Brazilian Primary Health Care strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic: A scoping review

Abstract

Primary Health Care is the gateway for users to access the Brazilian healthcare system and has been particularly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic demands. This review systematically identified and mapped evidence regarding novel or adapted strategies developed within PHC during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil. Our results are presented as a narrative synthesis following the JBI methodology. They were analyzed and discussed through the lens of the Health Work Process Theory, which allowed us to categorize the publications into two principal domains of strategies, managerial and clinical, encompassing strategies that were new, adapted, or maintained in healthcare services. Two hundred twenty-six interventions were identified (130 managerial and 96 clinical) from 49 studies. The new strategies appeared more frequently in both domains, while the maintained ones were less prevalent. The array of interventions highlights different care models, sometimes aligned with a biomedical approach. In contrast, others focus on comprehensiveness and longitudinality based on a person-centered care, in the family, and the community. Thus, this review identified that the same pre-pandemic challenges persist.

Key words:
COVID-19; Primary Health Care; Scoping review; Health Services; Brazil

Resumo

A Atenção Primária à Saúde é a porta de entrada dos usuários ao sistema de saúde brasileiro e foi, especialmente, impactada pelas demandas com a COVID-19. Essa revisão identificou e mapeou sistematicamente evidências sobre as estratégias novas ou adaptadas desenvolvidas na Atenção Primária à Saúde durante a pandemia de COVID-19 no Brasil. Foi realizada uma revisão de escopo, conforme metodologia proposta pelo JBI. Os resultados apresentados em uma síntese narrativa, foram analisados e discutidos à luz da Teoria do Processo de Trabalho em Saúde que agrupou as publicações em dois grandes domínios de estratégias, gerenciais e assistenciais, sendo elas novas, adaptadas ou mantidas. A partir de 49 estudos, mapeou-se 226 intervenções (130 gerenciais; 96 assistenciais). Em ambos os domínios, as novas estratégias apareceram em maior número e as mantidas, em menor. A diversidade de intervenções explicitou distintos modelos de atenção, que ora se aproximaram de um enfoque biologicista, ora da integralidade e da longitudinalidade baseada no cuidado centrado na pessoa, na família e na comunidade. Evidenciou-se, assim, que perduram os mesmos desafios anteriores ao período pandêmico.

Palavra-chave:
COVID-19; Atenção Primária à Saúde; Revisão de escopo; Serviços de saúde; Brasil

Introduction

Primary Health Care (PHC) services are the main gateway to the Brazilian health system. PHC’s proximity to the community and the list of strategies developed give it greater capacity for comprehensive and longitudinal care, increasing its resolving power for most health problems at this care level^1-3. However, we should consider the intense “PHC strengthening discontinuity process”⁴ movement in the country in recent years^5,6.

The change in the National Primary Care Policy (PNAB) and the financing model induced some setbacks, such as the low coverage of doctors in remote and peripheral regions, the deployment of partial or incomplete teams, the interrupted expansion and qualification of PHC services, especially those organized under the Family Health Strategy (ESF) model, besides the destructuring of important health promotion programs, as in the case of the School Health Program⁴.

Added to this context of fragility in PHC services is the public emergency created in March 2020 by the COVID-19 pandemic, with an exponential increase in the demand for PHC services as a result of the disease and, on the other hand, the resistance by most of the population to seeking these services for fear of becoming infected, adversely affected care and the organization of the work process of their teams^7-9.

Therefore, recognizing the possible deterioration of the population’s health situation and the prolonged extension of the pandemic period⁹, knowing the work processes can say a lot about the organization of services during this emergency, highlighting gaps or strategies that contribute to the decision-making by managers and health professionals working in these services during this phase of resuming activities and reorganizing services after the current change of federal government⁴.

Thus, the present work aimed to systematically identify and map evidence on the strategies developed in PHC during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil, detect research gaps, and support the development of future investigations.

Methods

This scoping review¹⁰ mapped the evidence of strategies used in PHC during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil. This approach adopted the principles of the scientific method and evidence synthesis, including rigor, transparency, and reproducibility¹¹, assured in the publication of the protocol on the Zenodo platform¹² (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6461683), which was followed without changes.

The following question was formulated to meet the objectives: “What strategies were employed in PHC during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil?”. It was developed according to the acronym P (Population) - Primary Health Care; C (Concept) - PHC Strategies; and C (Context) - COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil.

In this scoping review, we included studies that adopted strategies developed in PHC, performed by health professionals and managers to organize PHC services with the involvement of all stakeholders related to the development of PHC strategies. Primary and secondary qualitative and quantitative studies published and unpublished in English, Spanish, and Portuguese in Brazil by March 8, 2022, were also included.

A librarian experienced in systematic reviews developed the search strategies, combining keywords structured by the acronym PCC (primary care; COVID-19, Brazil), using the MeSH search terms in the PubMed database, and adapting to other databases. The published studies were extracted from the following databases: Medline (via PubMed), BVS Regional Portal, Lilacs, Embase, Scopus, WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease, and SciELO. Gray literature was searched through the Google Scholar repository (first 10 pages), the Brazilian Digital Database of Theses and Dissertations (BDTD), and the CAPES catalog. We also performed an additional search of the reference lists of the included articles and looked for steering groups on the topic. The search strategies and search process implemented are shown in Appendix 1 of the review protocol (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6461683).

Screening and eligibility of retrieved studies were preceded by a calibration of the inclusion and exclusion criteria performed by all reviewers using a sample of search results. After calibration, two reviewers independently selected the studies by independently screening titles and abstracts and reading the included studies’ full texts. Disagreements were decided by consensus. The entire process was performed using the reference management software Rayann QCRI¹³.

