IMPAIRED HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE IN PATIENTS WITH IDIOPATHIC INFLAMMATORY MYOPATHIES: A CROSS-SECTIONAL ANALYSIS FROM AN INTERNATIONAL E-SURVEY

BackgroundComprehensive and large-scale assessment of health-related quality of life in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) worldwide is lacking. The second COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune disease (COVAD-2) study [1] is an international, multicentre, self-reported e-survey assessing several aspects of COVID-19 infection and vaccination as well as validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to outline patient experience in various autoimmune diseases (AIDs), with a particular focus on IIMs.ObjectivesTo investigate physical and mental health in a global cohort of IIM patients compared to those with non-IIM autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIRDs), non-rheumatic AIDs (NRAIDs), and those without AIDs (controls), using Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) global health data obtained from the COVAD-2 survey.MethodsDemographics, AID diagnoses, comorbidities, disease activity, treatments, and PROMs were extracted from the COVAD-2 database. The primary outcomes were PROMIS Global Physical Health (GPH) and Global Mental Health (GMH) scores. Secondary outcomes included PROMIS physical function short form-10a (PROMIS PF-10a), pain visual analogue scale (VAS), and PROMIS Fatigue-4a scores. Each outcome was compared between IIMs, non-IIM AIRDs, NRAIDs, and controls. Factors affecting GPH and GMH scores in IIMs were identified using multivariable regression analysis.ResultsA total of 10,502 complete responses from 1582 IIMs, 4700 non-IIM AIRDs, 545 NRAIDs, and 3675 controls, which accrued as of May 2022, were analysed. Patients with IIMs were older [59±14 (IIMs) vs. 48±14 (non-IIM AIRDs) vs. 45±14 (NRAIDs) vs. 40±14 (controls) years, p<0.001] and more likely to be Caucasian [82.7% (IIMs) vs. 53.2% (non-IIM AIRDs) vs. 62.4% (NRAIDs) vs. 34.5% (controls), p<0.001]. Among IIMs, dermatomyositis (DM) and juvenile DM were the most common (31.4%), followed by inclusion body myositis (IBM) (24.9%). Patients with IIMs were more likely to have comorbidities [68.1% (IIMs) vs. 45.7% (non-IIM AIRDs) vs. 45.1% (NRAIDs) vs. 26.3% (controls), p<0.001] including mental disorders [33.4% (IIMs) vs. 28.2% (non-IIM AIRDs) vs. 28.4% (NRAIDs) vs. 17.9% (controls), p<0.001].GPH median scores were lower in IIMs compared to NRAIDs or controls [13 (interquartile range 10–15) IIMs vs. 13 (11–15) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 15 (13–17) NRAIDs vs. 17 (15–18) controls, p<0.001] and PROMIS PF-10a median scores were the lowest in IIMs [34 (25–43) IIMs vs. 40 (34–46) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 47 (40–50) NRAIDs vs. 49 (45–50) controls, p<0.001]. GMH median scores were lower in AIDs including IIMs compared to controls [13 (10–15) IIMs vs. 13 (10–15) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 13 (11–16) NRAIDs vs. 15 (13–17) controls, p<0.001]. Pain VAS median scores were higher in AIDs compared to controls [3 (1–5) IIMs vs. 4 (2–6) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 2 (0–4) NRAIDs vs. 0 (0–2) controls, p<0.001]. Of note, PROMIS Fatigue-4a median scores were the highest in IIMs [11 (8–14) IIMs vs. 8 (10–14) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 9 (7–13) NRAIDs vs. 7 (4–10) controls, p<0.001].Multivariable regression analysis in IIMs identified older age, male sex, IBM, comorbidities including hypertension and diabetes, active disease, glucocorticoid use, increased pain and fatigue as the independent factors for lower GPH scores, whereas coexistence of interstitial lung disease, mental disorders including anxiety disorder and depression, active disease, increased pain and fatigue were the independent factors for lower GMH scores.ConclusionBoth physical and mental health are significantly impaired in patients with IIMs compared to those with non-IIM AIDs or those without AIDs. Our results call for greater attention to patient-reported experience and comorbidities including mental disorders to provide targeted approaches and optimise global well-being in patients with IIMs.Reference[1]Fazal ZZ, Sen P, Joshi M, et al. COVAD survey 2 long-term outcomes: unmet need and protocol. Rheumatol Int. 2022;42:2151–58.AcknowledgementsThe authors a e grateful to all respondents for completing the questionnaire. The authors also thank The Myositis Association, Myositis India, Myositis UK, the Myositis Global Network, Cure JM, Cure IBM, Sjögren's India Foundation, EULAR PARE for their contribution to the dissemination of the survey. Finally, the authors wish to thank all members of the COVAD study group for their invaluable role in the data collection.Disclosure of InterestsAkira Yoshida: None declared, Yuan Li: None declared, Vahed Maroufy: None declared, Masataka Kuwana Speakers bureau: Boehringer Ingelheim, Ono Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie, Janssen, Astellas, Bayer, Asahi Kasei Pharma, Chugai, Eisai, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Nippon Shinyaku, Pfizer, Consultant of: Corbus, Mochida, Grant/research support from: Boehringer Ingelheim, Ono Pharmaceuticals, Naveen Ravichandran: None declared, Ashima Makol Consultant of: Boehringer-Ingelheim, Parikshit Sen: None declared, James B. Lilleker: None declared, Vishwesh Agarwal: None declared, Sinan Kardes: None declared, Jessica Day Grant/research support from: CSL Limited, Marcin Milchert: None declared, Mrudula Joshi: None declared, Tamer A Gheita: None declared, Babur Salim: None declared, Tsvetelina Velikova: None declared, Abraham Edgar Gracia-Ramos: None declared, Ioannis Parodis Grant/research support from: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, and F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Elena Nikiphorou Speakers bureau: Celltrion, Pfizer, Sanofi, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Consultant of: Celltrion, Pfizer, Sanofi, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Ai Lyn Tan Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Gilead, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Gilead, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Arvind Nune: None declared, Lorenzo Cavagna: None declared, Miguel A Saavedra Consultant of: AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline, Samuel Katsuyuki Shinjo: None declared, Nelly Ziade Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, Johannes Knitza: None declared, Oliver Distler Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Medscape, Novartis, Consultant of: 4P-Pharma, AbbVie, Acceleron, Alcimed, Altavant, Amgen, AnaMar, Arxx, AstraZeneca, Baecon, Blade, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Corbus, CSL Behring, Galderma, Galapagos, Glenmark, Gossamer, iQvia, Horizon, Inventiva, Janssen, Kymera, Lupin, Medscape, Merck, Miltenyi Biotec, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Prometheus, Redxpharma, Roivant, Sanofi, Topadur, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Kymera, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Roche, Hector Chinoy Grant/research support from: Eli Lilly, UCB, Vikas Agarwal: None declared, Rohit Aggarwal Consultant of: Mallinckrodt, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Bristol Myers-Squibb, EMD Serono, Kezar, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Alexion, Argenx, Boehringer Ingelheim (BI), Corbus, Janssen, Kyverna, Roivant, Merck, Galapagos, Actigraph, Abbvie, Scipher, Horizontal Therapeutics, Teva, Biogen, Beigene, ANI Pharmaceutical, Nuvig, Capella, CabalettaBio, Grant/research support from: Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Mallinckrodt, Janssen, Q32, EMD Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, Latika Gupta: None declared.

