Impacts of mild COVID-19 on elevated use of primary and specialist health care services: A nationwide register study from Norway

Aim To explore the temporal impact of mild COVID-19 on need for primary and specialist health care services. Methods In all adults (≥20 years) tested for SARS-CoV-2 in Norway March 1st 2020 to February 1st 2021 (N = 1 401 922), we contrasted the monthly all-cause health care use before and up to 6 months after the test (% relative difference), for patients with a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 (non-hospitalization, i.e. mild COVID-19) and patients with a negative test (no COVID-19). Results We found a substantial short-term elevation in primary care use in all age groups, with men generally having a higher relative increase (men 20–44 years: 522%, 95%CI = 509–535, 45–69 years: 439%, 95%CI = 426–452, ≥70 years: 199%, 95%CI = 180–218) than women (20–44 years: 342, 95%CI = 334–350, 45–69 years = 375, 95%CI = 365–385, ≥70 years: 156%, 95%CI = 141–171) at 1 month following positive test. At 2 months, this sex difference was less pronounced, with a (20–44 years: 21%, 95%CI = 13–29, 45–69 years = 38%, 95%CI = 30–46, ≥70 years: 15%, 95%CI = 3–28) increase in primary care use for men, and a (20–44 years: 30%, 95%CI = 24–36, 45–69 years = 57%, 95%CI = 50–64, ≥70 years: 14%, 95%CI = 4–24) increase for women. At 3 months after test, only women aged 45–70 years still had an increased primary care use (14%, 95%CI = 7–20). The increase was due to respiratory- and general/unspecified conditions. We observed no long-term (4–6 months) elevation in primary care use, and no elevation in specialist care use. Conclusion Mild COVID-19 gives an elevated need for primary care that vanishes 2–3 months after positive test. Middle-aged women had the most prolonged increased primary care use.

ENT Telephone Clinics During the Coronavirus Pandemic: An Analysis of 400 Telephone Consultations at a District General Hospital

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic led to the introduction of telephone consultations in order to provide specialist health care remotely. This study analyses the outcomes of ear, nose, and throat (ENT) telephone consultations. Methods: Retrospective analysis was undertaken of 400 ENT telephone consultations. Results: All 2-week-wait neck or face lump patients underwent imaging and 78% were successfully discharged. 80% of vertigo patients and 100% of 2-week-wait throat symptom patients were offered face-to-face consultations. All primary hyperparathyroidism patients were managed remotely, being discharged, or with telephone follow-up. The majority of routine referrals were managed without the need for face-to-face consultation. Conclusion: Vertigo patients and 2-week-wait throat symptom patients should be offered a face-to-face consultation in the first instance. For patients with neck or face lumps, initial referral for imaging may improve patient flow and facilitate safe discharge. It is appropriate to continue with telephone consultations for all other patient groups.

Health care use up to 6 months after COVID-19 in 700.000 children and adolescents: a pre-post study

Objectives: To explore whether, and for how long COVID-19 among children gives an increase in use of health care services, when compared to children with no COVID-19. Methods: Studying all Norwegian residents aged 1-5, 6-15 and 16-19 years from August 1st 2020 to February 1st 2021 (N= 768 560), we contrasted rates of monthly all-cause primary and specialist health care use before and after testing for SARS-CoV-2 (% relative change), for children testing positive (non-hospitalized in the acute phase) (N=10 306) vs children with no COVID-19 (N=758 254). Results: We found a substantial elevation in short-term primary care use for children testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the first month following positive test when compared to children testing negative (relative elevation 1-5 years: 325%, 95%CI=296-354; 6-15 years: 434%, 95%CI=415-453; 16-19 years: 360%, 95%CI=342-379). There was still elevated primary care use at 2 months (1-5 years: 21%, 95%CI= 4-38; 6-15 years: 13%, 95%CI=2-25) and at 3 months (1-5 years: 26%, 95%CI=7-45, 6-15 years: 15%, 95%CI=3-26) for young children, but not at 2 or 3 months for the older children (16-19 years: 10%, 95%CI=-1-22 and 6%, 95%CI=-5-18, respectively). The 1-5-year-olds also had a long-term (up to 6 months) increase of primary care (14%, 95%CI=1-26) that was not observed for older age groups, when compared to same-aged children testing negative. We observed no elevated use of specialist care. Conclusion: Children in pre-school age used health services for a longer time (3-6 months) after COVID-19 than children in primary and secondary school age (1-3 months).

Doctor’s Responsibility in Providing Telemedicine Services among Health Care Facilities: Legal and Professional Dimensions

To provide specialist health care closer and improve quality in health care facilities, especially for remote areas, the central government utilizes information and communication technology through telemedicine services among health care facilities. This matter is regulated in the Ministry of Health Regulation No. 20 Tahun 2019 tentang Penyelenggaraan Telemedicine Antar Fasilitas Pelayanan Kesehatan. This article aims to describe the forms of legal responsibility and professional responsibilities of doctors in telemedicine services among health care facilities. The method used in this study is normative juridical. The study results show that physicians' responsibilities in telemedicine services among health care facilities can be divided into legal responsibilities (which are divided into civil, criminal, and administrative) and professional responsibilities (ethics and discipline). Doctors’ responsibility in telemedicine services among health care facilities is an obligation that doctors must fulfill because obligations are nothing but part of the tasks carried out in a particular work environment.