One reviewer extracted data, which were checked by another reviewer, according to the research questions through an electronic spreadsheet containing the following aspects: study characteristics (principal author, year of publication, language of publication, type of publication, study design, region), study objective, population, information on the services where the strategies were implemented, strategies, and facilitators and barriers of the strategies. The evidence was not assessed evaluated regarding its methodological quality, as these data are unnecessary for this scoping review.

Considering the changes caused by the pandemic in the organization of PHC services and society and that health practices are social constructions determined by the interrelations between the needs of clients and those of health professionals, which dialectically transform and are transformed, we opted to present the results in a narrative synthesis, analyzing them from the Health Work Process Theory¹⁴ and the World Health Organization model¹⁵, allowing greater clarity on changes in the organizational dimension of services. Thus, the identified publications were grouped into two significant domains of analysis (Managerial Actions and Clinical Actions), with three subdomains each (Establishing strategies, Adapting strategies, and Maintaining strategies).

Results

A total of 2,590 records were retrieved from the databases and platforms. After excluding duplicates (n=1,254), 1,336 were screened. At the end of the first selection stage, 84 publications were included for reading the full texts. A selection was also carried out from a list of references (n=54), a manual search from research groups on the topic (n=19), and recommendations from experts (n=2). Seventy reports were excluded because they did not meet the eligibility criteria, and the justifications can be found in the supplementary material (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6461683). The final sample consisted of 49 publications^16-64. The selection process can be seen in Figure 1.

Figure 1
Flowchart of the study selection process.

Studies characteristics

Forty-nine reports were included in this scoping review. Thirty-two studies were experience reports^{16-20,22,23,25-28,30,31,35,38-41,43,46-48,50-52,54,55,57,60,61,63}. We also had three cross-sectional studies^28,32,56, a documentary analysis⁴⁶, a letter to the editor³⁵, a cohort³⁸, an essay³³, five case studies^{43,45,50,54,59}, a descriptive study⁶⁰, a netnography²⁵, and four publications had not indicated the type of study^21,24,37,63. The studies were primarily published in 2020^{17,19-24,26,28,30-32,36,39-41,43-52,55,56,58,59,64}, and there was no assessment of their methodological quality considering the characteristics of scoping reviews.

Sixteen studies were conducted in the Northeast^{17,18,20,28,31,42-44,47,48,50,51,54,56,60,61}, fourteen in the Southeast^{19,21,26,29,30,36-38,43,47,50,55,57}, nine in the South^{16,22,25,32,41,55,58,60,62}, one in the Midwest⁵³, and none in the North. Moreover, five publications had national coverage^{24,27,35,46,63}, one study covered Latin America³³, and one publication did not mention the location³⁷.

The study population comprised health professionals^{16,18,31,39,42,43,48,49,54,56,57,59,60,63,64}, community health workers^27,30, nurses²⁵, assigned population health services^{28,38,40,44,51,59,62}, older adults^37,45,51, and residents or undergraduate students^29,53,58. Three studies did not inform the population^33,35,46.

COVID-19 coping strategies

Based on the previous classification, the 49 studies revealed 226 actions (130 management and 96 clinical strategies). Most studies (n=30) combined management and clinical strategies (187 actions - 104 management and 83 clinical)^{16-18,21,22,25,26,28-31,33-36,40,41,43,45,46,48-50,52,53,56,57,59,63,64}, while 19 studies had unique strategies, ten of which were purely clinical^{19,23,37,38,42,51,55,60-62} and nine management^{20,24,27,31,38,43,46,53,57}.

Next, management and clinical strategies are described regarding establishing, adapting, or maintaining actions without distinguishing whether they were mixed or single-strategy studies. A single study may have been included in multiple strategies or actions.

Within management strategies, 33 studies^{16,17,20,22,24-26,28-36,39-41,43-48,52-54,56-58,63,64} created new actions (n=130 actions) to combat COVID-19, 22 proposed adapting actions previously worked on in services^{16-18,21,22,26,27,31,33-35,43,45-50,57,59,64} (n=31) and three^16-18 maintained what was in progress (n=3).

Regarding new actions, 24 publications reported the establishing workflows^{16,17,22,24,25,28-32,34-36,39,41,44,45,47,48,52,53,56,63,64}, 17 focused on continuing education actions^{25,26,28-31,35,36,40,43,45,47,48,52,54,56,57}, nine on workers’ benefits^{16,19,21,24,26,37,64}, six on expanding technical support^{22,24,36,46,47,58}, six on surveillance^{25,31,32,44,52,54}, six on security^{30,34-36,48,57}, three on the use of new technologies^20,24,28 and two on social support^26,34. In adaptations, 17 studies had actions aimed at workflows^{17,18,21,26,27,29,33,34,43,45,46,48-50,57,59,64}, three changes in gateways^18,22,64, four in relocating professionals^16,32,36,64, and two pointed out actions for the safety of professionals^57,64. In maintaining management strategies, a study focused on the safety of professionals, adaptation of services, and the issue of flows¹⁶.

Within care strategies, 32 studies^{16,18,19,22,23,25,28,29,31,33,34,36-38,40,41,43,45,46,48,49,51-53,55,57,60-64} created new actions (n=54 actions) to combat COVID-19, 18 adapted actions^{16,21,26,29,31,33-35,40-43,45,46,48,54,57} previously worked on the services (n=26) and 10^{16,21,25,33,34,36,48,54,58,60} maintained what was in progress (n=15).