REDUCED HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE USING PROMIS IN PATIENTS WITH SYSTEMIC SCLEROSIS: A CROSS-SECTIONAL ANALYSIS FROM THE INTERNATIONAL COVAD-2 E-SURVEY

BackgroundThe second COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune disease (COVAD-2) study [1] is an international, multicentre, self-reported e-survey designed to evaluate several facets covering COVID-19 infection and vaccination as well as validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in a variety of autoimmune diseases (AIDs), including systemic sclerosis (SSc). Detailed assessment of the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and its drivers in patients with SSc is lacking.ObjectivesTo assess physical and mental health in a global cohort of SSc patients in comparison with non-SSc autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIRDs), non-rheumatic AIDs (NRAIDs), and those without AIDs (controls) using Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) global health data from the COVAD-2 survey.MethodsThe COVAD-2 database was used to extract demographics, AID diagnosis, comorbidities, disease activity, current therapies, and PROMs. PROMIS global physical health (GPH), global mental health (GMH) scores, PROMIS physical function short form-10a (PROMIS PF-10a), pain visual analogue scale (VAS), and PROMIS Fatigue-4a scores were compared between SSc, non-SSc AIRDs, NRAIDs, and controls. Outcomes were also compared between diffuse cutaneous SSc (dcSSc) vs limited cutaneous SSc (lcSSc). Multivariable regression analysis was performed to identify factors influencing GPH and GMH scores in SSc.ResultsA total of 10,502 complete responses from 276 SSc, 6006 non-SSc AIRDs, 545 NRAIDs, and 3675 controls as of May 2022 were included in the analysis. Respondents with SSc were older [SSc vs. non-SSc AIRDs vs. NRAIDs vs. controls: 55 (14) vs. 51 (15) vs. 45 (14) vs. 40 (14) years old, mean (SD), p < 0.001]. Among patients with SSc, 129 (47%) had dcSSc and 147 (53%) had lcSSc. SSc patients reported a significantly higher prevalence of ILD [SSc vs. non-SSc AIRDs vs. NRAIDs vs. controls: 30.4% vs. 5.5% vs. 1.5% vs. 0.2%, p < 0.001], and treatment with MMF [SSc vs. non-SSc AIRDs vs. NRAIDs vs. controls: 26.4% vs. 9.5% vs. 1.1% vs. 0%, p < 0.001].Patients with SSc had lower GPH and PROMIS PF-10a scores [SSc vs. non-SSc AIRDs vs. NRAIDs vs. controls: 13 (11–15) vs. 13 (11–15) vs. 15 (13–17) vs. 17 (15–18), median (IQR), p < 0.001;39 (33–46) vs. 39 (32–45) vs. 47 (40–50) vs. 49 (45–50), p < 0.001, respectively] and higher Pain VAS and PROMIS Fatigue-4a scores compared to those with NRAIDs or controls [SSc vs. non-SSc AIRDs vs. NRAIDs vs. controls: 3 (2–5) vs. 3 (1–6) vs. 2 (0–4) vs. 0 (0–2), p < 0.001;11 (8–14) vs. 11 (8–14) vs. 9 (7–13) vs. 7 (4–10), p < 0.001, respectively]. Patients with AIDs including SSc had lower GMH scores compared to controls [SSc vs. non-SSc AIRDs vs. NRAIDs vs. controls: 12.5 (10–15) vs. 13 (10–15) vs. 13 (11–16) vs. 15 (13–17), p < 0.001].Among SSc patients, GPH, GMH, and PROMIS PF-10a scores were lower in dcSSc compared to lcSSc [dcSSc vs. lcSSc: 12 (10–14) vs. 14 (11–15), p < 0.001;12 (10-14) vs. 13 (10-15), p<0.001;38 (30–43) vs. 41 (34–47), p < 0.001, respectively]. Pain VAS and PROMIS Fatigue-4a scores were higher in dcSSc compared to lcSSc [4 (2–6) vs. 3 (1–5), p < 0.001;12 (8–15) vs. 9 (8–13), p < 0.001, respectively].The independent factors for lower GPH scores in SSc were older age, Asian ethnicity, glucocorticoid use, and higher pain and fatigue scales, while mental health disorders and higher pain and fatigue scales were independently associated with lower GMH scores.ConclusionIn a global cohort, patient-reported physical and mental health were significantly worse in patients with SSc in comparison to those with non-SSc AIDs and without AIDs. Our findings support the critical need for more attention to patient's subjective experiences including pain and fatigue to improve the HRQOL in patients with SSc.Reference[1]Fazal ZZ, Sen P, Joshi M, et al. COVAD survey 2 long-term outcomes: unmet need and protocol. Rheumatol Int. 2022;42: 2151–58.Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsKeina Yomono: None declared, Yuan Li: None dec ared, Vahed Maroufy: None declared, Naveen Ravichandran: None declared, Akira Yoshida: None declared, Kshitij Jagtap: None declared, Tsvetelina Velikova Speakers bureau: Pfizer and AstraZeneca, Parikshit Sen: None declared, Lorenzo Cavagna: None declared, Vishwesh Agarwal: None declared, Johannes Knitza: None declared, Ashima Makol: None declared, Dey Dzifa: None declared, Carlos Enrique Toro Gutierrez: None declared, Tulika Chatterjee: None declared, Aarat Patel: None declared, Rohit Aggarwal Consultant of: Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Genentech, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Mallinckrodt, AstraZeneca, Corbus, Kezar, Abbvie, Janssen, Kyverna Alexion, Argenx, Q32, EMD-Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roivant, Merck, Galapagos, Actigraph, Scipher, Horizon Therepeutics, Teva, Beigene, ANI Pharmaceuticals, Biogen, Nuvig, Capella Bioscience, and CabalettaBio, Grant/research support from: Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Genentech, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Mallinckrodt, AstraZeneca, Corbus, Kezar, Abbvie, Janssen, Kyverna Alexion, Argenx, Q32, EMD-Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roivant, Merck, Galapagos, Actigraph, Scipher, Horizon Therepeutics, Teva, Beigene, ANI Pharmaceuticals, Biogen, Nuvig, Capella Bioscience, and CabalettaBio, Latika Gupta: None declared, Masataka Kuwana Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Asahi-Kasei, Astellas, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chugai, Eisai, MBL, Mochida, Nippon Shinyaku, Ono Pharmaceuticals, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Consultant of: Astra Zeneka, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chugai, Corbus, GSK, Horizon, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Grant/research support from: Boehringer-Ingelheim, Vikas Agarwal: None declared.

