ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: On March 11, 2020, the WHO classified COVID-19 as a global pandemic. Measures to quell the pandemic included limiting non-essential activities including clinic visits and procedures. It is unclear if individuals with OI had disruptions in their access to healthcare or medications, and if such disruptions affected patients' symptoms. METHOD(S): A REDCap survey was distributed through the OI Foundation on August 31. Surveys completed through September 11 by individuals with OI or their caregiver are included in this analysis. Participants were asked to compare their symptoms and access to healthcare during the first 4 months of the pandemic to the 4 months before the pandemic. RESULT(S): 85 surveys were completed, and 6 were partially completed. The median age of participants was 40 years;35% were children. 32% of participants self-identified as having severe OI. Although most reported no changes in bone pain or fractures, 46% reported they were less likely to seek emergency medical care to treat a fracture, while 33% reported they were more likely to treat fractures at home (Fig 1A). There were delays in accessing all services, with greatest delays accessing dentistry (74%) and aquatic therapy (84%) (Fig 1B). 36% of participants receiving bisphosphonate infusions had delayed infusions because of the pandemic (Fig 1C). Of note, 50% of planned surgeries were delayed. CONCLUSION(S): Although many individuals with OI and their caregivers reported delays in accessing bone-related services/clinics during this 4-month period, there was not a concomitant increase in reported symptoms. This may have related to shelter-in-place restrictions and decreased activity. Limitations of this study include small sample size and potential selection bias because responses were obtained only from OIF members. To address these limitations, we are distributing the survey through healthcare providers of individuals with OI across major regions of the US from a variety of practice types including endocrine, orthopedics and multidisciplinary clinics. Furthermore, as the COVID-19 pandemic continues, we hope that this survey will provide information to address what aspects of healthcare may be in greatest need, as well as the modality through which services may be met. (Figure Presented).
ABSTRACT
Purpose of Study: The COVID-19 pandemic has presented considerable challenges in the care of patients with chronic diseases, including osteoporosis. In this study, we determined whether initiation of pharmacologic treatment was delayed for patients who were newly diagnosed with osteoporosis during the pandemic. Methods Used: Patients >= 50 years who were newly diagnosed with osteoporosis using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) screening at a single academic institution were included. Patients with osteoporosis diagnosed between March 1, 2018 to January 31, 2020 (pre-pandemic cohort) were compared to patients diagnosed between March 1, 2020 to January 31, 2022 (pandemic cohort). Basic demographics including age, gender, race, and ethnicity were evaluated. Primary outcomes included the proportion of patients who were initiated on pharmacologic therapy at 3-months and 6-months of diagnosis, as well as the mean time from osteoporosis diagnosis to initiation of pharmacologic treatment. Ordering providers (primary care vs specialty care providers) and types of pharmacologic agents were also compared. Summary of Results: In total, 1,189 were newly diagnosed with osteoporosis on DXA during the study period, with 576 patients in the pre-pandemic cohort and 613 in the pandemic cohort. There was no significant difference between cohorts with regard to age (69.3 vs 68.8 years, p=0.33), gender (87.0 vs 86.1% female, p=0.67), or ethnicity (88.2 vs 86.0% Non-Hispanic, p=0.25). However, there was a higher proportion of Whites in the pre-pandemic cohort (74.1 vs 68.4%, p=.028). Overall, only 40.5% of patients (n=481) newly diagnosed with osteoporosis were started on pharmacologic therapy within 6 months of diagnosis. Proportions of patients treated at 3-months (31.8 vs 35.4%, p=0.19) and at 6-months (37.8 vs 42.9, p=0.08) were comparable between cohorts (47.2 vs 50.2% p=0.30). Mean time from osteoporosis diagnosis to initiation of pharmacologic treatment was similar (46 vs 45 days, p=0.72). Ordering providers did not differ between cohorts (65.1 vs 57.4% primary care providers, p=0.08). Bisphosphonates were the most often prescribed in pre-pandemic (90%) and pandemic cohorts (82.1%). Conclusion(s): This is the first study to compare the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the pharmacologic treatment of patients who were newly diagnosed with osteoporosis. In our retrospective comparative study, we found only 40.5% of patients with newly diagnosed osteoporosis were treated pharmacologically within 6 months of diagnosis, and the COVID-19 pandemic did not significantly affect treatment rates. Bisphosphonates were the most often prescribed medication group. Further studies are needed to better understand patient-, provider-, and system-specific factors contributing to the low treatment rates of patients newly diagnosed with osteoporosis.
