The COVID-19 pandemic and the measures adopted are having a profound impact on a major goal of public healthcare systems: universal access to health services. The objective is to synthesize the available knowledge on access to health care for non-COVID-19 conditions and to identify knowledge gaps. A scoping review was conducted searching different databases (Medline, Google Scholar, etc.) for original articles published between December 2019 and September 2021. A total of 53 articles were selected and analyzed using the Aday and Andersen framework as a guide. Of these, 37 analyzed changes in levels of use of health services, 15 focused on the influencing factors and barriers to access, and 1 studied both aspects. Most focused on specific diseases and the early stages of the pandemic, based on a review of records. Analyses of the impact on primary care services’ use, unmet needs or inequalities in access were scarce. A generalized reduction in the use of health services was described. The most frequent access barrier described for non-COVID-19 conditions related to the services was a lack of resources, while barriers related to the population were predisposing (fear of contagion, stigma, or anticipating barriers) and enabling characteristics (worse socioeconomic status and an increase in technological barriers). In conclusion, our results show a general reduction in services’ use in the early stages of the pandemic, as well as new barriers to access and the exacerbation of existing ones. In view of these results, more studies are required on the subsequent stages of the pandemic, to shed more light on the factors that have influenced access and the pandemic’s impact on equity of access.

The increasing complexity in healthcare delivery might impede the achievement of continuity of care, being defined as ‘one patient experiencing care over time as coherent and linked’. This article aims to improve the knowledge on patients' perceptions of relational (RC), informational (IC) and management continuity (MC) across care levels. A descriptive, qualitative meta-synthesis was conducted based on a literature search in various electronic databases using the subject heading ‘continuity of care’ and linked key terms. We scanned retrieved articles for adherence to inclusion criteria: (i) relevance to research topic, (ii) original study adopting a qualitative design and (iii) investigating the patient's perspective. Content analysis was conducted by identification of themes and aggregation of findings. The selected 25 studies most frequently investigated RC. Being attended to regularly and over time by one physician (RC) was valued by chronic ill patients, but balanced with convenient access by young patients (MC). Communication and information transfer across care settings as well as the gathering of holistic information about the patient were perceived to foster IC. Critical features for achieving MC were accessibility between care levels, individualized care and a smooth discharge process including the receipt of support. Patients further considered that their personal involvement was one facilitating element of continuity of care. Patients identified elements that enhance or distract from continuity of care across boundaries. Variations in perceived importance seem to depend on both individual and contextual factors which should be taken into account during healthcare provision.

There are few comprehensive studies available on barriers encountered from the initial seeking of healthcare through to the resolution of the health problem; in other words, on access in its broad domain. For Colombia and Brazil, countries with different healthcare systems but common stated principles, there have been no such analyses to date. This paper compares factors that influence access in its broad domain in two municipalities of each country, by means of a cross-sectional study based on a survey of a multistage probability sample of people who had had at least one health problem within the last three months (2163 in Colombia and 2155 in Brazil). The results reveal important barriers to healthcare access in both samples, with notable differences between and within countries, once differences in sociodemographic characteristics and health needs are accounted for. In the Colombian study areas, the greatest barriers were encountered in initial access to healthcare and in resolving the problem, and similarly when entering the health service in the Brazilian study areas. Differences can also be detected in the use of services: in Colombia greater geographical and economic barriers and the need for authorization from insurers are more relevant, whereas in Brazil, it is the limited availability of health centres, doctors and drugs that leads to longer waiting times. There are also differences according to enrolment status and insurance scheme in Colombia, and between areas in Brazil. The barriers appear to be related to the Colombian system's segmented, non-universal nature, and to the involvement of insurance companies, and to chronic underfunding of the public system in Brazil. Further research is required, but the results obtained reveal critical points to be tackled by health policies in both countries.

Improving healthcare coordination is a priority in many healthcare systems, particularly in chronic health problems in which a number of professionals and services intervene. There is an abundance of coordination strategies and mechanisms that should be systematized so that they can be used in the most appropriate context. The present article aims to analyse healthcare coordination and its instruments using the organisational theory. Coordination mechanisms can be classified according to two basic processes used to coordinate activities: programming and feedback. The optimal combination of mechanisms will depend on three factors: the degree to which healthcare activities are differentiated, the volume and type of interdependencies, and the level of uncertainty. Historically, healthcare services have based coordination on skills standardization and, most recently, on processes standardization, through clinical guidelines, maps, and plans. Their utilisation is unsatisfactory in chronic diseases involving intervention by several professionals with reciprocal interdependencies, variability in patients' response to medical interventions, and a large volume of information to be processed. In this case, mechanisms based on feedback, such as working groups, linking professionals and vertical information systems, are more effective. To date, evaluation of healthcare coordination has not been conducted systematically, using structure, process and results indicators. The different strategies and instruments have been applied mainly to long-term care and mental health and one of the challenges to healthcare coordination is to extend and evaluate their use throughout the healthcare continuum.