Translate this page into:
Outpatient Attendance in COVID Pandemic Lockdown: An Observational Study
*Corresponding author: Shibba Takkar Chhabra, Department of Cardiology, Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, Unit Hero DMC Heart Institute, Ludhiana, Punjab, India. shibbachhabra@yahoo.com
-
Received: ,
Accepted: ,
How to cite this article: Chhabra SK, Kaur G, Aggarwal R, Bansal N, Kishore H, Goyal M, et al. Outpatient attendance in COVID pandemic lockdown: An observational study. Indian J Cardiovasc Dis Women 2023;8:18-24.
Abstract
Objectives:
The objectives of this study were to analyze the profile of outpatient department (OPD) attendance of a tertiary care hospital during pre- and post-pandemic lockdown period.
Materials and Methods:
All consecutive patients presenting to OPD from August 1, 2019 to November 23, 2020 were included in the study. The sample was divided into Zone R (Regular domain) and Zone L (Lockdown domain). Zone L was divided into three groups A, B, and C; representing attendance to be <30%, 30–60%, and >60% of previous (i.e., Zone R), respectively. The patient gender, intradepartmental, and inter departmental OPD attendance data were collected and analyzed.
Results:
n = 428,322 patients attended the OPD in the study period. 301,586 patients presented in Zone R and 126,736 presented in Zone L (P = 0.000). Zone L recorded an OPD attendance drop to 42% of Zone R. The least attended an OPD (Group A) was ophthalmology, ENT, dermatology, surgery, and orthopedics versus highest attendance (Group C) was noticed in emergency OPD and oncology with a moderate decline in the rest (P = −0.00, 0.00, and 0.00, respectively). Both male and female attendance in the OPD showed a decline; however, the gender divide was apparent with significantly low women attendance in all the departments (P = 0.00).
Conclusion:
OPD attendance showed a significant reduction in COVID lockdown era hitting the non-emergent medical branches the most. The gender divide significantly widened with less female attendance recorded in most OPDs in pandemic lockdown. Apt administrative measures could prove fruitful by an improved OPD attendance and its psychosocial implications to a society with less disease burden.
Keywords
COVID 19
Outpatients
Lock down
ABSTRACT IMAGE
INTRODUCTION
SARS-CoV-2 has brought unprecedented catastrophe to mankind. Besides physical illness, psychological pressures, the economic brunt is being faced by major sections of society. As the society curtails on its basic expenditure, several health-related issues are also nipped off. Baring major emergencies, the patient population avoids any routine visits, semi-elective or elective procedures.
To curb the disease transmission, many countries have adopted the policy of lockdown, an action for mass quarantine. The government of India ordered a nationwide lockdown for 3 weeks on March 24, 2020, which was subsequently extended and still remains in effect with some relaxations at the time of writing.
The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically changed how outpatient care is delivered in health care practices. Several previous reports reveal a lower footfall to their outpatient departments (OPD). In the present review, we attempt to analyzed data on changes in visit volume of OPD attendance in our hospital during the pandemic lockdown and pre-pandemic era.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Study design and study population
The outpatient attendance data were collected from a tertiary care hospital of North India, a non-profit organization with a high footfall and volume. The research was performed with patient or public involvement. All consecutive patients presenting to OPD from August 1, 2019, to November 23, 2020, were included in the study. The attendance of all the departments of the hospital was considered and the percentage of patients presenting in each was calculated. The lockdown in India in the first wave of COVID-19 was initiated on March 24, 2020.[1] The sample was divided into two time domains, a pre-lockdown domain labeled as Zone R (Regular Domain) from August 1, 2019, to March 23, 2020, and a lockdown domain labeled as Zone L (Lockdown Domain) from March 23, 2020, to November 23, 2020. The number and percentage of patients presenting overall in all departments together and then individually in each were compared in the two domains. The attendance in Zone L was further segregated into three groups: A, B, and C; representing attendance to be <30%, 30–60%, and >60% of the previous (i.e., Zone R). The male and female attendance was recorded and noticed for each of the departments.