ABSTRACT
Care of osteoporosis patients during COVID-19 pandemic is challenging. Due to lockdowns and restrictions, the management of osteoporosis has changed. Diagnosis of osteoporosis decreased and the influence of COVID-19 on drug prescriptions and dispensing is currently unclear. Therefore, the aim of the study was to assess the dispensing of anti-osteoporotic drugs during the Covid19 pandemic. Methods This study was a nationwide retrospective register-based observational study which included all patients in Austria aged >= 50 who received at least one prescription for anti-osteoporotic drug between January 2016 and November 2020. Pseudonymized individual-level patients' data were obtained from social insurance authorities and the Federal Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs, Health and Consumer Protection in Austria. Anti-osteoporotic agents were divided into: (i) oral bisphosphonates, (ii) intravenous bisphosphonates, (iii) selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), (iv) teriparatide (TPTD) and (v) Denosumab (DMAB). We used interrupted time series analysis with autoregressive integrated moving average models (ARIMA) for the prediction of drug dispensing. Results There were 2,884,627 dispensing of anti-osteoporotic drugs by 318,573 patients between 2016-2020. The mean monthly prescriptions for oral bisphosphonates (-14.5 %) and SERMs (-12.9 %) decreased during COVID-19 pandemic, compared to the non-COVID-19 period. The dispensing for intravenous bisphosphonates (1.7 %) and teriparatide (9.5 %) increased during COVID- 19. The prescriptions for DMAB decreased during the first lock-down in March and April 2020 (24 %), however increased by 29.1 % for the total observation time. The ARIMA model for alendronate showed, that the estimated step change was minus 1443 dispensing (95 % CI - 2870 to - 17), while the estimated change in slope was minus 29 dispensing per month (95 % CI - 327 to 270). Thus, there were 1472 (1443 + 29) fewer dispensing in March 2020 than predicted had the lockdown not occurred. Discussion The total number of prescriptions dispensed to patients treated with anti-osteoporotic medications declined rapidly during the first COVID-19 lockdown. The largest drops in absolute terms were observed for ibandronate, followed by alendronate, denosumab, zolendronic acid and risendronate. The observed decrease of DMAB during the first lockdown, was compensated in the following months. Current evidence suggests no need for discontinuation of anti-osteoporotic drugs during COVID-19 pandemic, nor because of vaccination. Taking into account the massive treatment gap for osteoporosis, and the related fracture risk, clinicians should continue treatment, even in times of pandemics.
ABSTRACT
The proceedings contain 47 papers. The topics discussed include: increased humoral immune response after vaccination with mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2 in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases;comparison of anti-fracture effectiveness of denosumab versus bisphosphonates in a registry-based, real-world cohort study;comparison of drug retention of TNF inhibitors, other biologics and JAK inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who discontinued JAK inhibitor therapy;BRD3 regulates the inflammatory and stress response in rheumatoid arthritis synovial fibroblasts;effect of methotrexate and folic acid co-administration in arthritis;early anti-S antibody levels predict anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing activity over 24 weeks in RA patients after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination;effect of zoledronate on bone mineral density and bone turnover markers after long-term denosumab therapy: observations in a real-world setting;and developing a screening tool for the detection of interstitial lung disease in systemic sclerosis: the ILD-RISC score.
