Comparison of Disease Profiles and Three-Month Outcomes of Patients with Neurological Disorders with and without COVID-19: An Ambispective Cohort Study.

Objective: Neurological emergencies saw a paradigm shift in approach during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with the challenge to manage patients with and without COVID-19. We aimed to compare the various neurological disorders and 3 months outcome in patients with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: In an ambispective cohort study design, we enrolled patients with and without SARS CoV-2 infection coming to a medical emergency with neurological disorders between April 2020 and September 2020. Demographic, clinical, biochemical, and treatment details of these patients were collected and compared. Their outcomes, both in-hospital and at 3 months were assessed by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Results: Two thirty-five patients (235) were enrolled from emergency services with neurological disorders. Of them, 81 (34.5%) were COVID-19 positive. The mean (SD) age was 49.5 (17.3) years, and the majority of the patients were male (63.0%). The commonest neurological diagnosis was acute ischemic stroke (AIS) (43.0%). The in-hospital mortality was higher in the patients who were COVID-19 positive (COVID-19 positive: 29 (35.8%) versus COVID-19 negative: 12 (7.8%), P value: <0.001). The 3 months telephonic follow-up could be completed in 73.2% of the patients (142/194). Four (12.1%) deaths occurred on follow-up in the COVID-19 positive versus fifteen (13.8%) in the COVID-19 negative patients (P value: 1.00). The 3-month mRS was worse in the COVID-19 positive group (P value <0.001). However, this was driven by higher in-hospital morbidity and mortality in COVID-19 positive patients. Conclusion: Patients with neurological disorders presenting with COVID-19 infection had worse outcomes, including in-hospital and 3 months disability.

Patients with Neurological Illnesses and Their Experience During the Lockdown: A Teleinterview-based Study.

Background: Governments have imposed lockdowns in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Hospitals have restricted outpatient clinics and elective services meant for non-COVID illnesses. This has led to patients facing unprecedented challenges and uncertainties. This study was carried out to assess patients' concerns and apprehensions about the effect of the lockdown on their treatments. Materials and Methods: An ambispective, observational cross-sectional single centre study was conducted. Patients were contacted telephonically and requested to answer a structured questionnaire. Their responses were documented and summarized as frequency and proportions. Results: A total of 727 patients were interviewed. Epilepsy (32%) was the most common neurological illness in our cohort followed by stroke (18%). About half the patients and/or their caregivers reported health-related concerns during the lockdown. The primary concern was how to connect with their treating neurologist if need arose. Forty-seven patients (6.4%) had drug default. Among patients on immunomodulatory treatments, only eight patients had drug default. High compliance rates were also observed in the stroke and epilepsy cohorts. Of the 71 patients who required emergency care during the lockdown, 24 could reach our hospital emergency. Fourteen patients either had a delay or could not seek emergency care. Two-thirds of our patients found the telemedicine experience satisfactory. Conclusion: The ongoing pandemic will continue to pose challenges to both physicians and patients. Patients in follow-up may need to be contacted regularly and counselled regarding the importance of maintaining drug compliance. Telemedicine can be used to strengthen the healthcare delivery to patients with non-COVID illnesses.

Frequency of Neurologic Manifestations in COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: One year after the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, we aimed to summarize the frequency of neurologic manifestations reported in patients with COVID-19 and to investigate the association of these manifestations with disease severity and mortality. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Medline, Cochrane library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and EMBASE for studies from December 31, 2019, to December 15, 2020, enrolling consecutive patients with COVID-19 presenting with neurologic manifestations. Risk of bias was examined with the Joanna Briggs Institute scale. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed, and pooled prevalence and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for neurologic manifestations. Odds ratio (ORs) and 95% CIs were calculated to determine the association of neurologic manifestations with disease severity and mortality. Presence of heterogeneity was assessed with I 2, meta-regression, and subgroup analyses. Statistical analyses were conducted in R version 3.6.2. RESULTS: Of 2,455 citations, 350 studies were included in this review, providing data on 145,721 patients with COVID-19, 89% of whom were hospitalized. Forty-one neurologic manifestations (24 symptoms and 17 diagnoses) were identified. Pooled prevalence of the most common neurologic symptoms included fatigue (32%), myalgia (20%), taste impairment (21%), smell impairment (19%), and headache (13%). A low risk of bias was observed in 85% of studies; studies with higher risk of bias yielded higher prevalence estimates. Stroke was the most common neurologic diagnosis (pooled prevalence 2%). In patients with COVID-19 ≥60 years of age, the pooled prevalence of acute confusion/delirium was 34%, and the presence of any neurologic manifestations in this age group was associated with mortality (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.11-2.91). DISCUSSION: Up to one-third of patients with COVID-19 analyzed in this review experienced at least 1 neurologic manifestation. One in 50 patients experienced stroke. In those >60 years of age, more than one-third had acute confusion/delirium; the presence of neurologic manifestations in this group was associated with nearly a doubling of mortality. Results must be interpreted with the limitations of observational studies and associated bias in mind. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020181867.

Mild COVID-19 infection-predicting symptomatic phase and outcome: A study from AIIMS, New Delhi.

