Telemedicine for Neurosurgery Consultations at a Pituitary Center of Excellence: Patient Preference and Willingness to Proceed with Surgery

Objective  The purpose of this study was to evaluate pituitary tumor patient satisfaction with telemedicine, patient preference for telemedicine, potential socioeconomic benefit of telemedicine, and patients' willingness to proceed with surgery based on a telemedicine visit alone. Method  In total, 134 patients who had pituitary surgery and a telemedicine visit during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic (April 23, 2020–March 4, 2021) were called to participate in a 13-part questionnaire. Chi-square, ANOVA, and Wilcoxon Rank Sum tests were used to determine significance. Result  Of 134 patients contacted, 90 responded (67%). Ninety-five percent were "satisfied” or "very satisfied” with their telemedicine visit, with 62% stating their visit was "the same” or "better” than previous in-person appointments. Eighty-two percent of the patients rated their telemedicine visit as "easy” or "very easy.” On average, patients saved 150 minutes by using telemedicine compared with patient reported in-person visit times. Seventy-seven percent of patients reported the need to take off from work for in-person visits, compared with just 12% when using telemedicine. Forty-nine percent of patients preferred in-person visits, 34% preferred telemedicine, and 17% had no preference. Fifty percent of patients said they would feel comfortable proceeding with surgery based on a telemedicine visit alone. Patients with both initial evaluation and follow-up conducted via telemedicine were more likely to feel comfortable proceeding with surgery based on a telemedicine visit alone compared with patients who had only follow-up telemedicine visits ( p  = 0.051). Conclusion  Many patients are satisfied with telemedicine visits and feel comfortable proceeding with surgery based on a telemedicine visit alone. Telemedicine is an important adjunct to increase access to care at a Pituitary Center of Excellence.

An international observational study to assess the impact of the Omicron variant emergence on the clinical epidemiology of COVID-19 in hospitalised patients.

Background: Whilst timely clinical characterisation of infections caused by novel SARS-CoV-2 variants is necessary for evidence-based policy response, individual-level data on infecting variants are typically only available for a minority of patients and settings. Methods: Here, we propose an innovative approach to study changes in COVID-19 hospital presentation and outcomes after the Omicron variant emergence using publicly available population-level data on variant relative frequency to infer SARS-CoV-2 variants likely responsible for clinical cases. We apply this method to data collected by a large international clinical consortium before and after the emergence of the Omicron variant in different countries. Results: Our analysis, that includes more than 100,000 patients from 28 countries, suggests that in many settings patients hospitalised with Omicron variant infection less often presented with commonly reported symptoms compared to patients infected with pre-Omicron variants. Patients with COVID-19 admitted to hospital after Omicron variant emergence had lower mortality compared to patients admitted during the period when Omicron variant was responsible for only a minority of infections (odds ratio in a mixed-effects logistic regression adjusted for likely confounders, 0.67 [95% confidence interval 0.61-0.75]). Qualitatively similar findings were observed in sensitivity analyses with different assumptions on population-level Omicron variant relative frequencies, and in analyses using available individual-level data on infecting variant for a subset of the study population. Conclusions: Although clinical studies with matching viral genomic information should remain a priority, our approach combining publicly available data on variant frequency and a multi-country clinical characterisation dataset with more than 100,000 records allowed analysis of data from a wide range of settings and novel insights on real-world heterogeneity of COVID-19 presentation and clinical outcome. Funding: Bronner P. Gonçalves, Peter Horby, Gail Carson, Piero L. Olliaro, Valeria Balan, Barbara Wanjiru Citarella, and research costs were supported by the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) and Wellcome [215091/Z/18/Z, 222410/Z/21/Z, 225288/Z/22/Z]; and Janice Caoili and Madiha Hashmi were supported by the UK FCDO and Wellcome [222048/Z/20/Z]. Peter Horby, Gail Carson, Piero L. Olliaro, Kalynn Kennon and Joaquin Baruch were supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1209135]; Laura Merson was supported by University of Oxford's COVID-19 Research Response Fund - with thanks to its donors for their philanthropic support. Matthew Hall was supported by a Li Ka Shing Foundation award to Christophe Fraser. Moritz U.G. Kraemer was supported by the Branco Weiss Fellowship, Google.org, the Oxford Martin School, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the European Union Horizon 2020 project MOOD (#874850). The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission. Contributions from Srinivas Murthy, Asgar Rishu, Rob Fowler, James Joshua Douglas, François Martin Carrier were supported by CIHR Coronavirus Rapid Research Funding Opportunity OV2170359 and coordinated out of Sunnybrook Research Institute. Contributions from Evert-Jan Wils and David S.Y. Ong were supported by a grant from foundation Bevordering Onderzoek Franciscus; and Andrea Angheben by the Italian Ministry of Health "Fondi Ricerca corrente-L1P6" to IRCCS Ospedale Sacro Cuore-Don Calabria. The data contributions of J.Kenneth Baillie, Malcolm G. Semple, and Ewen M. Harrison were supported by grants from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR; award CO-CIN-01), the Medical Research Council (MRC; grant MC_PC_19059), and by the NIHR Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at University of Liverpool in partnership with Public Health England (PHE) (award 200907), NIHR HPRU in Respiratory Infections at Imperial College London with PHE (award 200927), Liverpool Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre (grant C18616/A25153), NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Imperial College London (award IS-BRC-1215-20013), and NIHR Clinical Research Network providing infrastructure support. All funders of the ISARIC Clinical Characterisation Group are listed in the appendix.

