Patient Experience of a Neurology Tele-Follow-Up Program Initiated During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A Questionnaire-Based Study.

Background: Teleneurology consultations can be highly advantageous since neurological diseases and disabilities often limit patient's access to health care, particularly in a setting where they need to travel long distances for specialty consults. Patient satisfaction is an important outcome assessing success of a telemedicine program. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted to determine satisfaction and perception of patients toward an audio call based teleneurology follow-up initiated during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Primary outcomes were satisfaction to tele-consult, and proportion of patients preferring telemedicine for future follow-up. Results: A total of 261 patients who received tele-consult were enrolled. Satisfaction was highest for domain technological quality, followed by patient-physician dialogue (PPD) and least to quality of care (QoC). Median (interquartile range) patient satisfaction on a 5-point Likert scale was 4 (3-5). Eighty-five (32.6%; 95% confidence interval 26.9-38.6%) patients preferred telemedicine for future follow-up. Higher overall satisfaction was associated with health condition being stable/better, change in treatment advised on tele-consult, diagnosis not requiring follow-up examination, higher scores on domains QoC and PPD (p < 0.05). Future preference for telemedicine was associated with patient him-/herself consulting with doctor, less duration of follow-up, higher overall satisfaction, and higher scores on domain QoC (p < 0.05). On thematic analysis, telemedicine was found convenient, reduced expenditure, and had better physician attention; in-person visits were comprehensive, had better patient-physician relationship, and better communication. Discussion: Patient satisfaction was lower in our study than what has been observed earlier, which may be explained by the primitive nature of our platform. Several variables related to the patients' disease process have an effect on patient satisfaction. Conclusion: Development of robust, structured platforms is necessary to fully utilize the potential of telemedicine in developing countries.

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.

Neuroimaging in COVID-19 Patients on Mechanical Ventilation Receiving Sedation: Insight Beyond Diagnosis: A Case Series

Patients with severe COVID-19 are at risk of thrombotic complications such as deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, and stroke. The incidence of strokes following COVID-19 is reported to be around 1.2%. There has been increased incidence with COVID-19 of large vessel strokes, especially in young patients without any known vascular risk factors. We reported four patients with severe COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome where stroke was diagnosed following neuroimaging. All the patients were on ventilatory assistance and supportive treatment when stroke was diagnosed. They had received sedation and paralytics during mechanical ventilation. Poor response to stimulation and nonresponsiveness after wearing off sedation prompted neuroimaging in these patients, which revealed stroke. Incidentally, all these patients had hypernatremia when stroke was diagnosed. This case series suggests that stroke should be considered a possible cause in all COVID-19 patients presenting with abnormal or altered sensorium.

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.

Clinical Features and Outcome of Stroke with COVID-19. COVID-19 Stroke Study Group (CSSG), India.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Occurrence of stroke has been reported among patients with COVID-19. The present study compares clinical features and outcomes of stroke patients with and without COVID-19. METHODS: The COVID-19 Stroke Study Group (CSSG) is a multicentric study in 18 sites across India to observe and compare the clinical characteristics of patients with stroke admitted during the current pandemic period and a similar epoch in 2019. The present study reports patients of stroke with and without COVID-19 (CoVS and non-CoVS, respectively) seen between February 2020 and July 2020. Demographic, clinical, treatment, and outcome details of patients were collected. RESULTS: The mean age and gender were comparable between the two groups. CoVS patients had higher stroke severity and extent of cerebral involvement on imaging. In-hospital complications and death were higher among CoVS patients (53.06% vs. 17.51%; P < 0.001) and (42.31% vs. 7.6%; P < 0.001), respectively. At 3 months, higher mortality was observed among CoVS patients (67.65% vs. 13.43%; P < 0.001) and good outcome (modified Rankin score [mRS]: 0-2) was seen more often in non-CoVS patients (68.86% vs. 33.33%; P < 0.001). The presence of COVID-19 and baseline stroke severity were independent predictors of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: CoVS is associated with higher severity, poor outcome, and increased mortality. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and baseline stroke severity are independent predictors of mortality.

Intracerebral Hemorrhage and SARS-CoV-2: Association or Causation.

