Global disparities in the treatment of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: results from an international online survey study.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to explore current practice and interregional differences in the treatment of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs). We triangulated these observations considering countries' Gross National Income (GNI), disease subtypes, and symptoms using patient-reported information. METHODS: A cross-sectional ancillary analysis of the "COVID-19 vaccination in auto-immune disease" (COVAD) e-survey containing demographic characteristics, IIM subtypes (dermatomyositis (DM), polymyositis (PM), inclusion-body myositis (IBM), anti-synthetase syndrome (ASSD), immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy (IMNM), overlap myopathies (OM)), current symptoms (surrogate for organ involvement), and treatments (corticosteroids (CS), immunomodulators (IM), i.e., antimalarials, immunosuppressants (IS), intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG), biological treatments, and targeted-synthetic small molecules). Treatments were presented descriptively according to continents, GNI, IIM, and organ involvement, and associated factors were analyzed using multivariable binary logistic regressions. RESULTS: Of 18,851 respondents from 94 countries, 1,418 with IIM were analyzed (age 61 years, 62.5% females). DM (32.4%), IBM (24.5%), and OM (15.8%) were the most common subtypes. Treatment categories included IS (49.4%), CS (38.5%), IM (13.8%), and IVIG (9.4%). Notably, treatments varied across regions, GNI categories (IS mostly used in higher-middle income, IM in lower-middle income, IVIG and biologics largely limited to high-income countries), IIM subtypes (IS and CS associated with ASSD, IM with OM and DM, IVIG with IMNM, and biological treatments with OM and ASSD) and disease manifestations (IS and CS with dyspnea). Most inter-regional treatment disparities persisted after multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: We identified marked regional treatment disparities in a global cohort of IIM. These observations highlight the need for international consensus-driven management guidelines considering patient-centered care and available resources.

High fatigue scores in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: a multigroup comparative study from the COVAD e-survey.

Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) confer a significant risk of disability and poor quality of life, though fatigue, an important contributing factor, remains under-reported in these individuals. We aimed to compare and analyze differences in visual analog scale (VAS) scores (0-10 cm) for fatigue (VAS-F) in patients with IIMs, non-IIM systemic autoimmune diseases (SAIDs), and healthy controls (HCs). We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the data from the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) international patient self-reported e-survey. The COVAD survey was circulated from December 2020 to August 2021, and details including demographics, COVID-19 history, vaccination details, SAID details, global health, and functional status were collected from adult patients having received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. Fatigue experienced 1 week prior to survey completion was assessed using a single-item 10 cm VAS. Determinants of fatigue were analyzed in regression models. Six thousand nine hundred and eighty-eight respondents (mean age 43.8 years, 72% female; 55% White) were included in the analysis. The overall VAS-F score was 3 (IQR 1-6). Patients with IIMs had similar fatigue scores (5, IQR 3-7) to non-IIM SAIDs [5 (IQR 2-7)], but higher compared to HCs (2, IQR 1-5; P < 0.001), regardless of disease activity. In adjusted analysis, higher VAS-F scores were seen in females (reference female; coefficient -0.17; 95%CI -0.21 to -13; P < 0.001) and Caucasians (reference Caucasians; coefficient -0.22; 95%CI -0.30 to -0.14; P < 0.001 for Asians and coefficient -0.08; 95%CI -0.13 to 0.30; P = 0.003 for Hispanics) in our cohort. Our study found that patients with IIMs exhibit considerable fatigue, similar to other SAIDs and higher than healthy individuals. Women and Caucasians experience greater fatigue scores, allowing identification of stratified groups for optimized multidisciplinary care and improve outcomes such as quality of life.

Vaccine hesitancy decreases, long term concerns remain in myositis, rheumatic disease patients: A comparative analysis of the COVAD surveys.

