Changes in outpatient health care use after COVID-19 infection among Veterans

Abstract: Importance The association of COVID-19 infection with outpatient care utilization is unclear. Many studies reported population surveillance studies rather than comparing outpatient health care use between COVID-19-infected and uninfected cohorts. Objective To compare outpatient health care use across 6 categories of care (primary care, specialty care, surgery care, mental health, emergency care, and diagnostic and/or other care) between veterans with or without COVID-19 infection. Design, Setting, and Participants In a retrospective cohort study of Veterans Affairs primary care patients, veterans with COVID-19 infection were matched to a cohort of uninfected veterans. Data were obtained from the Veterans Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Fee-for-Service Carrier/Physician Supplier file from January 2019 through December 2022. Data analysis was performed from September 2022 to April 2023. Exposure COVID-19 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the count of outpatient visits after COVID-19 infection. Negative binomial regression models compared outpatient use over a 1-year preinfection period, and peri-infection (0-30 days), intermediate (31-183 days), and long-term (184-365 days) postinfection periods. Results The infected (202 803 veterans; mean [SD] age, 60.5 [16.2] years; 178 624 men [88.1%]) and uninfected (202 803 veterans; mean [SD] age, 60.4 [16.5] years; 178 624 men [88.1%]) cohorts were well matched across all covariates. Outpatient use in all categories (except surgical care) was significantly elevated during the peri-infection period for veterans with COVID-19 infection compared with the uninfected cohort, with an increase in all visits of 5.12 visits per 30 days (95% CI, 5.09-5.16 visits per 30 days), predominantly owing to primary care visits (increase of 1.86 visits per 30 days; 95% CI, 1.85-1.87 visits per 30 days). Differences in outpatient use attenuated over time but remained statistically significantly higher at 184 to 365 days after infection (increase of 0.25 visit per 30 days; 95% CI, 0.23-0.27 visit per 30 days). One-half of the increased outpatient visits were delivered via telehealth. The utilization increase was greatest for veterans aged 85 years and older (6.1 visits, 95% CI, 5.9-6.3 visits) vs those aged 20 to 44 years (4.8 visits, 95% CI, 4.7-4.8 visits) and unvaccinated veterans (4.5 visits, 95% CI, 4.3-4.6 visits) vs vaccinated veterans (3.2 visits; 95% CI, 3.4-4.8 visits). Conclusions and Relevance This study found that outpatient use increased significantly in the month after infection, then attenuated but remained greater than the uninfected cohorts' use through 12 months, which suggests that there are sustained impacts of COVID-19 infection.

Read the full article
Report a problem with this article

Related articles

  • More for Researchers

    Pandemic concerns, occupational stressors, burnout, and psychological distress among U.S. Air Force remotely piloted aircraft personnel: A multidimensional mediation model

    Abstract: U.S. Air Force remotely piloted aircraft (USAF RPA) personnel face diverse stressors negatively affecting psychological health and military readiness. Prior research in diverse populations supports predictable impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on occupational stressors, burnout, and more distal outcomes. Extending earlier studies linking broad variables (e.g., COVID-19 threat → work stress → burnout), the current study tests and refines an expanded mediation model based on multiple distinct pandemic concerns, occupational stressors, and burnout facets as antecedents of psychological distress mid-pandemic in RPA personnel (N = 496). Differential representation of demands, resources, and rewards evident across distinct occupational stressors in light of job demands/resources theory guided specification of mediated pathways. SEM analysis yielded moderate fit. Following removal of non-significant paths and addition of two interpretable direct paths, fit was improved, yielding seven dominant pandemic concern → occupational stressor → burnout → psychological distress pathways. In support of domain specification, five 'hub' variables (pandemic-driven change, personal stressors, workload, leader communication, and exhaustion) emerged as key intervention targets in mitigating distress in the USAF RPA community and similar populations during future pandemic-related crises.