Long-term support of COVID-19 patients with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: Complications, predictors of mortality and long-term outcome

Objectives: Treatment of severe respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to COVID-19 by veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) had a mortality of up to 70% in Germany. Many patients with COVID-19 need VV-ECMO support longer than 28 days (long-term VV-ECMO). Evidence on mortality, complications during intensive care, functional status after discharge and mortality-predictors for patients supported with long-term VV-ECMO is lacking. Method(s): Retrospective study of 137 consecutive patients treated with VV-ECMO for ARDS due to COVID-19 at University Hospital Regensburg from March 2020 to March 2022. Result(s): 38% (n=52;87% male) of patients needed longterm VV-ECMO support. In these, SOFA score (median [IQR]) at ECMO initiation was 9 [8-11], age 58.2 [50.6- 62.5] years, PaO2/FiO2-ratio 67 [52-88] mmHg, pCO262 [52-74] mmHg, Murray-Score 3.3 [3.0-3.6] and PEEP 15 [13 - 16] cmH2O. Duration of long-term support was 45 [35-65] days. 26 (50%) patients were discharged from the ICU. Only one patient died after hospital discharge. At VVECMO initiation, baseline characteristics did not differ between deceased and survivors. Complications were frequent (acute kidney injury: 31/52, renal replacement therapy: 14/52, pulmonary embolism: 21/52, intracranial hemorrhage 8/52, major bleeding 34/52 and secondary sclerosing cholangitis: 5/52) and more frequent in the deceased. Karnofsky index (normal 100) after rehabilitation was 70 [57.5-82.5]. Twelve of the 18 patients discharged from rehabilitation had a satisfactory quality of life according to their own subjective assessment. Four patients required nursing support. Mortality-predictors within the first 30 days on VV-ECMO only observed in those who deceased later, were: Bilirubin >5mg/dl for > 7 days, pulmonary compliance <10ml/mbar for >14 days, and repeated serum concentrations of interleukin 8 >150ng/L. Conclusion(s): Long-term extracorporeal lung support in patients with COVID-19 resulted in 50 % survival and subsequently lead to a satisfactory quality of life and functionality in the majority of patients. It should preferably be performed in experienced centers because of a high incidence of complications. Several findings during the early course were associated with late mortality but need validation in large prospective studies.

Anxiety and depression among epilepsy patients in low-risk areas for COVID-19 in the northern part of Guizhou Province, China, during the COVID-19 pandemic

BackgroundThis study was aimed to investigate whether patients with epilepsy (PWE) have higher depression and anxiety levels than the normal population in low-risk areas for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the northern part of Guizhou Province, China, during the COVID-19 epidemic, to evaluate their knowledge on COVID-19, and to analyze related factors for the psychological distress of PWE at this special time.MethodsThe survey was conducted online from February 28, 2020 to March 7, 2020 via a questionnaire. PWE from the outpatient clinic of epilepsy of the Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University, and healthy people matched for age and sex, participated in this study. Mental health was assessed via a generalized anxiety self-rating scale (GAD-7) and the self-rating depression scale (PHQ-9). The knowledge of COVID-19 in both groups was investigated.ResultsThere were no significant differences in the general demographics between the PWE and healthy control groups. The scores of PHQ-9 (P < 0.01) and GAD-7 (P < 0.001) were higher in the PWE group than in the healthy group. There was a significant difference in the proportions of respondents with different severities of depression and anxiety, between the two groups, which revealed significantly higher degree of depression and anxiety in PWE than in healthy people (P = 0, P = 0). Overwhelming awareness and stressful concerns for the pandemic and female patients with epilepsy were key factors that affect the level of anxiety and depression in PWE. Further, the PWE had less accurate knowledge of COVID-19 than healthy people (P < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in the knowledge of virus transmission route, incubation period, susceptible population, transmission speed, clinical characteristics, and isolation measures on COVID-19 (P > 0.05). PWE knew less about some of the prevention and control measures of COVID-19 than healthy people.ConclusionsDuring the COVID-19 epidemic, excessive attention to the epidemic and the female sex are factors associated with anxiety and depression in PWE, even in low-risk areas.

Reassures Me There Are People Around Who Care about Me: Analyzing Meanings of Support for People with Epilepsy

Aims The study aimed to examine the nature and outcomes of social support for the well-being and quality of life (QoL) of adults with epilepsy. Methods The Australian Epilepsy Longitudinal Survey's 5 th Wave included the Medical Outcomes Study Modified Social Support Survey on four dimensions of social support and the QOLIE-31. Both numerical data and open-ended responses were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively. A mixed method was used where quantitative analysis used t -tests, analysis of variance and block recursive regression, and qualitative analysis identified themes. Results Three-hundred thirty-two people with epilepsy (PWE) participated. The quantitative component showed that for emotional/informational support being older and living alone were key factors. These as well as household income were important in tangible support. For affectionate support living alone and household income were factors, but only income was a factor for positive social interaction. In addition, only positive social interaction predicted increased QoL. In the qualitative component of the study both positive and negative supports were identified for the emotional/informational supports. Many reported the benefits of having information, although some reported failure to have their needs taken seriously by health professionals or epilepsy associations. Inability to drive was an important feature of negative tangible support as was finding some assistive services unaffordable. Reports of positive social interaction identified being accepted as a person with epilepsy that is the primary concern. Peer support plays a role here. Discussion The findings of factors affecting the four dimensions of support in this study have supported a number of studies. This includes the effects of positive social interaction on QoL. The qualitative analysis supports these results, but it also contributes to deeper understanding of support in the lives of PWE. Conclusion Social support is a particularly important issue for PWE. The results of this study demonstrate the complexities and benefits of obtaining the appropriate forms of support. This survey took place before the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and it may well be that this phenomenon affects PWE's support needs. Copyright © 2023. Indian Epilepsy Society. All rights reserved.

