ABSTRACT
Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic rapidly and drastically required the shift of healthcare services from face-to- face delivery to telepractice modalities. This was a key strategy to maintain and complement healthcare services disrupted by the pandemic, revealing the need for a higher emphasis on telepractice in speech-language- hearing services. We synthesized existing evidence on the effectiveness of speech-language teleinterventions delivered via videoconferencing to users of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) devices. Patients and methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in ten electronic databases, from inception until August 2021. Included were speech-language teleinterventions delivered by researchers and/or clinicians via videoconferencing to users of AAC systems, without restrictions on chronological age and clinical diagnosis. Quality of the included studies was appraised using the Downs and Brown's checklist, and risk of bias was assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-I). Results: Six teleinterventions involving 25 participants met inclusion criteria. Five studies used a single-subject design and one was a cohort study. Interventions included active consultation (n = 2), functional communication training (n = 2), brain computer interface (n = 1), and both tele-and on-site intervention (n = 1). All teleinterventions reported an increase in participants' independent use of AAC systems during the training sessions compared to baseline, and an overall high satisfaction and treatment acceptability. Conclusion: Speech-language teleinterventions for users of AAC systems show a great potential of a successful method of service delivery. Future teleintervention studies with larger sample sizes and more robust methodology are strongly encouraged to allow generalization of results across different populations.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Belgium was one of the hardest hit countries during the COVID-19 pandemic. Measures and restrictions were imperative to abate spreading of COVID-19. This study aimed to gain insights into the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the accompanying restrictions on children with disabilities, their caregivers, and service providers/professionals in Belgium. Patients and Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study of two voluntary-response sample surveys was carried out by the European Academy of Childhood Disability. 254 caregivers of individuals with childhood-onset disability and 279 professionals working in this field, living in Belgium, completed an online survey between April-May 2020 on the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and the accompanying restrictions. Quantitative analyses of survey responses were performed at group level for each survey. Results: 85% of the caregivers reported a reduced amount of therapy received per week in the survey period compared to before the COVID-19 crisis. 68% of the caregivers stated that less than 1 hour of therapy per week was provided during the survey period, compared to only 5% before the pandemic restrictions. 79% of the professionals noticed a physical health impact and 92% a mental health impact on individuals with a childhood-onset disability. Conclusion: Caregivers reported a strong decline in the amount of received therapy for people with a childhood-onset disability, while professionals reported noticing a physical and mental health impact. More insights into the (long-term) effects of the COVID-19 pandemic are warranted to provide best possible care and support for future health crises, other serious or daily events.
ABSTRACT
Beginning with the final of 2019, the whole world has faced the challenges of a new disease. Each country has dealt with it in a proper way, but all of them adopted radical measures for the sectors major affected. One of the sectors that have been immobilized is tourism. Despite the Romanian tourism it is not a significant contributor to Gross Domestic Product, the lockdown had many strong effects. The present paper contains three main components: the analysis of the hotel, restaurant, and travel industry (the industry evolution between 2014–2019, the analysis of the correlation of the sector with the other sectors of the national economy—Leontief model);the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the industry (social and economic impacts) and the plan of proposed measures to reduce the effects of COVID-19 and to relaunch the field in the short and medium terms (measures proposals for large companies and for small and medium enterprises and households, etc.). The aim of this paper is to study the situation of hotel, restaurant, and travel industry in Romania and to find the solutions to restart the activity safely. © 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the visual acuity, quality of vision and patient reported outcomes for patients that were either bilaterally implanted with a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) or an extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOL. DESIGN: Single site, prospective, non-interventional, masked, two-arm comparative study. METHODS: Subjects who had prior uncomplicated cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of one of the lenses above were evaluated. Subjects in each group were assessed during a single visit. The uncorrected and best distance-corrected binocular near (40 cm), intermediate (60 cm), and distance visual acuity (VA) were measured, along with a spectacle independence questionnaire, a quality of vision questionnaire and contrast sensitivity measured in both mesopic and photopic conditions. RESULTS: The study included 23 EDOF and 25 trifocal subjects. Binocular Uncorrected VAs were similar at distance and intermediate, but about 1.5 lines better at near with the trifocal (p < 0.001). Binocular best corrected distance - VA was significantly better with the EDOF lens (0.5 lines, p < 0.001), though the mean VA was better than 20/20 in both groups. Distance-corrected intermediate and near VA were significantly better with the trifocal IOL (1 line and 1.5 lines respectively, p < 0.001). Significantly more trifocal subjects had 20/25 or better VA at all three test distances (64% vs 4%, p<0.001). Patient reported spectacle independence was significantly higher in the trifocal group, driven primarily by differences in near vision. Mesopic and photopic binocular contrast sensitivity, satisfaction and subjective quality of vision scores were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: The trifocal IOL provided significantly better near vision (1.5 lines) with slightly worse distance vision (0.5 lines), while providing similar contrast sensitivity and visual quality. It may be the preferred choice for patients desiring more spectacle independence.