The use of new technologies to promote care was reported^{18,19,22,23,25,26,28,31,33,34,36,40,43,45,46,48,49,51-53,55,57,60-64} in 27 studies. Four indicated diagnostic actions^16,29,38,64, three home visit actions^45,46,52, three vaccinations for other audiences^41,43,45, three establishing clinical flows^25,28,36, two clinical follow-ups^29,38, and a strategy was created to vaccinate older adults against COVID-19³⁷ in one study exclusively. Regarding adapting care strategies, 12 studies showed actions to promote care continuity^{16,19,21,23-25,30-33,35,38}, five telemedicine adaptations^{16,32,33,42,51}, two in monitoring^32,42, two in vaccination^21,42, one study portrayed changes in oral health actions²¹ and two in dispensing medicines for chronic patients^20,45. Regarding maintaining the strategies, five studies reported actions to care for chronic patients^{16,21,36,38,55}, five strategies for maintaining care flows^{25,35,50,59,61}, three for maternal and child care^16,36,55, and two for vaccination^36,55.

Barriers and facilitators

Forty-two publications had barriers or facilitators to implementing strategies and actions^{16,17,19,20, 23-29,32-39,41,42,44,46-64}, categorized into client, professional, and services and systems levels.

At the client level, we underscore barriers to clients’ adaptation and access to new technologies for teleservice or online practices^{23,24,35,51,55,61,62}, access to qualified information^35,55,60 and conviction about the risks of conversations and crowds at UBS⁴⁴. At the professional level, the barriers identified were the difficulty of managing technologies or PPE^49,60,64, communication with clients^22,27,45, availability of PPE^58,59, internet access³⁴, and work overload²⁷. Regarding the level of services, the main barriers were lack of PPE^{16,31,36,47,64}, reorganization of the workflow and new protocols^{17,32,33,44,50,60}, internet access³⁴ and limited physical space^41,45,53. Difficulties with diagnostic tests^47,63 and financing^31,48 were the main barriers at the system level.

Regarding facilitators for implementing actions, the collaboration of the population¹⁸, increased bonding and reception^{28,37,44,47,48}, and higher patient adherence via remote access^40,62 at the client level were cited. Concerning professionals, the commitment of professionals¹⁶, multidisciplinary meetings²⁰, professional recognition²⁶, greater rapprochement between professionals^27,56, and availability of training^55,58,59 were highlighted as potentials. Regarding the level of services, remote technologies^21,38,56, alternative opening hours³¹, territorial coordination with community devices⁵², and content transmission⁵⁶ were reported as facilitators. Furthermore, the use of new protocols and guidelines^25,44,56 was highlighted as a potential for the systems level.

Discussion

This scoping review mapped in the scientific evidence the strategies developed in Brazilian primary health care during the COVID-19 pandemic, as shown in the results presented. Most studies were case reports and included health professionals, which was expected given the urgency of sharing evidence in the health emergency and the role of these professionals in the actions adopted. The many publications that mix management and clinical strategies corroborate studies showing how management and care are interconnected in health practice^65-68. At the same time, identifying a more significant number of publications with managerial interventions may signal an influence of managers’ interests on such practices.

Results such as that most strategies (74%) of a managerial scope refer to proposals created during that period, while only around 20% are adaptations and 2% maintenance of actions already performed in routine, reinforce the perception that the entire technical-scientific knowledge that belongs to the professionals directly responsible for healthcare⁶⁸ were insufficient in that situation and show how much the imposed health needs lead to proposing new practices⁶⁹.

At the same time, the tendency of health professionals to adapt or sustain practices already incorporated into the daily services, simultaneously with the creation of new strategies, reaffirms the search to meet the needs already imposed on the services, as in the case of prenatal care appointments and vaccination actions, while recognizing the new needs foisted by the COVID-19 pandemic⁶⁹.

The construction of flows and lines of care exemplifies this conception. These interventions stood out most among the strategies created^{16,17,22,24,25,28-32,34-36,39,41,44,45,47,48,52,53,56,63,64} and adapted^{17,18,21,26,27,29,33,34,43,45-50,57,59} by management. In the clinical sphere, this was the use of new technologies^{18,19,22,23,25,26,28,31,33,34,36,40,43,45,46,48,49,51-53,55,57,60-64}.

The use of digital technologies by PHC services, particularly teleservice (by telephone, WhatsApp, online appointment), was already expanding in health practice⁵⁰. If kept in the teams’ daily routine, the increasing use of digital technologies could assist in expanding access to clients located in remote areas and difficult to travel to services.

However, it is noteworthy that this feature was widely used for individual appointments^{22,23,26,40,41}, with a predominance of proposals for specific population groups, such as severe mental disorders, violence, palliative care, and those already considered a priority in the daily life of services, such as children under one year, pregnant women, puerperae, and older adults^{16,21,36-38,43,46,49,52,53}.

We should highlight the questioning about home visits and prioritization of population groups for care, considering that these standards were already defined before the COVID-19 pandemic, but which became more evidenced in this setting imposed on social distancing and suspended routine appointments. These standards would respond to the need imposed by the new PHC financing model, which entered into force during the pandemic^70,71. We should consider that the indicators of this new model are sought by teams in an unbridled manner, even to the detriment of other population groups or more inclusive practices^21,70, as seen with the dental care of pregnant women, pointed out by literature as one of the causes of return of the elective oral health care, even before the establishment of scientific-technical standards for its realization with safety²¹.

Thus, besides the suspended group activities, which characterizes a disease-centered care model, this result also raises the reflection that although it refers to a new strategy, it maintains, in essence, the same operant technology of individual in-person appointments and reproduces a biologicist care model focused on programmatic actions⁶⁹, which continues to value the logic of surveillance.

