Most COVID-19 patients were treated in primary health care (PHC) in Europe.To demonstrate the scope of PHC workflow during the COVID-19 pandemic emphasising similarities and differences of patient’...

Background and aim: Primary health care (PHC) supported long-term care facilities (LTCFs) in attending COVID-19 patients. The aim of this study is to describe the role of PHC in LTCFs in Europe during the early phase of the pandemic. Methods: Retrospective descriptive study from 30 European countries using data from September 2020 collected with an ad hoc semi-structured questionnaire. Related variables are SARS-CoV-2 testing, contact tracing, follow-up, additional testing, and patient care. Results: Twenty-six out of the 30 European countries had PHC involvement in LTCFs during the COVID-19 pandemic. PHC participated in initial medical care in 22 countries, while, in 15, PHC was responsible for SARS-CoV-2 test along with other institutions. Supervision of individuals in isolation was carried out mostly by LTCF staff, but physical examination or symptom’s follow-up was performed mainly by PHC. Conclusion: PHC has participated in COVID-19 pandemic assistance in LTCFs in coordination with LTCF staff, public health officers, and hospitals.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the majority of patients received ambulatory treatment, highlighting the importance of primary health care (PHC). However, there is limited knowledge regarding PHC workload in Europe during this period. The utilization of COVID-19 PHC indicators could facilitate the efficient monitoring and coordination of the pandemic response. The objective of this study is to describe PHC indicators for disease surveillance and monitoring of COVID-19’s impact in Europe. Descriptive, cross-sectional study employing data obtained through a semi-structured ad hoc questionnaire, which was collectively agreed upon by all participants. The study encompasses PHC settings in 31 European countries from March 2020 to August 2021. Key-informants from each country answered the questionnaire. Main outcome: the identification of any indicator used to describe PHC COVID-19 activity. Out of the 31 countries surveyed, data on PHC information were obtained from 14. The principal indicators were: total number of cases within PHC (Belarus, Cyprus, Italy, Romania and Spain), number of follow-up cases (Croatia, Cyprus, Finland, Spain and Turkey), GP’s COVID-19 tests referrals (Poland), proportion of COVID-19 cases among respiratory illnesses consultations (Norway and France), sick leaves issued by GPs (Romania and Spain) and examination and complementary tests (Cyprus). All COVID-19 cases were attended in PHC in Belarus and Italy. The COVID-19 pandemic exposes a crucial deficiency in preparedness for infectious diseases in European health systems highlighting the inconsistent recording of indicators within PHC organizations. PHC standardized indicators and public data accessibility are urgently needed, conforming the foundation for an effective European-level health services response framework against future pandemics.

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted global healthcare systems, leading to challenges in managing Long COVID. Variations in definitions and diagnostic criteria across Europe hinder recognition and treatment efforts. This study aims to analyse and compare the definitions of Long COVID used in 34 European countries. A retrospective descriptive study was conducted involving key informants from 34 European countries, utilising an online questionnaire to gather data on Long COVID definitions. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were employed to assess the variability of definitions and challenges in managing Long COVID. The study found significant variation in Long COVID definitions among the participating countries; the most frequent definition was the other definition (n: 17, 50.0%), followed by the World Health Organisation's definition (n: 16, 47.0%) and the CDC definition (n: 11, 32.3%). Half of the countries reported using multiple definitions simultaneously, indicating a lack of standardisation. Qualitative analyses highlighted challenges such as difficulties in standardising terminology, variability in clinical criteria, and issues with implementing diagnostic codes. The findings underscore the need for a unified, yet adaptable, definition of Long COVID. Such a definition would support general practitioners (GPs) by simplifying diagnostic processes, improving continuity of care, and facilitating equitable patient access to multidisciplinary resources. The current lack of consensus complicates patient care, data collection, and resource allocation, impacting health policy development. Future efforts should focus on achieving agreement on definitions to ensure equitable treatment and effective healthcare responses to Long COVID.