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 vaccines have a favorable safety profile in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) such as idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs), however hesitancy continues to persist among these patients.Therefore, we studied the prevalence, predictors, and reasons for hesitancy in patients with IIMs, other AIRDs, non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs) and healthy controls (HCs), using data from the two international COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) e-surveys. METHODS: The 1st and 2nd COVAD patient self-reported e-surveys were circulated from March to December 2021, and February to June 2022 (ongoing). We collected data on demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 infection and vaccination history, reasons for hesitancy, and patient reported outcomes. Predictors of hesitancy were analyzed using regression models in different groups. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 18,882 (COVAD-1) and 7666 (COVAD-2) respondents. Reassuringly, hesitancy decreased from 2021 (16.5%) to 2022 (5.1%) [OR 0.26; 95%CI: 0.24-0.30, p < 0.001]. However, concerns/fear over long-term safety had increased [OR 3.6;95% CI:2.9-4.6, p < 0.01].We noted with concern greater skepticism over vaccine science among patients with IIMs than AIRDs [OR:1.8; 95%CI: 1.08-3.2, p = 0.023] and HCs [OR: 4; 95%CI: 1.9-8.1, p < 0.001], as well as more long-term safety concerns/fear [IIMs vs AIRDs; OR: 1.9; 95%CI: 1.2-2.9, p = 0.001; IIMs vs HCs; OR: 5.4 95%CI: 3-9.6), p < 0.001].Caucasians [OR 4.2 (1.7-10.3)] were likely to be more hesitant, while those with better PROMIS physical health score were less hesitant [OR 0.9 (0.8-0.97)]. CONCLUSION: Vaccine hesitancy has decreased from 2021 to 2022, long-term safety concerns remain among patients with IIMs, particularly in Caucasians and those with poor physical function.

Flares in IIMs and the timeline following COVID-19 vaccination: a combined analysis of the COVAD-1 and 2 surveys.

OBJECTIVES: Disease flares in the post COVID-19 vaccination period represent a prominent concern, though risk factors are poorly understood. We studied these flares among patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) and other autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs). METHODS: The COVAD-1 and -2 global surveys were circulated in early 2021 and 2022 respectively, and we captured demographics, comorbidities, AIRDs details, COVID-19 infection history, and vaccination details.Flares of IIMs were defined as a. patient self-reported, b. immunosuppression (IS) denoted, c. clinical sign directed, and d. with >7.9-point MCID worsening of PROMISPF10a score. Risk factors of flares were analyzed using regression models. RESULTS: Of 15165 total respondents, 1278 IIMs (age 63 years, 70.3% female, 80.8% Caucasians), and 3453 AIRDs were included. Flares of IIM were seen in 9.6%, 12.7%, 8.7%, and 19.6% patients by definitions a-d respectively with a median time to flare of 71.5 (10.7-235) days, similar to AIRDs. Patients with active IIMs pre-vaccination (OR:1.2; 95%CI:1.03-1.6, p = 0.025) were prone to flares, while those receiving Rituximab (OR:0.3; 95%CI:0.1-0.7, p = 0.010) and Azathioprine (OR:0.3, 95%CI:0.1-0.8, p = 0.016) were at lower risk. Female gender and comorbidities predisposed to flares requiring changes in immunosuppression. Asthma (OR: 1.62; 95%CI: 1.05-2.50, p = 0.028) and higher pain VAS (OR: 1.19; 95%CI: 1.11-1.27, p < 0.001) were associated with disparity between self-reported and IS-denoted flares. CONCLUSION: A diagnosis of IIMs confers an equal risk of flares in the post COVID-19 vaccination period to AIRDs, with active disease, female gender, and comorbidities conferring a higher risk. Disparity between patient and physician reported outcomes represents a future avenue for exploration.

[Acceptance of video consultation among patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases depends on gender and location-Results of an online survey among patients and physicians]. / Akzeptanz der Videosprechstunde unter Patienten/innen mit entzündlich rheumatischen Erkrankungen ist geschlechts- und ortsabhängig ­ Ergebnisse einer Online-Umfrage unter Patienten/innen und Ärzten/innen.

INTRODUCTION: In order to successfully integrate telemedicine into the daily routine of rheumatology, both the patient's and the physician's perspective are important. For this purpose, a detailed study by means of a web-based survey was conducted by the Working Group Young Rheumatology (AGJR) of the German Society for Rheumatology (DGRh) and the German Rheumatism League National Association. By means of subgroup analysis of the data regarding video consultation, the aim was now to find out which requirements and wishes patients and physicians have for video consultations. METHODS: The prospective survey was distributed via social media, QR code and email. Descriptive statistics and regression analysis related to video consultation were performed and correlations were shown. RESULTS: The data indicated positive attitudes toward video consultation on the part of both patients (n = 299) and rheumatologists (n = 129). A correlation between age and positive opinion of the video consultation was found among the patients (r = 0.161, p = 0.006), especially among female patients a positive approval of the video consultation was found with increasing age (r = 0.244, p < 0.001 to male patients: r = -0.190, p = 0.145). Regarding the travelling time to the treating rheumatologist, male patients found the video consultation more attractive with increasing travelling time (r = 0.229, p = 0.078). With respect to the wishes of patients and physicians, video consultation should be used primarily for follow-up or emergency appointments. Video consultation for initial appointments, on the other hand, was very rarely mentioned. CONCLUSION: During the COVID 19 pandemic, video consultation was increasingly popular among rheumatology patients as well as among rheumatologists.