Diabetes mellitus, glycaemic control, and severe COVID-19 in the Australian critical care setting: A nested cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Internationally, diabetes mellitus is recognised as a risk factor for severe COVID-19. The relationship between diabetes mellitus and severe COVID-19 has not been reported in the Australian population. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of and outcomes for patients with diabetes admitted to Australian intensive care units (ICUs) with COVID-19. METHODS: This is a nested cohort study of four ICUs in Melbourne participating in the Short Period Incidence Study of Severe Acute Respiratory Infection (SPRINT-SARI) Australia project. All adult patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19 from 20 February 2020 to 27 February 2021 were included. Blood glucose and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) data were retrospectively collected. Diabetes was diagnosed from medical history or an HbA1c ≥6.5% (48 mmol/mol). Hospital mortality was assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS: There were 136 patients with median age 58 years [48-68] and median Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score of 14 [11-19]. Fifty-eight patients had diabetes (43%), 46 patients had stress-induced hyperglycaemia (34%), and 32 patients had normoglycaemia (23%). Patients with diabetes were older, were with higher APACHE II scores, had greater glycaemic variability than patients with normoglycaemia, and had longer hospital length of stay. Overall hospital mortality was 16% (22/136), including nine patients with diabetes, nine patients with stress-induced hyperglycaemia, and two patients with normoglycaemia. CONCLUSION: Diabetes is prevalent in patients admitted to Australian ICUs with severe COVID-19, highlighting the need for prevention strategies in this vulnerable population.

A multi-center survey on the postpartum mental health of mothers and attachment to their neonates during COVID-19 in Hubei Province of China.

BACKGROUND: There is an emerging literature on the mental health of both pre- and post-partum mothers during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: As of April 1, 2020, 23 mothers confirmed with COVID-19, 15 mothers suspected with COVID-19 but with negative polymerase chain reaction tests, and 33 mothers without COVID-19 (Control Group) were recruited for a study from Hubei Province in China. The Maternal Postnatal Attachment Scale (MPAS), the Zung Self-rating Anxiety Scale, and the Zung Self-rating Depression Scale were applied to investigate the attachment of mothers to their neonates and the postpartum mental health of mothers within the first 3 months after delivery (between 20 to 89 days). RESULTS: The period of mother-child separation among the confirmed group (33.9±20.9 days) was significantly longer than that of suspected group (16.7±12.2 days) and control group (10.7±8.4 days). The total score of the MPAS in mothers confirmed with COVID-19 (45.5±4.2) was significantly lower (indicating less mother-child attachment) than that in the suspected (50.5±4.7) and control (48.8±4.6) groups. A negative correlation was noted between the mother-child separation time and the MPAS scores, including the subscale scores of attachment (MPAS acore: Spearman's ρ =-0.33, 95% CI: -0.095 to -0.538, P=0.005; Subscale score of attachment: Spearman's ρ =-0.40, 95% CI: -0.163 to -0.592, P=0.001). The incidence of postpartum anxiety in the confirmed, suspected and control groups was 4.3%, 6.7% and 12.1%, respectively; and the incidence of postpartum depression was 39.1%, 33.3% and 30.3%, respectively. No significant difference was found with regards to maternal postpartum anxiety and depression among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: Decreased mother-child attachment found among mothers confirmed with COVID-19, indicates that further intervention is needed to ensure mother-child interaction to appropriately develop attachment. Mother-child attachment experienced disruption due to prolonged mother-child separation necessitated by the COVID-19 management protocol, which needs to be revised to reduce prolonged mother-child separation. Additionally, mothers with and without COVID-19 suffered a high incidence of depression, which warrants further mental health investment for pregnant mothers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

What Is the Remedy for State and Local Fiscal Squeeze During the COVID-19 Recession? More Debt, and That Is Okay

The COVID-19 crisis is placing a tremendous fiscal squeeze on state and local governments in the United States. We argue that the federal government should increase its deficit to fill in the fiscal gap. In the absence of sufficient federal assistance, we recommend that states suspend their balanced budget rules and norms and run deficits in their operating budgets to maintain services and meet additional obligations due to the pandemic. A comparison with Eurozone countries shows that states have more than enough debt capacity to run short-term deficits to respond to the crisis.