ABSTRACT
Background: The determinants of the susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19) manifestations are yet not fully understood. Amino-bisphosphonates (N-BPs) have anti-infammatory properties and have been shown to reduce the incidence of lower respiratory infections, cardiovascular events and cancer. Objectives: We conducted a population-based retrospective observational case control study with the primary objective of determining if oral N-BPs treatment can play a role in thesusceptibility to the development of severe COVID-19. Methods: Administrative ICD-9-CM and AT C data, representative of Italian population (9% sample of the overallpopulation), were analyzed. Oral N-BPs (mainly alendronate and risedronate) were included in the analysis. Patients treated with bisphosphonates (cases) were randomly matched (1:1 ratio) for age, sex and for other clinically relevant variables (presence of treatments other than bisphosphonates and hospitalizations) with all the health-assisted population without this treatment (controls). Results: Incidence of Covid-19 hospitalization was 12.32 [95%CI 9.61-15.04] and 11.55 [95%CI 8.91-14.20], of ICU utilization due to COVID-19 was 1.25 [95%CI 0.38-2.11] and 1.42 [95%CI 0.49-2.36] and of all-cause death was4.06 [95%CI 2.50-5.61] and 3.96 [95%CI 2.41-5.51] for oral N-BPs users and non-users, respectively (Figure 1A). Figure 1B Incidence and 95% CI of COVID-19 related events in N-BPs treated and untreated subjects with anti-osteoporotic drugs and without corticos-teroids. C. Incidence and 95% CI of COVID-19 related events in N-BPs treated and untreated without previous vertebral or hip fragility fractures. D. Incidence of COVID-19related events in bisphosphonates treated and untreated patients without previous vertebral or hip fracture without corticosteroid prescriptions. Conclusion: In conclusion, we found that the incidence of COVID-19 hospi-talization, intensive care unit (ICU) utilization and COVID-19 potentially related mortality were similar in N-BPs treated and non-treated subjects. Similar results were found in N-BPs versus other anti-osteoporotic drugs. We provided real-life data on the safety of oral N-BPs in terms of severe COVID-19 risk on a population-based cohort. Our results strongly support national and international guidelines that advocate against the discontinuation of oral bisphosphonates only for the fear of COVID-19.
ABSTRACT
Background: Complex regional pain syndrome type-1 (CRPS-1) is a severely disabling pain syndrome characterized by sensory and vasomotor disturbance, swelling, and functional impairment. Persistence of signs and symptoms has been observed in up to 64% of cases until 5.8 yrs after the onset of manifestations. Long-term disability, such as irreversible functional limitation, has been reported in up to 28% of cases with severe consequences on workability. No scores are validated to evaluate residual disability. Bisphosphonates have the best efficacy profile, compared with other therapeutic approaches, but data on long-term effectiveness are lacking. Objectives: To retrospectively evaluate long-term residual disability in patients with CRPS-1 of hand or foot after treatment with IV Neridronate (IVNer). To identify predictors of residual disability. To quantify disease outcomes, such as patient's subjective perception and residual pain. To assess long-term safety profile. Methods: We retrospectively collected data of patients affected by CRPS-1, treated with IVNer, referred to a tertiary Rheumatology Centre between Feb 2013 and Dec 2020. Visual analogue scale (VAS) and McGill Questionnaire (McGQ) were used for pain assessment. Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society's (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot scale for hand and foot involvement, respectively, were administered to explore disability through a phone survey. This kind of investigation was preferred for Covid pandemic. Results: 106 patients with definite diagnosis of CRPS-1 were included, mean age±standard deviation 55.6±13 yrs, 67% females, mean follow up duration 56.3 months (range 14-94), 46.2% with hand involvement. The mean VAS score before treatment onset was 55.8±23.4mm, while the McGQ was 12.9±6.7 in the sensory domain, 4.9±3.3 in the affective domain and 17.8±9.2 on the total score. Based on the patient's subjective perception and the proposed semi-quantitative scale, 77.4% described themselves as fully recovered (FR), 15% partially recovered (PR), and 7.6% with persistent disease (PD). Comparison between baseline and follow-up VAS shows a significant reduction (55.8±23.4 vs 15.1±26.4, p<0.00001). Pain assessment by McGQ showed a significant improvement in global score (baseline vs follow-up 17.8±9.2 vs 3.9±7.8, p<0.00001), sensory (12.9±6.7 vs 2.7±5.7, p<0.00001) and affective (4.9±3.3 vs 1.2±2.3, p<0.00001) domains. According to DASH score, 79.2% of the patients were FR, 3.8% had some difficulties, but with overall preserved use of the upper limb, and 17.0% had permanent functional disability. According to AOFAS ankle-hindfoot scale 76.4% of patients were FR, 16.0% had partial recovery, and 7.6% had severe functional impairment. Percentages of DASH and AOFAS scores showed a complete accordance with patients' subjective perception (Figure 1a and b). The only predictor of long-term functional impairment for CRPS-1 in the hand was a delayed treatment compared to symptoms onset (p=0.02). No predictors were found for foot localization. No patients reported the occurrence of osteonecrosis of the jaw or atraumatic fractures/atypical fracture features. Conclusion: IVNer maintained a good long-term effectiveness and safety profile in the treatment of CRPS-1. The effectiveness of IVNer is maintained on both pain symptoms and function, in terms of reductions in the VAS, McGQ and in hand and foot disability scores.