The study was conducted under real-life conditions of daily clinical practice and in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Study protocol was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee and it conformed to ethical guidelines of the 1975 Declaration of Helsinki (DMCH/R&D/2020/145).
Statistical analysis
Data were described in terms of frequencies (number of cases) and relative frequencies (percentages) as appropriate. For comparing categorical data, Chi-square (χ2) test was performed. A probability value (P value) <0.05 was considered statistically significant. All statistical calculations were done using (Statistical Package for the Social Science) SPSS 21version (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) statistical program for Microsoft Windows.
RESULTS
A total sample size of 428,322 patients attended the OPD in the study period. Of these, 301,586 patients presented in Zone R (Regular period) versus 126,736patients in Zone L (Lockdown period) (P = 0.000). Besides overall reduction in OPD volume in Zone L, the individual attendance of each department in Zone L was also significantly reduced [Table 1 and Figure 1]. Collectively, only 42% of Zone R’s attendance was seen in Zone L [Table 2].
Department | Zone R (regular zone) | Zone l (lockdown zone) | P-value | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Anesthesiology | 54 | 0.02% | 13 | 0.01% | 0.080 |
Cardiac thoracic surgery | 3899 | 1.29% | 2316 | 1.83% | 0.000 |
Cardiology | 31222 | 10.35% | 16661 | 13.15% | 0.000 |
Dental | 3471 | 1.15% | 899 | 0.71% | 0.000 |
Dermatology | 23825 | 7.90% | 6679 | 5.27% | 0.000 |
ENT | 13741 | 4.56% | 3689 | 2.91% | 0.000 |
Emergency | 24279 | 8.05% | 16722 | 13.19% | 0.000 |
Endocrinology | 7531 | 2.50% | 2714 | 2.14% | 0.000 |
Eye | 14454 | 4.79% | 3420 | 2.70% | 0.000 |
G. I. Surgery | 1242 | 0.41% | 603 | 0.48% | 0.003 |
Gastroenterology | 26524 | 8.79% | 14305 | 11.29% | 0.000 |
Hypertension (HDHI) | 913 | 0.30% | 191 | 0.15% | 0.000 |
Liver transplant/hepathobiliary | 54 | 0.02% | 20 | 0.02% | 0.700 |
Medicine | 30172 | 10.00% | 14199 | 11.20% | 0.000 |
Nephrology | 3838 | 1.27% | 2008 | 1.58% | 0.000 |
Neurosurgery | 4144 | 1.37% | 1030 | 0.81% | 0.000 |
Neurology | 14669 | 4.86% | 6400 | 5.05% | 0.010 |
Obst&gyne | 12350 | 4.10% | 4415 | 3.48% | 0.000 |
Oncowing medical oncology | 3748 | 1.24% | 2951 | 2.33% | 0.000 |
Oncowing radiation oncology | 1766 | 0.59% | 1152 | 0.91% | 0.000 |
Oncowing surgical oncology | 961 | 0.32% | 901 | 0.71% | 0.000 |
Oncology | 190 | 0.06% | 364 | 0.29% | 0.000 |
Orthopedics | 14889 | 4.94% | 4358 | 3.44% | 0.000 |
Pediatric surgery | 696 | 0.23% | 221 | 0.17% | 0.000 |
Pediatrics | 13404 | 4.44% | 4741 | 3.74% | 0.000 |
Plastic surgery | 1800 | 0.60% | 591 | 0.47% | 0.000 |
Psychiatry | 9865 | 3.27% | 4494 | 3.55% | 0.000 |
Pulmonary medicine | 6289 | 2.09% | 2219 | 1.75% | 0.000 |
Radiology | 268 | 0.09% | 275 | 0.22% | 0.000 |
Rheumatology and immunology | 1598 | 0.53% | 671 | 0.53% | 1.000 |
Spine center | 1024 | 0.34% | 46 | 0.04% | 0.000 |
Surgery | 15095 | 5.01% | 2073 | 1.64% | 0.000 |
Urban health center | 9040 | 3.00% | 3741 | 2.95% | 0.420 |