Thus, many of the proposals understood as new, in their nature, refer to adapted work processes to preserve routine services. At the same time, without getting into the discussion of the need for these remote activities to be also used for health promotion, this initiative provided closer follow-up for priority groups, signaling the operationalization of a care model that values longitudinal care - even if not offered to the entire population of the territory.

Against this movement of suspended group activities^{26,27,32,49,50} or strategies centered on priority groups, we underscore studies that showed the preservation of regular flow by the service^{25,33,50,57,59}. Among them, we highlight one that mentions the work of community health workers (ACS) as a “fundamental element in the success of the action”⁶⁰, which reaffirms the availability and potential of different mobilizing agents in the health work process⁶⁹, besides the importance of these professionals in recovering the leadership in times gone by.

From the same perspective, we should underscore initiatives centered on more comprehensive care, promoting healthy habits, and preserving bonds^{28,40,51,52,62,63}. In an even smaller number, but fully serving the proposal of a comprehensive and integrative PHC, we identified interventions focused on social protection, such as the distribution of staple food baskets and hygiene items, and assistance to complete the registration of clients in social programs^26,34,36,41.

This movement of creating health promotion interventions and prevention of diseases was also observed in specific actions on COVID-19, through the dissemination of reliable information and vaccination, including influenza - which emerged as a disease in the pandemic situation of the country^{20,26,28,35,37,41-43,45,52,56}. Such initiatives would deserve to be incorporated into the routines of services since they could contribute to health promotion issues and prevention of diseases and the confrontation of stigma and discrimination that have been reproduced over the years by population misinformation on specific diseases.

Among the new clinical interventions, we highlight the construction of clinical flows to keep distance between clients, without prejudice to expanding access to diagnosis and clinical care, including monitoring and follow-up on suspected or confirmed people^{16,25,28,29,36,38,45,64}.

In the strategies created by management, besides those focused on disease surveillance^{25,33,34,46,54,56} and construction of care line and organizational flows of the services network^{16,17,22,24,25,28-32,34-36,39,41,44,45,47,48,52,53,56,63,64}, the development of proposals to support services deserves attention, such as the qualification of the health work process (Technical Notes and Continuing Education Actions for Health Professionals)^{16,19-21,25,33,42} and for employees from other municipal sectors³⁰.

Building knowledge exchange spaces, as in the creation of discussion and decision-making groups^47,59, is another action that deserves to be highlighted by qualifying professionals from the perspective of care focused on the specificities of each situation, which would deserve to be continued in the routine of these services and incorporated by all others, since it would favor the materialization of the so-called recommended PHC comprehensiveness and still far from the practice of many services.

We also observed initiatives for occupational health, such as the supply of psychological care, auriculotherapy, Reiki, yoga, self-massage and meditation techniques, labor gymnastics^47,48,52,59, and reception strategies for employees away from work due to COVID-19⁴⁸.

It is noteworthy that despite the methodological rigor of the scoping review, the results need to be considered cautiously since the quality of the publications was not assessed. Another limiting factor to consider is data selection because, despite the comprehensive search, studies may have yet to be retrieved, and others may have been published after completion of the review due to the large volume of publications around the COVID-19 theme. Moreover, the urgent need for information has led many articles to be made available in preprint format and published on a very tight schedule, which often compromises the description of strategies and the contextualization of actions and is reflected in the results.

Final considerations

The COVID-19 health emergency imposed a huge challenge and required an immediate response from the health system, which had to reorganize to meet the demands. The situation was similar in the PHC services. It required adapting or adopting new strategies to ensure the population’s access to care continuity added to COVID-19 care. This scoping review aimed to present and describe these strategies.

The diverse interventions identified in the studies lead us to conclude that several projects are in dispute in PHC services, evidenced by different objects, work instruments, and professionals’ actions, which explain different care models produced in the work process⁶⁹. Some have identified themselves with the traditional (epidemiological and clinical) care model - which brings a biologicist approach centered on individualizing disease surveillance - and others of collective health - with a holistic health perspective, seeking to meet the expanded care model, which values comprehensiveness and longitudinality based on care centered on the person, family, and the community.

We should consider that although COVID-19 refers to a transmissible disease and therefore needs a more centered approach to epidemiological surveillance, PHC services must consider health in its broadest aspect, including the vulnerabilities that enable its occurrence and the coexistence of different health conditions that can aggravate the disease’s clinical picture. Also, besides the pandemic, work processes should recognize that people continue to live and produce new and old needs of (and in) health. In this sense, we found that the same challenge as the pre-pandemic antagonism in the organization of work processes in PHC endures in current strategies.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Mônica Martins de Oliveira Viana (Postgraduate Program in Collective Health, Institute of Health, SES-SP), for the support in the conception of the review, and Isabel dos Santos Figueiredo (Librarian of the Access to Information Service, in the division of the Library and Documentation of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of São Paulo), for the elaboration of search strategies and her search process in the databases and platforms.

