ArticleActa diabetologica2022
Quality outcome of diabetes care during COVID-19 pandemic: a primary care cohort study.
Article in Acta diabetologica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Primary Care Utilisation: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The impact of the covid-19 pandemic on perceived diabetes care and regulation, with a focus on ethnic minorities: a mixed-methods study.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Factors disrupting the continuity of care for patients with chronic disease during the pandemics: A systematic review.Health science reports · 2024Article
- The COVID-19 pandemic and disruptions to maternal and child health services in public primary care Malaysia: a retrospective time-series analysis.BMJ global health · 2023Article
- Influenza vaccination uptake among at-risk patients in Switzerland-The potential of national claims data for surveillance.Influenza and other respiratory viruses · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimManagement of diabetes care can be affected by COVID-19 pandemic control measures. This study aimed to determine the impact of the pandemic, during 17.03.2020-16.03.2021, on quality outcomes of diabetes care in general practice in Switzerland.
methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, diabetes mellitus patients (≥ 18 years) with at least one consultation at a general practitioner, during 17.03.2018-16.03.2019 (cohort 1) and 17.03.2019-16.03.2020 (cohort 2) were included and followed-up for two years. Quality indicators and outcomes of diabetes care, at patient and practitioner level, were compared before and during the pandemic. Logistic regression was performed to identify patient's risk factors for dropout from follow-up.
resultsData from 191 practices, 23,903 patients, cohort 1 and 25,092 patients, cohort 2, were analyzed. The fraction of patients lost to follow-up, attributable to the pandemic, was 28% (95% confidence interval: 25%, 30%). During the pandemic, compared to the previous year, regular measurement of weight, HbA1c, blood pressure and serum creatinine were less frequent and less patients per practitioner reached HbA1c and blood pressure target outcomes. Factors associated with continuity of care during the pandemic were: patient age 41-80 years, longer diabetes duration, diagnosis of hypertension or dyslipidemia, influenza vaccination during the last year. Risk factors for dropout were age > 80 and receiving only insulin as anti-diabetic medication.
conclusionA considerable quality reduction in diabetes mellitus care could be observed during the pandemic. Though the most vulnerable patients were not the most affected by the pandemic, key factors that might reduce dropout from follow-up were identified.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.