ABSTRACT
Background: Treatment of patients with osteoporosis was inadequate even before the COVID-19 pandemic. Not only patients without fracture, but only a small proportion of patients with osteoporotic fracture have treated. In Hungary only 30% of patients with osteoporosis received adequate antiporotic treatment before the pandemic. Almost 90% of whom were women, less than 10% of men. The incidence of fractures is increasing dramatically worldwide. In 2010, the vertebral fracture rate was 3.5 million in Europe but it is expected to reach 4.5 million by 2025. In 1990, osteoporosis caused 1.26 million hip fractures and by 2025 this is estimated at 2.6 million worldwide. The care for patients with osteoporosis was further aggravated by the restrictions necessarily imposed due to the coronavirus. Objectives: The aim of the study was to explore the extent and consequences of diagnostic and therapeutic failure in patients with osteoporosis. Methods: I determined the number of osteoporosis examinations performed in our centre in 2019-2021 from the medical database. I surveyed how many patients were discontinued the antiporotic treatment during the pandemic according to the different drug groups in Hungary and also in our centre as well as the prevalence of wrist and hip fractures due to minor trauma in our county in the pre-and post-pandemic period. Results: In our centre an average of 30 DEXA examinations were performed daily in the pre-pandemic period. From the end of October 2021 to the end of May 2021 there was not perform any ODM examinations. It means 3.980 missed exams and at least 1.000 missed osteoporosis diagnoses and therapy starts. More than 20% of patient were lost from the antiporotic care in Hungary. Drop-out was mainly seen in patients treated with bisphosphonates. There were 20730 bisphosphonate-treated patient in 2019, 19813 in 2020 and 17315 in 2021. Antiporotic treatment was discontinued in 30% of patients treated with bisphosphonate+vitamin-D (7849 in 2019, 6950 in 2020, 5484 in 2021) or bisphosphonate+calcium+vitamin-D fxed combination products (3256-2876-2289). In our centre, the prescribing of bisphosphonates has also decreased more than half. Patients treated with iv. bisphosphonates were interrupted or switched to oral formulations. Denosumab therapy was continuous: 581 injections were prescribed in the 12 months before and 579 during the pandemic. However, no new treatment started. In case of teriparatide, the initiated therapies were continued and even the number of prescriptions increased. As a consequence, an increase in the occurrence of fractures due to minor trauma is expected. Although epidemiological restrictions in this regard, the curfew has had some positive effects. According to international data, the number of wrist fractures has almost halved, while the data for hip fractures are controversial. The decrease of wrist fractures can also be verifed in our county. The number of wrist fractures was 598 in April-May 2019, 393 in the same period in 2020, and 372 in 2021. After a signifcant reduction in hip fractures in 2020, there is already an upward trend in 2021 (470 in 2019, 358 in 2020, 393 in 2021). The real consequences of failure to treat osteoporosis are expected only after years. Conclusion: Missed doctor-patient appointments were associated with missed diagnoses and interruptions of ongoing treatments. Fear of the virus, immobilisation due to home office and curfews, lack of exercise, sun exposure, caused depressive symptoms, increased alcohol consumption and caloric intake are all increase the risk of osteoporosis. Thus, traditional risk factors for osteoporosis expanded with the direct effects and the introduced restrictions because of the pandemic.