Referências

• ¹
  Starfield B, Shi L, Macinko J. Contribution of primary care to health systems and health. Milbank Q 2005; 83(3):457-502.
• ²
  Viacava F, Oliveira RAD, Carvalho CC, Laguardia J, Bellido JG. SUS: oferta, acesso e utilização de serviços de saúde nos últimos 30 anos. Cien Saude Colet 2018; 23:1751-1762.
• ³
  Venancio SI, Rosa TEC, Sanches MTC, Shigeno EY, Souza JMP. Efetividade da Estratégia Saúde da Família sobre indicadores de saúde da criança no Estado de São Paulo. Rev Bras Saude Mater Infant 2016; 16:283-293.
• ⁴
  Alckmin G, Pesaro F, Hoffmann G. Comissão de Transição Governamental. Relatório do Grupo Técnico de Saúde - Produto 2. Relatório Final. Brasília: MS; 2022.
• ⁵
  Melo EA, Mendonça MHM, Oliveira JR, Andrade GCL. Mudanças na Política Nacional de Atenção Básica: entre retrocessos e desafios. Saude Debate 2018; 42(n. esp. 1):38-51.
• ⁶
  Morosini MVGC, Fonseca AF, Baptista TWF. Previne Brasil, Agência de Desenvolvimento da Atenção Primária e Carteira de Serviços: radicalização da política de privatização da atenção básica? Cad Saude Publica 2020; 36(9):e00040220.
• ⁷
  Nunes J. A pandemia de COVID-19: securitização, crise neoliberal e a vulnerabilização global. Cad Saude Publica 2020; 36(5):e00063120.
• ⁸
  Johnson MC, Saletti-Cuesta L, Tumas N. Emociones, preocupaciones y reflexiones frente a la pandemia del COVID-19 en Argentina. Cien Saude Colet 2020; 25(Supl. 1):2447-2456.
• ⁹
  Medina MG, Giovanella L, Bousquat A, Mendonça MHM, Aquino R. Atenção primária à saúde em tempos de COVID-19: o que fazer? Cad Saude Publica 2020; 36(8):e00149720.
• ¹⁰
  Peters MDJ, Godfrey C, McInerney P, Munn Z, Tricco AC, Khalil, H. Chapter 11: Scoping Reviews (2020 version). In: Aromataris E, Munn Z, editors. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI; 2020.
• ¹¹
  Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O'Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, Moher D, Peters MD, Horsley T, Weeks L, Hempel S, Akl EA, Chang C, McGowan J, Stewart L, Hartling L, Aldcroft A, Wilson MG, Garritty C, Lewin S, Godfrey CM, Macdonald MT, Langlois EV, Soares-Weiser K, Moriarty J, Clifford T, Tunçalp Ö, Straus SE. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med 2018; 169(7):467-473.
• ¹²
  Viana MMO, Bortoli MCS, Sanine PR, Costa MIS, Oliveira CF, Araújo BC. Estratégias desenvolvidas nos serviços de atenção primária à saúde durante a pandemia da Covid-19 no Brasil: uma revisão de escopo rápida - Protocolo. Zenodo; 2022.
• ¹³
  Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A. Rayyan - a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev 2016; 5:210.
• ¹⁴
  Mendes-Gonçalves RB. Práticas de saúde: processos de trabalho e necessidades. In: Ayres JRCM, Santos L, organizadores. Saúde, sociedade e história. São Paulo: Hucitec/Rede Unida; 2017. p. 298-374.
• ¹⁵
  World Health Organization (WHO). Strengthening and Adjusting Public Health Measures throughout the COVID-19 Transition Phases. Copenhagen: WHO European Region; 2020.
• ¹⁶
  Andres SC, Carlotto AB, Leão A. A organização e estruturação do serviço de saúde na APS para o enfrentamento da Covid-19: relato de experiência. APS Rev 2021; 3(1):9-15.
• ¹⁷
  Araújo Júnior DG, Belarmino AC, Rodrigues MENG, Vieira LJES, Ferreira Júnior AR. Implicações da gestão em atenção primária em saúde no enfrentamento da pandemia da COVID-19. Rev APS 2021; 23(3):559-568.
• ¹⁸
  Belfort IKP, Costa VC, Monteiro SCM. Acolhimento na estratégia saúde da família durante a pandemia da Covid-19. APS Rev 2021; 3(1):3-8.
• ¹⁹
  Brêtas SM, Guilam MCR. Relato de Experiência: A Odontologia no Apoio ao Monitoramento Estratégico da Covid-19. In: Teixeira CP, Favoreto CAO, Santos DVD, Savassi LCM, Guilam MCR, Machado MFAS, Pinto MEB, organizadores. COVID-19 e Atenção Primária: As Experiências Nos Territórios (Rede Profsaúde). Rio de Janeiro: Anais/Sessões temáticas/Profsaúde; 2020. p. 58-65.
• ²⁰
  Cardona Júnior AHS, Andrade CWQ, Caldas LNM. Educação em saúde: programa e canal de comunicação via WhatsApp da unidade básica de saúde do N6 para comunidade rural do sertão pernambucano. APS Rev 2020; 2(2):137-141.
• ²¹
  Carletto AF, Santos FF. A atuação do dentista de família na pandemia do Covid-19: o cenário do Rio de Janeiro. Physis (Rio J) 2020; 30(3):e300310.
• ²²
  Cruz NMLV, Souza EB, Sampaio CSF, Santos AJM, Chaves SV, Hora RN, Souza RC, Santos JE. Apoio psicossocial em tempos de COVID-19: experiências de novas estratégias de gestão e ajuda mútua no sul da Bahia, Brasil. APS Rev 2020; 2(2):97-105.
