GP trainees, without any other health care professionals (n = 1,544), and "Multiprofessional," comprising practices with at least one GP or GP trainee and one or more other health professionals (n = 3,936)., Results: Both categories of practices improved in infection control routines when compared before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. A larger proportion of the multiprofessional practices changed their routines to protect vulnerable patients. Telephone triage was used in more "Multiprofessional" practices, whereas "Only GPs" were more likely to perform video consultations as an alternative to physical visits. Both types of practices reported that the time to review new guidelines and scientific literature decreased during the pandemic. However, both had more meetings to discuss directives than before the pandemic., Conclusions: Multiprofessional teams were keener to introduce changes to the care organization to protect vulnerable patients. However, practices with only GPs were found to be more aligned with video consultations, perhaps reflecting the close patient-doctor relationship. In contrast, telephone triage was used more in multiprofessional teams., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, family physicians (FPs) served as the the initial point of contact for patients potentially infected with the virus, necessitating frequent updates to treatment protocols. However, practices also faced organizational challenges in providing care to other patients who also needed their medical attention. The pressure on FPs increased and affected their well-being. The international PRICOV-19 study, titled "Primary care in times of COVID-19 pandemic," investigated how FPs functioned during the COVID-19 pandemic. This article examines the correlation between various organizational and structural COVID-19-related variables and the well-being of FPs in Slovenia., Methods: Between October 2020 and January 2021, we conducted an online cross-sectional survey. The questionnaire was distributed to 1040 Slovenian FPs and 218 family medicine (FM) trainees. Part of the questionnaire assessed the cooperation and well-being of FPs. The Mayo Clinic Well-being Index was used for the assessment. FP's well-being was also assessed descriptively by asking open-ended questions about maintaining mental health during the pandemic. Potential factors associated with FPs' well-being were identified using a multivariate linear regression method., Results: The final sample comprised 191 participants (response rate 14.1%). The mean value ± standard deviation of the Mayo Well-being Index was 3.3 ± 2.6 points. The FPs with the poorest well-being had 5-15 years of work experience and worked in a practice where work could not be distributed in the absence of a co-worker without compromising the well-being of colleagues. Physical activity was identified as the most common method of maintaining mental health among FPs., Conclusions: The results of the study suggest that targeted interventions are needed to support FPs mid-career, increase resilience in practice, promote strong team dynamics, and prioritise physical activity in healthcare. Addressing these aspects can contribute to the well-being of individual FPs and the overall health of the healthcare workers., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Patient safety is defined as the prevention of harm to patients and aims to prevent errors. This analysis explores factors associated with the reported occurrence of patient safety incidents (PSIs) in general practices in Ireland at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: The PRICOV-19 was a cross-sectional study to record the (re)organisation of care provided in general practice and changes implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic in 38 countries. Primary outcomes include three potential scenarios of PSIs: delayed care due to practice factors, delayed care due to patient factors, and delayed care due to triage. Exploratory variables included demographic and organisational characteristics, triage, collaboration, and strategies to safeguard staff members' well-being., Results: Of the 172 participating Irish general practices, 71% (n = 122) recorded at least one potential PSI. The most frequent incident was delayed care due to patient factors (65%), followed by practice (33%) and triage (30%). Multivariate analysis showed that delayed care due to patient factors was associated with changes in the process of repeat prescriptions (OR 6.7 [CI 95% 2.5 to 19.6]). Delayed care due to practice factors was associated with suburbs/small towns (OR 4.2 [1.1 to 19.8]) and structural changes to the reception (OR 3.5 [1.2 to 11.4]). While delayed care due to patient factors was associated with having a practice population of 6000-7999 patients (OR 4.7 [1.1 to 27.6]) and delayed care due to practice factors was associated with having a practice population of 2000-3999 patients (OR 4.2 [1.2 to 17.1]). No linear associations were observed with higher or lower patient numbers for any factor. Delayed care due to triage was not associated with any exploratory variables., Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in dramatic changes in the delivery of care through general practices in Ireland. Few factors were associated with the reported occurrence of PSIs, and these did not show consistent patterns. Sustained improvements were made in relation to repeat prescriptions. The lack of consistent patterns, potentially confirms that the autonomous decisions made in general practice in response to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic could have benefitted patient safety (See Graphical abstract)., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The PRICOV-19 study aimed to assess the organization of primary health care (PHC) during the COVID-19 pandemic in 37 European countries and Israel; and its impact on different dimensions of quality of care. In this paper, we described measures taken by public PHC centers in Greece. Additionally, we explored potential differences between rural and non-rural settings., Methods: The study population consisted of the 287 public PHC centers in Greece. A random sample of 100 PHC centers stratified by Health Region was created. The online questionnaire consisted of 53 items, covering six sections: general information on the PHC center, patient flow, infection prevention, information processing, communication to patients, collaboration, and collegiality., Results: Seventy-eight PHC centers (78%) - 50 rural and 28 non-rural - responded to the survey. Certain measures were reported by few PHC centers. Specifically, the use of online messages about complaints that can be solved without a visit to the PHC center (21% rural; and 31% non-rural PHC centers), the use of video consultations with patients (12% rural; and 7% non-rural PHC