Will 'the feeling of abandonment' remain? Persisting impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic on rheumatology patients and clinicians

Prevalence and identification of neuropsychiatric symptoms in systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases: an international mixed methods study

OBJECTIVE

A limited range of neuropsychiatric symptoms have been reported in systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs), with varied symptom prevalence. This study aimed to investigate a wider range of potential symptoms than previous studies, compare patient self-reports with clinician estimates, and explore barriers to symptom identification.

METHODS

Mixed methods were used. Data from SARDs patients (n = 1853) were compared with controls (n = 463) and clinicians (n = 289). In-depth interviews (n = 113) were analysed thematically. Statistical tests compared means of survey items between patients and controls, 8 different SARD groups, and clinician specialities.

RESULTS

Self-reported lifetime prevalences of all 30 neuropsychiatric symptoms investigated (including cognitive, sensorimotor and psychiatric) were significantly higher in SARDs than controls. Validated instruments assessed 55% of SARDs patients as currently having depression and 57% anxiety. Barriers to identifying neuropsychiatric symptoms included: (i) limits to knowledge, guidelines, objective tests and inter-speciality cooperation; (ii) subjectivity, invisibility and believability of symptoms; and (iii) under-eliciting, under-reporting and under-documenting. A lower proportion of clinicians (4%) reported never/rarely asking patients about mental health symptoms than the 74% of patients who reported never/rarely being asked in clinic (P < 0.001). Over 50% of SARDs patients had never/rarely reported their mental health symptoms to clinicians, a proportion underestimated at <10% by clinicians (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Neuropsychiatric symptom self-reported prevalences are significantly higher in SARDs than controls, and are greatly underestimated by most clinicians. Research relying on medical records and current guidelines is unlikely to accurately reflect patients' experiences of neuropsychiatric symptoms. Improved inter-speciality communication and greater patient involvement is needed in SARD care and research.

Development and evaluation of a text analytics algorithm for automated application of national COVID-19 shielding criteria in rheumatology patients

INTRODUCTION

At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the UK's Scientific Committee issued extreme social distancing measures, termed 'shielding', aimed at a subpopulation deemed extremely clinically vulnerable to infection. National guidance for risk stratification was based on patients' age, comorbidities and immunosuppressive therapies, including biologics that are not captured in primary care records. This process required considerable clinician time to manually review outpatient letters. Our aim was to develop and evaluate an automated shielding algorithm by text-mining outpatient letter diagnoses and medications, reducing the need for future manual review.

METHODS

Rheumatology outpatient letters from a large UK foundation trust were retrieved. Free-text diagnoses were processed using Intelligent Medical Objects software (Concept Tagger), which used interface terminology for each condition mapped to Systematized Medical Nomenclature for Medicine-Clinical Terminology (SNOMED-CT) codes. We developed the Medication Concept Recognition tool (Named Entity Recognition) to retrieve medications' type, dose, duration and status (active/past) at the time of the letter. Age, diagnosis and medication variables were then combined to calculate a shielding score based on the most recent letter. The algorithm's performance was evaluated using clinical review as the gold standard. The time taken to deploy the developed algorithm on a larger patient subset was measured.

RESULTS

In total, 5942 free-text diagnoses were extracted and mapped to SNOMED-CT, with 13 665 free-text medications (n=803 patients). The automated algorithm demonstrated a sensitivity of 80% (95% CI: 75%, 85%) and specificity of 92% (95% CI: 90%, 94%). Positive likelihood ratio was 10 (95% CI: 8, 14), negative likelihood ratio was 0.21 (95% CI: 0.16, 0.28) and F1 score was 0.81. Evaluation of mismatches revealed that the algorithm performed correctly against the gold standard in most cases. The developed algorithm was then deployed on records from an additional 15 865 patients, which took 18 hours for data extraction and 1 hour to deploy.

