Hospitalizations for emergency-sensitive conditions in Germany during the Covid-19 pandemic Insights from the German-wide Helios hospital network

INTRODUCTION

While there are numerous reports that describe emergency calls,¹ emergency room visits ² and hospital admissions ^3-6 for several medical and surgical conditions during the early Covid-19 pandemic (1^st wave), there is scarcity of data during later pandemic stages (e.g. 2^nd wave, period between waves). In addition, a comprehensive overview covering previously defined emergency-sensitive conditions ⁷ is also missing.

With this study, we wish to complement previous reports by providing and comparing hospitalization data for patients with emergency-sensitive conditions hospitalized in a large German-wide hospital network during different pandemic phases.

METHODS

RESULTS

Hospital admissions for emergency-sensitive conditions and daily new SARS-CoV2 infections in Germany are depicted in Figure 1. There was a hospitalization deficit between March 12 and June 13, 2020 coinciding with the 1^st pandemic wave (deficit phase). During this period, there were 32,807 hospitalizations as opposed to 39,379 in 2019 (IRR 0.83, 95% CI 0.82 – 0.85, P<0.01) including 286 PCR-confirmed Covid-19 cases. During the following observational period (June 14 to November 17, 2020 including the start of the 2^nd infection wave; resumption phase), emergency-sensitive hospitalizations were reduced from 63,799 in 2019 to 59,910 in 2020 including 436 Covid-19 cases, but this reduction was not that pronounced (IRR 0.94, 95% CI 0.93 – 0.95, P<0.01) as during the 1^st infection wave.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1.

Total weekly hospital admissions for emergency-sensitive conditions (upper panel) and daily new SARS-CoV2 infections in Germany (lower panel). Smooth curves for weekly admission rates were fitted via Locally Weighted Scatterplot Smoothing (LOESS) with a degree of smoothing of α = 0.25. Grey areas represent 95% confidence intervals (CI). A 2020 deficit period starting at the first the day with non-overlapping 95% CI intervals and ending at the last day with non-overlapping intervals was defined. The first day at which the intervals are overlapping again, was defined as the start of the resumption period (dotted vertical lines).

Hospitalizations for the individual emergency-sensitive conditions stratified for both periods are summarized in Table 1 showing a heterogeneous pattern. Of note, despite the inclusion of Covid-19 cases, hospitalizations with sepsis, pneumonia, obstructive pulmonary disease, and intracranial injuries as primary diagnosis were reduced during the entire pandemic. Similarly, when expanding the definition of pneumonia (J18) to include all severe acute respiratory infections (J09 – J22, excluding hospital acquired infections U69.0), IRR was 0.76 (95% CI 0.74 – 0.78, P< 0.01) in the deficit and 0.97 (95% CI 0.94 – 0.99, P< 0.01) in the resumption phase. In contrast, there was an increase in hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction (IRR 1.07, 95% CI 1.03 –1.11, P < 0.01), aortic aneurism and dissection (IRR 1.21, 95% CI 1.02 – 1.44), P=0.03) and pulmonary embolism (IRR 1.14, 95% CI 1.06 – 1.23, P < 0.01) after the 1^st infection wave.

DISCUSSION

This study was performed in the largest German-wide hospital network serving about 10% of the German population by analyzing emergency-sensitive conditions from claims data. This comprehensive list ⁷ has been suggested for the assessment of the acute care system but modifications (e.g. expansion of definitions for unspecific pneumonia, J18) may be warranted.⁸

We found an initial reduction in several emergency-sensitive conditions including myocardial infarction, heart failure, diabetes mellitus, or pancreatitis that is in agreement with previous studies.^2-6 Those observations corresponded with the initiation of national public health emergency measures, and this decline persisted for several weeks. On the one hand, there may be a true reduction in the incidence of emergencies as a result of lower physical or psychological stress, improved medication adherence, diminished air pollution, traffic, and infectious disease transmission, or better outpatient care delivery models. In fact, the consistently lower rates of exacerbations of respiratory conditions, or traumatic intracranial injuries support this hypothesis. On the other hand, it is the possibility that patients were reluctant to seek medical attention due to fear of contagion at the hospital. In addition, the emphasis on social distancing might have inappropriately persuaded patients to avoid in-person medical care. While this reduction was pronounced during the 1^st wave and effected multiple conditions, hospitalizations for the majority of those resumed to previous year levels during later pandemic phases.

Of special concern is the increased incidence of hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction, aortic aneurism and dissection as well as pulmonary embolism. While the former may be a result of reduced cardiovascular care during the early pandemic,^5,6 the latter could also be associated with preceding Covid-19 infections.⁹ If the increased incidence of hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction, aortic dissection and pulmonary embolism is a signal for a rising incidence of those conditions in the public, this could at least in part explain the observed excess mortality in Germany between late July and mid October 2020.¹⁰ Those alarming signals require immediate attention and further studies.