centers), and the use of electronic medical records (EMRs) to systematically identify the list of patients with chronic conditions (5% rural; and 10% non-rural PHC centers) were scarcely reported. Very few PHC centers reported measures to support identifying and reaching out to vulnerable population, including patients that may have experienced domestic violence (8% rural; and 7% non-rural PHC centers), or financial problems (26% rural; and 7% non-rural PHC centers). Providing administrative documents to patients through postal mail (12% rural; and 21% non-rural PHC centers), or regular e-mail (11% rural; and 36% non-rural PHC centers), or through a secured server (8% rural; and 18% non-rural PHC centers) was rarely reported. Finally, providing information in multiple languages through a PHC website (12% rural PHC centers only), or an answering machine (6% rural PHC centers only), or leaflets (3% rural PHC centers only; and for leaflets specifically on COVID-19: 6% rural; and 8% non-rural PHC centers) were lacking in most PHC centers., Conclusion: Our study captured measures implemented by few PHC centers suggesting potential priority areas of future improvement., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Primary Health Care (PHC) has been key element in detection, monitoring and treatment of COVID-19 cases in Spain. We describe how PHC practices (PCPs) organized healthcare to guarantee quality and safety and, if there were differences among the 17 Spanish regions according to the COVID-19 prevalence., Methods: Cross-sectional study through the PRICOV-19 European Online Survey in PCPs in Spain. The questionnaire included structure and process items per PCP. Data collection was due from January to May 2021. A descriptive and comparative analysis and a logistic regression model were performed to identify differences among regions by COVID-19 prevalence (low < 5% or high ≥5%)., Results: Two hundred sixty-six PCPs answered. 83.8% of PCPs were in high prevalence regions. Over 70% PCPs were multi-professional teams. PCPs attended mainly elderly (60.9%) and chronic patients (53.0%). Regarding structure indicators, no differences by prevalence detected. In 77.1% of PCPs administrative staff were more involved in providing recommendations. Only 53% of PCPs had a phone protocol although 73% of administrative staff participated in phone triage. High prevalence regions offered remote assessment (20.4% vs 2.3%, p 0.004) and online platforms to download administrative documents more frequently than low prevalence (30% vs 4.7%, p < 0.001). More backup staff members were hired by health authorities in high prevalence regions, especially nurses (63.9% vs 37.8%, p < 0.001. OR:4.20 (1.01-8.71)). 63.5% of PCPs provided proactive care for chronic patients. 41.0% of PCPs recognized that patients with serious conditions did not know to get an appointment. Urgent conditions suffered delayed care in 79.1% of PCPs in low prevalence compared to 65.9% in high prevalence regions (p 0.240). A 68% of PCPs agreed on having inadequate support from the government to provide proper functioning. 61% of high prevalence PCPs and 69.5% of low ones (p: 0.036) perceived as positive the role of governmental guidelines for management of COVID-19., Conclusions: Spanish PCPs shared a basic standardized PCPs' structure and common clinical procedures due to the centralization of public health authority in the pandemic. Therefore, no relevant differences in safety and quality of care between regions with high and low prevalence were detected. Nurses and administrative staff were hired efficiently in response to the pandemic. Delay in care happened in patients with serious conditions and little follow-up for mental health and intimate partner violence affected patients was identified. Nevertheless, proactive care was offered for chronic patients in most of the PCPs., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the World Health Organization established a number of key recommendations such as educational activities especially within primary care practices (PCPs) which are a key component of this strategy. This paper aims to examine the educational activities of PCPs during COVID-19 pandemic and to identify the factors associated with these practices across 38 countries., Methods: A "Patient Education (PE)" score was created based on responses to six items from the self-reported questionnaire among PCPs (n = 3638) compiled by the PRICOV-19 study. Statistical analyses were performed on 3638 cases, with PCPs with missing PE score values were excluded., Results: The PE score features a mean of 2.55 (SD = 0.68) and a median of 2.50 (2.16 - 3.00), with a maximum of 4.00, and varies quite widely between countries. Among all PCPs characteristics, these factors significantly increase the PE score: the payment system type (with a capitation payment system or another system compared to the fee for service), the perception of average PCP with patients with chronic conditions and the perception of adequate governmental support., Conclusion: The model presented in this article is still incomplete and requires further investigation to identify other configuration elements favorable to educational activities. However, the results already highlight certain levers that will enable the development of this educational approach appropriate to primary care., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The mental health and well-being of GPs is a critical issue as they play a vital role in providing healthcare services to individuals and communities. Research has shown that GPs often face high levels of stress, burnout, and mental health problems due to their demanding work environment. During the COVID-19 pandemic, GPs faced additional challenges which further impacted their mental health and well-being. This study aims to investigate the impact of systemic work-related stressors on the level of well-being of GPs in Belgium during the pandemic, with a particular emphasis on identifying regional variations between Flanders, Wallonia, and Brussels-Capital., Methods: Data were collected with a self-reported online questionnaire from 479 GPs Belgian practices between December 2020 and August 2021 as part of the international PRICOV-19 study that explored the organization of general practices during COVID-19 in 38 countries to guarantee safe, effective, patient-centered, and equitable care. Well-being was evaluated by the Mayo Clinic's expanded 9-item well-being index., Results: The findings of this study reveal notable regional discrepancies in the degree of well-being experienced by Belgian GPs, with the Walloon region displaying the lowest level of well-being (37%) in a population highly susceptible to professional distress (57%). Among the key stressors contributing to such distress, financial difficulties among patients (p < 0.011), the fee-for-service payment system (p = 0.013), a lack of work-related purpose (p = 0.047), and inadequate work-life balance (p < 0.001) were identified as significant factors. When examining the influence of regional disparities, it was found that the sole significant interaction between work-related stressors and region regarding the probability of experiencing distress was related to the possibility of workload sharing among practice personnel., Conclusion: The findings from this study underscore the imperative for more comprehensive research aimed at scrutinizing the differences in well-being across the three regions in Belgium and identifying the systemic factors that influence the practice environment, as opposed to exclusively concentrating on enhancing individual resilience., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: General practitioners (GPs) have a vital role in reaching out to vulnerable populations during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Nonetheless, they experience many challenges to fulfill this role. This study aimed to examine associations between practice characteristics, patient population characteristics and the extent of deprivation of practice area on the one hand, and the level of outreach work performed by primary care practices (PCPs) during the COVID-19 pandemic on the other hand., Methods: Belgian data from the international PRICOV-19 study were analyzed. Data were collected between December 2020 and August 2021 using an online survey in PCPs. Practices were recruited through randomized and convenience sampling. Descriptive statistics and ordinal logistic regression analyses were performed. Four survey questions related to outreach work constitute the outcome variable. The adjusted models included four practice characteristics (practice type, being a teaching practice for GP trainees; the presence of a nurse or a nurse assistant and the presence of a social worker or health promotor), two patient population characteristics (social vulnerability and medical complexity) and an area deprivation index., Results: Data from 462 respondents were included. First, the factors significantly associated with outreach work in PCPs are the type of PCP (with GPs working in a group performing more outreach work), and the presence of a nurse (assistant), social worker or health promotor. Second, the extent of outreach work done by a PCP is significantly associated with the social vulnerability of the practice's patient population. This social vulnerability factor, affecting outreach work, differed with the level of medical complexity of the practice's patient population and with the level of deprivation of the municipality where the practice is situated., Conclusions: In this study, outreach work in PCPs during the COVID-19 pandemic is facilitated by the group-type cooperation of GPs and by the support of at least one staff member of the disciplines of nursing, social work, or health promotion. These findings suggest that improving the effectiveness of outreach efforts in PCPs requires addressing organizational factors at the practice level. This applies in particular to PCPs having a more socially vulnerable patient population., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic immensely impacted care provision, including quality of care in general practice. This paper aimed: (1) to assess how Belgian general practices acted upon the six dimensions of quality of care during COVID-19; (2) to study differences between the three Belgian regions; and (3) to benchmark the performance of the Belgian practices against the performance in other European countries., Methods: The data collected from 479 Belgian practices during 2020-2021 using an online survey as part of the international cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study were analyzed.  Hereby, descriptive statistics, chi-squared tests, and binary logistic regression analyses were performed. Thirty-four survey questions related to the six dimensions of quality of care were selected as outcome variables. The adjusted regression models included four practice characteristics as covariates: practice type, being a teaching practice for GP trainees, multidisciplinarity of the team, and payment system., Results: Belgian practices made important organizational changes to deliver high-quality care during COVID-19. Most practices (n = 259; 56.1%) actively reached out to vulnerable patients. Limitations to the practice building or infrastructure threatened high-quality care in 266 practices (55.5%). Infection prevention measures could not always be implemented during COVID-19, such as using a cleaning protocol (n = 265; 57.2%) and providing a separate doctor bag for infection-related home visits (n = 130; 27.9%). Three hundred and sixty practices (82.0%) reported at least one safety incident related to a delayed care process in patients with an urgent condition. The adjusted regression analysis showed limited significant differences between the Belgian regions regarding the quality of care delivered. Belgian practices demonstrated varied performance compared to other European countries. For example, they excelled in always checking the feasibility of isolation at home but reported more patient safety incidents related to timely care than at least three-quarters of the other European countries., Conclusions: Future studies using different design methods are crucial to investigate which country and practice characteristics are associated with delivering high-quality care., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: PRICOV-19 is a European cross-sectional study based on an online questionnaire, describing the impact of the pandemic on primary care structures (PCS). In France, PCS are solo practices (SP), single or multi-professional group practices (GP), coordinated practice structures (CPS): health houses and health centers. Triage, whether it is digital (TD), by telephone (TT) or at the reception (TR), is essential to reduce the risk of infection, and is part of recommended organizational practices., Purpose of Research: Based on French data from the PRICOV-19 study, the objective is to describe the frequency and factors associated with triage in PCSs during the COVID 19 pandemic., Results: 1100 structures responded to the survey. The TD was implemented in 64% of PCSs (53.3% of SPs, 64.9% of GPs, 73.2% of CPSs). The TT was implemented in 76% of structures (72.7% of SPs, 75.4% of GPs and 81% of CPSs). Finally, TR was implemented in 52% of structures (37.7% of SPs, 52% of GPs and 67% of CPSs). The other positively associated factors are the urban territory and the lower workload for the TD, and the presence of a receptionist for the TR., Conclusions: Triage practices seem to be clearly associated with the organization and working conditions in the PCSs, and first and foremost with the type of structure.