DISCUSSION

An automated algorithm for risk stratification has several advantages including reducing clinician time for manual review to allow more time for direct care, improving efficiency and increasing transparency in individual patient communication. It has the potential to be adapted for future public health initiatives that require prompt automated review of hospital outpatient letters.

Telemedicine in specialist outpatient care during COVID-19: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 accelerated healthcare changes, introducing various telehealth services. Work is needed to determine the suitability of telemedicine in the post-pandemic era.

AIMS

To explore perceptions and experiences of telemedicine among patients and providers (clinicians and health administrators) who were involved in telemedicine appointments in hospital outpatient clinics in 2020-2022.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Qualitative study: semi-structured interviews were conducted with 37 participants (16 patients and 21 providers) in various hospital specialist outpatient clinics in a New South Wales local health district.

RESULTS

Patients were generally satisfied with telemedicine consultations, especially during COVID restrictions, because of the convenience of accessing care from home and minimising the risk of COVID exposure. However, patients considered that the inability to receive a physical examination was a significant disadvantage of telemedicine. Providers had ambivalent perceptions and expressed concerns about mis- and under-diagnoses because of the inability to conduct physical examinations. They considered telemedicine suitable for review appointments but noted an associated increased workload and stressed the need for sustainable funding models (Medicare items). Both patients and providers recognised the need for education/training and better integration of telemedicine platforms into existing infrastructure to facilitate an optimal hybrid model of care.

CONCLUSION

Despite expressing some concerns over its limitations, patients valued telemedicine for its convenience and for meeting their needs during the pandemic. While acknowledging that patients experienced some benefits from telemedicine, clinicians expressed concerns about potential missed diagnoses, uncertain clinical outcomes and lack of administrative and technological infrastructure. The ultimate test of telemedicine will be its impact on clinical outcomes versus longstanding models of in-person care.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the kidney community: lessons learned and future directions

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disproportionately affected patients with kidney disease, causing significant challenges in disease management, kidney research and trainee education. For patients, increased infection risk and disease severity, often complicated by acute kidney injury, have contributed to high mortality. Clinicians were faced with high clinical demands, resource shortages and novel ethical dilemmas in providing patient care. In this review, we address the impact of COVID-19 on the entire spectrum of kidney care, including acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, dialysis and transplantation, trainee education, disparities in health care, changes in health care policies, moral distress and the patient perspective. Based on current evidence, we provide a framework for the management and support of patients with kidney disease, infection mitigation strategies, resource allocation and support systems for the nephrology workforce.

Lessons from experiences of accessing healthcare during the pandemic for remobilising rheumatology services: a national mixed methods study

Objectives

To understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on access to healthcare services for patients with inflammatory and non-inflammatory MSK conditions.

Methods

Three established cohorts which included individuals with axial spondyloarthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and musculoskeletal pain completed a questionnaire between July and December 2020. In parallel, a subset of individuals participated in semi-structured interviews.

Results

1054 people (45% female, median age 59 years) were included in the quantitative analyses. Qualitative data included 447 free-text questionnaire responses and 23 interviews. 57% respondents had tried to access care since the start of UK national lockdown. Over a quarter reported being unable to book any type of healthcare appointment. GP appointments were less likely to be delayed or cancelled compared with hospital appointments. Younger age, unemployment/health-related retirement, DMARD therapy, anxiety or depression and being extremely clinically vulnerable was associated with a greater likelihood of attempting to access healthcare. People not in work, those reporting anxiety or depression and poorer quality of life were less likely to be satisfied with remotely-delivered healthcare. Participants valued clear, timely and transparent care pathways across primary care and specialist services. Whilst remote consultations were convenient for some, in-person appointments enabled physical assessment and facilitated development and maintenance of clinical relationships with care providers.

Conclusions

We have identified patient factors that predict access to and satisfaction with care, and aspects of care that patients value. This is important to inform remobilisation of rheumatology services to better meet the needs of patients.