Pain in individuals with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, other systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases, and without rheumatic diseases: A report from the COVAD study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare pain intensity among individuals with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs), other systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs), and without rheumatic disease (wAIDs). METHODS: Data were collected from the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study, an international cross-sectional online survey, from December 2020 to August 2021. Pain experienced in the preceding week was assessed using numeral rating scale (NRS). We performed a negative binomial regression analysis to assess pain in IIMs subtypes and whether demographics, disease activity, general health status, and physical function had an impact on pain scores. RESULTS: Of 6988 participants included, 15.1% had IIMs, 27.9% had other AIRDs, and 57.0% were wAIDs. The median pain NRS in patients with IIMs, other AIRDs, and wAIDs were 2.0 (interquartile range [IQR] = 1.0-5.0), 3.0 (IQR = 1.0-6.0), and 1.0 (IQR = 0-2.0), respectively (P < 0.001). Regression analysis adjusted for gender, age, and ethnicity revealed that overlap myositis and antisynthetase syndrome had the highest pain (NRS = 4.0, 95% CI = 3.5-4.5, and NRS = 3.6, 95% CI = 3.1-4.1, respectively). An additional association between pain and poor functional status was observed in all groups. Female gender was associated with higher pain scores in almost all scenarios. Increasing age was associated with higher pain NRS scores in some scenarios of disease activity, and Asian and Hispanic ethnicities had reduced pain scores in some functional status scenarios. CONCLUSION: Patients with IIMs reported higher pain levels than wAIDs, but less than patients with other AIRDs. Pain is a disabling manifestation of IIMs and is associated with a poor functional status.

Systemic sclerosis and COVID-19 vaccine safety: short-term insights from the global COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune disease (COVAD) survey.

The safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines is understudied in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). We compared short-term adverse events (AEs) 7 days following vaccination in patients with SSc vs other rheumatic (AIRDs), non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs), and healthy controls (HCs). The COVID-19 Vaccination in autoimmune diseases (COVAD) self-reporting e-survey was circulated by a group of > 110 collaborators in 94 countries from March to December 2021. AEs were analyzed between different groups using regression models. Of 10,679 complete respondents [73.8% females, mean age 43 years, 53% Caucasians], 478 had SSc. 83% had completed two vaccine doses, Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) (51%) was the most common. Minor and major AEs were reported by 81.2% and 3.3% SSc patients, respectively, and did not differ significantly with disease activity or different vaccine types, though with minor symptom differences. Frequencies of AEs were not affected by background immunosuppression, though SSc patients receiving hydroxychloroquine experienced fatigue less commonly (OR 0.4; 95% CI 0.2-0.8). Frequency of AEs and hospitalisations were similar to other AIRDs, nrAIDs, and HC except a higher risk of chills (OR 1.3; 95% CI 1.0-1.7) and fatigue (OR 1.3; 95% CI 1.0-1.6) compared to other AIRDs. COVID-19 vaccines were largely safe and well tolerated in SSc patients in the short term. Background immunosuppression and disease activity did not influence the vaccination-related short-term AEs.

Impaired physical function in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: results from the multicentre COVAD patient-reported e-survey.

