Skip to main content
JAMA Network logoLink to JAMA Network
. 2020 Aug 31;324(14):1459–1462. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.15891

SARS-CoV-2 Testing and Changes in Primary Care Services in a Multistate Network of Community Health Centers During the COVID-19 Pandemic

John Heintzman 1,, Jean O’Malley 1, Miguel Marino 2, Jonathan V Todd 1, Kurt C Stange 3, Natalie Huguet 2, Rachel Gold 4
PMCID: PMC7489408  PMID: 32870237

Abstract

This study uses electronic health record data to describe primary care services offered by US community health centers in March through May 2020, including SARS-CoV-2 testing, well-child visits, HbA1c testing, and cancer screening.


The effect of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the primary care community health centers (CHCs) in the US has not been well described. CHCs serve approximately 30 million people,1 including high proportions of patients susceptible to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and adverse outcomes.2,3 Surveys indicate that many primary care practices, including CHCs, lacked access to SARS-CoV-2 testing, personal protective equipment, and emergency financial resources, and that in-person visits and preventive and chronic illness care have been reduced.4 We describe SARS-CoV-2 testing, individuals with positive test results, and changes in select primary care services in a multistate network of CHCs in the first weeks of the pandemic.

Methods

We used electronic health record (EHR) data from OCHIN, a network of CHCs in 21 states that share a linked EHR.5 We included patients aged 79 years or younger with a clinic visit between January 1, 2019, and May 31, 2020. We examined patients who underwent SARS-CoV-2 testing and had results positive for SARS-CoV-2 in their EHR by patient characteristics (Table 1) from March 1, 2020, to May 31, 2020, using bivariable generalized estimating equation Poisson regression accounting for clustering of patients within health systems. Patients were considered “tested” once their first test was recorded; subsequent tests were included only in counts of positive test results. We also compared the clinic-level delivery of common primary care services indicated for varying ages/sexes (relative rates of face-to-face visits with a medical professional, well-child visits, Papanicolaou testing, hemoglobin A1c testing, and mammogram orders) in January 2019 to February 2019, March 2019 to May 2019, January 2020 to February 2020, and March 2020 to May 2020 using generalized estimating equation Poisson regression. Statistical significance was defined as a 95% CI that did not include 1.0. Analyses were performed with SAS Enterprise Guide, version 7.15. This study was considered exempt by the Advarra Institutional Review Board.

Table 1. Characteristics of Primary Care Patients in 132 Community Health Centers (CHC), January-May 2020.