Surgical oncology | 347 | 0.12% | 169 | 0.13% | 0.120 |
Urology | 4224 | 1.40% | 1485 | 1.17% | 0.000 |
Total | 301,586 | 100.00% | 126,736 | 100.00% | 0.000 |
Department | Zone R (regular zone) | Zone l (lockdown zone) | Percentage of previous |
---|---|---|---|
Anesthesiology | 54 | 13 | 24.07 |
Cardiac thoracic surgery | 3899 | 2316 | 59.40 |
Cardiology | 31222 | 16661 | 53.36 |
Dental | 3471 | 899 | 25.90 |
Dermatology | 23825 | 6679 | 28.03 |
ENT | 13741 | 3689 | 26.85 |
Emergency | 24279 | 16722 | 68.87 |
Endocrinology | 7531 | 2714 | 36.04 |
Eye | 14454 | 3420 | 23.66 |
G. I. Surgery | 1242 | 603 | 48.55 |
Gastroenterology | 26524 | 14305 | 53.93 |
Hypertension (HDHI) | 913 | 191 | 20.92 |
Liver transplant/hepathobiliary | 54 | 20 | 37.04 |
Medicine | 30172 | 14199 | 47.06 |
Nephrology | 3838 | 2008 | 52.32 |
Neurosurgery | 4144 | 1030 | 24.86 |
Neurology | 14669 | 6400 | 43.63 |
Obst&Gyne | 12350 | 4415 | 35.75 |
Oncowing medical oncology | 3748 | 2951 | 78.74 |
Oncowing radiation oncology | 1766 | 1152 | 65.23 |
Oncowing surgical oncology | 961 | 901 | 93.76 |
Oncology | 190 | 364 | 191.58 |
Orthopedics | 14889 | 4358 | 29.27 |
Pediatric surgery | 696 | 221 | 31.75 |
Pediatrics | 13404 | 4741 | 35.37 |
Plastic surgery | 1800 | 591 | 32.83 |
Psychiatry | 9865 | 4494 | 45.55 |
Pulmonary medicine | 6289 | 2219 | 35.28 |
Radiology | 268 | 275 | 102.61 |
Rheumatology and immunology | 1598 | 671 | 41.99 |
Spine center | 1024 | 46 | 4.49 |
Surgery | 15095 | 2073 | 13.73 |
Urban health center | 9040 | 3741 | 41.38 |
Surgical oncology | 347 | 169 | 48.70 |
Urology | 4224 | 1485 | 35.16 |
Total | 301586 | 126736 | 42.02 |
In Zone L, Group A (<30% of previous) consisted of the least attended OPDs, Group B (30–60% of previous) consisted of moderately attended OPDs, and Group C (>60% of previous) were the OPDs with maximum attendance during the lockdown phase. The least attended OPDs include ophthalmology, ENT, dermatology, orthopedics, neurosurgery, anesthesia, and general surgery. Moderate attendance was noted in pediatric surgery, plastic surgery, urology, pulmonary medicine, pediatrics, obstetrics and gynecology, endocrinology, urban health center, rheumatology, neurology, psychiatry, medicine, nephrology, cardiology, and cardiothoracic surgery. Maximum attendance was observed in oncology with its medical, surgical and radiation wings, and in emergency OPD. Furthermore, a statistically significant rise in attendance in Zone L as compared to Zone R was noticed in oncology and radiology (P = 0.003, 0.600 respectively) [Table 3]. The gender description of our subject population was noticed and separated into male and female subsets. A significant decline in OPD attendance was apparent among both the sexes in Zone L versus Zone R. However, the gender divide was significantly higher with relatively a smaller number of females presenting in the lockdown era. A statistically significant reduction in number of women presenting in Zone L versus Zone R was noticed in cardiology, emergency, endocrinology, ophthalmology, medicine, neurosurgery, neurology, oncology, orthopedics, psychiatry, pulmonary medicine, surgery, and urology departments [Table 4 and Figure 2].
