ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic has been a stress test for the population, especially for people with chronic disorders such as Parkinson's disease (PD). In addition to public health restrictions that contrast with PD management recommendations, there were deep changes in health care delivery. This retrospective study evaluates the impact of COVID-19 on the clinical and functional evolution of a cohort of 221 PD patients consecutively referred to the Movement Disorders Center between 2018 and 2021. We analyzed the trend in motor and non-motor symptoms and functional status across years based on the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) and Non-Motor Symptom Scale (NMSS). We also compared the number of emerging complications, neurologic visits, and rehabilitation sessions per subject per year. In 2020, all primary endpoint measures worsened compared to 2019, without age, disease duration, or greater neurologic impairment explaining this outcome. Concurrently, the percentage of patients receiving neurologic visits or rehabilitation sessions reduced by 53% and 58%, respectively. The subgroup analysis of 167 subjects revealed that those who received at least one cycle of rehabilitation sessions in 2020 maintained their independence level. These findings lead to emphasizing the importance of regular monitoring and rehabilitation delivery in people with chronic neurological disorders.
ABSTRACT
COVID-19 pandemic is creating collateral damage to outpatients, whose rehabilitation services have been disrupted in most of the European countries. Telemedicine has been advocated as a possible solution. This paper reports the contents of the third Italian Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (SIMFER) webinar on "experiences from the field" COVID-19 impact on rehabilitation ("Covinars"). It provides readily available, first-hand information about the application of telemedicine in rehabilitation. The experiences reported were very different for population (number and health conditions), interventions, professionals, service payment, and technologies used. Commonalities included the pushing need due to the emergency, previous experiences, and a dynamic research and innovation environment. Lights included feasibility, results, reduction of isolation, cost decrease, stimulation to innovation, satisfaction of patients, families, and professionals beyond the starting diffidence. Shadows included that telemedicine can integrate but will never substitute face-to-face rehabilitation base on the encounter among human beings; age, and technology barriers (devices absence, bad connection and human diffidence) have also been reported. Possible issues included privacy and informed consent, payments, cultural difficulties in understanding that telemedicine is a real rehabilitation intervention. There was a final agreement that this experience will be incorporated by participants in their future services: technology is ready, but the real challenge is to change PRM physicians' and patients' habits, while better specific regulation is warranted.