Accessibility of general and specialized obstetric care providers in Germany and England: An analysis of location and neonatal outcome.

BACKGROUND: Health care accessibility is known to differ geographically. With this study we focused on analysing accessibility of general and specialized obstetric units in England and Germany with regard to urbanity, area deprivation and neonatal outcome using routine data. METHODS: We used a floating catchment area method to measure obstetric care accessibility, the degree of urbanization (DEGURBA) to measure urbanity and the index of multiple deprivation to measure area deprivation. RESULTS: Accessibility of general obstetric units was significantly higher in Germany compared to England (accessibility index of 16.2 vs. 11.6; p < 0.001), whereas accessibility of specialized obstetric units was higher in England (accessibility index for highest level of care of 0.235 vs. 0.002; p < 0.001). We further demonstrated higher obstetric accessibility for people living in less deprived areas in Germany (r = - 0.31; p < 0.001) whereas no correlation was present in England. There were also urban-rural disparities present, with higher accessibility in urban areas in both countries (r = 0.37-0.39; p < 0.001). The analysis did not show that accessibility affected neonatal outcomes. Finally, our computer generated model for obstetric care provider demand in terms of birth counts showed a very strong correlation with actual birth counts at obstetric units (r = 0.91-0.95; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In Germany the focus of obstetric care seemed to be put on general obstetric units leading to higher accessibility compared to England. Regarding specialized obstetric care the focus in Germany was put on high level units whereas in England obstetric care seems to be more balanced between the different levels of care with larger units on average leading to higher accessibility

Access to intensive care in 14 European countries: A spatial analysis of intensive care need and capacity in the light of COVID-19.

Purpose The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) poses major challenges to health-care systems worldwide. This pandemic demonstrates the importance of timely access to intensive care and, therefore, this study aims to explore the accessibility of intensive care beds in 14 European countries and its impact on the COVID-19 case fatality ratio (CFR). Methods We examined access to intensive care beds by deriving (1) a regional ratio of intensive care beds to 100,000 population capita (accessibility index, AI) and (2) the distance to the closest intensive care unit. The cross-sectional analysis was performed at a 5-by-5 km spatial resolution and results were summarized nationally for 14 European countries. The relationship between AI and CFR was analyzed at the regional level. Results We found national-level differences in the levels of access to intensive care beds. The AI was highest in Germany (AI = 35.3), followed by Estonia (AI = 33.5) and Austria (AI = 26.4), and lowest in Sweden (AI = 5) and Denmark (AI = 6.4). The average travel distance to the closest hospital was highest in Croatia (25.3 min by car) and lowest in Luxembourg (9.1 min). Subnational results illustrate that capacity was associated with population density and national-level inventories. The correlation analysis revealed a negative correlation of ICU accessibility and COVID-19 CFR (r = - 0.57;p < 0.001). Conclusion Geographical access to intensive care beds varies significantly across European countries and low ICU accessibility was associated with a higher proportion of COVID-19 deaths to cases (CFR). Important differences in access are due to the sizes of national resource inventories and the distribution of health-care facilities relative to the human population. Our findings provide a resource for officials planning public health responses beyond the current COVID-19 pandemic, such as identifying potential locations suitable for temporary facilities or establishing logistical plans for moving severely ill patients to facilities with available beds

World-wide architecture of osteoporosis research: density-equalizing mapping studies and gender analysis

<p><b>Objective:</b> While research activities on osteoporosis grow constantly, no concise description of the global research architecture exists. Hence, we aim to analyze and depict the world-wide scientific output on osteoporosis combining bibliometric tools, density-equalizing mapping projections and gender analysis.</p> <p><b>Method:</b> Using the NewQIS platform, we analyzed all osteoporosis-related publications authored from 1900 to 2012 and indexed by the Web of Science. Bibliometric details were analyzed related to quantitative and semi-qualitative aspects.</p> <p><b>Results:</b> The majority of 57 453 identified publications were original research articles. The USA and Western Europe dominated the field regarding cooperation activity, publication and citation performance. Asia, Africa and South America played a minimal role. Gender analysis revealed a dominance of male scientists in almost all countries except Brazil.</p> <p><b>Conclusion:</b> Although the scientific performance on osteoporosis is increasing world-wide, a significant disparity in terms of research output was visible between developed and low-income countries. This finding is particularly concerning since epidemiologic evaluations of future osteoporosis prevalences predict enormous challenges for the health-care systems in low-resource countries. Hence, our study underscores the need to address these disparities by fostering future research endeavors in these nations with the aim to successfully prevent a growing global burden related to osteoporosis.</p