ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The aim was to determine the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on access to health care among patients with scleroderma and to analyse the economic and psychosocial impacts and the infection prevention measures taken by them during the pandemic. METHODS: A 25-item questionnaire designed to assess the components of the objectives was tele-administered between October 2020 and January 2021 to the patients enrolled in the Indian Progressive Systemic Sclerosis Registry. RESULTS: Of the 428 patients in the registry, 336 took part in the study. A scheduled outpatient visit was missed by 310 (92.3%) patients, and 75 (22.3%) skipped prescription drugs. During the pandemic, 75 (22.3%) had a family member lose a job. Financial difficulties were reported by 155 (46.1%), with 116 (34.5%) patients having to spend an additional INR 4000 (2000-10 000) [USD 54.9 (27.0-137.4)] to continue treatment. Although 35 patients (10.4%) had at least one symptom suggestive of COVID-19, infection was confirmed in only 4. None of them needed hospitalization or had adverse outcomes. Worsening of scleroderma was seen in 133 (39.6%) individuals, with 15 (4.5%) requiring hospitalization. Most (96%) of the patients were aware of infection prevention measures, and 91 (27.1%) had taken unproven prophylactic medications. CONCLUSION: Individuals with scleroderma in India have been affected during the pandemic owing to closure of hospital services, lack of transport, loss of jobs and the additional financial burden. Health-care providers should continue to educate patients to stay on their medications and encourage them to be vaccinated for COVID-19.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To assess acceptability of teleconsultation among the socioeconomically marginalized sections of patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs), to identify the socioeconomic barriers in continuing rheumatology care during the COVID-19 crisis and to identify patients who could benefit by shifting to tele-rheumatology consultations. METHODS: This was a cross sectional analytical study done at a tertiary care teaching hospital in India including patients with RMDs who were not on biological diseases modifying agents. Assessment of disease status, socioeconomic status and economic impact of COVID-19 was done via tele-consultation. RESULTS: Out of the 680 patients satisfying inclusion criteria, 373 completed the study. The format was found easy by 334 (89.6%) of them and 284 (76.1%) considered tele-rheumatology better than in-person consultation. During the pre-COVID months, the median monthly per capita income of the families of our patients and cost of illness was Indian rupees (INR) 2000 (US$ 26) and INR 1685 (US$ 21.91), respectively. Families whose financial needs were met (OR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.239, 0.598) or those with schooling upto at least secondary school (OR = 0.442, 95% CI: 0.260, 0.752) (P =0.002) were less likely to stop prescription drugs. In a hypothetical model, 289 (77.4%) could be successfully switched to tele-rheumatology follow-up. CONCLUSION: The acceptability of tele-rheumatology among socioeconomically marginalized patients with RMDs is good. During times of crisis, patients from poorer strata of society and lower educational background are likely to abruptly stop medications. Switching to a telemedicine-based hybrid model is likely to improve drug adherence with substantial savings on loss of pay and out of pocket expenditure.