Minimal effects from injunctive norm and contentiousness treatments on COVID-19 vaccine intentions: evidence from 3 countries.

Does information about how other people feel about COVID-19 vaccination affect immunization intentions? We conducted preregistered survey experiments in Great Britain (5,456 respondents across 3 survey waves from September 2020 to February 2021), Canada (1,315 respondents in February 2021), and the state of New Hampshire in the United States (1,315 respondents in January 2021). The experiments examine the effects of providing accurate public opinion information to people about either public support for COVID-19 vaccination (an injunctive norm) or public beliefs that the issue is contentious. Across all 3 countries, exposure to this information had minimal effects on vaccination intentions even among people who previously held inaccurate beliefs about support for COVID-19 vaccination or its perceived contentiousness. These results suggest that providing information on public opinion about COVID vaccination has limited additional effect on people's behavioral intentions when public discussion of vaccine uptake and intentions is highly salient.

Outcomes of COVID-19 in people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease in Ireland over the first 2 years of the pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Poor COVID-19 outcomes occur with higher frequency in people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMD). Better understanding of the factors involved is crucial to informing patients and clinicians regarding risk mitigation. AIM: To describe COVID-19 outcomes for people with RMD in Ireland over the first 2 years of the pandemic. METHODS: Data entered into the C19-GRA provider registry from Ireland between 24th March 2020 and 31st March 2022 were analysed. Differences in the likelihood of hospitalisation and mortality according to demographic and clinical variables were investigated. RESULTS: Of 237 cases included, 59.9% were female, 95 (41.3%) were hospitalised, and 22 (9.3%) died. Hospitalisation was more common with increasing age, gout, smoking, long-term glucocorticoid use, comorbidities, and specific comorbidities of cardiovascular and pulmonary disease, and cancer. Hospitalisation was less frequent in people with inflammatory arthritis and conventional synthetic or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug use. Hospitalisation had a U-shaped relationship with disease activity, being more common in both high disease activity and remission. Mortality was more common with increasing age, gout, smoking, long-term glucocorticoid use, comorbidities, and specific comorbidities of cardiovascular disease, pulmonary disease, and obesity. Inflammatory arthritis was less frequent in those who died. CONCLUSION: Hospitalisation or death were more frequently experienced by RMD patients with increasing age, certain comorbidities including potentially modifiable ones, and certain medications and diagnoses amongst other factors. These are important 'indicators' that can help risk-stratify and inform the management of RMD patients.

Temporal trends in COVID-19 outcomes in people with rheumatic diseases in Ireland: data from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance registry.

OBJECTIVES: Although evidence is accumulating globally, data on outcomes in rheumatic disease and COVID-19 in Ireland are limited. We used data from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance (C19-GRA) to describe time-varying COVID-19 outcomes for people with rheumatic disease in Ireland. METHODS: Data entered into the C19-GRA provider registry from Ireland between 24 March 2020 and 9 July 2021 were analysed. Differences in the likelihood of hospitalization and mortality according to demographic and clinical variables were investigated using Chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test, as appropriate. Trends in odds of hospitalization and mortality over time were investigated using logistic regression with the time period as a categorical variable. RESULTS: Of 212 cases included, 59.4% were female and median age was 58.0 years (range 13-96). Of the 212 cases, 92 (43%) were hospitalized and 22 (10.4%) died. Increasing age, a diagnosis of gout, ever smoking, glucocorticoid use, having comorbidities and specific comorbidities of cancer, cardiovascular and pulmonary disease were more common in those hospitalized. A diagnosis of inflammatory arthritis, csDMARD and/or b/tsDMARD use were less frequent in those hospitalized. Increasing age, a diagnosis of gout, ever smoking, having comorbidities and specific comorbidities of obesity, cardiovascular and pulmonary disease were more common in those who died. Odds of hospitalization or mortality did not change over time. CONCLUSION: No temporal trend was observed in either COVID-19-related hospitalization or mortality outcomes for people with rheumatic disease in Ireland.

