Veränderung hausärztlicher und psychotherapeutischer Versorgung in Deutschland während der ersten beiden COVID-19-Lockdowns 2020 und 2021: Zwei Befragungswellen unter Berücksichtigung von Geschlechtsidentität und sexueller Orientierung

INTRODUCTION: Measures against the COVID-19 pandemic led to restrictions in ambulatory health care in Germany. While the restrictions have been described from claims data, the patients‘ perspective has been missing. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans-, inter- and asexual persons (LGBTIA) might have been particularly affected by these restrictions because of their vulnerability. Thus, our research questions were: 1) How did the restrictions during the pandemic influence primary care and psychotherapy in Germany from the patients’ perspective? 2) Are there differences between LGBTIA and cis-heterosexual persons regarding these restrictions? METHODS: We conducted an online survey with two survey waves in March/April 2020 and January/February 2021. Sampling was conducted via multiplicators and via snowball sampling. Amongst others, the survey contained open-ended questions regarding primary care and psychotherapy. From the answers of the first survey wave we constructed quantitative items for the second survey wave. Descriptive and inferential statistical analysis was conducted, including linear regression with R. RESULTS: 6,784 participants took part in the survey (2,641 in the first survey wave), 5,442 of whom identified as LGBTIA. Categories of changes in primary care were: no health care utilization, no changes in primary care, insecurity regarding primary care, and changes in primary care which could be less frequent utilization, differing procedures or changes in ways of communication. In the second wave, LGBTIA participants rated the worsening of primary care during the pandemic as being more pronounced. Regarding psychotherapy, the change can be described as no change in care, changes in the form of therapy, treatment in emergencies only and a longer break from psychotherapy. There was no different rating by LGBTIA persons compared to cis-heterosexual persons in the second survey wave. Telephone and video consultations were more common in psychotherapy than in primary care. DISCUSSION: LGBTIA persons were oversampled, so the sample included more people from urban areas than the German population. Due to the online survey form, older people were underrepresented relative to their numbers in the general German population. CONCLUSION: With respect to future pandemics general practitioners in primary care must be prepared that psychotherapy might be paused and delayed for some time. Video and telephone consultations should be offered to overcome pandemic-related restrictions in the future. General practitioners should know the gender identity and sexual orientation of their patients in order to proactively address health care barriers.