ABSTRACT
Type 3 intestinal failure (IF) is known to negatively impact bone metabolism contributing to increased prevalence of osteoporosis and associated increases in morbidity and mortality. It has been challenging to appropriately monitor for these pathologies under the restrictions imposed by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. We performed a retrospective audit assessing compliance with current guidelines1. All type 3 IF patients receiving home parenteral nutrition (HPN) prescribed at a national centre prior to 1st May 2021 were included. Data was collected from hospital electronic recorded, de-identified and collated on an excel spreadsheet that was securely stored on a departmental computer. 270 patients fulfilled inclusion criteria (35.5% male, mean age 54.0 ± 17.5 years). The mean age at HPN initiation was 45.8 ± 18.5 years and the mean number of years on HPN was 8.2 ± 7.2 years. The maximum duration of HPN administration in this cohort was 37 years. DEXA scan results performed within the preceding 5 years were available for 23.0% of patients. Of these scans 96.8% of patients had evidence of reduced bone density (45.2% osteopenic, 51.6% osteoporotic). Comparing DEXA results at diagnosis and in the last 5 years, a majority (54.2%) of patients progressed or remained osteoporotic, with 8.3% showing improvement in bone density and 4.2% of patients having a return to normal bone density. 59.6% of patients had blood tests performed within the preceding 12 months. 54.4% of patients had undergone plasma vitamin D levels measurement. Vitamin D levels were found to be low (<50nmol/L) in 32.7%. 44.4% of patients were receiving vitamin D supplementation of which 86.7% were prescribed oral supplements and 13.3% intramuscular supplements. 31.3% of patients with osteoporosis were on bisphosphonate therapy. These results demonstrate high prevalence of metabolic bone disease amongst type 3 IF patients on HPN. This highlights a potentially modifiable risk of low-trauma fracture which has a very high morbidity and mortality index. Our findings regarding the prevalence and longitudinal changes in bone density are in agreement with the published ESPEN surveys2,3. The results also demonstrate poor compliance with current guidelines. We believe this reflects the challenges of obtaining non-emergent scans and blood test due to COVID-related restrictions as well as our patients’ very understandable fear of exposure should they attend hospital for a face-to-face review. It is also possible that some of these tests were performed locally, due to many patients living far away from our national referral centre, and thus not visible to the audit team. These findings have highlighted the need for greater education and prompted our group to increase our focus on metabolic bone disease during clinic interactions and to create a subsection of our database for tracking DEXA intervals for this patient cohort. References 1. Pironi L, Arends J, Bozzetti F, et al. ESPEN guidelines on chronic intestinal failure in adults. Clin Nutr 2016;35: 247-307. 2. Pironi L, Labate AM, Pertkiewicz M, et al. Prevalence of bone disease in patients on home parenteral nutrition. Clin Nutr 2002;4: 289-296 3. Pironi L, Tjellesen L, De Francesco A, et al. Bone mineral density in patients on home parenteral nutrition: a follow-up study. Clin Nutr. 2004 Dec;23(6):1288-302
ABSTRACT
Objective: To assess if current practices in bone health monitoring and treatment at a specialist regional cystic fibrosis (CF) centre are in line with current European CF guidelines. Methods: An audit of bone health of all adolescents and adults atWolfson CF centre UK was conducted. Data was gathered between December 2020 and November 2021 from medical records which included timing of last DEXA scan and if it had been within last 5 years, DEXA scan T/Z scores, vitamin D status and bisphosphonate use. Results: 237 individuals were identified, 106 female with a median age of 30 (±15) years. DEXA scans had been conducted in the last 5 years for 70% of the clinic. Of thosewho had a DEXA scan (n = 199), 53% were conducted on time in line with guidelines and 27% were overdue by more than 3 years. Median Z scores were −0.7 (±1.9) at the spine, −0.4 (±1.63) at the neck of femur, −0.6 (±1.5), total femur, and −0.4 (±1.75) total body. CF-related low bone mineral diseasewas present in 0.4–11% of clinic depending on the site of the Z score. 80% of the clinic had had vitamin D levels checked within the last year, with 47% being classed as sufficient (≥75 nmol/L). However, only 3% were classed as deficient with levels below 25 nmol/L. Bisphosphonate treatmentwas indicated in 19% of individuals. However, this had happened in just half of this group. 46% used oral medication, 54% intravenous. Conclusion: The majority of individuals had DEXA scans on time and repeated within 5 years. However, roughly a quarter of individuals were overdue by ≥3 years. Vitamin D levels should be checked at least annually as a minimum and this occurred in the majority of the clinic. There was a very low proportion of vitamin D deficiency but improved monitoring is needed, especially in those with vitamin D insufficiency. Although these results suggest that more robust measures could be in place for bone health monitoring and treatment, the coronavirus pandemic would have had an effect.