The ephemeral effects of fact-checks on COVID-19 misperceptions in the United States, Great Britain and Canada.

Widespread misperceptions about COVID-19 and the novel coronavirus threaten to exacerbate the severity of the pandemic. We conducted preregistered survey experiments in the United States, Great Britain and Canada examining the effectiveness of fact-checks that seek to correct these false or unsupported beliefs. Across three countries with differing levels of political conflict over the pandemic response, we demonstrate that fact-checks reduce targeted misperceptions, especially among the groups who are most vulnerable to these claims, and have minimal spillover effects on the accuracy of related beliefs. However, these reductions in COVID-19 misperception beliefs do not persist over time in panel data even after repeated exposure. These results suggest that fact-checks can successfully change the COVID-19 beliefs of the people who would benefit from them most but that their effects are ephemeral.

Predictors of hospitalization in patients with rheumatic disease and COVID-19 in Ireland: data from the COVID-19 global rheumatology alliance registry.

OBJECTIVES: Given the limited data regarding the risk of hospitalization in patients with rheumatic disease and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Ireland, we used the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance (GRA) registry data to study outcomes and their predictors. The primary objective was to explore potential predictors of hospitalization. METHODS: We examined data on patients and their disease-related characteristics entered in the COVID-19 GRA provider registry from Ireland (from 24 March 2020 to 31 August 2020). Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the association of demographic and clinical characteristics with hospitalization. RESULTS: Of 105 patients, 47 (45.6%) were hospitalized and 10 (9.5%) died. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that age [odds ratio (OR) = 1.06, 95% CI 1.01, 1.10], number of co-morbidities (OR = 1.93, 95% CI 1.11, 3.35) and glucocorticoid use (OR = 15.01, 95% CI 1.77, 127.16) were significantly associated with hospitalization. A diagnosis of inflammatory arthritis was associated with lower odds of hospitalization (OR = 0.09, 95% CI 0.02, 0.32). CONCLUSION: Increasing age, co-morbidity burden and glucocorticoid use were associated with hospitalization, whereas a diagnosis of inflammatory arthritis was associated with lower odds of hospitalization.

Emotional Fatigue, Psychological Distress, and Clinically Significant Depression Associated with Being a COVID-19 Frontline Healthcare Worker

The purpose of this study was to empirically examine emotional fatigue, psychological distress, and clinically significant depression associated with being a COVID-19 frontline healthcare worker. Building our argument by drawing on data collected from ACHA, BMA, Chapman University, Ginger, HMN, ICF, IPPR, Pew Research Center, UPMC, and YouGov, we performed analyses and made estimates regarding emotional and psychosocial distress in COVID-19 frontline medical staff. The structural equation modeling technique was used to test the research model.

Fast and safe: Optimising multiple sclerosis infusions during COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic challenges multiple sclerosis services to be innovative in delivering infusible therapies. To reduce time in clinical settings, and potential staff or space losses, we implemented rapid infusion protocols for selected patients. OBJECTIVE: To analyse the rate of infusion related reactions and patient experience of rapid infusions of natalizumab and ocrelizumab. To document time reduction patients spent in clinical settings during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Patients with prior exposure to at least three natalizumab or two 300mg ocrelizumab infusions were approved for rapid protocols. A retrospective audit and survey were completed. RESULTS: We analysed 269 rapid natalizumab infusions and 100 rapid ocrelizumab infusions. Infusion related reactions during the natalizumab or ocrelizumab infusions occurred in two patients (1.52%) and eight patients (8%), respectively. All infusion related reactions were mild to moderate and did not require infusion discontinuation. No infusion reactions occurred during the post-infusion observation. Patient experience was positive. CONCLUSION: Frequency or severity of infusion related reactions in rapid infusions were no different compared to published data. In the setting of COVID-19, pandemic rapid infusion protocols could potentially save hospital resources and limit patient exposure to a high-risk clinical setting while still maintaining ongoing treatment of multiple sclerosis.