THE PREVALENCE AND INCIDENCE OF PSORIASIS AND PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS IN ENGLAND FROM 2009-2019: AN OBSERVATIONAL STUDY USING PRIMARY CARE DATA

BackgroundPsoriasis (PsO) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) can greatly impact quality of life and result in substantial personal and societal costs. Complete and up to date data on the prevalence and incidence of these conditions and whether these change over time and vary by age is important for healthcare service planning so that specialist care and funding can be appropriately allocated.ObjectivesTo determine the prevalence and incidence of PsO and PsA in males and females from 2009-2019 across all age groups in England.MethodsWe used Clinical Practice Research Datalink AURUM, a primary care electronic health record database, including 20% of the English population. The codes used to identify patients with PsO and PsA were selected by rheumatologists and dermatologists and cross-checked with published code lists from other studies to ensure inclusion of all relevant codes. All included patients must have data for at least 1 year before their diagnosis. The annual incidence and point prevalence were calculated from 2009-2019 and stratified by age/sex. The study period ended in 2019 to avoid COVID-19 pandemic affecting results.ResultsThe prevalence of PsO and PsA in males and females increased annually, peaking in 2019 (PsO males 2.41% [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.40, 2.42];PsO females 2.60% [95% CI 2.59-2.61];PsA males 0.20% [95% CI 0.20-0.20];PsA females 0.21% [95% CI 0.21- 0.22]), as illustrated in Table 1. In 2019, the prevalence of PsO and PsA was highest in the over 65 years age group;PsO 4.25% [95% CI 4.22-4.28] and PsA 0.38% [95% CI 0.37-0.38]. The annual incidence (per 100,000 person years) of PsO has gradually decreased in males (from 168 (164-171) in 2009 to 148 (145-151) in 2019) but in females it has been stable with a slight annual decrease (from 180 (177-184) in 2009 to 173 (170-176) in 2019). The annual incidence for PsA has increased in both males and females (13 (12-14) in 2009 and 15 (14-16) in 2019 for males and 12 (11-13) in 2009 and 18 (17-19) in 2019 for females).ConclusionThe increasing prevalence of PsO and PsA highlights the importance of organising healthcare services to meet this need, particularly in the elderly population.ReferencesNIL.Table 1.Prevalence of PsO and PsA from 2009-2019 in EnglandYear20092010201120122013201420152016201720182019Population (n)1073383110910802110318501118036711343299112249341137842211657996119336261223432512420998PsO (n)216841229106239819250667259988268032276804286499295712304568311104PsO prevalence (%, 95%CI)-Male1.98 (1.96-1.99)2.06 (2.05- 2.07)2.13 (2.12-2.14)2.19 (2.18-2.20)2.24 (2.23- 2.25)2.33 (2.32- 2.34)2.37 (2.36- 2.38)2.39 (2.38- 2.40)2.40 (2.39- 2.41)2.40 (2.39- 2.42)2.41 (2.40- 2.42)-Female2.07 (2.05- 2.08)2.14 (2.13- 2.16)2.22 (2.21- 2.23)2.29 (2.28- 2.31)2.35 (2.33- 2.36)2.45 (2.43- 2.46)2.50 (2.49- 2.51)2.53 (2.52- 2.54)2.56 (2.54- 2.57)2.58 (2.56- 2.59)2.60 (2.59- 2.61)PsO incidence (100,000 person years)-Male168 (164-171)158 (155- 162)161 (158-165)153 (150-157)161 (157- 164)156 (153- 159)155 (152- 159)154 (151- 157)153 (150-156)150 (147-153)148 (145-151)-Female180 (177-184)176 (172-179)181 (177-184)171 (167-174)175 (171-178)176 (172-180)179 (176-183)178 (174-181)177 (174-181)174 (170-177)173 (170-176)PsA (n)1444515443164681752218545196182072021994232572451425683PsA prevalence (%, 95%CI)-Male0.14 (0.14- 0.14)0.15 (0.14- 0.15)0.15 (0.15- 0.16)0.16 (0.16- 0.16)0.17 (0.16- 0.17)0.18 (0.17- 0.18)0.18 (0.18- 0.19)0.19 (0.18- 0.19)0.19 (0.19- 0.20)0.20 (0.19- 0.20)0.20 (0.20- 0.20)-Female0.13 (0.13- 0.13)0.14 (0.13- 0.14)0.15 (0.14- 0.15)0.15 (0.15- 0.16)0.16 (0.16- 0.16)0.17 (0.17- 0.18)0.18 (0.18- 0.18)0.19 (0.19- 0.19)0.20 (0.19- 0.20)0.20 (0.20- 0.21)0.21 (0.21- 0.22)PsA incidence (100,000 person years)-Male13 (12- 14)12 (11- 13)13 (12- 14)12 (11- 13)13 (12-14)14 (13- 15)14 (13- 15)14 (13-15)1514-16)14(13- 15)15 (14-16)-Female12 (11- 13)13 (12- 14)13 (12- 14)14 (13-15)14 (13-15)15 (14-16)17 (16- 18)16 (15- 17)17 (16- 18)18 (17-19)18 (17-19)Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsArani Vivekanantham: None declared, Edward Burn: None dec ared, Marta Pineda-Moncusí: None declared, Sara Khalid Grant/research support from: SK has received research grant funding from the UKRI and Alan Turing Institute outside this work. SK's research group has received grant support from Amgen and UCB Biopharma., Daniel Prieto-Alhambra Grant/research support from: DPA's department has received grant/s from Amgen, Chiesi-Taylor, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, and UCB Biopharma. His research group has received consultancy fees from Astra Zeneca and UCB Biopharma. Amgen, Astellas, Janssen, Synapse Management Partners and UCB Biopharma have funded or supported training programmes organised by DPA's department., Laura Coates Speakers bureau: LC has been paid as a speaker for AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB., Consultant of: LC has worked as a paid consultant for AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB., Grant/research support from: LC has received grants/research support from AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Novartis and Pfizer.

COMPARATIVE DISEASE BURDEN IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS, PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS OR ANKYLOSING SPONDYLITIS: DATA FROM COVAD PATIENT-REPORTED E-SURVEY