OPD attendance as compared to previous | Percentage | Departments | P-value |
---|---|---|---|
Group A | |||
<30% | 4.49 | Spine center | |
13.73 | Surgery | ||
20.92 | Hypertension | ||
23.66 | Eye | ||
24.07 | Anesthesiology | ||
24.86 | Neuro surgery | ||
25.90 | Dental | ||
26.85 | ENT | ||
28.03 | Dermatology | ||
29.27 | Orthopedics | 0.00 | |
Group B | |||
30–60% | 31.75 | Pediatric surgery | |
32.83 | Plastic Surgery | ||
35.16 | Urology | ||
35.28 | Pulmonary | ||
medicine | |||
35.37 | Pediatrics | ||
35.75 | Obst&Gyne | ||
36.04 | Endocrinology | ||
37.04 | Liver transplant/Hepathobiliary | ||
41.38 | Urban health | ||
center | |||
41.99 | Rheumatology and immunology | ||
43.63 | Neurology | ||
45.55 | Psychiatry | ||
47.06 | Medicine | ||
48.55 | G. I. Surgery | ||
48.70 | Surgical oncology | ||
52.32 | Nephrology | ||
53.36 | Cardiology | ||
53.93 | Gastroenterology | ||
59.40 | Cardiac thoracic surgery | 0.00 | |
Group C | |||
>60% | 68.87 | Emergency | |
78.74 | Medical oncology | ||
65.23 | Radiation oncology | ||
93.76 | Surgical oncology | ||
191.58 | Oncology | ||
102.61 | Radiology | 0.00 |
Department | ZONE R | ZONE L | P-value | ZONE R | ZONE L | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Male | Female | Male | Female | Female% | Female% | ||
Anesthesiology | 36 | 18 | 9 | 4 | 1.000 | 33.33 | 30.77 |
Cardiac thoracic surgery | 2783 | 1116 | 1662 | 654 | 0.740 | 28.62 | 28.24 |
Cardiology | 19138 | 12084 | 10362 | 6299 | 0.050 | 38.70 | 37.81 |
Dental | 1798 | 1673 | 467 | 432 | 0.940 | 48.20 | 48.05 |
Dermatology | 12470 | 11355 | 3549 | 3130 | 0.240 | 47.66 | 46.86 |
ENT | 7688 | 6053 | 2084 | 1605 | 0.880 | 44.05 | 43.51 |
Emergency | 14948 | 9331 | 10501 | 6221 | 0.011 | 38.43 | 37.20 |
Endocrinology | 3326 | 4205 | 1294 | 1420 | 0.001 | 55.84 | 52.32 |
Eye | 7511 | 6943 | 1890 | 1530 | 0.001 | 48.04 | 44.74 |
G. I. Surgery | 695 | 547 | 343 | 260 | 0.720 | 44.04 | 43.12 |
Gastroenterology | 16381 | 10143 | 9015 | 5290 | 0.012 | 38.24 | 36.98 |
Hypertension | 617 | 296 | 132 | 59 | 0.730 | 32.42 | 30.89 |
Liver transplant/hepathobiliary | 37 | 17 | 17 | 3 | 0.230 | 31.48 | 15.00 |
Medicine | 15074 | 15098 | 8294 | 5905 | 0.000 | 50.04 | 41.59 |
Nephrology | 2437 | 1401 | 1275 | 733 | 1.000 | 36.50 | 36.50 |
Neurosurgery | 2488 | 1656 | 679 | 351 | 0.000 | 39.96 | 34.08 |
Neurology | 7433 | 7236 | 3381 | 3019 | 0.004 | 49.33 | 47.17 |
Obst&gyne | 203 | 12147 | 68 | 4347 | 0.670 | 98.36 | 98.46 |
Oncowing medical oncology | 1728 | 2020 | 1307 | 1644 | 0.144 | 53.90 | 55.71 |
Oncowing radiation oncology | 774 | 992 | 482 | 670 | 0.300 | 56.17 | 58.16 |
Oncowing surgical oncology | 375 | 586 | 371 | 530 | 0.340 | 60.98 | 58.82 |
Oncology | 91 | 99 | 222 | 142 | 0.003 | 52.11 | 39.01 |
Orthopedics | 7110 | 7779 | 2278 | 2080 | 0.000 | 52.25 | 47.73 |
Pediatric surgery | 505 | 191 | 163 | 58 | 0.790 | 27.44 | 26.24 |
Pediatrics | 8137 | 5267 | 2907 | 1834 | 0.460 | 39.29 | 38.68 |
Plastic surgery | 1164 | 636 | 406 | 185 | 0.800 | 35.33 | 31.30 |
Psychiatry | 5673 | 4192 | 2688 | 1806 | 0.009 | 42.49 | 40.19 |
Pulmonary medicine | 3528 | 2761 | 1337 | 882 | 0.006 | 43.90 | 39.75 |
Radiology | 151 | 117 | 162 | 113 | 0.600 | 43.66 | 41.09 |
Rheumatology and immunology | 448 | 1150 | 165 | 506 | 0.090 | 71.96 | 75.41 |
Spine center | 537 | 487 | 25 | 21 | 0.880 | 47.56 | 45.65 |
Surgery | 8449 | 6646 | 1274 | 799 | 0.000 | 44.03 | 38.54 |
Surgical oncology | 139 | 208 | 45 | 124 | 0.003 | 59.94 | 73.37 |
Urban health center | 3639 | 5401 | 1431 | 2310 | 0.030 | 59.75 | 61.75 |
Urology | 3219 | 1005 | 1197 | 288 | 0.004 | 23.79 | 19.39 |
Total | 160,730 | 140,856 | 71,482 | 55,254 | 0.000 | 46.71 | 43.60 |
DISCUSSION
The year 2020–2021 has brought the mankind and medical profession at the crossroads with a calamity never before seen. A hospital is nurtured primarily through it is outpatient visits besides the visits to the emergency department. The attendance to the outpatient department is reflective of the care provided by the hospital and also the care sought by the public at large. The data from several institutes documented reduction in the out-patient department during the pandemic and lockdown phase.[2-4]
As expected, in the present study, the visit to out-patient departments were significantly reduced during the lockdown phase. This reduction can be attributed to the overall decrease in elective or preventive visits such as annual health check-ups, fear of transmission of infection among health workers, and public and travel restrictions implemented by the government at large.[3] While maximum reduction was seen in Ophthalmology, ENT, Dermatology, Dental, Anesthesia, Neurosurgery, and Orthopedics OPD, the least reduction in patient attendance was seen the emergency wing and oncology (inclusive of medical, radiation, and surgical oncology). Rest all the OPDs documented a moderate (30–60% attendance of previous) reduction in OPD attendance and these reductions were statistically significant. These OPD trends are consistent with several previous reports documenting a fall in OPDs with a smaller number of emergent or critical procedures and issues. However, a rebound increase in these OPDs with patients presenting with chronic ailments could be expected in times to come.[3] It was interesting to note that besides emergency visits the number of patient reduction in the OPD department of oncology was the least, which is very encouraging since any withdrawal of chemotherapy or radiotherapy in carcinomatous patients could mean a worsening stage of carcinogenesis and rapid deterioration and loss of human life. It could also be reflective of inability of primary care centers and primary care physicians to render medical services to sick oncological patients with active disease.[5-7]
Another interesting finding in our study was the disparity in female attendance to the various OPDs. Gender bias in seeking health care by women has been reported even in the preCOVID era.[1,8-11] This study documents a further reduction in health-care seeking behavior in women presenting to the out-patient department of the hospital during the pandemic which is of statistical significance. Although, the trend for reduced female attendance was seen in all the OPDs, the statistically significant reduction was seen in cardiology, emergency, endocrinology, ophthalmology, gastroenterology, medicine, neurosurgery, neurology, oncology, orthopedics, and psychiatry departments (P = 0.050, 0.011, 0.001, 0.001, 0.012, 0.000, 0.000, 0.004, 0.003, 0.000, 0.009, 0.006, 0.000, and 0.004, respectively).