OBJECTIVES: The assessment of physical function is fundamental in the management of patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs). We aimed to investigate the physical function of patients with IIMs compared with those with non-IIM autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) utilizing Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF) data obtained in the COVAD study, an international self-reported e-survey assessing the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in AIRDs. METHODS: Demographics, AIRD diagnosis, disease activity, and PROMIS PF short form-10a data were extracted from the COVAD database. PROMIS PF-10a scores were compared between disease categories and stratified by disease activity. Factors affecting PROMIS PF-10a scores other than disease activity were identified by multivariable regression analysis in patients with inactive disease. RESULTS: 1057 IIM patients, 3635 non-IIM AIRD patients, and 3981 healthy controls (HCs) responded to the COVAD e-survey from April to August 2021. Using a binomial regression model, the predicted mean of PROMIS PF-10a scores was significantly lower in IIM patients compared with non-IIM AIRD patients or HCs (36.3 [95% confidence interval (CI) 35.5-37.1] vs 41.3 [95%CI 40.2-42.5] vs 46.2 [95%CI 45.8-46.6], P < 0.001), irrespective of disease activity. The independent factors for lower PROMIS PF-10a scores in patients with inactive disease were older age, female, longer disease duration, and a diagnosis of inclusion body myositis or polymyositis. CONCLUSION: Physical function is significantly impaired in IIMs compared with non-IIM AIRDs or HCs, even in patients with inactive disease. Our study highlights a critical need for better strategies to minimize functional disability in patients with IIMs.

Flares in autoimmune rheumatic diseases in the post-COVID-19 vaccination period - A Cross-sequential study based on COVAD surveys.

OBJECTIVE: Flares of autoimmune rheumatic disease (AIRDs) following COVID-19 vaccination are an outstanding concern in vaccine-hesitant individuals. Therefore, we investigated the incidence, predictors and patterns of flares following vaccination in individuals living with AIRDs using global COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) surveys. METHODS: The COVAD surveys were used to extract data on flare demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 history, and vaccination details among patients with AIRDs. Flares following vaccination were identified as patient-reported(a), increased immunosuppression(b), clinical exacerbations(c) and worsening of PROMIS scores(d). We studied flare characteristics and used regression models to differentiate flares among various AIRDs. RESULTS: Of 15165 total responses, the incidence of flares in 3453 patients with AIRDs was 11.3%, 14.8%, 9.5%, and 26.7% by definitions a-d, respectively. There was moderate agreement between patient-reported and immunosuppression-defined flares (K = 0.403, p = 0.022). Arthritis (61.6%) and fatigue (58.8%) were the most commonly reported symptoms. Self-reported flares were associated with higher comorbidities (p = 0.013), mental health disorders (MHD) (p < 0.001), and autoimmune multimorbidity (AIDm) (p < 0.001).In regression analysis, the presence of AIDm (OR = 1.4;95%CI:1.1-1.7;p=0.003), MHD (OR = 1.7;95%CI:1.1-2.6;p=0.007), and Moderna vaccine (OR = 1.5;95%CI:1.09-2.2;p=0.014) recipients were predictors of flares. Mycophenolate (OR = 0.5;95%CI:0.3-0.8;p=0.009) and glucocorticoids (OR = 0.6;95%CI:0.5-0.8;p=0.003) were protective.A higher frequency of patients with AIRDs reported overall active disease post-vaccination compared to before vaccination (OR = 1.3;95%CI:1.1-1.5;p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Flares occur in nearly one in ten individuals with AIRDs after COVID vaccination, with people with comorbidities, especially AID multimorbidity, mental health disorders and use of the Moderna vaccine being particularly vulnerable. Future avenues include exploring flare profiles and optimizing vaccine strategies for this group.

COVID-19 vaccination-related adverse events among autoimmune disease patients: results from the COVAD study.

OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 vaccines have been proven to be safe in the healthy population. However, gaps remain in the evidence of their safety in patients with systemic autoimmune and inflammatory disorders (SAIDs). COVID-19 vaccination related adverse events (ADEs) in patients with SAIDs and healthy controls (HC) seven days post-vaccination were assessed in the COVAD study, a patient self-reported cross-sectional survey. METHODS: The survey was circulated in early 2021 by > 110 collaborators (94 countries) to collect SAID details, COVID-19 vaccination details, and 7-day vaccine ADEs, irrespective of respondent vaccination status. Analysis was performed based on data distribution and variable type. RESULTS: 10900 respondents [42 (30-55) years, 74% females and 45% Caucasians] were analyzed. 5,867 patients (54%) with SAIDs were compared with 5033 HCs.79% had minor and only 3% had major vaccine ADEs requiring urgent medical attention (but not hospital admission) overall. Headache [SAIDs=26%, HCs=24%; OR = 1.1 (1.03-1.3); p = 0.014], abdominal pain [SAIDs=2.6%, HCs=1.4%; OR = 1.5 (1.1-2.3); p = 0.011], and dizziness [SAIDs=6%, HCs=4%; OR = 1.3 (1.07-1.6); p = 0.011], were slightly more frequent in SAIDs. Overall, major ADEs [SAIDs=4%, HCs=2%; OR = 1.9 (1.6-2.2); p < 0.001] and, specifically, throat closure [SAIDs=0.5%, HCs=0.3%; OR = 5.7 (2.9-11); p = 0.010] were more frequent in SAIDs though absolute risk was small (0-4%). Major ADEs and hospitalizations (less than 2%) were comparable across vaccine types in SAIDs. CONCLUSION: Vaccination against COVID-19 is relatively safe in SAID patients. SAIDs were at a higher risk of major ADEs than HCs, though absolute risk was small. There are small differences in minor ADEs between vaccine types in SAID patients.

