Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Autoimmun Rev ; 22(3): 103259, 2023 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2291252

ABSTRACT

Autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARD) can affect women and men during fertile age, therefore reproductive health is a priority issue in rheumatology. Many topics need to be considered during preconception counselling: fertility, the impact of disease-related factors on pregnancy outcomes, the influence of pregnancy on disease activity, the compatibility of medications with pregnancy and breastfeeding. Risk stratification and individualized treatment approach elaborated by a multidisciplinary team minimize the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes (APO). Research has been focused on identifying biomarkers that can be predictive of APO. Specifically, preeclampsia and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy tend to develop more frequently in women with ARD. Placental insufficiency can lead to intrauterine growth restriction and small-for-gestational age newborns. Such APO have been shown to be associated with maternal disease activity in different ARD. Therefore, a key message to be addressed to the woman wishing for a pregnancy and to her family is that treatment with compatible drugs is the best way to ensure maternal and fetal wellbeing. An increasing number of medications have entered the management of ARD, but data about their use in pregnancy and lactation are scarce. More information is needed for most biologic drugs and their biosimilars, and for the so-called small molecules, while there is sufficient evidence to recommend the use of TNF inhibitors if needed for keeping maternal disease under control. Other issues related to the reproductive journey have emerged as "unmet needs", such as sexual dysfunction, contraception, medically assisted reproduction techniques, long-term outcome of children, and they will be addressed in this review paper. Collaborative research has been instrumental to reach current knowledge and the future will bring novel insights thanks to pregnancy registries and prospective studies that have been established in several Countries and to their joint efforts in merging data.


Subject(s)
Autoimmune Diseases , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Rheumatic Diseases , Male , Child , Pregnancy , Female , Infant, Newborn , Humans , Prospective Studies , Reproductive Health , Placenta , Pregnancy Outcome , Autoimmune Diseases/complications , Autoimmune Diseases/therapy , Rheumatic Diseases/complications , Rheumatic Diseases/drug therapy
2.
ACR Open Rheumatol ; 4(10): 845-852, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1966021

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate a novel scoring system, the Encounter Appropriateness Score for You (EASY), to assess provider perceptions of telehealth appropriateness in rheumatology encounters. METHODS: The EASY scoring system prompts providers to rate their own encounters as follows: in-person or telehealth acceptable, EASY = 1; in-person preferred, EASY = 2; or telehealth preferred, EASY = 3. Assessment of the EASY scoring system occurred at a single academic institution from January 1, 2021, to August 31, 2021. Data were collected in three rounds: 1) initial survey (31 providers) assessing EASY responsiveness to five hypothetical scenarios, 2) follow-up survey (34 providers) exploring EASY responsiveness to 11 scenario modifications, and 3) assessment of EASYs documented in clinic care. RESULTS: The initial and follow-up surveys demonstrated responsiveness of EASYs to different clinical and nonclinical factors. For instance, less than 20% of providers accepted telehealth when starting a biologic for active rheumatoid arthritis, although more than 35% accepted telehealth in the same scenario if the patient lived far away or was well known to the provider. Regarding EASY documentation, 27 providers provided EASYs for 12,381 encounters. According to these scores, telehealth was acceptable or preferred for 29.7% of all encounters, including 21.4% of in-person encounters. Conversely, 24.4% of telehealth encounters were scored as in-person preferred. CONCLUSION: EASY is simple, understandable, and responsive to changes in the clinical scenario. We have successfully accumulated 12,381 EASYs that can be studied in future work to better understand telehealth utility and optimize telehealth triage.

3.
Lupus Science & Medicine ; 8(Suppl 2):A53, 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1504683

ABSTRACT

1205 Figure 1Respondents indicated which factors would have a positive influence on their likelihood of getting vaccinated against COVID-19;more than two-thirds of respondents indicated they would be more likely to pursue vaccination if they were presented with evidence of COVID-19 vaccine safety in lupus.[Figure omitted. See PDF]ConclusionsThese results indicate an opportunity for healthcare professionals and patient advocacy organizations to assuage unfounded patient concerns, such as vaccine interactions with medications or food allergies being a contraindication to COVID-19 vaccination, while reassuring patients that vaccine-triggered flares are rare.AcknowledgementWe would like to thank the Lupus Foundation of American for their partnership in this research.