Background: During the Covid-19 pandemic, family medicine practices (FMPs) changed to improve safety against new coronavirus infections for both patients and employees. Protocols for treating patients with suspected Sars-Cov-2 infections were established to protect medical staff and other patients from being infected. However, these protocols also led to increased safety risks, such as delays in treating patients with other medical conditions. This exploratory study aimed to investigate safety risks in treating patients in FMPs during the Covid-19 pandemic and to suggest improvements to prevent Covid-19 in FMPs in Slovenia., Methods: A cross-sectional study was rolled out in FMPs in Slovenia as part of the international Pricov-19 study. Data collection on safety management during the Covid-19 pandemic in FMPs in Slovenia took place from November 2020 until January 2021 using a self-administered online survey for FP working in Slovenia. A chi-square test, ANOVA, independent samples t-test or bivariate correlation test was performed to explore associations regarding the safety of patients' management variables., Results: From the 191 participating family physicians (FPs) (15.2% response rate), 54.8% reported having treated patients with fever (not Covid-19) late due to the new protocols at least once, and 54.8% reported patients with urgent conditions having been seen late at least once due to not coming. In the suburbs and rural environments FPs more often reported that at least once patient with a fever (not Covid-19) was seen late due to the protocol (p = 0.017) and more often reported that at least once patient with an urgent condition was seen late due to not coming to their FP (p = 0.017). The larger the practice, the more they reported that at least once a patient with fever (not Covid-19) was seen late due to the protocol (p = 0.012) and the more they reported at least once a patient with an urgent condition was seen late due to not coming to their FP (p = 0.012)., Conclusion: Covid-19 affected the safety of patient management in FMP in Slovenia. The most common problem was foregone care. Therefor, protocols for chronic patient management in the event of epidemics need to be established., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Addressing equity in healthcare is fundamental for delivering safe care to vulnerable patients, especially during COVID-19. This paper aims to identify barriers and enabling factors for general practitioners (GPs) in delivering safe and equitable care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Semi-structured interviews took place during May-July 2020 among 18 Flemish and 16 Dutch GPs. Thematic analysis of the interviews demonstrated that while GPs acknowledged a smooth information flow by governments and professional organizations on care guidelines, the fast-changing information challenged them to stay up to date. Media communication facilitated information dissemination but also fueled misinformation and miscommunication, creating unrealistic patient expectations. Certain guidelines and patient reluctance delayed necessary care. A shortage of personal protective equipment made GPs concerned about patient safety during face-to-face contacts. Teleconsultations became a popular alternative, but posed increased patient safety risks. GPs struggled to identify and reach vulnerable patients. Equitable care was hindered by time constraints; thus, having the appropriate materials facilitated such care. An interprofessional collaboration involving paramedical, social, and city services benefited patient safety and equity in healthcare. However, limitations in this collaboration pressured GPs. The unprecedented and resource-constrained environment challenged GPs' capacity to provide the healthcare quality they aspired to deliver. A well-structured collaborative network involving all stakeholders could benefit safe and equitable care in future pandemics.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic led to huge and rapid changes in general practice in Norway as in the rest of Europe. This paper aims to explore to what extent the COVID-19 pandemic changed the work tasks and organization of Norwegian general practice., Material and Method: We analysed data from the Norwegian part of the international, cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study, collecting data from general practice via an online self-reported questionnaire. We included 130 Norwegian general practices, representing an estimated 520 Norwegian general practitioners (GPs). All Norwegian GPs were invited to participate. In the analyses, we focused on items related to the use of alternatives to face-to-face consultations, changes in the workload, tasks and delegated responsibilities of both the GPs and other personnel in the GP offices, adaptations in routines related to hygiene measures, triage of patients, and how the official rules and recommendations affected the practices., Results: There was a large and significant increase in the use of all forms of alternative consultation forms (digital text-based, video- and telephone consultations). The use of several different infection prevention measures were significantly increased, and the provision of hand sanitizer to patients increased from 29.6% pre-pandemic to 95.1% since the pandemic. More than half of the GPs (59.5%) reported that their responsibilities in the practice had increased, and 41% were happy with the task shift. 27% felt that they received adequate support from the government; however, 20% reported that guidelines from the government posed a threat to the well-being of the practice staff. We found no associations with the rurality of the practice location or size of the municipalities., Conclusion: Norwegian GPs adapted well to the need for increased use of alternatives to face-to-face consultations, and reported a high acceptance of their increased responsibilities. However, only one in four received adequate support from the government, which is an important learning point for similar situations in the future., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has had an enormous impact on health systems in Europe and has generated unprecedented challenges for tertiary care. Less is known about the effects on the activities of local family doctors (FDs), who have shifted tasks and adapted their practice to accommodate the new services brought by the pandemic. The PRICOV-19 study was a multi-country survey aiming to understand the challenges posed by the pandemic in primary health care (PHC) practices around Europe. Within the framework of this study, we assessed the impact of the pandemic on PHC facilities in urban, rural, and mixed urban/rural areas in the Republic of Moldova., Methods: We present the results from the PRICOV-19 questionnaire designed at Ghent University (Belgium) and distributed between January and March 2021 to PHC facilities from the 35 districts of the Republic of Moldova. This analysis presents descriptive data on limitations to service delivery, staff role changes, implementation and acceptance of COVID-19 guidelines, and incidents reported on staff and patient safety during the pandemic., Results: Results highlighted the differences between facilities located in urban, rural, and mixed areas in several dimensions of PHC. Nearly half of the surveyed facilities experienced limitations in the building or infrastructure when delivering services during the pandemic. 