• ²³
  Dimer NA, Canto-Soares N, Santos-Teixeira L, Goulart BNG. The COVID-19 pandemic and the implementation of telehealth in speech-language and hearing therapy for patients at home: An experience report. CODAS 2020; 32(3):e20200144.
• ²⁴
  Farias LABG, Colares MP, Barretoti FKA, Cavalcanti LPG. O papel da atenção primária no combate ao Covid-19: impacto na saúde pública e perspectivas futuras. Rev Bras Med Fam Comunidade 2020; 15(42):2455.
• ²⁵
  Fermo VC, Alves TF, Boell JEW, Tourinho FSV. A consulta de enfermagem no enfrentamento da COVID-19: vivências na atenção primária à saúde. Rev Eletr Enferm 2021; 23:1-7.
• ²⁶
  Fernandez MV, Castro DM, Fernandes LMM, Alves IC. Reorganizar para avançar: a experiência da Atenção Primária à Saúde de Nova Lima/MG no enfrentamento da pandemia da Covid-19. APS Rev 2020; 2(2):114-121.
• ²⁷
  Fernandez M, Lotta G, Corrêa M. Desafios para a Atenção Primária à Saúde no Brasil: uma análise do trabalho das agentes comunitárias de saúde durante a pandemia de Covid-19. Trab Educ Saude (Online) 2021; 19:e00321153.
• ²⁸
  Ferreira MGBL, Santos TC, Santos RC, Lucena MLF, Santos CF, Araújo HMSS, et al. Estratégias de Enfrentamento da COVID-19 na Perspectiva da Atenção Primária de Saúde: relato de experiência da ESF Branca II. In: Teixeira CP, Favoreto CAO, Santos DVD, Savassi LCM, Guilam MCR, Machado MFAS, Pinto MEB, organizadores. COVID-19 e Atenção Primária: as Experiências nos Territórios (Rede Profsaúde). Rio de Janeiro: Anais/Sessões temáticas/Profsaúde; 2020. p. 28-33.
• ²⁹
  Figueiredo EAB, Silva KLS, Luz HDH, Martins FLM, Marçal MA, Vitorino DFM, Costa HS. Atuação do Fisioterapeuta na saúde primária no enfrentamento da COVID-19: relato de experiência. Rev Bras Promo Saude 2021; 34(1):1-10.
• ³⁰
  Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (Fiocruz). 2º Boletim da Pesquisa Monitoramento da saúde dos ACS em tempos de Covid-19 [Internet]. [acessado 2022 maio 13]. Disponível em: https://portal.fiocruz.br/documento/segundo-boletim-da-pesquisa-monitoramento-da-saude-dos-acs-em-tempos-de-covid-19
  » https://portal.fiocruz.br/documento/segundo-boletim-da-pesquisa-monitoramento-da-saude-dos-acs-em-tempos-de-covid-19
• ³¹
  Franca MCE, Alvarez REC. Assistência à Saúde do Trabalhador Usuário/Profissional do SUS durante o enfrentamento ao COVID-19 no município de Eunápolis-BA. In: Teixeira CP, Favoreto CAO, Santos DVD, Savassi LCM, Guilam MCR, Machado MFAS, Pinto MEB, organizadores. COVID-19 e Atenção Primária: as experiências nos territórios (Rede Profsaúde). Rio de Janeiro: Anais/Sessões temáticas/Profsaúde; 2020. p. 108-111.
• ³²
  Freitas FO, Santos DVD. Covid-19 e Atenção Primária à Saúde: contexto epidemiológico e as experiências do Profsaúde nos territórios. In: Teixeira CP, Favoreto CAO, Santos DVD, Savassi LCM, Guilam MCR, Machado MFAS, Pinto MEB, organizadores. COVID-19 e Atenção Primária: as experiências nos territórios (Rede Profsaúde). Rio de Janeiro: Anais/Sessões temáticas/Profsaúde; 2020. p. 12-13.
• ³³
  Giovanella L, Vega R, Tejerina-Silva H, Acosta-Ramirez N, Parada-Lezcano M, Ríos G, Iturrieta D, Almeida PF, Feo O. ¿Es la atención primaria de salud integral parte de la respuesta a la pandemia de Covid-19 en Latinoamérica? Trab Educ Saude 2021; 19:e00310142.
• ³⁴
  Giovanella L, Bousquat A, Medina MG, Mendonça MHM, Facchini LA, Tasca R, Nedel FB, Lima JG, Mota PHS, Aquino R. Desafios da atenção básica no enfrentamento da pandemia de COVID-19 no SUS. Rio de Janeiro: Fiocruz/Editora Fiocruz; 2022.
• ³⁵
  Gois-Santos VT, Santos VS, Souza CDF, Tavares CSS, Gurgel RQ, Martins-Filho PR. Primary health care in Brazil in the times of COVID-19: Changes, challenges and perspectives. Rev Assoc Med Bras 2021; 66(7):876-879.
• ³⁶
  Guimarães FG, Carvalho TML, Bernardes RM, Pinto JM. A organização da atenção primária à saúde de Belo Horizonte no enfrentamento da pandemia COVID-19: relato de experiência. APS Rev 2020; 2:74-82.
• ³⁷
  Gutiérrez-Murillo RS. The Family Health Strategy and Its Relevance to Geriatric Immunisation Campaigns Against COVID-19 in Brazil. Electro J Gen Med 2022; 19(2):1-2.
• ³⁸
  Leal FE, Mendes-Correa MC, Buss LF, Costa SF, Bizario JCS, Souza SRP, Thomaz O, Tozetto-Mendoza TR, Villas-Boas LS, Oliveira-da Silva LC, Grespan RMZ, Capuani L, Buccheri R, Domingues H, Alexander N, Mayaud P, Sabino EC. Clinical features and natural history of the first 2073 suspected COVID-19 cases in the Corona São Caetano primary care programme: a prospective cohort study. BMJ Open 2021; 11(1):e042745.