BackgroundRheumatoid arthritis (RA) and spondyloarthritis, including either Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) and Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS), are some of the most diagnosed autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) in rheumatologists' routine clinical practice [1]. Understanding patients' health and functional status is crucial to provide personalized management strategies to optimize disease control and enhance the quality of life.ObjectivesWe aimed to compare disease burden in patients with RA, PsA or AS by assessing Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Health, Global Mental Health, Physical Function and Fatigue 4a together with VAS Pain.MethodsData were obtained in the international COVID vaccination in autoimmune rheumatic diseases study second e-survey (COVAD study). Demographics, AIRD diagnosis, disease activity, PROMIS Global Physical health, PROMIS Global Mental Health, PROMIS Physical Function SF10 and PROMIS Fatigue 4a score were extracted from the COVAD study database. For this study, we only included patients with self-reported RA or spondyloarthritis (either PsA or AS) undergoing active treatment with conventional synthetic disease-modifying drugs (DMARDs) and/or biologic DMARDs, who answered all the survey questions. Active disease was defined as the patient's perception of their disease as active in the four weeks before their first COVID-19 vaccine shot. Analysis of Variance with Bartlett's and Tukey's test was used to compare continuous variables between groups.ResultsFrom January to June 2022, n.1907 patients with RA, female 87.62% (1671/1907), with mean age (±SD) 50.95 ±13.67, n.311 patients with PsA, female 67.20% (209/311), with a mean age of 50.42 ±12.70, and n.336 patients with AS, male 51.31% (209/311), with a mean age of 43.13 ±12.75 years, responded to the COVAD e-survey.In those with active disease, neither physical health, global mental health, physical function, fatigue, nor pain were different among groups (Table 1, Figure 1). Patients with inactive AS had higher mean global physical health scores than RA patients (13.13 ±2.93 VS RA 12.48 ±2.90, p=0.01, Table 1). Those with inactive RA or PsA showed more severe fatigue (PsA 10.58 ±2.22, RA 10.45 ±4.08 VS 9.4 ±4.13, p =0.01 for both). Patients with inactive RA also reported poorer physical function and more residual pain than those with AS (37.79 ±8.86 VS 41.13 ±7.79, p<0.001;3.87 ±2.45 VS 3.34 ±2.39, p=0.01, respectively). Similarly, residual pain was perceived as higher in patients with inactive PsA than those with AS (4.04 ±2.50 VS 3.34 ±2.39, p=0.01)ConclusionDisease burden is roughly comparable in patients with active RA, PsA or AS. Patients with inactive RA and PsA suffer higher disease burden than those with inactive AS.Reference[1]Mease PJ, Liu M, Rebello S, Kang H, Yi E, Park Y, Greenberg JD. Comparative Disease Burden in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis, Psoriatic Arthritis, or Axial Spondyloarthritis: Data from Two Corrona Registries. Rheumatol Ther. 2019 Dec;6(4):529-542.Table 1.Patient-Reported Outcome Measures between groups.Inactive diseaseAS (n.185)PsA (n.179)RA (n.1167)MeanSDMeanSDMeanSDPROMIS Global Physical Health13.13*2.9512.433.2712.482.90p=0.01, VS RAPROMIS Global Mental Health13.313.3612.973.3312.843.17PROMIS Fatigue 4a9.44.1310.58*4.2210.45*4.08p=0.01, bothPROMIS Physical Function SF10 Score41.137.3939.279.0137.79*8.86p<0.001, VS ASVAS Pain3.342.394.04*2.503.87*2.45p=0.01, bothActive DiseaseAS (n.35)PsA (n.38)RA (n.189)MeanSDMeanSDMeanSDPROMIS Global Physical Health11.053.1910.102.7611.243.41PROMIS Global Mental Health11.313.2610.843.6311.893.30PROMIS Fatigue 4a12.944.8712.844.4211.754.68PROMIS Physical Function SF10 Score35.829.6233.528.7634.909.80VAS Pain4.682.775.02.544.682.61Figure 1.Violin plots showing kernel densities, quartiles and median for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for patients with RA, PsA and AS, stratified by disease activity status.[Figure omitted. See PDF]Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsVincenzo Venerito: None declared, Marc Fornaro: None declared, Florenzo Iannone: None declared, Lorenzo Cavagna: None declared, Masataka Kuwana: None declared, Vishwesh Agarwal: None declared, Naveen Ravichandran: None declared, Jessica Day Grant/research support from: JD has received research funding from CSL Limited., Mrudula Joshi: None declared, Sreoshy Saha: None declared, Syahrul Sazliyana Shaharir: None declared, Wanruchada Katchamart: None declared, Phonpen Akarawatcharangura Goo: None declared, Lisa Traboco: None declared, Yi-Ming Chen: None declared, Parikshit Sen: None declared, James B. Lilleker Speakers bureau: JBL has received speaker honoraria/participated in advisory boards for Sanofi Genzyme, Roche, and Biogen. None is related to this manuscript., Consultant of: JBL has received speaker honoraria/participated in advisory boards for Sanofi Genzyme, Roche, and Biogen. None is related to this manuscript., Arvind Nune: None declared, John Pauling: None declared, Chris Wincup: None declared, Ai Lyn Tan Speakers bureau: ALT has received honoraria for advisory boards and speaking for Abbvie, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB., Nelly Ziade Speakers bureau: NZ has received speaker fees, advisory board fees, and research grants from Pfizer, Roche, Abbvie, Eli Lilly, NewBridge, Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, and Pierre Fabre;none are related to this manuscript, Grant/research support from: NZ has received speaker fees, advisory board fees, and research grants from Pfizer, Roche, Abbvie, Eli Lilly, NewBridge, Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, and Pierre Fabre;none are related to this manuscript, Marcin Milchert: None declared, Abraham Edgar Gracia-Ramos: None declared, Carlo Vinicio Caballero: None declared, COVAD Study: None declared, Vikas Agarwal: None declared, Rohit Aggarwal Speakers bureau: RA has a consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from the following companies: Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Genentech, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Mallinckrodt, AstraZeneca, Corbus, Kezar, Abbvie, Janssen, Alexion, Argenx, Q32, EMD-Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Roivant., Grant/research support from: RA has a consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from the following companies: Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Genentech, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Mallinckrodt, AstraZeneca, Corbus, Kezar, Abbvie, Janssen, Alexion, Argenx, Q32, EMD-Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Roivant., Latika Gupta: None declared.

Trauma-focused therapy in early intervention for psychosis settings: Results of a feasibility RCT of 'EMDR for psychosis'

Aims: Trauma is particularly prevalent amongst Early Intervention (EI) patients and is associated with adverse clinical and prognostic outcomes. To determine the feasibility of a large-scale randomized controlled trial (RCT) of an 'EMDR for psychosis' intervention for trauma survivors with active psychotic symptoms supported by EI services, we conducted a single-blind RCT comparing 16 sessions of EMDRp + TAU versus TAU only. Method(s): EMDRp therapy and trial assessments were completed both in-person and remotely during the COVID-19 pandemic, and key feasibility outcomes (recruitment & retention, therapy attendance/ engagement, adherence to EMPRp treatment protocol, and the 'promise of efficacy' of EMDRp on relevant clinical outcomes) were examined at 6- and 12-month post-randomization assessments. Results and Conclusion(s): 60 participants (100% of the recruitment target) received TAU or EMDR + TAU. The feasibility criteria examined in this trial were fully met, and EMDRp was associated with promising signals of efficacy on a range of valuable post-treatment outcomes, including improved psychotic symptoms (PANSS), subjective recovery (QPR), post-traumatic symptoms (PCL-5;ITQ), depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (GAD-7) and general health status (EQ-5D-VAS) at the 6-month assessment. Signals of efficacy at 12-month were less pronounced, but remained robust for trauma symptoms and general health status. The findings will be discussed with relevance to future clinical trials of trauma-focused therapy in clients with early psychosis, and the provision of more tailored trauma therapies for EI service users.