Characteristic Patient sample, No. (%)a SARS-CoV-2 tests per 1000 patientsb Results positive for SARS-CoV-2 per 1000 tested patientsc
No. Rate (95% CI) Relative rate (95% CI) No. Rate (95% CI) Relative rate (95% CI)
Total patients 1 982 954 33 266 15.1 (10.9-20.8) 9348 200 (165-243)
Patient statusd
Established 1 907 901 (96.2) 28 216 13.2 (9.6-18.1) 1 [Reference] 7570 194 (159-237) 1 [Reference]
New patient 75 053 (3.8) 5050 62.7 (44.1-89.1) 4.76 (3.84-5.89) 1778 238 (189-299) 1.22 (1.01-1.49)
Sexe
Male 879 565 (44.4) 15 049 14.8 (10.5-20.9) 1 [Reference] 4660 215 (177-262) 1 [Reference]
Female 1 102 822 (55.6) 18 200 15.3 (11.2-20.9) 1.03 (0.92-1.15) 4684 188 (154-230) 0.88 (0.81-0.95)
Age, yf
<12 325 850 (16.4) 1437 3.6 (2.1-6.1) 0.21 (0.15-0.30) 315 169 (132-217) 0.85 (0.71-1.01)
12-19 234 033 (11.8) 1497 5.6 (3.6-8.6) 0.33 (0.26-0.41) 427 214 (176-260) 1.08 (0.97-1.19)
20-39 598 692 (30.1) 11 583 17.0 (12.5-23.1) 1 [Reference] 3269 199 (163-142) 1 [Reference]
40-59 514 716 (26.0) 12 606 21.4 (16.0-28.8) 1.26 (1.13-1.41) 3603 199 (164-242) 1.00 (0.93-1.08)
≥60 309 279 (15.6) 6086 16.8 (11.9-23.7) 0.99 (0.80-1.23) 4406 197 (152-255) 0.99 (0.82-1.19)
Ethnicityg
Non-Hispanic 1 166 088 (58.8) 19 434 8.2 (3.4-19.8) 1 [Reference] 4328 63 (25-159) 1 [Reference]
Hispanic 673 182 (34.0) 11 099 6.2 (2.0-18.9) 0.76 (0.18-3.23) 4307 174 (93-326) 2.78 (1.35-5.73)
Unknown 143 684 (7.25) 2733 5.1 (1.7-15.2) 0.63 (0.44-0.90) 713 122 (58-259) 1.95 (0.92-4.15)
Race
White 1 186 540 (59.8) 17 414 16.4 (11.9-22.6) 1 [Reference] 3819 182 (146 -228) 1 [Reference]
American Indian 18 876 (1.0) 349 17.6 (11.8-26.5) 1.08 (0.83-1.39) 81 202 (145-281) 1.11 (0.85-1.44)
Asian 117 656 (5.9) 1206 9.1 (5.6-14.8) 0.56 (0.41-0.76) 268 186 (145-241) 1.02 (0.80-1.31)
Black or African 368 532 (18.6) 8482 13.8 (9.0-21.2) 0.84 (0.64-1.11) 3211 218 (167-285) 1.20 (0.92-1.57)
Multiple race 21 628 (1.1) 234 13.2 (8.9-19.5) 0.81 (0.65-1.00) 50 231 (171-311) 1.26 (1.01-1.59)
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 14 051 (0.7) 376 17.2 (10.5-28.2) 1.05 (0.72-1.53) 182 259 (200-335) 1.42 (1.06-1.91)
Other/unknown 255 671 (12.9) 5205 14.7 (9.0-24.0) 0.89 (0.61-1.31) 1789 253 (210-304) 1.39 (1.31-1.61)
Primary languageh
English 1 369 936 (69.1) 23 146 16.0 (11.5-22.1) 1 [Reference] 4983 162 (127-207) 1 [Reference]
Spanish 433 037 (21.8) 7242 16.4 (11.3-23.8) 1.03 (0.82-1.30) 3247 304 (253-365) 1.87 (1.40-2.52)
Other 179 595 (9.1) 2530 8.0 (4.6-13.9) 0.50 (0.32-0.77) 984 274 (209-358) 1.69 (1.26-2.26)
Charlson Comorbidity Indexi
0 954 598 (48.1) 13 738 12.9 (8.9-18.9) 1 [Reference] 4499 230 (191-277) 1 [Reference]
1-3 672 847 (33.9) 11 055 14.8 (10.8-20.2) 1.14 (0.98-1.34) 3074 203 (168-245) 0.88 (0.79-0.99)
≥4 355 476 (17.9) 8473 20.5 (15.7-26.7) 1.59 (1.29-1.95) 1775 157 (120-205) 0.68 (0.55-0.84)
Insurancej
Private 288 909 (14.6) 6823 18.4 (12.8-26.5) 1 [Reference] 1735 171 (134-218) 1 [Reference]
Medicaid/other public 1 037 795 (52.3) 10 535 8.4 (5.5-12.9) 0.46 (0.36-0.58) 2748 177 (142-220) 1.03 (0.88-1.20)
Medicare 155 611 (7.9) 2419 13.1 (8.8-19.6) 0.71 (0.59-0.87) 492 159 (114-222) 0.93 (0.76-1.13)
Uninsured 497 738 (25.1) 13 263 26.9 (19.0-38.0) 1.46 (1.02-2.10) 4151 229 (191-276) 1.34 (1.12-1.61)
a

Patients with CHC contact from January 2019 through May 2020 at any of the 431 US study clinics (in AK, CA, CO, CT, GA, ID, IN, LA, MA, MN, MO, MT, NC, NJ, NY, OH, OR, SC, TX, WA, and WI).

b

Rates of testing from March through May 2020 determined by generalized estimating equation (GEE) Poisson models. More than 99% of reported severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) tests were reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction tests via nasophargyngeal swabs. Tests were counted if the result was available directly in the electronic health record; most tests were likely ordered/collected in the clinic and performed at a lab offsite. Results were unique patients tested; multiple tests were not counted.

c

Rates of positive results determined by GEE Poisson models.

d

Status of new patient if they had no contact with the CHC before March 2020.

e

A total of 567 patients reported other or unknown sex status and were not reported in this table.

f

On January 1, 2020. A total of 264 patients did not have a documented age and were not reported in this table.

g

Race, ethnicity, and income were collected via by clinics via voluntary self-report. Categories were United States Office Management and Budget categories, and inclusion was necessary to evaluate testing and positive results in groups vulnerable to poor health outcomes.

h

A total of 386 patients had an unknown primary language and were not reported in this table.

i

As of last visit, determined from historical problem list and encounter diagnosis codes; 33 patients had an unknown index and were not reported in this table.

j

As reported at last visit; 2901 patients had unknown insurance status and were not reported in this table.

Results

Among 1 938 736 patients seen at 431 primary care clinics in 132 CHCs, 33 266 patients (1.7%) underwent SARS-CoV-2 testing, of whom 9348 (28% of all tests) had positive results (Table 1). New patients (n = 75 053) seen between March 1, 2020, and May 31, 2020, had higher SARS-CoV-2 testing rates compared with established patients. Being Asian, speaking a language other than English or Spanish, and being publicly insured (Medicare or Medicaid/other) were associated with lower testing rates. Having a Charlson Comorbidity Index6 of at least 4 and being uninsured were associated with higher testing rates. Speaking Spanish, being Hispanic, being uninsured, and speaking a language other than English or Spanish were associated with higher rates of positive test results than reference comparators. Being female and having a Charlson Comorbidity Index of 1 to 3 or greater than or equal to 4 (vs 0) were associated with lower rates of positive test results. There were no differences in rates of positive test results across age groups.