95% of respondents reported an increase in time spent giving information to patients by phone, and 88% reported an increase in responsibilities. Few practices reported errors in clinical assessments, though a slightly higher number of incidents were reported in urban areas. Half of the respondents reported difficulties delivering routine care to patients with chronic conditions and a delay in treatment-seeking., Conclusions: During the pandemic, the workload of PHC staff saw a significant increase, and practices met important structural and organizational limitations. Consequently, these limitations may have also affected care delivery for vulnerable patients with chronic conditions. Adjustments and bottlenecks need to be addressed, considering the different needs of PHC facilities in urban, rural, and mixed areas., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: The SARS-CoV2 pandemic as well as the implementation of public health measures to decrease the spread of the virus re-sparked the call for "virtual" health or "distance" treatments. This paper aimed to assess the use of video consultations, the up-to-dateness of practice websites, and the views of GPs on whether eHealth is a positive aspect for the future of their practices in publicly -funded primary healthcare facilities in Austria., Methods: The cross-sectional online questionnaire, part of the PRICOV-19 study, was conducted from December 2020 until July 2021. We randomly recruited 176 GP practices across Austria. Descriptive statistics as well as binary logistic regression models were applied to examine the associations between telemedicine use and practice factors., Results: Compared with before the pandemic (3.8%), 7.6% of publicly funded GP practices have been using video consultations since the pandemic. In line with this, 93.9% of the practices had no increase in video consultation use. Fewer than half (44.3%) had an up-to-date webpage, and 27.8% assumed that the pandemic might have been a positive driver for eHealth in their practices. Positive associations with video consultation use could be found in practices with fewer patients aged 70 years and over than the average and more patients with chronic diseases than the average., Conclusion: The use of video consultations in general practice and the readiness for other telemedicine approaches are both very low in Austria. Austria has to urgently follow the example of countries with a transparent and comprehensive national digital health strategy that includes video consultation. Without a proper payment system, patient inclusion, and support with regard to administrative and organizational aspects, no substantial change will occur in spite of an increase in need due to the pandemic and changes in the patient population., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

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., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: General practices have adapted the practice organisation to the circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this article we describe several adjustments in general practices in the field of patient flow management, appointments, triage, referral and infection prevention. We also examined how practices relate to the policy of the government and of the professional organisations during the pandemic., Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among a sample of 893 general practitioners (GPs) during February and March 2021. The response rate was 17%. Because the questionnaire concerns practices and not individual GPs, one practice owner per practice received an invitation with a link to the online questionnaire. One reminder has been sent., Results: General practices adapted their organisation during the corona pandemic, partly based on information and advice from their professional organisations. The adjustments were necessary to ensure that patient care continued as much and as safely as possible, often remotely. The use of video consultations quickly increased from 6% to 65% of the practices. The cooperation with neighbouring practices improved and practices felt supported by the professional organisations., Conclusions: The pandemic itself, remote care and stricter patient flow management have put pressure on the quality of care and patient safety. The accessibility of the practices was sometimes limited. In the perception of patients, this was stronger than in reality., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: The international collaboration study PRICOV-19 -Primary Health Care in times of COVID-19 aims to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the organisation of primary health care. The German part focuses on the subjective perceptions of general practitioners on primary health care and the impact of political measures during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Within this survey, the "open text field" of the questionnaire was utilised remarkably frequently and extensively by the respondents. It became clear that the content that was named needed to be analysed in an exploratory manner. Accordingly, this paper addresses the following question: What preoccupies general practitioners in Germany during COVID-19 that we have not yet asked them enough?, Methods: The data collection took place throughout Germany from 01.02.2021 to 28.02.2021with a quantitative online questionnaire consisting of 53 items arranged across six topics as well as an "open text field" for further comments. The questionnaire's open text field was analysed following the premises of the qualitative content analysis., Results: The topics discussed by the respondents were: insufficient support from health policies, not being prioritised and involved in the vaccination strategy, feeling insufficient prepared, that infrastructural changes and financial concerns threatened the practice, and perceiving the own