BACKGROUND: Recent respiratory infection including SARS-CoV-2 is an independent risk factor for acute cerebrovascular disease. PURPOSE: There have been reports linking haemorrhagic strokes to SARS-CoV-2 infection during this pandemic, which lead us to evaluate if SARS-CoV-2 infection could be associated with increased risk of intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH). METHODS: A retrospective observational study evaluating all stroke cases admitted in our centre in the past one month. RESULTS: More than half (56%) had ICH, compared to 22% last year. Two patients with ICH were SARS-CoV-2 positive and they had no or mild respiratory symptoms and had higher occurrence of renal dysfunction. CONCLUSION: There could be possible association between ICH and SARS-CoV-2 infections. However, a prospective study with larger sample size is needed to elucidate the pathogenesis.

Clinical profile and outcome of non-COVID strokes during pandemic and the pre pandemic period: COVID-Stroke Study Group (CSSG) India.

BACKGROUND: As the health systems around the world struggled to meet the challenges of COVID-19 pandemic, care of many non-COVID emergencies was affected. AIMS: The present study examined differences in the diagnosis, evaluation and management of stroke patients during a defined period in the ongoing pandemic in 2020 when compared to a similar epoch in year 2019. METHODS: The COVID stroke study group (CSSG) India, included 18 stroke centres spread across the country. Data was collected prospectively between February and July 2020 and retrospectively for the same period in 2019. Details of demographics, stroke evaluation, treatment, in-hospital and three months outcomes were collected and compared between these two time points. RESULTS: A total of 2549 patients were seen in both study periods; 1237 patients (48.53%) in 2019 and 1312 (51.47%) in 2020. Although the overall number of stroke patients and rates of thrombolysis were comparable, a significant decline was observed in the month of April 2020, during the initial period of the pandemic and lockdown. Endovascular treatment reduced significantly and longer door to needle and CT to needle times were observed in 2020. Although mortality was higher in 2020, proportion of patients with good outcome were similar in both the study periods. CONCLUSIONS: Although stroke admissions and rates of thrombolysis were comparable, some work flow metrics were delayed, endovascular stroke treatment rates declined and mortality was higher during the pandemic study period. Reorganization of stroke treatment pathways during the pandemic has likely improved the stroke care delivery across the globe.

Managing Non-COVID Acute Neurology Amidst the Pandemic: Challenges and Work in Progress.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has precipitated a global health crisis. Non-COVID diseases across specialties have been significantly compromised. The greatest challenge has been to continue providing care to non-COVID cases with minimum transmission risk to health care workers, patients, and caregivers. In this specter, better described as a medical holocaust, we present our experiences of dealing with acute neurological patients who could access our facility. We attempted to work on three key areas - initial screening using a more inclusive, dynamic checklist for COVID suspicion over and above the emergency triage, a mandatory initial holding on a separate floor of our inpatient service equipped with infection control strategies similar to a COVID-designated area, and daily screening of health care workers and caregivers for symptoms and possible exposures. It was a steep learning curve, a couple of close shaves, and many more lessons that went into the development of an algorithm that seems to be working well.

Efficacy of various treatment modalities for nCOV-2019: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Several therapeutic agents have been investigated for treatment of novel coronavirus 2019 (nCOV-2019). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of various treatment modalities in nCOV-2019 patients. METHODS: A literature search was conducted before 29 June 2020 in PubMed, Google Scholar and Cochrane library databases. A fixed-effect model was applied if I2  < 50%, else results were combined using random-effect model. Risk ratio (RR) or standardized mean difference (SMD) along with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was used to pool the results. Between-study heterogeneity was explored using influence and sensitivity analyses, and publication bias was assessed using funnel plots. Entire statistical analysis was conducted in R version 3.6.2. RESULTS: Fifty studies involving 15 in vitro and 35 clinical studies including 9170 nCOV-2019 patients were included. Lopinavir-ritonavir was significantly associated with shorter mean time to clinical recovery (SMD -0.32; 95% CI -0.57 to -0.06), remdesivir was significantly associated with better overall clinical recovery (RR 1.17; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.29), and tocilizumab was associated with less all-cause mortality (RR 0.38; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.93). Hydroxychloroquine was associated with longer time to clinical recovery and less overall clinical recovery. It additionally had higher all-cause mortality and more total adverse events. CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis suggests that except in vitro studies, no treatment has shown overall favourable outcomes in nCOV-2019 patients. Lopinavir-ritonavir, remdesivir and tocilizumab may have some benefits, while hydroxychloroquine administration may cause harm in nCOV-2019 patients. Results from upcoming large clinical trials may further clarify role of these drugs.