4.
J Rheumatol ; 49(1): 110-114, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1478163

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To describe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and pregnancy outcomes in patients with rheumatic disease who were pregnant at the time of infection. METHODS: Since March 2020, the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance has collected cases of patients with rheumatic disease with COVID-19. We report details of pregnant women at the time of COVID-19 infection, including obstetric details separately ascertained from providers. RESULTS: We report on 39 patients, including 22 with obstetric detail available. The mean and median age was 33 years, range 24-45 years. Rheumatic disease diagnoses included rheumatoid arthritis (n = 9), systemic lupus erythematosus (n = 9), psoriatic arthritis/other inflammatory arthritides (n = 8), and antiphospholipid syndrome (n = 6). Most had a term birth (16/22), with 3 preterm births, 1 termination, and 1 miscarriage; 1 woman had yet to deliver at the time of report. One-quarter (n = 10/39) of pregnant women were hospitalized following COVID-19 diagnosis. Two of 39 (5%) required supplemental oxygen (both hospitalized); no patients died. The majority did not receive specific medication treatment for their COVID-19 (n = 32/39, 82%), and 7 patients received some combination of antimalarials, colchicine, anti-interleukin 1ß, azithromycin, glucocorticoids, and lopinavir/ritonavir. CONCLUSION: Women with rheumatic diseases who were pregnant at the time of COVID-19 had favorable outcomes. These data have limitations due to the small size and methodology; however, they provide cautious optimism for pregnancy outcomes for women with rheumatic disease particularly in comparison to the increased risk of poor outcomes that have been reported in other series of pregnant women with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Rheumatic Diseases , Rheumatology , Adult , COVID-19 Testing , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Middle Aged , Pregnancy , Pregnant Women , Rheumatic Diseases/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
5.
Am Heart J ; 231: 1-5, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-893408

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic brought about abrupt changes in the way health care is delivered, and the impact of transitioning outpatient clinic visits to telehealth visits on processes of care and outcomes is unclear. METHODS: We evaluated ordering patterns during cardiovascular telehealth clinic visits in the Duke University Health System between March 15 and June 30, 2020 and 30-day outcomes compared with in-person visits in the same time frame in 2020 and in 2019. RESULTS: Within the Duke University Health System, there was a 33.1% decrease in the number of outpatient cardiovascular visits conducted in the first 15 weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic, compared with the same time period in 2019. As a proportion of total visits initially booked, 53% of visits were cancelled in 2020 compared to 35% in 2019. However, patients with cancelled visits had similar demographics and comorbidities in 2019 and 2020. Telehealth visits comprised 9.3% of total visits initially booked in 2020, with younger and healthier patients utilizing telehealth compared with those utilizing in-person visits. Compared with in-person visits in 2020, telehealth visits were associated with fewer new (31.6% for telehealth vs 44.6% for in person) or refill (12.9% vs 15.6%, respectively) medication prescriptions, electrocardiograms (4.3% vs 31.4%), laboratory orders (5.9% vs 21.8%), echocardiograms (7.3% vs 98%), and stress tests (4.4% vs 6.6%). When adjusted for age, race, and insurance status, those who had a telehealth visit or cancelled their visit were less likely to have an emergency department or hospital encounter within 30 days compared with those who had in-person visits (adjusted rate ratios (aRR) 0.76 [95% 0.65, 0.89] and aRR 0.71 [95% 0.65, 0.78], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In response to the perceived risks of routine medical care affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, different phenotypes of patients chose different types of outpatient cardiology care. A better understanding of these differences could help define necessary and appropriate mode of care for cardiology patients.


Subject(s)
Ambulatory Care , COVID-19 , Cardiovascular Diseases , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Infection Control/methods , Telemedicine , Ambulatory Care/methods , Ambulatory Care/organization & administration , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cardiology/trends , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/therapy , Electronic Health Records/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
7.
J Rheumatol ; 2020 May 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-251108

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To characterize hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) exposure in patients with rheumatic disease receiving longterm HCQ compared to target concentrations with reported antiviral activity against the coronavirus disease 2019 caused by SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19). METHODS: We evaluated total HCQ concentrations in serum and plasma from published literature values, frozen serum samples from a pediatric systemic lupus erythematosus trial, and simulated concentrations using a published pharmacokinetic model during pregnancy. For each source, we compared observed or predicted HCQ concentrations to target concentrations with reported antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: The average total serum/plasma HCQ concentrations were below the lowest SARS-CoV-2 target of 0.48 mg/l in all studies. Assuming the highest antiviral target exposure (total plasma concentration of 4.1 mg/l), all studies had about one-tenth the necessary concentration for in vitro viral inhibition. Pharmacokinetic model simulations confirmed that pregnant adults receiving common dosing for rheumatic diseases did not achieve target exposures; however, the models predict that a dosage of 600 mg once a day during pregnancy would obtain the lowest median target exposure for most patients after the first dose. CONCLUSION: We found that the average patient receiving treatment with HCQ for rheumatic diseases, including children and non-pregnant/pregnant adults, are unlikely to achieve total serum or plasma concentrations shown to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 in vitro. Nevertheless, patients receiving HCQ long term may have tissue concentrations far exceeding that of serum/plasma. Because the therapeutic window for HCQ in the setting of SARS-CoV-2 is unknown, well-designed clinical trials that include patients with rheumatic disease are urgently needed to characterize the efficacy, safety, and target exposures for HCQ.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL