BACKGROUND

Data collection in the pediatric primary care settings, conducted by general practitioners and pediatricians, is inherently challenging. However, during the COVID-19 pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, the urgent need for real-time, localized information on the pandemic's impact on children motivated a network of pediatric practices in the canton of Zurich to undertake systematic data collection and analysis. This initiative aimed to complement established public health networks by providing focused insights from the local pediatric primary care perspective.

AIMS OF THE STUDY

The aim of this study was to establish a research network of pediatric primary care providers (PCP) for data collection in the canton of Zurich, using the pandemic as an opportunity to test the feasibility of such a collaborative system. Secondary aims were to monitor respiratory infections, SARS-CoV-2 test results, and workload impacts among pediatric practices in ther Canton of Zurich during the pandemic.

METHODS

Pediatric practices in the canton of Zurich were invited to enter data on respiratory infections, the indications for and results of SARS-CoV-2 tests, and transmission routes into an online database, as well as staff workload and distress per week. Also, initial structural data including the number of staff, hours worked per staff member, and patient volume per week were documented. Structural data were available for all 44 practices, with 28 practices contributing data on respiratory infections and SARS-CoV-2 testing. Following data collection, an online survey was distributed to both participants and non-participants to gather feedback on the study process.

RESULTS

Throughout the data collection period, the weekly number of tests performed varied from 77 to 1066, with positive tests ranging from zero to 65 per week and positivity rates between zero and 0.4. A strong correlation was observed between respiratory infections and the number of tests performed (r = 0.95, p < 0.01) and between the number of tests and the proportion of positive test results in late 2020 and early 2021 (r = 0.492-0.805, p < 0.01). Most infections were attributed to transmission from parents or unknown sources. Structural data indicated wide variations in clinical working hours per week (physicians: median 24 h, range: 8.8-50 h; assistants: median 22.5 h, range: 2.9-63.3) and patient numbers per week (physicians: median 50, range: 3.3-135; assistants: 38.3, range: 7.1-90). No significant correlation was found between the number of SARS-CoV-2 tests and staff stress levels. Feedback on the data collection indicated that participants found data entry manageable, highly valued the regular interim feedbacks on results, and expressed strong interest in participating in similar future studies.

CONCLUSION

The study demonstrated the feasibility of regional data collection within a cantonal network, yielding up-to-date epidemiologic insights during the pandemic. Participants were highly motivated, with regular feedback on interim results cited as a key incentive for continued engagement.