role as important, as well as that health policies affected the wellbeing of the respondents. One of the main points was the way general practitioners were not sufficiently acknowledged for their contribution to ensuring high-quality care during the pandemic., Discussion: German general practitioners perceived their work and role as highly relevant during the COVID-19 pandemic. In controversy with their perception, they described political conditions in which they were the ones who contributed significantly to the fight against the pandemic but were not given enough recognition., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Stark et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Several changes must be made to the services to ensure patient safety and enable delivering services in environments where the danger of infection of healthcare personnel and patients in primary care (PC) institutions is elevated, i.e., during the COVID-19 pandemic., Objective: This study aimed to examine patient safety and healthcare service management in PHC practices in Kosovo during the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: In this cross-sectional study, data were collected using a self-reported questionnaire among 77 PHC practices., Results: Our main finding reveals a safer organization of PC practices and services since the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the previous period before the pandemic. The study also shows a collaboration between PC practices in the close neighborhood and more proper human resource management due to COVID-19 suspicion or infection. Over 80% of the participating PC practices felt the need to introduce changes to the structure of their practice. Regarding infection protection measures (IPC), our study found that health professionals' practices of wearing a ring or bracelet and wearing nail polish improved during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic period. During the COVID-19 pandemic, PC practice health professionals had less time to routinely review guidelines or medical literature. Despite this, implementing triage protocols over the phone has yet to be applied at the intended level by PC practices in Kosovo., Conclusions: Primary care practices in Kosovo responded to the COVID-19 pandemic crisis by modifying how they organize their work, implementing procedures for infection control, and enhancing patient safety.

This paper explores the differences between rural and urban practices in the response to the COVID-19 pandemic, emphasizing aspects such as management of patient flow, infection prevention and control, information processing, communication and collaboration. Using a cross-sectional design, data were collected through the online PRICOV-19 questionnaire sent to general practices in 38 countries. Rural practices in our sample were smaller than urban-based practices. They reported an above-average number of old and multimorbid patients and a below-average number of patients with a migrant background or financial problems. Rural practices were less likely to provide leaflets and information, but were more likely to have ceased using the waiting room or to have made structural changes to their waiting room and to have changed their prescribing practices in terms of patients attending the practices. They were less likely to perform video consultations or use electronic prescription methods. Our findings show the existence of certain issues that could impact patient safety in rural areas more than in urban areas due to the underlying differences in population profile and supports. These could be used to plan the organization of care for similar future pandemic situations.

The COVID-19 pandemic left no one untouched, and reports of domestic violence (DV) increased during the crisis. DV victims rarely seek professional help, yet when they do so, they often disclose it to their general practitioner (GP), with whom they have a trusting relationship. GPs rarely screen and hence rarely take the initiative to discuss DV with patients, although victims indicate that offering this opportunity would facilitate their disclosure. This paper aims to describe the frequency of screening for DV by GPs and disclosure of DV by patients to the GP during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to identify key elements that could potentially explain differences in screening for and disclosure of DV. The PRICOV-19 data of 4295 GP practices from 33 countries were included in the analyses, with practices nested in countries. Two stepwise forward clustered ordinal logistic regressions were performed. Only 11% of the GPs reported (much) more disclosure of DV by patients during COVID-19, and 12% reported having screened for DV (much). Most significant associations with screening for and disclosure of DV concerned general (pro)active communication. However, (pro)active communication was performed less frequently for DV than for health conditions, which might indicate that GPs are insufficiently aware of the general magnitude of DV and its impact on patients and society, and its approach/management. Thus, professional education and training for GPs about DV seems highly and urgently needed.

The COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately affected vulnerable populations' access to health care. By proactively reaching out to them, general practices attempted to prevent the underutilization of their services. This paper examined the association between practice and country characteristics and the organization of outreach work in general practices during COVID-19. Linear mixed model analyses with practices nested in countries were performed on the data of 4982 practices from 38 countries. A 4-item scale on outreach work was constructed as the outcome variable with a reliability of 0.77 and 0.97 at the practice and country level. The results showed that many practices set up outreach work, including extracting at least one list of patients with chronic conditions from their electronic medical record (30.1%); and performing telephone outreach to patients with chronic conditions (62.8%), a psychological vulnerability (35.6%), or possible situation of domestic violence or a child-rearing situation (17.2%). Outreach work was positively related to the availability of an administrative assistant or practice manager ( p < 0.05) or paramedical support staff ( p < 0.01). Other practice and country characteristics were not significantly associated with undertaking outreach work. Policy and financial interventions supporting general practices to organize outreach work should focus on the range of personnel available to support such practice activities.

