When months matter; modelling the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnostic pathway of Motor Neurone Disease (MND).

BACKGROUND: A diagnosis of MND takes an average 10-16 months from symptom onset. Early diagnosis is important to access supportive measures to maximise quality of life. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant delays in NHS pathways; the majority of GP appointments now occur online with subsequent delays in secondary care assessment. Given the rapid progression of MND, patients may be disproportionately affected resulting in late stage new presentations. We used Monte Carlo simulation to model the pre-COVID-19 diagnostic pathway and then introduced plausible COVID-19 delays. METHODS: The diagnostic pathway was modelled using gamma distributions of time taken: 1) from symptom onset to GP presentation, 2) for specialist referral, and 3) for diagnosis reached after neurology appointment. We incorporated branches to simulate delays: when patients did not attend their GP and when the GP consultation did not result in referral. An emergency presentation was triggered when diagnostic pathway time was within 30 days of projected median survival. Total time-to-diagnosis was calculated over 100,000 iterations. The pre-COVID-19 model was estimated using published data and the Improving MND Care Survey 2019. We estimated COVID-19 delays using published statistics. RESULTS: The pre-COVID model reproduced known features of the MND diagnostic pathway, with a median time to diagnosis of 399 days and predicting 5.2% of MND patients present as undiagnosed emergencies. COVID-19 resulted in diagnostic delays from 558 days when only primary care was 25% delayed, to 915 days when both primary and secondary care were 75%. The model predicted an increase in emergency presentations ranging from 15.4%-44.5%. INTERPRETATIONS: The model suggests the COVID-19 pandemic will result in later-stage diagnoses and more emergency presentations of undiagnosed MND. Late-stage presentations may require rapid escalation to multidisciplinary care. Proactive recognition of acute and late-stage disease with altered service provision will optimise care for people with MND.

Neurology and neuropsychiatry of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the early literature reveals frequent CNS manifestations and key emerging narratives

There is accumulating evidence of the neurological and neuropsychiatric features of infection with SARS-CoV-2. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to describe the characteristics of the early literature and estimate point prevalences for neurological and neuropsychiatric manifestations. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL up to 18 July 2020 for randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies and case series. Studies reporting prevalences of neurological or neuropsychiatric symptoms were synthesised into meta-analyses to estimate pooled prevalence. 13 292 records were screened by at least two authors to identify 215 included studies, of which there were 37 cohort studies, 15 case-control studies, 80 cross-sectional studies and 83 case series from 30 countries. 147 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The symptoms with the highest prevalence were anosmia (43.1% (95% CI 35.2% to 51.3%), n = 15 975, 63 studies), weakness (40.0% (95% CI 27.9% to 53.5%), n = 221, 3 studies), fatigue (37.8% (95% CI 31.6% to 44.4%), n = 21 101, 67 studies), dysgeusia (37.2% (95% CI 29.8% to 45.3%), n = 13 686, 52 studies), myalgia (25.1% (95% CI 19.8% to 31.3%), n = 66 268, 76 studies), depression (23.0% (95% CI 11.8% to 40.2%), n = 43 128, 10 studies), headache (20.7% (95% CI 16.1% to 26.1%), n = 64 613, 84 studies), anxiety (15.9% (5.6% to 37.7%), n = 42 566, 9 studies) and altered mental status (8.2% (95% CI 4.4% to 14.8%), n = 49 326, 19 studies). Heterogeneity for most clinical manifestations was high.Neurological and neuropsychiatric symptoms of COVID-19 in the pandemic's early phase are varied and common. The neurological and psychiatric academic communities should develop systems to facilitate high-quality methodologies, including more rapid examination of the longitudinal course of neuropsychiatric complications of newly emerging diseases and their relationship to neuroimaging and inflammatory biomarkers. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Persistent neuropsychiatric symptoms after COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The nature and extent of persistent neuropsychiatric symptoms after COVID-19 are not established. To help inform mental health service planning in the pandemic recovery phase, we systematically determined the prevalence of neuropsychiatric symptoms in survivors of COVID-19. For this pre-registered systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO ID CRD42021239750), we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO to 20 February 2021, plus our own curated database. We included peer-reviewed studies reporting neuropsychiatric symptoms at post-acute or later time-points after COVID-19 infection and in control groups where available. For each study, a minimum of two authors extracted summary data. For each symptom, we calculated a pooled prevalence using generalized linear mixed models. Heterogeneity was measured with I 2. Subgroup analyses were conducted for COVID-19 hospitalization, severity and duration of follow-up. From 2844 unique titles, we included 51 studies (n = 18 917 patients). The mean duration of follow-up after COVID-19 was 77 days (range 14-182 days). Study quality was most commonly moderate. The most prevalent neuropsychiatric symptom was sleep disturbance [pooled prevalence = 27.4% (95% confidence interval 21.4-34.4%)], followed by fatigue [24.4% (17.5-32.9%)], objective cognitive impairment [20.2% (10.3-35.7%)], anxiety [19.1% (13.3-26.8%)] and post-traumatic stress [15.7% (9.9-24.1%)]. Only two studies reported symptoms in control groups, both reporting higher frequencies in COVID-19 survivors versus controls. Between-study heterogeneity was high (I 2 = 79.6-98.6%). There was little or no evidence of differential symptom prevalence based on hospitalization status, severity or follow-up duration. Neuropsychiatric symptoms are common and persistent after recovery from COVID-19. The literature on longer-term consequences is still maturing but indicates a particularly high prevalence of insomnia, fatigue, cognitive impairment and anxiety disorders in the first 6 months after infection.

"Neuropsychiatric disorders and COVID-19": Comment

Comments on an article by Maxime Taquet et al. (see record 2021-39396-023). Authors read with interest the Article by Maxime Taquet et al. At face value, this specific finding reported by Taquet et al. could indicate an important neuromuscular complication in COVID-19. Authors recommend that COVID-19- related neuromuscular complications are investigated in more detail. Neuromuscular disorders after COVID-19 might have substantial implications for patient recovery and utilization of physical rehabilitation health-care resources. In authors' view, critical illness myopathy might be the most likely explanation for this previously unrecognized, important finding. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)

The Unique Impact of COVID-19 on Human Gut Microbiome Research.

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted clinical trials globally, with unique implications for research into the human gut microbiome. In this mini-review, we explore the direct and indirect influences of the pandemic on the gut microbiome and how these can affect research and clinical trials. We explore the direct bidirectional relationships between the COVID-19 virus and the gut and lung microbiomes. We then consider the significant indirect effects of the pandemic, such as repeated lockdowns, increased hand hygiene, and changes to mood and diet, that could all lead to longstanding changes to the gut microbiome at an individual and a population level. Together, these changes may affect long term microbiome research, both in observational as well as in population studies, requiring urgent attention. Finally, we explore the unique implications for clinical trials using faecal microbiota transplants (FMT), which are increasingly investigated as potential treatments for a range of diseases. The pandemic introduces new barriers to participation in trials, while the direct and indirect effects laid out above can present a confounding factor. This affects recruitment and sample size, as well as study design and statistical analyses. Therefore, the potential impact of the pandemic on gut microbiome research is significant and needs to be specifically addressed by the research community and funders.