Evaluating the perspective of patients with MS and related conditions on their DMT in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic in one MS centre in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with Multiple Sclerosis (MS) and on disease modifying therapies (DMTs) that can be immunosuppressive or immunomodulatory form a special group where risk of continuation of DMT needs to be taken into account with risk of contracting Covid-19. This concept can pose a degree of anxiety for patients as well as neurologists. We aimed to evaluate patient perspectives regarding the use of Natalizumab and anti-CD20 therapies (Rituximab and Ocrelizumab) in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: cross-sectional study conducted via voluntary survey filled in by patients with MS and related disorders receiving their infusional treatment in one MS centre in Australia, exploring their concerns regarding their therapy, their therapy and COVID-19, precautions undertaken in response to the pandemic, and factors impacting their decision-making. RESULTS: 170 patients completed the survey. Of patients on Natalizumab, the majority had either no or mild concern regarding their DMT and COVID-19, and of patients on B-cell depleting therapies, again, the majority had no or mild concern, though a slightly higher proportion had a moderate level of concern. Asked to delineate their concerns, an increased risk of contracting COVID-19 was more commonly conveyed than MS-specific factors or poor outcomes pertaining to COVID-19 if contracted, by patients in both groups. Conversely, being invited to specifically consider the possibility of contracting COVID-19 or experience a relapse of MS, almost half of the cohort rated both of equal of concern. More than half of the cohort were self-isolating more stringently than general government advice and government-related resources followed by information provided by patient's neurologist where the commonest means of information to guide decision making. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst a large proportion of patients had some concern regarding the impact of their DMT on COVID-19, whether on their risk of contracting COVID-19 or a theoretical risk for more severe disease, the overall level of concern in most cases was at most mild. Patients on B-cell depleting therapies were more inclined to express a higher level of concern. A similar concern was ascribed to a risk of a relapse or worsening MS symptoms compared to the risk of contracting COVID-19. Such attitudes may underscore a willingness of patients to continue their DMT where benefits outweigh risks during future phases of the COVID-19 pandemic.

American Neurotology Society, American Otological Society, and American Academy of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Foundation Guide to Enhance Otologic and Neurotologic Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

: This combined American Neurotology Society, American Otological Society, and American Academy of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery Foundation document aims to provide guidance during the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) on 1) "priority" of care for otologic and neurotologic patients in the office and operating room, and 2) optimal utilization of personal protective equipment. Given the paucity of evidence to inform otologic and neurotologic best practices during COVID-19, the recommendations herein are based on relevant peer-reviewed articles, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention COVID-19 guidelines, United States and international hospital policies, and expert opinion. The suggestions presented here are not meant to be definitive, and best practices will undoubtedly change with increasing knowledge and high-quality data related to COVID-19. Interpretation of this guidance document is dependent on local factors including prevalence of COVID-19 in the surgeons' local community. This is not intended to set a standard of care, and should not supersede the clinician's best judgement when managing specific clinical concerns and/or regional conditions.Access to otologic and neurotologic care during and after the COVID-19 pandemic is dependent upon adequate protection of physicians, audiologists, and ancillary support staff. Otolaryngologists and associated staff are at high risk for COVID-19 disease transmission based on close contact with mucosal surfaces of the upper aerodigestive tract during diagnostic evaluation and therapeutic procedures. While many otologic and neurotologic conditions are not imminently life threatening, they have a major impact on communication, daily functioning, and quality of life. In addition, progression of disease and delay in treatment can result in cranial nerve deficits, intracranial and life-threatening complications, and/or irreversible consequences. In this regard, many otologic and neurotologic conditions should rightfully be considered "urgent," and almost all require timely attention to permit optimal outcomes. It is reasonable to proceed with otologic and neurotologic clinic visits and operative cases based on input from expert opinion of otologic care providers, clinic/hospital administration, infection prevention and control specialists, and local and state public health leaders. Significant regional variations in COVID-19 prevalence exist; therefore, physicians working with local municipalities are best suited to make determinations on the appropriateness and timing of otologic and neurotologic care.