Introduction: In the wake of COVID-19 primary care practices have had to overcome and to adapt to several challenges in providing quality care. An international consortium led by Ghent University, Belgium, set up the PRICOV-19 project to study how primary care practices in 38 countries responded to the new challenges., Objective: The aim of the study was to describe how Covid-19 impacted the organisation of primary care practices in rural and urban environments in Poland, including the organisation of patient flows, infection prevention, information processing, and communication., Material and Methods: This is cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey among primary care practices. In Poland, the survey was distributed among primary care practices in 16 Polish regions. 180 practices participated in the study. In the analysis of the data U-Mann Whitney or t-test for independent groups, and Wilcoxon test were used to compare the organisation of care before and since the pandemic., Results: Over two-thirds of practices made considerable changes in their structure due to COVID-19; over three-quarters introduced security procedures for phone registrations, but only a quarter still offered consultations without a prior appointment. The use of video consultation quadrupled, and teleconsultations became almost universal. Rural practices were significantly more likely to offer active care for deprived patient groups. A significant increase in infection prevention measures occurred in both urban and rural practices., Conclusions: COVID-19 brought challenges that spurred changes to the organisation of primary care practices as they sought to continue offering quality care. Despite these hardships, new opportunities for effective changes to clinical operations and organization have emerged and will benefit global health systems in the face of new crises.

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

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a large and varying impact on primary care. This paper studies changes in the tasks of general practitioners (GPs) and associated staff during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data from the PRICOV-19 study of 5093 GPs in 38 countries were used. We constructed a scale for task changes and performed multilevel analyses. The scale was reliable at both GP and country level. Clustering of task changes at country level was considerable (25%). During the pandemic, staff members were more involved in giving information and recommendations to patients contacting the practice by phone, and they were more involved in triage. GPs took on additional responsibilities and were more involved in reaching out to patients. Problems due to staff absence, when dealt with internally, were related to more task changes. Task changes were larger in practices employing a wider range of professional groups. Whilst GPs were happy with the task changes in practices with more changes, they also felt the need for further training. A higher-than-average proportion of elderly people and people with a chronic condition in the practice were related to task changes. The number of infections in a country during the first wave of the pandemic was related to task changes. Other characteristics at country level were not associated with task changes. Future research on the sustainability of task changes after the pandemic is needed.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic had a major impact on primary care and primary care physicians (PCPs) in Israel and around the world. There is paucity of information regarding treatment of patients with COVID-19 in the community, since most research was performed in hospitals. The aim of this study was to describe the Israeli PCPs' experience., Methods: This study is a part of an international cross-sectional study, the PRICOV-19. A translated version of the questionnaire was distributed among Israeli PCPs from December 2020 to July 2021. In this study, we describe the Israeli results and compare them to the international results., Results: 5,961 respondents from 29 countries answered the questionnaire, 94 from Israel, with an Israeli response rate of 16%. Israeli PCPs reported an increase in use of telemedicine from 11 to 49% during the COVID epidemic. PCPs also reported a decline in their wellbeing; absence of secured time slots for keeping updated; perception that the Ministry of Health guidelines were a threat to the staff wellbeing and organization of practice and delays in the examination of non-COVID urgent cases., Conclusions: The findings of this study raise concerns regarding the PCPs experience and may form the basis for an improved process of care. Guidelines for proper usage of telemedicine, substitutes for the physical examination and procedures for minimizing delayed patient examination for urgent conditions should be developed. Government directives and clinical guidelines should be communicated in a timely manner, with secured timeslots for physicians' self-learning or updating. Ensuring physicians' well-being in general should be an organization priority., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

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

Infection prevention and control (IPC) is an evidence-based approach used to reduce the risk of infection transmission within the healthcare environment. Effective IPC practices ensure safe and quality healthcare. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for enhanced IPC measures and the World Health Organization (WHO) emphasized the need for strict adherence to the basic principles of IPC. This paper aims to describe the IPC strategies implemented in general practice during the COVID-19 pandemic and to identify the factors that impact their adoption. Data were collected by means of an online self-reported questionnaire among general practices. Data from 4466 practices in 33 countries were included in the analysis. Our results showed a notable improvement in IPC during COVID-19 with more practices reporting that staff members never wore nail polish (increased from 34% to 46.2%); more practices reporting that staff never wear a ring/bracelet (increased from 16.1% to 32.3%); and more practices using a cleaning protocol (increased from 54.9% to 72.7%). Practice population size and the practice payment system were key factors related to adoption of a) range of IPC measures including patient flow arrangements and infrastructural elements. An understanding of the interplay between policy, culture, systemic supports, and behavior are necessary to obtain sustained improvement in IPC measures.