Impact of COVID-19 Lock Down on Quality of Life among Primary Caregivers of Individuals with Schizophrenia in Rural Areas

BACKGROUND: The lockdown would become the primary strategy for facing covid-19 as it quickly mutates which might cause repeated pandemics;however, it negatively affects individuals' quality of life (QOL). The schizophrenia caregivers experience considerable stress. The research on the impact of the COVID-19 lockdown on QOL of schizophrenia caregivers is essential, especially for those who reside in rural areas. AIM: This study aimed to investigate the impact of lockdown-related COVID-19 on QOL among primary caregivers of schizophrenia patients living in a rural area. METHOD(S): This study recruited 204 primary caregivers (15-79 years). This study used the World Health Organization Quality of Life instrument (WHOQOL-BREF) to asses QOL's primary caregiver. Evaluate the possible change in caregivers' QOL before and during the COVID-19 lockdown using paired t-test for repeated measures. RESULT(S): The mean age of the caregivers was 46.61 years (SD = 12.79), ranging from 15 to 79 years, with a preponderance of male (54.5%), aged 38-47 years old (29.7%), married (81.2%), employed (57.4%), and had senior high school level of education (34.7%). Majority were parents (26.2%) of the ill relative, and took care of the patients more than 5 years (52.5%). There was a statistical difference (p < 0.05) in caregivers' QOL between before and during the COVID-19 lockdown, including in physical health, psychological, social relationships, and environment domain. CONCLUSION(S): Implementing a lockdown policy related to COVID-19 has negatively impacted the caregivers' QOL. The degradation of caregivers' QOL showed from before to during COVID-19 lockdown. Further study needs to explore the QOL of other mental illness caregivers regarding COVID-19 lockdown. This finding becomes a reference for a government to modify some policy-related lockdowns to minimize their negative impact.Copyright © 2023 Utomo Utomo, Eko Mulyadi, Endang Fauziyah.

Examination of the Effects of COVID-19 on Happiness in Different Geographical Regions with Piecewise Linear Panel Data Models

The COVID-19 pandemic has recently caused the loss of millions of lives, and billions of others have been deeply affected. This crisis has changed the way people live, think about life, and perceive happiness. The aim of this study is to reveal differences between geographical regions by investigating the effect of the happiness variable on different countries during the international COVID-19 pandemic. The primary purpose is to demonstrate how such a pandemic may affect different countries in terms of happiness at the individual level and to identify possible strategies for the future. With this aim, both static and dynamic panel data models were used while applying fixed effects, random effects, and the generalized method of moments (GMM). A basic assumption in panel data models is that the coefficients do not change over time. This assumption is unlikely to hold, however, especially during major devastating events like COVID-19. Therefore, the piecewise linear panel data model was applied in this study. As a result of empirical analysis, pre- and post-COVID differences were seen between different geographical regions. Based on analysis conducted for three distinct geographical regions with piecewise linear models, it was determined that the piecewise random effects model was appropriate for European and Central Asian countries, the piecewise FGLS model for Latin American and Caribbean countries, and the piecewise linear GMM model for South Asian countries. According to the results, there are many variables that affect happiness, which vary according to different geographical conditions and societies with different cultural values.

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on medical students: A cross-sectional study

Background: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has affected the medical education throughout the world. A study was done to assess the effect of education and psychological behavior on medical students. Aims and Objectives: The objective of the study is to evaluate the effect of COVID-19 on medical graduates in various aspects such as education, effect on clinical rotations, impact on the technology used for online classes, effect on quality of life, loneliness, sleep, and depressive symptoms. Material(s) and Method(s): A set of questions were distributed to Government Medical college, Suryapet students during November 2021-January 2022. Questionnaire aimed to study students' viewpoint of COVID-19's impact on their education, mental health, and willingness to participate clinically. Result(s): One hundred medical students from Government Medical College, Suryapet participated in this study. Most students (88%) agreed that pandemic had disrupted their medical education. About 64% agreed to attend clinical rotations and 68% of students accepting the risk of contracting COVID-19 in clinical rotations. COVID-19 had an impact on technology tools used for medical education. Students reported that COVID-19 had moderate impact on quality of life, sleep quality, anxiety, and depressive symptoms. Conclusion(s): The COVID-19 had an overall significant negative impact on undergraduate medical education. It is recommended that measures need to be taken to relieve students' stress.Copyright © 2023, Mr Bhawani Singh. All rights reserved.

Faktory ovplyvňujúce duševné zdravie sestier v období pandémie covidu-19

Súhrn Úvod: Zdravotnícki pracovníci, predovšetkým sestry, môžu byť v exponovanom období počas pandémie covidu-19 vystavení zvýšenej psychickej záťaži. Cieľ: Zistiť, aký je dopad zvýšených nárokov na poskytovanie zdravotnej starostlivosti spojený s koronakrízou, na úroveň psychickej záťaže a kvality života sestier na rôznych pracoviskách. Metodika: Prierezová, prieskumná štúdia merania duševného zdravia u 504 sestier. Bol použitý štandardizovaný dotazník SF-36 a Meisterov dotazník miery neuropsychickej záťaže. Výsledky: Škála preťaženia a monotónnosti významne (p < 0,05) a negatívne (r < 0) koreluje s kvalitou života v každej z domén. Celková záťaž významne (p < 0,05) a negatívne (r < 0) koreluje s kvalitou života v každej z domén. Vek respondentov významne (p < 0,05) a pozitívne (r > 0) koreluje s kvalitou života v doménach vitalita, mentálne zdravie a duševné zdravie a negatívne (r < 0) koreluje s kvalitou života v oblastiach fyzické fungovanie, telesná bolesť, celkové vnímanie zdravia a celkové fyzické zdravie. Záťaž signifikantne lepšie zvládali muži. Signifikantne vyššia bola v skupine respondentov pracujúcich na jednotkách intenzívnej starostlivosti a v primárnej zdravotnej starostlivosti. Záver: Zvýšené nároky na poskytovanie zdravotnej starostlivosti spojené s koronakrízou negatívne pôsobili na úroveň psychickej záťaže a kvalitu života sestier. Horšie výsledky boli zaznamenané u sestier pracujúcich na jednotkách intenzívnej starostlivosti a v primárnej zdravotnej starostlivosti.Alternate :Introduction: Health care workers, especially nurses, may be exposed to increased psychological stress during the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective: To determine how the increased demands on health care delivery associated with the coronavirus crisis affect the level of psychological stress and quality of life of nurses in different workplaces. Methods: A cross-sectional exploratory study of mental health in 504 nurses. The standardized SF-36 questionnaire and Meister's questionnaire for neuropsychological strain were used. Results: The overload and monotony scales are significantly (p < 0.05) and negatively (r < 0) correlated with quality of life in each of the domains. The total load is significantly (p < 0.05) and negatively (r < 0) correlated with quality of life in each of the domains. The age of respondents is significantly (p < 0.05) and positively (r < 0) correlated with quality of life in the domains of Vitality, Mental Health, and Mental Component Summary, and negatively (r > 0) correlated with quality of life in the domains of Physical Functioning, Bodily Pain, General Health, and Physical Component Summary. Men handled the stress significantly better. Stress levels were significantly higher in the group of respondents working in intensive care units and in primary care. Conclusions: The increased demands on health care delivery associated with the coronavirus crisis had a negative impact on the level of psychological load and the quality of life of nurses. Worse results were found in nurses working in intensive care units and in primary care.

