ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: In March 2020, we organized two tweet chats to discuss the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on people affected by chronic pain. The objective of this study is to evaluate the #CovidPain tweet chat activities that took place at the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We performed a quantitative analysis of the magnitude, range, engagement, and sentiment of each tweet chat. The data was extracted from Twitter and analyzed in Twitter Analytics and Symplur Signals using frequency and distributions. Then, we conducted a qualitative content analysis of the narrative tweets generated in response to the questions posted during the tweet chats. RESULTS: The two tweet chats attracted 2305 participants, which generated 4351 tweets. The participants were healthcare providers, patient advocates, researchers/academics, and caregivers. COVID-19 had both negative and positive impacts. The negative consequences of COVID-19 included the reduction of physical activity, canceled appointments and treatments, more isolation, deterioration of preexisting mental health problems, and economic consequences. The positive consequences included efficient use of telemedicine, innovative methods for self-management, and at-home interventions. CONCLUSION: Twitter and tweet chats are useful in involving a diverse group of stakeholders for taking a deep dive into the topical issues relevant to a community that might be disproportionately affected by a public health crisis.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The majority of patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 can be managed using virtual care. Dyspnoea is challenging to assess remotely, and the accuracy of subjective dyspnoea measures in capturing hypoxaemia have not been formally evaluated for COVID-19. We explored the accuracy of subjective dyspnoea in diagnosing hypoxaemia in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of consecutive outpatients with COVID-19 who met criteria for home oxygen saturation monitoring at a university-affiliated acute care hospital in Toronto, Canada from 3 April 2020 to 13 September 2020. Dyspnoea measures were treated as diagnostic tests, and we determined their sensitivity (SN), specificity (SP), negative/positive predictive value (NPV/PPV) and positive/negative likelihood ratios (+LR/-LR) for detecting hypoxaemia. In the primary analysis, hypoxaemia was defined by oxygen saturation <95%; the diagnostic accuracy of subjective dyspnoea was also assessed across a range of oxygen saturation cutoffs from 92% to 97%. RESULTS: During the study period, 89/501 (17.8%) of patients met criteria for home oxygen saturation monitoring, and of these 17/89 (19.1%) were diagnosed with hypoxaemia. The presence/absence of dyspnoea had limited accuracy for diagnosing hypoxaemia, with SN 47% (95% CI 24% to 72%), SP 80% (95% CI 68% to 88%), NPV 86% (95% CI 75% to 93%), PPV 36% (95% CI 18% to 59%), +LR 2.4 (95% CI 1.2 to 4.7) and -LR 0.7 (95% CI 0.4 to 1.1). The SN of dyspnoea was 50% (95% CI 19% to 81%) when a cut-off of <92% was used to define hypoxaemia. A modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea score >1 (SP 98%, 95% CI 88% to 100%), Roth maximal count <12 (SP 100%, 95% CI 75% to 100%) and Roth counting time <8 s (SP 93%, 95% CI 66% to 100%) had high SP that could be used to rule in hypoxaemia, but displayed low SN (≤50%). CONCLUSIONS: Subjective dyspnoea measures have inadequate accuracy for ruling out hypoxaemia in high-risk patients with COVID-19. Safe home management of patients with COVID-19 should incorporate home oxygenation saturation monitoring.