• ³⁹
  Lima ED, Kinker FS. Relatos de experiência sobre Eldorado/SP - Vale do Ribeira: Trabalhador da saúde em tempos de COVID-19. In: Teixeira CP, Favoreto CAO, Santos DVD, Savassi LCM, Guilam MCR, Machado MFAS, Pinto MEB, organizadores. COVID-19 e Atenção Primária: as experiências nos territórios (Rede Profsaúde). Rio de Janeiro: Anais/Sessões temáticas/Profsaúde; 2020. p. 99-101.
• ⁴⁰
  Mendes AO, Campanha GSC, Silva CS, Medeiros H. Ampliação do acesso através de ferramentas virtuais. In: Teixeira CP, Favoreto CAO, Santos DVD, Savassi LCM, Guilam MCR, Machado MFAS, Pinto MEB, organizadores. COVID-19 e Atenção Primária: as experiências nos territórios (Rede Profsaúde). Rio de Janeiro: Anais/Sessões temáticas/Profsaúde; 2020. p. 119-123.
• ⁴¹
  Mendonça CS, Rosset I, Gonçalves MR, Bastos CGM, Medeiros AF. Resposta assistencial de um serviço docente assistencial de APS à pandemia do COVID-19. APS Rev 2020; 2:28-32.
• ⁴²
  Oliveira MAB, Monteiro LS, Oliveira RC, Moreira TS, Marques ACF, Silva UMA, Oliveira NA, Pereira GFC, Silva ACS, Santana RM. A prática do núcleo de apoio à saúde da família do Recife no enfrentamento à pandemia COVID-19. APS Rev 2020; 2(2):142-150.
• ⁴³
  Oliveira LMS, Gomes NP, Oliveira ES, Santos AA, Pedreira LC. Estratégia de enfrentamento para covid-19 na atenção primária à saúde: relato de experiência em Salvador-BA. Rev Gaucha Enferm 2021; 42(n; esp.):e20200138.
• ⁴⁴
  Parente NC, Matta MFSSR, Brasil MA, Moreira MRC, Machado MFAS. Teleconsultas de usuários com suspeita de COVID-19: uma experiência na Estratégia Saúde da Família. In: Teixeira CP, Favoreto CAO, Santos DVD, Savassi LCM, Guilam MCR, Machado MFAS, Pinto MEB, organizadores. COVID-19 e Atenção Primária: as experiências nos territórios (Rede Profsaúde). Rio de Janeiro: Anais/Sessões temáticas/Profsaúde; 2020. p. 135-137.
• ⁴⁵
  Pingel ES, Llovet A, Cosentino F, Lesser J. Committing to Continuity: Primary Care Practices During COVID-19 in an Urban Brazilian Neighborhood. Health Educ Behav 2021; 48(1):29-33.
• ⁴⁶
  Prado NMBL, Rossi TRA, Chaves SCL, Barros SG, Magno L, Santos HLPC, Santos AMD. The international response of primary health care to COVID-19: document analysis in selected countries. Cad Saude Publica 2020; 36(12):e00183820.
• ⁴⁷
  Ribeiro MA, Araújo Júnior DG, Cavalcante ASP, Martins AF, Sousa LA, Carvalho RC, Cunha ICKO. (RE)Organização da Atenção Primária à Saúde para o enfrentamento da COVID-19: Experiência de Sobral-CE. APS Rev 2020; 2(2):177-188.
• ⁴⁸
  Rios AFM, Lira LSSP, Reis IM, Silva GA. Atenção Primária à Saúde frente à COVID-19: Relato de experiência de um Centro de Saúde. Enferm Foco (Brasília) 2020; 11(1):246-251.
• ⁴⁹
  Rodrigues AP, Felipe CR, Lima DB, Costa LRO, Fernandes PF, Silva RPP, Fernandes RM, Lazarini WS. Telemonitoramento como estratégia de cuidado longitudinal a grupos prioritários em tempos da COVID-19: uma experiência na atenção primária à saúde do município de Vitória-ES. APS Rev 2020; 2(2):189-196.
• ⁵⁰
  Santos ABS, França MVS, Santos JLF. Atendimento remoto na APS no contexto da COVID-19: a experiência do Ambulatório da Comunidade da Escola Bahiana de Medicina e Saúde Pública em Salvador, Bahia. APS Rev 2020; 2(2):169-176.
• ⁵¹
  Santos SM, Reis DS, Souza CRC, Cunha VMM, Chazan ACS. Terapia comunitária integrativa no enfrentamento à pandemia: uma rede on-line de apoio solidário. In: Teixeira CP, Favoreto CAO, Santos DVD, Savassi LCM, Guilam MCR, Machado MFAS, Pinto MEB, organizadores. COVID-19 e Atenção Primária: as experiências nos territórios (Rede Profsaúde). Rio de Janeiro: Anais/Sessões temáticas/Profsaúde; 2020. p. 138-142.
• ⁵²
  Silva MHM, Costa BF, Itaborahy LM, Costa LT, Grossman E. APS no combate à pandemia: estratégias individual, familiar e comunitária em uma clínica da família do Rio de Janeiro. In: Teixeira CP, Favoreto CAO, Santos DVD, Savassi LCM, Guilam MCR, Machado MFAS, Pinto MEB, organizadores. COVID-19 e Atenção Primária: as experiências nos territórios (Rede Profsaúde). Rio de Janeiro: Anais/Sessões temáticas/Profsaúde; 2020. p. 34-39.
• ⁵³
  Souza DTV, Stefanello S. "Anjos da Saúde": O telemonitoramento de idosos como estratégia de enfrentamento à COVID-19. In: Teixeira CP, Favoreto CAO, Santos DVD, Savassi LCM, Guilam MCR, Machado MFAS, Pinto MEB, organizadores. COVID-19 e Atenção Primária: as experiências nos territórios (Rede Profsaúde). Rio de Janeiro: Anais/Sessões temáticas/Profsaúde; 2020. p. 124-128.