In March 2020 to May 2020, compared with March 2019 to May 2019, rates of face-to-face visits (relative rate [RR], 0.58 [95% CI, 0.51-0.66]), well-child visits (RR, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.41-0.54]), Papanicolaou tests (RR, 0.34 [95% CI, 0.30-0.39]), hemoglobin A1c tests (RR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.46-0.57]), and mammograms (RR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.38-0.51]) declined. No such decline was observed comparing January to February in 2019 vs 2020 (Table 2).

Table 2. Rates of Services in Primary Care Clinics in Community Health Centers in January Through May of 2019 and 2020.

Primary care service Rate of monthly services delivered per 1000 patients (95% CI)a Monthly service relative rate (95% CI)
January-February 2019 March-May 2019 January-February 2020 March-May 2020 January-February 2020 vs 2019 March-May 2020 vs 2019
Completed face-to-face visits with a medical professionalb 246 (228-265) 258 (242-276) 249 (232-266) 151 (131-173) 1.01 (0.97-1.05) 0.58 (0.51-0.66)
Completed well-child visitsc 232 (199-272) 213 (179-253) 238 (205-276) 101 (80-126) 1.03 (0.97-1.08) 0.47 (0.41-0.54)
Papanicolaou testsd 15.8 (13.9-18.1) 16.5 (14.8 -18.3) 15.0 (13.6-16.6) 5.6 (4.8-6.6) 0.95 (0.88-1.03) 0.34 (0.30-0.39)
Hemoglobin A1c testse 141 (134-148) 147 (140-154) 147 (140-153) 75 (68-83) 1.04 (1.00-1.08) 0.51 (0.46-0.57)
Mammogram ordersf 31.9 (28.8-35.4) 34.9 (32.0-38.0) 32.6 (29.7-35.8) 15.4 (13.2-18.1) 1.02 (0.96-1.10) 0.44 (0.38-0.51)
a

Community health center (CHC) clinics were limited to 431 clinics from 132 community health centers on OCHIN electronic health records by January 1, 2019. Patient sample size for each service was determined by the number of patients in the specified age and sex category with a primary care visit between January 1, 2019, and March 31, 2020. Rates of monthly delivery and CIs were determined by generalized estimating equation models of monthly service counts specifying a Poisson distribution, a log link, and an offset equal to log(patient sample size/ adult_1000). We adjusted for within–health system correlation using robust sandwich estimators.

b

Excludes visits coded as mental or behavioral health visits. Medical professionals were defined as physicians, advanced practice clinicians, or registered nurses. Patient sample size was 768 810 adult patients with primary care visits aged 19 to 79 years.

c

Includes all visits by patients younger than 18 years with preventive care evaluation and management codes or diagnosis codes indicating well-child visits (n = 289 117 children with primary care visits).

d

Resulted papanicolaou tests for women aged 21 to 65 years (n = 354 911 women with primary care visits).

e

Resulted hemoglobin A1c tests in patients with diabetes aged 21 to 79 years (n = 107 100 patients with diabetes and primary care visits).

f

Mammogram orders in women aged 50 to 70 years (n = 134 627 women with primary care visits).

Discussion

Despite limited test availability,4 CHCs reported thousands of SARS-CoV-2 tests, underscoring their important role in serving vulnerable populations. The 75 053 patients seen for the first time after the pandemic started suggests that CHCs were an access point in the midst of the crisis. Small differences in testing and positive rates by race, and larger differences by ethnicity, preferred language, and insurance status, suggest ongoing need for targeted, language-concordant testing strategies.

In the pandemic’s initial weeks, delivery of common services in CHCs declined, possibly due to in-person care reductions. Although these changes may have been necessary and unavoidable, the potential consequences are concerning because reductions in preventive/chronic disease care may affect population health.

Study limitations include not having clinical presentation data of tested patients or additional clinic-level factors, such as testing capacity, geography, local disease rates, and infrastructure. CHC patients may have received tests that were not recorded in the networked EHR; therefore, the results may underestimate true population testing rates. Results may not be generalizable to all primary care clinics; however, the network has similar patient characteristics as CHCs nationwide.1,5 Further research should assess differences in clinical presentation in various demographic groups, the effect of remote (telephone/video) visits on care quality, and the potential ongoing role of CHCs in mitigating pandemic-related inequity.

Section Editor: Jody W. Zylke, MD, Deputy Editor.

References


Articles from JAMA are provided here courtesy of American Medical Association

RESOURCES