Recommendations on the management of adult patients with rheumatic diseases in the context of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 infection. Colombian Association of Rheumatology

Characteristics of patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases hospitalized for SARS-CoV-2 infection

Background

Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID) predispose to a higher infection risk by modifying the host's immune response, which acts as a key factor in SARS-CoV-2 infection resolution. Recent publications show that IMID patients and its treatments do not worsen the outcome of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Objectives

To describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with IMID who required hospital admission due to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Secondly, to compare clinical characteristics and outcomes between patients who required hospital admission due to SARS-CoV-2 infection with IMID and those who were not affected.

Methods

We performed an observational retrospective cohort study, including admitted patients with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection, treated according to medical criteria and local protocols based on the best available scientific evidence. Clinical data were collected from their electronical clinical history. Statistical analysis determined the differences in the characteristics and clinical outcome of the infection in IMID patients.

Results

Of a total number of 612 revised patients, 23 had an IMID and 9 of them were positive for the SARS-CoV-2 infection. We did not observe a correlation between these two disorders. There was a higher frequency of obesity and cardiovascular disease among IMID patients, but without statistical significance. The clinical outcomes were no different between hospitalized IMID and non IMID patients.

Conclusion

IMID and its treatments do not determine the outcome of patients admitted with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on patients with rheumatic diseases in Latin America

The objective of our study was to describe knowledge, attitudes and practices of Latin-American rheumatology patients regarding management and follow-up of their disease during COVID-19 pandemic. A cross-sectional observational study was conducted using a digital anonymous survey. Rheumatic patients ≥ 18 years from non-English-speaking PANLAR countries were included. Our survey included 3502 rheumatic patients living in more than 19 Latin-American countries. Median age of patients was 45.8(36-55) years and the majority (88.9%) was female. Most frequently self-reported disease was rheumatoid arthritis (48.4%). At least one anti-rheumatic treatment was suspended by 23.4% of patients. Fear of contracting SARS-Cov2 (27.7%) and economic issues (25%) were the most common reasons for drug discontinuation. Self-rated disease activity increased from 30 (7-50) to 45 (10-70) points during the pandemic. Communication with their rheumatologist during the pandemic was required by 55.6% of patients, mainly by telephone calls (50.2%) and social network messages (47.8%). An adequate knowledge about COVID-19 was observed in 43% of patients. Patients with rheumatic diseases in Latin America were negatively affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. An increase in self-rated disease activity, a reduction in medication adherence, and hurdles for medical follow-up were reported. Teleconsultation was perceived as a valid alternative to in-person visits during the pandemic.

Delphi methodology in healthcare research: How to decide its appropriateness

The Delphi technique is a systematic process of forecasting using the collective opinion of panel members. The structured method of developing consensus among panel members using Delphi methodology has gained acceptance in diverse fields of medicine. The Delphi methods assumed a pivotal role in the last few decades to develop best practice guidance using collective intelligence where research is limited, ethically/logistically difficult or evidence is conflicting. However, the attempts to assess the quality standard of Delphi studies have reported significant variance, and details of the process followed are usually unclear. We recommend systematic quality tools for evaluation of Delphi methodology; identification of problem area of research, selection of panel, anonymity of panelists, controlled feedback, iterative Delphi rounds, consensus criteria, analysis of consensus, closing criteria, and stability of the results. Based on these nine qualitative evaluation points, we assessed the quality of Delphi studies in the medical field related to coronavirus disease 2019. There was inconsistency in reporting vital elements of Delphi methods such as identification of panel members, defining consensus, closing criteria for rounds, and presenting the results. We propose our evaluation points for researchers, medical journal editorial boards, and reviewers to evaluate the quality of the Delphi methods in healthcare research.

Delphi methodology in healthcare research: How to decide its appropriateness

The Delphi technique is a systematic process of forecasting using the collective opinion of panel members. The structured method of developing consensus among panel members using Delphi methodology has gained acceptance in diverse fields of medicine. The Delphi methods assumed a pivotal role in the last few decades to develop best practice guidance using collective intelligence where research is limited, ethically/logistically difficult or evidence is conflicting. However, the attempts to assess the quality standard of Delphi studies have reported significant variance, and details of the process followed are usually unclear. We recommend systematic quality tools for evaluation of Delphi methodology; identification of problem area of research, selection of panel, anonymity of panelists, controlled feedback, iterative Delphi rounds, consensus criteria, analysis of consensus, closing criteria, and stability of the results. Based on these nine qualitative evaluation points, we assessed the quality of Delphi studies in the medical field related to coronavirus disease 2019. There was inconsistency in reporting vital elements of Delphi methods such as identification of panel members, defining consensus, closing criteria for rounds, and presenting the results. We propose our evaluation points for researchers, medical journal editorial boards, and reviewers to evaluate the quality of the Delphi methods in healthcare research.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Rheumatology Practice in Latin America

OBJECTIVE

To describe the effect of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on Latin American rheumatologists from a professional, economic, and occupational point of view.

METHODS

We conducted an observational cross-sectional study using an online survey sent to rheumatologists of each non-English-speaking country member of the Pan American League of Rheumatology Associations (PANLAR). A specific questionnaire was developed.

RESULTS

Our survey included 1097 rheumatologists from 19 Latin American countries. Median (IQR) age of respondents was 48 (40-59) years and 618 (56.3%) were female. Duration of practice since graduation as a rheumatologist was 17 years, and 585 (53.3%) were aged < 50 years. Most rheumatologists worked in private practice (81.8%) and almost half worked in institutional outpatient centers (55%) and inpatient care (49.9%). The median number of weekly hours (IQR) of face-to-face practice before the pandemic was 27 (15-40) hours, but was reduced to 10 (5-20) hours during the pandemic. Telehealth was used by 866 (78.9%) respondents during the pandemic. Most common methods of communication were video calls (555; 50.6%), telephone calls (499; 45.5%), and WhatsApp voice calls (423; 38.6%). A reduction in monthly wages was reported by 946 (86.2%) respondents. Consultation fees also were reduced and 88 (8%) rheumatologists stated they had lost their jobs. A reduction in patient adherence to medication was reported by nearly 50% of respondents. Eighty-one (7.4%) rheumatologists received a COVID-19 diagnosis and 7 (8.6%) of them were hospitalized.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic has reshaped rheumatology practice in Latin America and has had a profound effect on rheumatologists' behaviors and clinical practice.

Characteristics of Patients With Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases Hospitalized for SARS-CoV-2 Infection

BACKGROUND

Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID) predispose to a higher infection risk by modifying the host's immune response, which acts as a key factor in SARS-CoV-2 infection resolution. Recent publications show that IMID patients and its treatments do not worsen the outcome of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with IMID who required hospital admission due to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Secondly, to compare clinical characteristics and outcomes between patients who required hospital admission due to SARS-CoV-2 infection with IMID and those who were not affected.

METHODS

We performed an observational retrospective cohort study, including admitted patients with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection, treated according to medical criteria and local protocols based on the best available scientific evidence. Clinical data were collected from their electronical clinical history. Statistical analysis determined the differences in the characteristics and clinical outcome of the infection in IMID patients.

RESULTS

Of a total number of 612 revised patients, 23 had an IMID and 9 of them were positive for the SARS-CoV-2 infection. We did not observe a correlation between these two disorders. There was a higher frequency of obesity and cardiovascular disease among IMID patients, but without statistical significance. The clinical outcomes were no different between hospitalized IMID and non IMID patients.

CONCLUSION

IMID and its treatments do not determine the outcome of patients admitted with SARS-CoV-2 infection.