Pleurisy and pericarditis as a cause of atypical chest pain in patients with in early post-COVID-19 period.

During the pandemic COVID-19, there has been an increase in the number of patients with non-anginal chest pain at cardiologist appointments. Objective. To assess the incidence of signs of pleurisy and pericarditis after COVID-19 in non-comorbid patients with atypical chest pain and describe their characteristics according to echocardiography and magnetic resonance imaging. Materials and methods. From February 2021 to January 2022, 200 outpatients were prospectively enrolled in the study, all of them suffered from a discomfort in the heart region for the first time after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Inclusion criteria: 18-50 years old, 5-12 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 infection, non-anginal chest pain. Exclusion criteria: pneumonia or signs of pulmonary thromboembolism, coronary heart disease, congestive heart failure or kidney disease, clinical or laboratory signs of myocarditis, oncopathology, radiation or chemotherapy of the chest in past medical history. A survey was conducted (yes/no) for the presence of general malaise, quality of life deterioration, hyperthermia, cough. Ultrasound examination of the pericardium and pleura to detect effusion or post-inflammatory changes was performed in accordance with the recommendations. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed if ultrasound imaging was poor or there was no evidence of pericardial or pleural involvement in patients with typical symptoms. Results. 82 women and 118 men were included. Median of age 39 [28-46] years old. Pericarditis was diagnosed in 152 (76%) patients, including effusive pericarditis in 119 (78%), myocarditis in 6 (3%) and myopericarditis in 49 (25%) patients, pleurisy was detected in 22 (11%) patients, exudative pleurisy - in 11 (5.5%) patients with a predominant unilateral lesion of the mediastinal-diaphragmatic region adjacent to the heart. Hyperthermia was recorded in 2.5% of cases, general malaise - in 60% and a decrease in the quality of life - in 84%. Conclusion. Serositis as a cause of atypical chest pain among young non-comorbid patients in early postCOVID was identified in 87% of patients. In the coming years, it is probably worthwhile to perform ultrasound of the pericardium and pleura in all patients with chest pain.Copyright © 2022 Infectious Diseases: News, Opinions, Training.

BERTOLOTTI SYNDROME: AN UNDER RECOGNIZED CAUSE OF INFLAMMATORY BACK PAIN?

BackgroundBertolotti syndrome describes a lumbosacral transitional vertebra (LSTV) which causes symptoms, usually low back pain. LATV is a congenital anomaly where the L5 vertebra has an unusual morphology. Bertolotti syndrome is an under-recognised condition by clinicians.ObjectivesTo clarify the presentation of Bertolotti syndrome, whether there are features of inflammatory back pain (IBP) and the effect on quality of life.MethodsIn this pilot study, 62 patients with LSTV were identified on imaging (plain x-ray). Imaging was performed for a variety of indications, predominently for back pain. In total, 34 patients agreed to take part, with 18 returning questionnaires. Questionnaires were selected for face vailidity and included: Calin IBP Questionnaire, EQ-5D Questionnaire, Visual analogue pain scale (VAS-P). In view of Covid restrictions all contact was by phone and questionnaires were completed online or returned via post.Plain X-rays visualising the lumbar spine were assessed for radiological features of LSTV.ResultsSeventeen (94%) of the participants (n=18) recorded a VAS-P score >3, indicating a clinically significant level of pain. The mean VAS-P score was 6 (range of 2-9). 89% of respondents scored at least 3/5 in the Calin questionnaire. Of the 5 features of inflammatory back pain in the Calin questionnaire, 4 out of the 5 were reported by most respondents. The exception was ‘improvement on exercise', which was only reported by 18% of respondents. Quality of life was impaired-EQ-5D (mean: 0.503, range -0.074 to 0.796).The commonest radiological abnormality was enlarged transverse process (100%) followed by pseudoarticulation with the sacrum (83%) and scoliosis (33%). Presence of sclerosis and/or osteoarthritis at the pseudoarticulation was associated with worse pain scores. Female respondents reported worse pain.ConclusionThese results suggest Bertolotti syndrome is associated with pain in the majority of patients and affects quality of life,. The character and site of the pain suggests that Bertollotti syndrome should be considered in the differential diagnosis of spondyloarthritis.REFERENCES:NIL.Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsSimon Stebbings Consultant of: Abbvie.Janssen, Ciara White: None declared, Terence Doyle: None declared.

The temporal evolution in disease phenotype of COVID-19 hospitalisation, intensive care and case fatality rates in cancer patients across the United Kingdom (UKCCP)

Background: People living with cancer are reported to be at increased risk of hospitalization and death following infection with acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This is proposed to be dependent on a combination of intrinsic patient and cancer factors such as cancer subtype, and emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants with differing pathogenicity. However, COVID-19 phenotype evolution across the pandemic from 2020 has not yet been systematically evaluated in cancer patients. Method(s): This study is a population-scale real-world evaluation of Coronavirus outcomes in the United Kingdom for cancer patients from 1st November 2020-31st August 2022. The cancer cohort comprises individuals from Public Health England's national cancer dataset, excluding individuals less than 18 years old. Case-outcome rates, including hospitalization, intensive care and casefatality rates were used to assess the evolution in disease phenotype of COVID-19 in cancer patients. Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to compare risk of Coronavirus outcomes in the cancer cohort relative to the non-cancer population during the Omicron wave in 2022. Result(s): The cancer cohort comprised of 198,819 positive SARS-CoV-2 tests from 127,322 individual infections. Coronavirus case-outcome rates were evaluated by reference to 18,188,573 positive tests from 15,801,004 individual infections in the non-cancer population. From 2020 to 2022, the SARS-CoV-2 disease phenotype became less severe in both patients with cancer and the non-cancer population, though cancer patients remain at higher risk. In 2022, the relative risk of Coronavirus hospital admission, inpatient hospitalization, intensive care admission and mortality in cancer patients was 3.02x, 2.10x, 2.53x and 2.54x compared to the non-cancer population following multivariable adjustment, respectively. Higher risk of hospital admission and inpatient hospitalization were associated with receipt of B/T cell antibody and/or targeted therapy which also corresponded with an increased risk of Coronavirus mortality. Conclusion(s): The disease phenotype of SARS-CoV-2 in cancer patients in 2022 has evolved significantly from the disease phenotype in 2020. Direct effects of the virus in terms of SARS-CoV-2 hospitalization, intensive care and case fatality rates have fallen significantly over time. However, relative to the general population, people living with cancer and hematological malignancies remain at elevated risk. In order to mitigate the indirect effects of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in terms of disruption to cancer care, there should be increased focus on preventative measures. Used in conjunction with vaccination and early treatment programs, this will maximize quality of life for those with cancer during the ongoing pandemic and ensure the best cancer outcomes.

