Skip to main content

Table 3 Mitigation strategies reported in included studies

From: Disruptions of neurological services, its causes and mitigation strategies during COVID-19: a global review

Mitigation strategies Number of studies (n = 224) (%) Studies focused on adults (n = 173) (%) Studies focused on children (n = 26) (%) Studies from HICs
(n = 164) (%)
Studies from LMICs (n = 32) (%)
Telemedicine deployment to replace in-person consults or other teleconsultation formats 184 (82.1%) 140 (80.1%) 25 (96.1%) 136 (82.9%) 28 (87.5%)
Novel dispensing approaches for medicines, novel prescribing approaches 116 (51.8%) 86 (49.7%) 18 (69.2%) 84 (51.2%) 17 (53.1%)
Redirection of patients to alternate care sites, reorientation of referral pathways or integration of several services into a single visit 95 (42.4%) 74 (42.8%) 13 (50%) 68 (41.5%) 14 (43.7%)
Catch-up campaigns for missed appointments 83 (37.1%) 55 (31.8%) 18 (69.2%) 59 (36.0%) 11 (34.4%)
Triaging of neurological patients to identify priorities 57 (25.4%) 45 (26.0%) 6 (23.1%) 42 (25.6%) 9 (28.1%)
Self-care interventions, provision of home-based care or helplines for patients and caregivers 84 (37.5%) 56 (32.4%) 20 (76.9% =  60 (36.6% 14 (43.7%)
Task-shifting or role delegation 44 (19.6%) 34 (19.6%) 5 (19.2%) 34 (18.3%) 4 (12.5%)
Recruitment of additional staff, novel supply chain management and logistics approaches 34 (15.2%) 26 (15.0%) 4 (15.4%) 27 (16.5%) 2 (6.2%)
Community communications to ensure all citizens were aware and informed of continuity of services and that routine care could always be sought 23 (10.3%) 15 (8.7%) 7 (26.9%) 19 (11.6%) 3 (9.4%)
Government removal of user fees 12 (5.4%) 8 (4.6%) 3 (11.5%) 9 (5.5%) 0 (0%)
  1. Percentages are calculated over the 224 studies that described mitigation strategies and over the total number of studies that assessed only adults (n = 173) or only children (n = 26); and over the total number of studies from high-income countries (HICs) (n = 164) or low–middle-income countries (LMICs) (n = 32)