• ⁵⁴
  Souza LAB, Neves HCC, Aredes NDA, Medeiros ICLJ, Silva GO, Ribeiro LCM. Nursing supervised curricular internship in the Covid-19 pandemic: experience in the program Brasil Conta Comigo. Rev Esc Enferm USP 2021; 55:e20210003.
• ⁵⁵
  Souza JP, Garcia EG, Nascimento AS, Brito RS, Greszgorn Júnior IL, Bonfim JM. Contribuições do programa mais médicos no enfrentamento da pandemia de covid-19 na Bahia. Rev Baiana Saude Publica 2021; 45:108-119.
• ⁵⁶
  Ximenes Neto FRG, Carvalho e Araújo CR, Silva RCC, Aguiar MR, Sousa LA, Serafim TF, Dorneles JA, Gadelha LA. Coordenação do cuidado, vigilância e monitoramento de casos da COVID-19 na Atenção Primária à Saúde. Enferm Foco (Brasília) 2020; 11(1):239-245.
• ⁵⁷
  Souza LB, Schir DG, Soccol KLS, Santos NOD, Marchiori MRCT. Estágio curricular supervisionado em enfermagem durante a pandemia de Coronavírus: experiências na atenção básica. J Nurs Health 2020; 10(4):20104017.
• ⁵⁸
  Meneses AS. Gerenciamento Emergencial de Recursos da Atenção Primária à Saúde no Enfrentamento à pandemia da COVID-19. SciELO Preprints; 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/SciELOPreprints.557.
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/SciELOPreprints.557.
• ⁵⁹
  Claudino LMZ, Albuquerque MIN, Macêdo VC, Campelo FMP, Fernandes GAS. Tecnologias de Informação e Comunicação: ferramenta de educação em saúde no contexto da COVID-19. APS Rev 2020; 4(1):27-36.
• ⁶⁰
  Coelho OCS, Ferreira ATM, Mendonça RD. Pandemia COVID-19 e Ações do Núcleo Ampliado de Saúde da Família e Atenção Básica na Rede SUS. APS Rev 2021; 3(3):156-167.
• ⁶¹
  Brasileiro HMLM, Monte CD, Santos WJ, Meira MA, Pereira ANX, Ramos RLL, Nascimento R, Morais AF, Feitosa EMC. Controle glicêmico à distância dos idosos diabéticos insulinizados: uma experiência da atuação do Núcleo de Apoio à Saúde da Família (NASF) em tempos de pandemia da COVID-19. APS Rev 2021; 3(3):168-175.
• ⁶²
  Becchi AC, Moisés SCC, Lovato NS, Harami GH, Alcântara VCS, Barbosa VCAA, Machado RA. Incentivo a prática da atividade física: estratégias do NASF em meio à Pandemia de Covid-19. APS Rev 2021; 3(3):176-181.
• ⁶³
  Fernandez M, Carvalho W, Borges V, Klitzke D, Tasca R. A Atenção Primária à Saúde e o enfrentamento à pandemia da COVID-19: um mapeamento das experiências brasileiras por meio da Iniciativa APS Forte. APS Rev 2021; 3(3):224-234.
• ⁶⁴
  Silveira JPM, Zonta R. Experiência de reorganização da APS para o enfrentamento da COVID-19 em Florianópolis. APS Rev 2020; 2:91-96.
• ⁶⁵
  Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Shamseer L, Tetzlaff JM, Akl EA, Brennan SE, Chou R, Glanville J, Grimshaw JM, Hróbjartsson A, Lalu MM, Li T, Loder EW, Mayo-Wilson E, McDonald S, McGuinness LA, Stewart LA, Thomas J, Tricco AC, Welch VA, Whiting P, Moher D. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021; 372:n71.
• ⁶⁶
  Sanine PR, Dias A, Machado DF, Zarili TFT, Carrapato JFL, Placideli N, Nunes LO, Mendonça CS, Castanheira ERL. Influência da gestão municipal na organização da atenção à saúde da criança em serviços de atenção primária do interior paulista. Cad Saude Publica 2021; 37:e00242219.
• ⁶⁷
  Feuerwerker LCM, organizador. Micropolítica e saúde: produção do cuidado, gestão e formação. Porto Alegre: Rede Unida; 2014.
• ⁶⁸
  Schraiber LB, Peduzzi M, Sala A, Nemes MIB, Castanhera ERL, Kon R. Planejamento, gestão e avaliação em saúde: identificando problemas. Cien Saude Colet 1999; 4:221-242.
• ⁶⁹
  Paim JS. Da teoria do processo de trabalho em saúde aos modelos de atenção. In: Ayres JRCM, Santos L. organizadores. Saúde, sociedade e história. São Paulo: Hucitec/Rede Unida; 2017. p. 375-392.
• ⁷⁰
  Seta MH, Ocke-Reis CO, Ramos ALP. Programa Previne Brasil: o ápice das ameaças à Atenção Primária à Saúde? Cien Saude Colet 2021; 26(Supl. 2):3781-3786.
• ⁷¹
  Brasil. Ministério da Saúde (MS). Portaria nº 2.979, de 12 de novembro de 2019. Institui o Programa Previne Brasil, que estabelece novo modelo de financiamento de custeio da Atenção Primária à Saúde no âmbito do SUS, alterando a Portaria de Consolidação nº 6/GM/MS, de 28 de setembro de 2017. Diário Oficial da União; 2019.

• Funding

  Project funded by FESIMA, linked to the SES-SP, under CAF No. 015/2021.

Chief editors:

Romeu Gomes, Antônio Augusto Moura da Silva

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  01 Dec 2023
• Date of issue
  Dec 2023

History

• Received
  07 June 2023
• Accepted
  21 Aug 2023
• Published
  23 Aug 2023