CONTEXT: Comprehensive management of mild COVID infection calls for better understanding of symptomatology in these group of patients as well as early identification and close monitoring of patients at risk, data on which is limited. AIM: To study association between inflammatory markers and clinical presentation with progression of disease and the duration of resolution of symptoms. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: This is a retrospective study that has been conducted at a designated COVID -19 medical ward at AIIMS, New Delhi. METHODS AND MATERIAL: Fifty healthcare workers and their dependents who were admitted with asymptomatic and mild COVID-19 infection were included. Their records were retrospectively reviewed, entered into a predesigned proforma and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 50 participants were included in the study of which 70% were healthcare workers. The patients were admitted with mild COVID illness out of which 22 (44%) were males. Most common symptom at presentation was fever (72%). Among patients who had mild disease versus those who progressed to moderate illness (n = 3), the patients with moderate illness were older [mean (SD): 57.33 (10.21) vs. 36.13 (14.05); P = 0.014] and had a longer duration of hospital stay [17 (1.41) days vs. 11.20 (3.86) days; P = 0.04]. Inflammatory markers, C-Reactive Protein (CRP) [2.46 vs. 0.20 (P = 0.024)], and Ferritin [306.15 vs. 72.53 (P = 0.023)] were higher in patients with moderate illness. There is also a significant correlation between the number of days taken for symptoms to resolve with Serum Ferritin (P = 0.007), CRP (P = 0.0256), and neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (NLR) (P = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS: Acute phase reactants/Inflammatory markers serve as good indicators of time taken to resolution of symptoms in acute COVID infection. NLR is a simple and inexpensive method to provide insight into symptomatic phase. These may be utility tools for primary care physician in the management in periphery and timely decision.

Risk factors and outcome among COVID-19 exposed and quarantined healthcare workers: A study on the status of existing practices of standard precautions.

CONTEXT: Health care workers (HCWs) are at high risk of COVID-19 infection but data on the risk factors for exposure and infection rate among Indian HCWs are limited. AIMS: Our study aims to identify the risk factors and behavior of HCWs which make them high risk for COVID-19 infection and the infection rate among them. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: This is a retrospective study conducted at All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi. METHODS AND MATERIAL: Fifty HCWs quarantined at our institute in April and May 2020 following exposure to confirmed or suspected COVID-19 cases, or due to development of Influenza-Like Illness (ILI) were included. Data was collected from medical records in a predesigned proforma and analyzed. RESULTS: Thirty-eight (76%) of the 50 quarantined HCWs had high-risk exposure and there was a significant breach in personal protective measures. N-95 masks were worn by 59.6%, gloves by 61.7%, and goggles or face shields by 2%. Exposures were more common in non-COVID areas of the hospital. Hydroxychloroquine pre-exposure prophylaxis was taken by 7 (14%). 3 (6%) were confirmed to be COVID-19 positive during the quarantine period. CONCLUSIONS: Our study has shown leniency among HCWs in adhering to infection control and personal protective measures resulting in an increased quarantine and infection rate and loss of manpower. The safety of our HCWs must be given paramount importance during this pandemic and should be ensured by educating them about infection control, and persistently reinforcing and strictly adhering to standard precautions.

Conduct of Virtual Neurology DM Final Examination during COVID-19 Pandemic.

Medical training programs are witnessing immense disruptions worldwide due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Keeping in mind the trainees' future prospects, it is important to provide continuity of teaching and timely certification assessments. Overcoming the obstacles to routine functioning presented by SARS-CoV-2 spread, we recently conducted the DM Neurology exit examination in a hybrid virtual format. We created a curated case repository with history and clinical examination findings followed by structured questions that could be built upon for case discussions. The external examiners assessed the candidates virtually through a video conferencing platform. The end results were well accepted by all key stake holders. The concerns, logistics and experience of conducting the DM Neurology exit exam in a virtual format are summarized here.

Beyond Fever, Cough and Dyspnea: The Neurology of COVID-19

The pandemic due to Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV- 2) has rapidly engulfed the entire world, and continues to evolve at an aggressive pace. Although the characteristic concern in patients with COVID-19 is acute respiratory distress, there is meteoric accrual of data on neurological involvement. Neurological manifestations in COVID-19 have staggering diversity, ranging from mild olfactory and gustatory perception abnormalities to necrotising encephalopathy and stroke. Understanding of pathophysiological mechanisms underlying neurological invasion and disease is still nascent, and dictated largely by evidence from previous coronavirus infections which are known to have neuroinvasive potential. It has also been postulated that SARS CoV2 may affect the medullary respiratory centres in the brain stem thereby playing a possible role in causing neurogenic acute respiratory failure. Preliminary data suggest a role of immune hyperinflammation and hyperthrombosis mediating neurological features. Apart from acute neurological manifestations, immune dysregulation may contribute to para and post-infectious complications and potentially, neurodegenerative conditions. These concepts are paramount in developing therapeutic paradigms to mitigate the impact of the pandemic. In this review, we summarise putative pathophysiological underpinnings of neurological manifestations of COVID-19 and guidance for their management.