Impacts of COVID-19 on long-term health and health care use

AimTo explore impacts of mild and severe COVID-19 on acute and long-term utilization of primary care, inpatient- and outpatient specialist health care.MethodsIn all persons tested for the SARS-CoV-2 in Norway March 1st to November 1st 2020 (N=1 257 831), we used a difference-in-differences design to contrast the monthly health care use before and after testing, across patients with negative test (no COVID-19) and 1) positive test, not hospitalized (mild COVID-19) and 2) positive test, hospitalized (severe COVID-19). We studied all-cause- and cause-specific health care use for digestive, circulatory, respiratory, endocrine/metabolic/nutritional, genitourinary, eye/ear, musculoskeletal, mental, skin, blood and general/unspecified conditions.ResultsMild COVID-19 impacted on primary care due to respiratory conditions at 0-3 months after having tested positive (786% increase). Severe COVID-19 impacted on visits due to respiratory-(337-3316% increase), circulatory-(166-205% increase), endocrine/metabolic/nutritional-(168-791% increase) as well as visits due to general/unspecified conditions (48-431% increase) in outpatient and inpatient specialist care 0-3 months after being tested. Severe COVID-19 also impacted on outpatient specialist care after 4-6 months, for respiratory and circulatory conditions (199-246% increase) and general/unspecified conditions (40% increase).ConclusionOur findings imply that mild COVID-19 does not persist to cause a need for health care beyond two months after having tested positive. Health care contacts increased the most in specialist care for those who had undergone severe COVID-19, both at 0-3 and at 4-6 months. This increase was due to respiratory, circulatory, endocrine/metabolic/nutritional and general/unspecified causes.

Task shifting in the care for patients with hand osteoarthritis. Protocol for a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial

Background Current health policy states that patients with osteoarthritis (OA) should mainly be managed in primary health care. Still, research shows that patients with hand OA have poor access to recommended treatment in primary care, and in Norway, they are increasingly referred to rheumatologist consultations in specialist care. In this randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, we will test if a new model, where patients referred to consultation in specialist health care receive their first consultation by an occupational therapy (OT) specialist, is as safe and effective as the traditional model, where they receive their first consultation by a rheumatologist. More specifically, we will answer the following questions: What are the characteristics of patients with hand OA referred to specialist health care with regards to joint affection, disease activity, symptoms and function? Is OT-led hand OA care as effective and safe as rheumatologist-led care with respect to treatment response, disease activity, symptoms, function and patient satisfaction? Is OT-led hand OA care equal to, or more cost effective than rheumatologist-led care? Which factors, regardless of hand OA care, predict improvement 6 and 12 months after baseline? Methods Participants will be patients with hand OA diagnosed by a general practitioner and referred for consultation at one of two Norwegian departments of rheumatology. Those who agree will attend a clinical assessment and report their symptoms and function in validated outcome measures, before they are randomly selected to receive their first consultation by an OT specialist (n = 200) or by a rheumatologist (n = 200). OTs may refer patients to a rheumatologist consultation and vice versa. The primary outcome will be the number of patients classified as OMERACT/OARSI-responders after six months. Secondary outcomes are pain, function and satisfaction with care over the twelve-month trial period. The analysis of the primary outcome will be done by logistic regression. A two-sided 95% confidence interval for the difference in response probability will be formed, and non-inferiority of OT-led care will be claimed if the upper endpoint of this interval does not exceed 15%. Discussion The findings will improve access to evidence-based management of people with hand OA. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03102788. Registered April 6th, 2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03102788?term=Kjeken&draw=2&rank=1 Date and version identifier: December 17th, 2020. First version.

Shoulder patients in primary and specialist health care. A cross-sectional study

Objectives Shoulder pain is a prevalent problem and has a considerable impact on the use of primary and specialist health care in Norway. It is important to improve short-term recovery and reduce long-term consequences regarding pain and disability, the high costs of treatment and the amount of sick-leave. Treatment for non-specific shoulder pain is mainly non-operative. The aims of this study were to investigate if there are differences in main characteristics, pain and disability (SPADI-score) and psycho-social factors between patients in primary and specialist health care. Methods This cross-sectional study included patients consulting physiotherapy in primary health care and patients at an outpatient clinic in specialist health care. Well-known and tested questionnaires for these populations were used and variables were divided into clinical, sociodemographic, psycho-social, and shoulder pain and disability. Descriptive statistics were applied. Two-sample t-test and linear regression were used for continuous data whereas chi-square tests and logistic regression were applied to test differences in categorical data between the two study populations. Results Two hundred and 36 patients were recruited from primary health care (FYSIOPRIM, Physiotherapy In Primary Care) and 167 from specialist health care. Patients in primary health care reported less regular use of pain medication (30.7 vs. 61.3%) and fewer patients had symptom duration >12 months (41.9 vs. 51.0%). Furthermore, they reported lower pain intensity, less shoulder pain and disability (SPADI-score), lower scores on psycho-social factors, but higher on expectations of recovery. Conclusions Patients with shoulder pain treated in primary health care and in specialist health care are different according to factors such as duration of symptoms, pain and disability, and some of the psycho-social variables. However, the differences are small and the variations within the two study samples is large. Patients treated in primary health care seemed to be less affected and to have higher expectations concerning their recovery. However, based on our results we may question why many patients are referred to specialist health care rather than continuing treatment in primary health care.