Emerging literature is highlighting the huge toll of the COVID-19 pandemic on frontline health workers. However, prior to the crisis, the wellbeing of this group was already of concern. The aim of this paper is to describe the frequency of distress and wellbeing, measured by the expanded 9-item Mayo Clinic Wellbeing Index (eWBI), among general practitioners/family physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic and to identify levers to mitigate the risk of distress. Data were collected by means of an online self-reported questionnaire among GP practices. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software using Version 7 of the database, which consisted of the cleaned data of 33 countries available as of 3 November 2021. Data from 3711 respondents were included. eWBI scores ranged from -2 to 9, with a median of 3. Using a cutoff of ≥2, 64.5% of respondents were considered at risk of distress. GPs with less experience, in smaller practices, and with more vulnerable patient populations were at a higher risk of distress. Significant differences in wellbeing scores were noted between countries. Collaboration from other practices and perception of having adequate governmental support were significant protective factors for distress. It is necessary to address practice- and system-level organizational factors in order to enhance wellbeing and support primary care physicians.

Aim: To examine the relationship between physical and psychosocial work-related risk factors and perceived work ability (PWA) among nurses., Background: The work of nurses is challenging due to its high physical and mental workload. This might reduce PWA. A sustainable level of PWA is crucial to maintain well-being at work and to prevent early dropout. As a consequence, gaining a better understanding of which factors play a role in determining PWA is essential for health care organisations., Methods: The associations between work-related risk factors and PWA were investigated among 114 nurses from Ghent University Hospital, Belgium. PWA and psychosocial factors were subjectively assessed. Occupational physical activity (OPA) was objectively measured over a period of 2-5 days using two accelerometers., Results: No association between OPA and PWA was found. Multiple linear regression models revealed that job demands were negatively associated with PWA, whereas job control showed a positive association with PWA., Conclusions: The results highlight the importance of psychosocial factors for more research on the PWA of nurses. Further investigation into the specific physical work demands of nurses is called for., Implications for Nursing Management: Giving attention to psychosocial factors is crucial to enhance the PWA and well-being of nurses., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Unequal access to health promotion resources and early prevention services is a major determinant of health inequity among youth. Initiatives that improve the access to and adoption of health promotion messages are important undertakings, e.g., sport. Sport-for-development (SFD) programs are seen as valuable delivery tools, in which coaches are used as change agents to increase health awareness and behavior among at-risk youth. The delivery of such messages requires specific knowledge and skills that can be attained through training; however, the effectiveness of such training requires assessment. In this study, we evaluated the feasibility of such a training program for SFD coaches using process evaluation from a realist perspective, and views from multiple stakeholders, among other sources. We also clarified the inner workings of the training and investigated how context shaped the training outcomes. Increased health awareness and a sense of responsibility from acting as a role model for at-risk youth were among the perceived training outcomes. Building a safe environment for learning, engagement, and bonds of trust increased the confidence to learn, and resulted in a sense of critical self-reflection and self-development of SFD coaches towards health and prevention messages. Importantly, the unique situations (or context) of SFD coaches and SFD in general presented challenging variables, e.g., a precarious life history or living conditions, mental health issues, or low educational skills, that hampered the impact of the mechanisms put in place by the training. Here, we present a process in which the development of the 'right mind-set,' engagement and bonds of trust, in combination with the right settings are key elements for SFD coaches to learn how to convey health-promoting messages and take responsibility as role models for at-risk youth., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Disease-specific health-related quality of life (HRQOL) questionnaires provide the clinician with important information regarding the impact of the disease on functioning and well-being. For patients with velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI), the VPI Effects on Life Outcomes (VELO) questionnaire was developed and validated in English by Skirko et al. (2012). However, a valid and reliable Dutch translation of this questionnaire is not available yet., Methods: The English questionnaire was translated to Dutch following a forward-backward translation procedure. A linguistic validation and the evaluation of the internal consistency (Cronbach's α) of this Dutch version were performed based on the responses of 39 parents of patients with cleft (lip and) palate (mean age: 6.8 years) (parent report) and the responses of 14 patients older than 8 years (mean age: 9.5 years) (child report). Additionally, the concurrent validity was assessed by comparing the scores on the parent report to those on the pediatric voice handicap index. Furthermore, the validity of the parent proxy assessment and the relationship between age and responses on the VELO questionnaire were investigated. Based on the responses of an age and gender matched control group without cleft palate, the discriminant validity was evaluated., Results: The parent report was easy to complete for all parents. Nine of the fourteen (64%) patients were able to complete the child report independently. The median scores on the parent report and the child report were 82.7 and 95.1 respectively. The patient group had a significantly worse perception of HRQOL compared to the control group (p < 0.001; p = 0.029). There were no significant differences between the responses of the parent and their child's (p = 0.345). A significant positive correlation was found between the score on the parent report and the age of the patients (p = 0.001). Furthermore, a significant negative correlation was found between the parent report and the P-VHI (p < 0.001). Cronbach's α was 0.955 and 0.817 for the parent report and the child report respectively., Conclusion: The Dutch VELO questionnaire is a valid, reliable and user-friendly tool that provides important information about HRQOL in patients with cleft (lip and) palate., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)