Physical activity habits, well-being, and quality of life during COVID-19 preventive isolation in Bogota, Colombia

The Covid-19 pandemic forced the world population to incorporate prevention activities into their daily lives to preserve people's physical health. In Colombia, the national government, through resolutions and decrees, regulated quarantine and preventive isolation in order not to saturate health services and intensive care units, which were not prepared to respond to the disease. In this sense, this article analyzed the habits of physical activity, well-being, and quality of life in preventive isolation - Covid-19 in Bogota, Colombia. A cross-sectional descriptive quantitative study was conducted on a sample of 1,775 people with an average age of 43.5+or-25.5 years, of which 50.9% (n=903) corresponded to women and 49.1% (n=872) to men. It was found that due to the confinement the consumption of coffee and alcoholic beverages increased, as well as a decrease in physical activity. In addition, manifestations of anxiety, depression and feelings of loneliness were identified, which directly affected people's well-being and quality of life. It is expected that this type of research will contribute to the understanding of the impact of the contingency measures taken by the different nations to curb Covid-19 infections on people's health.

Glucosaminylmuramyl dipeptide efficacy in post-COVID-19 patient rehabilitation treatment.

The COVID-19 pandemic has altered people's lifestyles around the world. Prevention of recurrent episodes of the disease and mitigation of its consequences are especially associated with effective post-COVID-19 rehabilitation in patients. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effects of the drug Likopid (glucosaminylmuramyl dipeptide, GMDP) for post-COVID-19 rehabilitation in patients. Material and methods. Patients who recovered from mild to moderate COVID-19 (n=60, mean age 54+/- 11.7 years) were randomized into the observation group (n=30, 15 men and 15 women) who received 2 courses of Licopid (1 mg twice a day) and the comparison group (n=30, 15 men and 15 women). Analysis of the phenotypic and functional characteristics of the innate immune cellular factors was carried out before the start of immunomodulatory therapy, immediately after the end of the course, and also after 6 months observations. In order to assess the quality of life of all patients, we used the SF-36 Health Status Survey and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale questionnaires. Results. During assessing the effect of immunomodulatory therapy on the parameters of innate immunity of patients at the stage of rehabilitation after COVID-19, an increase in the protective cytolytic activity of CD16+ and CD8+Gr+ cells, as well as a persistent increase in TLR2, TLR4 and TLR9 expression was found, which indicates the antigen recognition recovery and presentation at the level of the monocytic link of the immune system. The use of GMDP as an immunomodulatory agent resulted in an 8-fold reduction in the frequency and severity of respiratory infections due to an increase in the total monocyte count. As a result of assessing patients' quality of life against the background of the therapy, a positive dynamic in role functioning was revealed in patients. In the general assessment of their health status, an increase in physical and mental well-being was noted during 6 months of observation. The comparison group showed no improvement in the psychoemotional state. Discussion. The study demonstrated the effectiveness of GMDP immunomodulatory therapy in correcting immunological parameters for post-COVID-19 rehabilitation in patients. The data obtained are consistent with the previously discovered ability of GMDP to restore impaired functions of phagocytic cells and induce the expression of their surface activation markers, which in turn contributes to an adequate response to pathogens. Conclusion. The study revealed that the correction of immunological parameters with the use of GMDP in COVID-19 convalescents contributed not only to a decrease in the frequency and severity of respiratory infections, but also to an improvement in the psycho-emotional state of patients, and a decrease in anxiety and depression.Copyright © Eco-Vector, 2023. All rights reserved.

A research framework for digital nomadism: a bibliometric study. (Special Issue: Leisure, knowledge work and the digital nomadism.)

Digital nomads live a new way of life that creates an ideal balance of work and leisure. Research on the phenomenon of digital nomads is still in its early stages and is not fully framed as a proper research category. Therefore, the present research aims to explore research on digital nomadism by study leading countries, authors and themes that can become a foundation for future research. This study is exploratory and interpretive - using bibliometrics, we systematically searched all articles indexed in the Web of Science database. The study presents the evolution of scholarly production, and identifies key authors and countries that have the potential to become pioneers in digital nomad research. We identified 17 core concepts of digital nomad research as well as concepts that have not yet received much attention from scientists. Additionally, our study provides a framework for research on digital nomadism and presents topics for future research: we determine how the 17 core concepts identified in this study affect the lives of digital nomads, research into legislation that directly affects digital nomads, study how COVID-19 has changed working styles, and offer a bibliometric analysis of data on digital nomads from other databases.

Epidemiological Population Study of Sars-Cov-2 in Lake County, Illinois: Contact: Health-Related Quality of Life Assessment

Objectives: The prospective, longitudinal, community-based CONTACT study aimed to improve our understanding of COVID-19 immunity, and other characteristics related to SARS-CoV-2 long-term, including the assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at baseline and over time by infection status. Method(s): Participants living or working in Lake County, IL were recruited between November 2020 and January 2021. At baseline and follow up visits (3-, 6-, and 9-Months-M-), participants self-reported their occupational exposure, COVID-19 vaccination status and provided nasal and blood serum specimens for molecular (RT-PCR) and serologic (IgG) testing to detect current or previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. HRQoL questionnaires EQ-5D-5L were completed online approximately within two weeks post-testing (at 0.5, 3.5, 6.5, and 9.5 months) after results were communicated. EQ-5D-5L information was described and stratified by COVID-19 status at baseline, 3M, 6M and 9M - software: SAS-v9.4. Result(s): Data from 1008 participants were analyzed. Participants testing positive to COVID-19 were 56/952, 48/751, 40/693, and 19/654, respectively, at baseline, 3M, 6M, and 9M. Of the five domains of EQ-5D-5L, a higher percentage of participants who tested positive for COVID-19 reported having no anxiety or depression versus those who tested negative: at baseline (55.4% [31/56] vs 50.5% [481/952]);3M (68.8% [33/48] vs. 56.3% [423/751]);6M (67.5% [27/40] vs. 56.3% [390/693]);and 9M (73.7% [14/19] vs. 60.4% [395/654]). Median Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score was at least 2 points higher at all time- points for participants who tested positive except at last visit (baseline: 89.0 vs. 87.0;3M: 88.0 vs. 86.0;6M: 87.5 vs. 85.0;9M: 85.0 vs. 87.0) Conclusion(s): This analysis provides insight into participant HRQoL burden at enrollment and over time when a positive test to COVID-19 was communicated. At all time-points, anxiety or depression was experienced by more participants who tested negative versus those who didn't.Copyright © 2023