ABSTRACT
Background: Patient satisfaction with non-medical prescriber (NMP) clinics at the Churchill Cancer Centre (Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust) has been reported previously.1 Patient consultations, (face to face or telephone) by prescribing pharmacists in uro-oncology clinics (mostly prostate cancer) have increased significantly and the scope of the role is expanding from cycle 2+clinical reviews to treatment initiation, consent and cycle 1 prescribing. Objectives • To quantify the increase in patient numbers seen or telephoned in prescribing pharmacist clinics, both as whole numbers and as a proportion of the Uro-oncology service (medical oncology). • To identify how the role of the prescribing pharmacist role is expanding to patient care at earlier stages in the treatment pathway. Method: Contribution to the uro-oncology service has been measured using the following parameters (see Table 1). • Number of patient consultations in prescribing pharmacist clinics over the past 12 months, using data from the Trust's Electronic Prescribing and Medicines Administration system. • Proportion of these patient contacts as a percentage of the overall uro-oncology service. • And compared to prior year. Results: In the 12 months to June 2021:- • Uro-oncology prescribing pharmacists have seen or telephoned 61% more patients than the previous 12 months. • 78% of the 889 patient contacts were telemedicine consultations, compared to 20% in the prior 12 months. This is due to the covid pandemic. • The contribution of prescribing pharmacist consultations to the overall uro-oncology service has increased by 7%. Discussion: At the Churchill Cancer Centre two prescribing pharmacists see or telephone an average of 21-24 patients per week. Current scope of the prescribing pharmacist role comprises clinical review of metastatic prostate cancer patients being treated with: luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists, with or without bicalutamide, enzalutamide, abiraterone, docetaxel, cabazitaxel. Clinical consultations typically include: assessment of treatment efficacy and tolerability, prescribing continued treatment, or referral to Consultant, addition of bicalutamide (PSA relapse) or stopping bicalutamide (for PSA withdrawal response), ordering CT or MRI scan if appropriate, managing symptoms e.g. medroxyprogesterone / cyproterone for hot flushes, requesting GP to initiate bone protection (bisphosphonate). The expanding scope of the role includes: liaison with MDT / Consultant for diagnosis and treatment, consenting patient for treatment, cycle 1 prescribing, oral education session prior to starting treatment (patient counselling including safety netting, clinical checks, drug interactions, drug supply). Adherence to treatment pathway (e.g. enzalutamide) to ensure correct blood tests ordered and timing of next clinic review. Conclusion: Prescribing pharmacist clinics enable follow up and treatment of large numbers of uro-oncology patients. The covid pandemic has driven trends for oral systemic anticancer treatment (e.g. enzalutamide) and telemedicine consultations. Expanding the role of the prescribing pharmacist to treatment initiation, patient consent, and cycle 1 prescribing can improve the efficiency of the clinical service and bring opportunities for enhanced skills and development.
ABSTRACT
Background/Aims The COVID-19 pandemic led to the widespread adoption of remote consultations. Whilst remote consultations offer many potential advantages to patients and healthcare services, they are unlikely to be suitable for all. Guidance encourages clinicians to consider patient preferences when choosing face-to-face vs remote consultations. However, little is known about acceptability of, and preferences for remote consultations, particularly amongst patients with musculoskeletal conditions. This study aimed to explore the acceptability of, and preferences for, remote consultations among patients with osteoporosis and rheumatoid arthritis. Methods Data for this study derived from three UK qualitative studies: iFraP (improving fracture prevention study), Blast Off (BO;Bisphosphonate aLternAtive regimenS for the prevenTion of Osteoporotic Fragility Fractures), and ERA (Exploring people with Rheumatoid Arthritis' experience of the pandemic). Each study explored patient experiences of accessing and receiving healthcare during the pandemic year. Transcripts from each data set relating to remote consulting were extracted. A minimum of two study team members worked independently, following a consistent approach, to conduct a rapid deductive analysis using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). The TFA consists of 7 constructs to understand acceptability of, in this context, remote consultations, including: affective attitudes;intervention coherence;perceived effectiveness;burden;self-efficacy;opportunity- costs;and ethicality. Following coding, the findings of all three studies were pooled. Analysis was facilitated by group meetings to discuss interpretations. Results Findings from 1 focus group and 64 interviews with 35 people, who had mostly experienced telephone consultations, were included the analysis. Participants' emotional attitudes to remote consultations, views on fairness (ethicality) and sense making (intervention coherence) varied according to their specific needs for the consultation and values, relative to the pandemic context;participants perceived remote consultations as making more sense and being 'fairer' earlier in the pandemic. Some participants valued the reduced burden associated with remote consultations, while others highly valued, and did not want to give up, non-verbal communication or physical examination associated with face-to-face consults (opportunity costs);although perceived need for physical examination in participants with RA was associated with strong preference for face-to-face consultations, asymptomatic participants with RA and osteoporosis also expressed similar strong preferences. Some participants described low confidence (self-efficacy) in being able to communicate in remote consultations and others perceived remote consultations as ineffective, in part due to suboptimal communication. Conclusion Acceptability of, and preferences for remote consultation appear to be influenced by a range of societal, healthcare provider and personal factors and in this study, were not fixed, or condition-dependent. Remote care by default has the potential to exacerbate health inequalities and needs nuanced implementation. The findings have supported the development of patient-centred recommendations for practice that should be considered alongside clinician-focused recommendations when deciding whether remote consultations are appropriate.