COVID-19 severity and vaccine breakthrough infections in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, other systemic autoimmune and inflammatory diseases, and healthy controls: a multicenter cross-sectional study from the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) survey.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the spectrum and severity of COVID-19 and vaccine breakthrough infections (BIs) among patients with IIMs, other systemic autoimmune and inflammatory diseases (SAIDs), and healthy controls (HCs). METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study with data from the COVAD study, a self-reported online global survey that collected demographics, COVID-19 history, and vaccination details from April to September 2021. Adult patients with at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose were included. BIs were defined as infections occurring > 2 weeks after any dose of vaccine. Characteristics associated with BI were analyzed with a multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS: Among 10,900 respondents [42 (30-55) years, 74%-females, 45%-Caucasians] HCs were (47%), SAIDs (42%) and IIMs (11%). Patients with IIMs reported fewer COVID-19 cases before vaccination (6.2%-IIM vs 10.5%-SAIDs vs 14.6%-HC; OR = 0.6, 95% CI 0.4-0.8, and OR = 0.3, 95% CI 0.2-0.5, respectively). BIs were uncommon (1.4%-IIM; 1.9%-SAIDs; 3.2%-HC) and occurred in 17 IIM patients, 13 of whom were on immunosuppressants, and 3(18%) required hospitalization. All-cause hospitalization was higher in patients with IIM compared to HCs [23 (30%) vs 59 (8%), OR = 2.5, 95% CI 1.2-5.1 before vaccination, and 3 (18%) vs 9 (5%), OR = 2.6, 95% CI 1.3-5.3 in BI]. In a multivariate regression analysis, age 30-60 years was associated with a lower odds of BI (OR = 0.7, 95% CI 0.5-1.0), while the use of immunosuppressants had a higher odds of BI (OR = 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.7). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with IIMs reported fewer COVID-19 cases than HCs and other SAIDs, but had higher odds of all-cause hospitalization from COVID-19 than HCs. BIs were associated with the use of immunosuppressants and were uncommon in IIMs.

Factors Associated With Telemedicine Use Among Patients With Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Disease: Secondary Analysis of Data From a German Nationwide Survey.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated telemedicine (TM) to be an effective tool to complement rheumatology care and address workforce shortage. With the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, TM experienced a massive upswing. A previous study revealed that physicians' willingness to use TM and actual use of TM are closely connected to their knowledge of TM. However, it remains unclear which factors are associated with patients' motivation to use TM. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify the factors that determine patients' willingness to try TM (TM try) and their wish that their rheumatologists offer TM services (TM wish). METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of data from a German nationwide cross-sectional survey among patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease (RMD). Bayesian univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were applied to the data to determine which factors were associated with TM try and TM wish. The predictor variables (covariates) studied individually included sociodemographic factors (eg, age and sex) and health characteristics (eg, disease type and health status). All the variables positively or negatively associated with TM try or TM wish in the univariate analyses were then considered for the Bayesian model averaging analysis after a selection based on the variance inflation factor (≤2.5). All the analyses were stratified by sex. RESULTS: Of the total 102 variables, 59 (57.8%) and 45 (44.1%) variables were found to be positively or negatively associated (region of practical equivalence ≤5%) with TM try and TM wish, respectively. A total of 16 and 8 determinant factors were identified for TM try and TM wish, respectively. Wishing that TM services were offered by rheumatologists, having internet access at home, residing 5 to 10 km away from the general practitioner's office, owning an electronic device, and being aged 40 to 60 years were among the factors positively associated with TM try and TM wish. By contrast, not yet being diagnosed with an RMD, having no prior knowledge of TM, having a bad health status, living in a rural area, not documenting one's health status, not owning an electronic device, and being aged 60 to 80 years were negatively associated with TM try and TM wish. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that health status, knowledge, age, and access to technical equipment and infrastructure influence the motivation of patients with RMD to use telehealth services. In particular, older patients with RMD living in rural areas, who could likely benefit from using TM, are currently not motivated to use TM and seem to need additional TM support.