As the mankind boggles in hands of nature and COVID pandemic peaks, waxes and wanes, the provision of healthcare to the needy is of utmost importance. Notwithstanding the fall in OPD attendance, serious attempts should be made to deliver healthcare to the recipient at their doorstep. Telemedicine can be of respite[2,3,7] and it can be supported by an organized schemata from hospital administration bodies organizing smooth, hassle free, and less time-consuming visits to the hospitals.[5,6] An improved OPD attendance could make not only the point of care health delivery to recipients but shall also foresee a major reduction in chronic ailments and psychological issues which could prove to be detrimental if permitted to accumulate.
CONCLUSION
OPD attendance has shown a significant reduction in COVID pandemic era especially in the non-emergent fields. Pre-existent gender divide in OPD presentation has increased all the more in the COVID pandemic era. It is imperative that measures such as telemedicine and organized protocols ensuring smooth, hassle free, and rapid OPD visits are encouraged. This could foresee a relatively healthy society with less chronic ailments and psychosocial issues.
Authors’ contributions
Shibba Takkar Chhabra, Gurleen Kaur, Namita Bansal, Harsh Kishore, Vivek Gupta, Gurbhej Singh, Bhupinder Singh, Abhishek Goyal, Rohit Tandon, Mamta Bansal, Naved Aslam, Bishav Mohan, Gurpreet Singh Wander – contributed in planning, conduct, and reporting of the work described in the article and being responsible for the overall content as guarantor(s).
Declaration of patient consent
The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
Audio summary available at
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
References
- Predicting cardiac rehabilitation attendance in a gender-tailored randomized clinical trial. J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev. 2010;30:147-56.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patterns of outpatient cardiovascular care. Am Heart J. 2021;231:1-5.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Outpatient Visits: A Rebound Emerges. New York: Commonwealth Fund; 2020
- [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Impact of COVID-19 on outpatient visits and intravitreal treatments in a referral retina unit: Let's be ready for a plausible “rebound effect”. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2020;258:2655-60.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Protect healthcare workers and patients from COVID-19: The experience of two tertiary ophthalmology care referral centers in Italy. Ophthalmol Ther. 2020;9:231-4.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Taking the right measures to control COVID-19 in ophthalmology: The experience of a tertiary eye care referral center in Italy. Eye (Lond). 2020;34:1175-6.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Telemedicine outpatient cardiovascular care during the COVID-19 pandemic: Bridging or opening the digital divide? Circulation. 2020;142:510-2.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Gender bias in cardiovascular healthcare of a tertiary care centre of North India. Heart Asia. 2016;8:42-5.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Cardiac health awareness among women presenting for routine health checkup at tertiary care center: Time trends over 15 years. Indian J Cardiovasc Dis Women WINCARS. 2019;4:79-84.
- [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- The role of gender in compliance and attendance at an outpatient clinic for Type 2 diabetes mellitus in Trinidad. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2006;19:79-84.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Missing female patients: An observational analysis of sex ratio among outpatients in a referral tertiary care public hospital in India. BMJ Open. 2019;9:e026850.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]