ABSTRACT
Background/Aims Osteoporosis is a burdensome disease internationally, that is commonly diagnosed following fragility fracture. In line with national guidance, in 2018 the North Staffordshire Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) changed their management policy of patients aged ≥85 years who sustain fragility fractures. Instead of calling these patients for a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan, a letter was sent to the patient's General Practitioner, advising the empirical commencement of oral bisphosphonates. This audit aimed to evaluate whether the recommendations in this letter were enacted by GPs. Following audit, the text of the letter was changed, and a re-audit conducted to evaluate changes in practice. Methods Patients aged ≥85 years sustaining a fragility fracture between December 2018 and October 2020 were identified from FLS records. Summary Care Records (SCRs) were used to identify whether each patient was receiving a bisphosphonate prescription at time of audit (October 2020). Analysis was descriptive, to report the proportion of patients prescribed a bisphosphonate. Quality improvement methodology informed changes to the standard letter, using GP feedback. Re-audit of fragility fractures occurring between December 2020 and May 2021 was undertaken in July 2021 to assess possible impact. Results 408 eligible patients were identified in the initial audit, of which 79% were female. SCR data was available for 396 patients;median time between fracture and data collection was 9 months. 160 patients (40%) had a bisphosphonate prescribed as an acute or repeat prescription, of which >90% were alendronic acid. Following the first audit cycle, the letter was changed to address barriers to clinical decision-making including advice on relative contraindications and referral. 74 patient SCRs were reviewed in the 2nd audit cycle (85% female) and 38 (51%) were recorded as prescribed a bisphosphonate (median time between fracture and assessment 5-months). Conclusion Rates of bisphosphonate prescribing, in people aged ≥85 following a recommendation letter sent to the GP, have increased from 40% to 51% following quality improvement initiative. Furthermore, the proportion of patients prescribed a bisphosphonate is similar to previous national data in patients post-DXA. This is of interest, particularly given the de-prioritisation of non-communicable diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic, and demonstrates that an intervention which requires little time, can result in changes in practice. Limitations of this work include that the SCR only includes contemporaneous prescribing data so the period of time between drug recommendation and audit was different in 1st and 2nd cycles, meaning that adherence may be expected to be higher in the 2nd cycle, because the period of time between letter and data collection was shorter, and not because of a change in our intervention.