At-home blood self-sampling in rheumatology: a qualitative study with patients and health care professionals.

BACKGROUND: The goal of the study was to investigate patients' with systemic rheumatic diseases and healthcare professionals' experiences and preferences regarding self-sampling of capillary blood in rheumatology care. METHODS: Patients performed a supervised and consecutive unsupervised capillary blood self-collection using an upper arm based device. Subsequently, patients (n = 15) and their attending health care professionals (n = 5) participated in an explorative, qualitative study using problem-centered, telephone interviews. Interview data were analyzed using structured qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Interviewed patients reported easy application and high usability. Patients and health care professionals alike reported time and cost savings, increased independence and flexibility, improved monitoring and reduction of risk of infection during Covid-19 as benefits. Reported drawbacks include limited blood volume, limited usability in case of functional restrictions, and environmental concerns. Older, immobile patients with long journeys to traditional blood collection sites and young patients with little time to spare for traditional blood collection appointments could be user groups, likely to benefit from self-sampling services. CONCLUSIONS: At-home blood self-sampling could effectively complement current rheumatology telehealth care. Appropriateness and value of this service needs to be carefully discussed with patients on an individual basis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: WHO International Clinical Trials Registry: DRKS00024925. Registered on 15/04/2021.

Factors Associated With Telemedicine Use Among German General Practitioners and Rheumatologists: Secondary Analysis of Data From a Nationwide Survey.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated telemedicine (TM) to be an effective tool to complement rheumatology care and address workforce shortage. With the outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, TM experienced a massive upswing. However, in rheumatology care, the use of TM stagnated again shortly thereafter. Consequently, the factors associated with physicians' willingness to use TM (TM willingness) and actual use of TM (TM use) need to be thoroughly investigated. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify the factors that determine TM use and TM willingness among German general practitioners and rheumatologists. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of data from a German nationwide cross-sectional survey with general practitioners and rheumatologists. Bayesian univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were applied to the data to determine which factors were associated with TM use and TM willingness. The predictor variables (covariates) that were studied individually included sociodemographic factors (eg, age and sex), work characteristics (eg, practice location and medical specialty), and self-assessed knowledge of TM. All the variables positively and negatively associated with TM use and TM willingness in the univariate analysis were then considered for Bayesian model averaging analysis after a selection based on the variance inflation factor (≤2.5). All analyses were stratified by sex. RESULTS: Univariate analysis revealed that out of 83 variables, 36 (43%) and 34 (41%) variables were positively or negatively associated (region of practical equivalence≤5%) with TM use and TM willingness, respectively. The Bayesian model averaging analysis allowed us to identify 13 and 17 factors of TM use and TM willingness, respectively. Among these factors, being female, having very poor knowledge of TM, treating <500 patients per quarter, and not being willing to use TM were negatively associated with TM use, whereas having good knowledge of TM and treating >1000 patients per quarter were positively associated with TM use. In addition, being aged 51 to 60 years, thinking that TM is not important for current and future work, and not currently using TM were negatively associated with TM willingness, whereas owning a smart device and working in an urban area were positively associated with TM willingness. CONCLUSIONS: The results point to the close connection between health care professionals' knowledge of TM and actual TM use. These results lend support to the integration of digital competencies into medical education as well as hands-on training for health care professionals. Incentive programs for physicians aged >50 years and practicing in rural areas could further encourage TM willingness.

One year of digital health applications (DiGA) in Germany - Rheumatologists' perspectives.

