Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41920896›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Evaluating patient harm minimization during the COVID-19-driven reduction in benign gynecological care: a nationwide claims-based longitudinal study in the Netherlands.

Eva L M Velthuijs, Ismail Ismail, Robert A de Leeuw, Wouter J K Hehenkamp, Xander H E Koolman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Eva L M VelthuijsDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Amsterdam UMC, Location VU/AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6386-4007
Ismail IsmailDepartment of Health Economics, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Robert A de LeeuwDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Amsterdam UMC, Location VU/AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Wouter J K HehenkampDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Amsterdam UMC, Location VU/AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Xander H E KoolmanDepartment of Health Economics, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate whether the COVID-19 pandemic influenced treatment modality, care intensity, and care setting in benign gynecological care in the Netherlands.

designRetrospective longitudinal cohort study evaluating the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.

settingNationwide healthcare delivery was analyzed across four benign gynecological pathways from 2017 to 2022 using Vektis and Dutch Hospital Data (DHD), accessed via Statistics Netherlands (CBS).

participantsThe study focused on four benign gynecological pathways, classified using Dutch Diagnosis Treatment Combinations (DTCs): menstrual disorders (G11), uterine fibroids (G15), prolapse (G25), and first-trimester pregnancy complications (Z12). All patients with a new DTC in the first half of each year were included. Exclusion criteria were patients under 18 years, and only in the menstrual disorder pathway, patients over 51 years of age. INTERVENTION OR EXPOSURE: Cohorts from the initial pandemic year (2020) were compared to pre-pandemic years (2017-2019), the late pandemic year (2021), and the post-pandemic year (2022). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the change in treatment mix within the care pathways. Secondary outcomes included regional variation, hospital-type distribution and care intensity.

resultsIn 2020, all care pathways showed reduced unique patient volumes. Treatment mix did change during the COVID-19 pandemic, but not uniformly across the four pathways toward more less-invasive options. We found no regional differences in treatment mixes. Patient age, number of care activities and medication use remained stable. Telephone follow-up consultations increased markedly in 2020. No deviation from the trend was observed in respect of hospital type providing care. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A sharp reduction in benign gynecological care did not result in strategies to minimize patient harm like prioritization or substitution of care, as observed with our available claims data. Our findings indicate a lack of flexibility in health care provision to adjust to rapidly changing demands. Data limitations underscore the need for complementary research using other data sources to assess patient harm.

Indexed as

COVID-19GynecologyAdultFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMiddle AgedNetherlandsPandemicsPregnancyRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID41920896
PMCPMC13042642

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.