ABSTRACT
COVID-19 is an emerging infectious disease that has specific characteristics that interfere with the care of patients with osteoporosis. This article discusses the interfaces between osteological issues and COVID-19. A prevalent fracture very modestly increases the risk of death from COVID-19 but in hospitalized patients, the prevalence of vertebral fracture can be considered another aspect of polymorbidity increasing the likelihood of an adverse course of infection. Vitamin D deficiency correlates with worse outcomes in COVID-19, and sufficient vitamin D saturation is very likely protective in relation to COVID-19. Containment measures at the peak of the pandemic may result in muscle loss and increased risk of falls in the elderly. Densitometry and majority of laboratory tests can be easily delayed in patients with osteoporosis. This also applies to parenteral administration of bisphosphonates, whereas continuation of oral bisphosphonate therapy can be ensured by electronic prescription. Teriparatide should not be discontinued for more than 2–3 months, and the interval between denosumab administrations should not exceed 7 months.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: The covid19 pandemic has forced the health system to restructure to prevent contagion of our patients. In this context, the members of the Orthogeriatric Group of the Catalan Society of Geriatrics and Gerontology (SCGiG) created a document that collected all the considerations to take into account during the pandemic, based on the current guides and scientific societies, in order to perform a correct follow-up, enhance adherence and prevent future falls. Methods: A bibliographic review was performed, defining the key points in the care of the fractured patient through telemedicine (document is available at http://scgig.cat/docs/gt-orto-covid.pdf). Results: During hospital admission, antiosteoporotic treatment should be started, evaluating indications with the patient and family, to ensure adherence. Diet intake of calcium and vitamin D will be assessed. Discharge report includes evaluation of treatment and monitoring plan, to be useful for liaison nurse, rehabilitator and general practitioner. Six-monthly follow up is recommended for patients with comorbidities, polypharmacy, confusion, fall-risk, or parenteral anti-osteoporotic treatment. With denosumab or teriparatide, annual laboratory tests are recommended, with GFR <20, every six months, at home if possible. Bisphosphonates can be followed by the GP. Zoledronate is not recommended due to delayed administration after surgery, and possibility of transient flu-like simptoms. In the telematic follow-up visit, in patients undergoing zoledronic acid treatment, the new dose can be delayed for 6-12 months, without risk. Consider sequential treatment. Denosumab treatment cannot be delayed, so the patient and family will be trained in self-administration. Support materials from laboratories will be useful to patient and caregivers. Conclusion: Telemedicine is a good strategy for a follow-up, to avoid hospital contact, and starts on hospital admission. Patient and caregivers need access to new technologies and able to understand medical instructions.
ABSTRACT
Case Report A 62-year-old Caucasian, female patient with history of celiac disease and chronic pain s/p spinal cord stimulator presented to our institution to follow up on abnormal lab findings. The patient presented to her PCP with complaints of worsening weakness, nausea, vomiting, constipation, polydipsia, and occasional palpitations. Labs resulted a severely elevated serum calcium level (17 mg/dL), increased BUN (32), and elevated Cr (1.8) indicating acute kidney injury. Full workup was initiated. Vitamin D, 25-Hydroxy level returned greater than 209 and PTH resulted in a normal range of 22. Detailed history revealed that the patient was taking 50,000 units of vitamin D3 by mouth six times/ week for six months. Fear surrounding the current COVID- 19 pandemic prompted the exorbitant intake of vitamin D supplementation in hopes of immune improvement. Bisphosphonate were contraindicated due to AKI.Volume expansion with normal saline and calcitonin successfully decreased the patient's serum calcium. Discussion The diagnostic criteria for reversible Brugada pattern, recently classified as Brugada phenocopy, includes four mandatory components. Primarily, an ECG tracing delineating type 1 or type 2 Brugada morphology. Secondarily, the presence of an underlying condition that is identifiable and reversible. Third, complete resolution of the ECG pattern upon elimination or correction of the underlying condition. Fourth, a low probability for Brugada syndrome determined by the lack of symptoms, clinical history, and family history. Our patient experienced severe hypercalcemia with palpitations that prompted an ECG. The abnormal ECG produced was read independently by two interventional cardiologists and a cardiac electrophysiologist who all concluded the ST segment and T wave deviations were consistent with Brugada pattern type 1. Importantly, the ECG was compared to one from a year prior which showed a normal rate and rhythm. There was complete resolution on repeat ECG once serum calcium was returned to reference range. The patient did not experience Brugada specific symptoms of syncope, seizures, nocturnal agonal breathing, or sudden cardiac death. No family history suggested Brugada syndrome or cardiac issues. Electronic medical record documentation tracked over the last 5 years showed no concerns for prior arrhythmias or syncope. Additionally, the patient does not fit the epidemiological profile of a male of Southeast Asian decent which is classically associated with Brugada syndrome. To our knowledge, this is the first documented presentation of Brugada phenocopy induced by severe hypercalcemia secondary to vitamin D toxicity. Conclusion Although the mechanism is not completely understood, severe hypercalcemia can cause a reversible type 1 Brugada pattern on ECG. Careful consideration of vitamin supplementation must be discussed with patients to avoid potentially fatal cardiac outcomes.