Background: Based on given legislation the German approach to digital health applications (DiGA) allows reimbursed prescription of approved therapeutic software products since October 2020. For the first time, we evaluated DiGA-related acceptance, usage, and level of knowledge among members of the German Society for Rheumatology (DGRh) 1 year after its legal implementation. Materials and methods: An anonymous cross-sectional online survey, initially designed by the health innovation hub (think tank and sparring partner of the German Federal Ministry of Health) and the German Pain Society was adapted to the field of rheumatology. The survey was promoted by DGRh newsletters and Twitter-posts. Ethical approval was obtained. Results: In total, 75 valid response-sets. 80% reported to care ≥ 70% of their working time for patients with rheumatic diseases. Most were working in outpatient clinics/offices (54%) and older than 40 years (84%). Gender distribution was balanced (50%). 70% knew the possibility to prescribe DiGA. Most were informed of this for the first time via trade press (63%), and only 8% via the scientific/professional society. 46% expect information on DiGA from the scientific societies/medical chambers (35%) but rarely from the manufacturer (10%) and the responsible ministry (4%). Respondents would like to be informed about DiGA via continuing education events (face-to-face 76%, online 84%), trade press (86%), and manufacturers' test-accounts (64%). Only 7% have already prescribed a DiGA, 46% planned to do so, and 47% did not intend DiGA prescriptions. Relevant aspects for prescription are provided. 86% believe that using DiGA/medical apps would at least partially be feasible and understandable to their patients. 83% thought that data collected by the patients using DiGA or other digital solutions could at least partially influence health care positively. 51% appreciated to get DiGA data directly into their patient documentation system/electronic health record (EHR) and 29% into patient-owned EHR. Conclusion: Digital health applications awareness was high whereas prescription rate was low. Mostly, physician-desired aspects for DiGA prescriptions were proven efficacy and efficiency for physicians and patients, risk of adverse effects and health care costs were less important. Evaluation of patients' barriers and needs is warranted. Our results might contribute to the implementation and dissemination of DiGA.

Self-collection of capillary blood and saliva to determine COVID-19 vaccine immunogenicity in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases and health professionals.

Introduction: Being able to independently determine vaccine induced antibody responses by minimal-invasive methods is of great interest to enable a flexible and effective vaccination strategy. This study aimed to evaluate (1) the accuracy, feasibility, usability and acceptability of capillary blood and saliva self-sampling to determine SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) and health professionals (HP). Methods: IMID patients and HP having received two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, self-collected capillary blood (Tasso+) and saliva samples. Capillary samples were considered interchangeable with venous blood if three criteria were met: Spearman's correlation coefficient (r) > 0.8, non-significant Wilcoxon signed-rank test (i.e., p > 0.05), and a small bias or 95% of tests within 10% difference through Bland-Altman. Participants completed a survey to investigate self-sampling usability (system usability scale; SUS) and acceptability (net promoter score; NPS). Study personnel monitored correct self-sampling completion and recorded protocol deviations. Results: 60 participants (30 IMID patients and 30 HP) were analyzed. We observed interchangeability for capillary samples with an accuracy of 98.3/100% for Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgA antibodies, respectively. Fifty-eight capillary blood samples and all 60 saliva samples were successfully collected within the first attempt. Usability of both self-sampling procedures was rated as excellent, with significantly higher saliva ratings (p < 0.001). Capillary self-sampling was perceived as significantly (p < 0.001) less painful compared to traditional venous blood collection. Participants reported a NPS for capillary and saliva self-sampling of +68% and +63%, respectively. The majority of both groups (73%) preferred capillary self-sampling over professional venous blood collection. Conclusion: Our results indicate that capillary self-sampling is accurate, feasible and preferred over conventional venous blood collection. Implementation could enable easy access, flexible vaccination monitoring, potentially leading to a better protection of vulnerable patient groups. Self-collection of saliva is feasible and safe however more work is needed to determine its application in clinical practice.

COVAD survey 2 long-term outcomes: unmet need and protocol.

Vaccine hesitancy is considered a major barrier to achieving herd immunity against COVID-19. While multiple alternative and synergistic approaches including heterologous vaccination, booster doses, and antiviral drugs have been developed, equitable vaccine uptake remains the foremost strategy to manage pandemic. Although none of the currently approved vaccines are live-attenuated, several reports of disease flares, waning protection, and acute-onset syndromes have emerged as short-term adverse events after vaccination. Hence, scientific literature falls short when discussing potential long-term effects in vulnerable cohorts. The COVAD-2 survey follows on from the baseline COVAD-1 survey with the aim to collect patient-reported data on the long-term safety and tolerability of COVID-19 vaccines in immune modulation. The e-survey has been extensively pilot-tested and validated with translations into multiple languages. Anticipated results will help improve vaccination efforts and reduce the imminent risks of COVID-19 infection, especially in understudied vulnerable groups.