ABSTRACT
Background/Aims Long Rheumatology waiting lists in the UK were further affected by the COVID-19 pandemic;resulting in negative impacts upon the timeliness and efficiency of patient care. The use of Advanced Practitioners within Rheumatology care pathways has been shown to be safe and effective;they can support the Rheumatology workforce and expedite care where patients are appropriately triaged to them. As part of a service provision change in a NHS Trust, an Advanced Practice Physiotherapist (APP) post was funded with the intent to harness these benefits. Initial utilisation of the APP appointments within the Rheumatology provision was found to be low and could be improved. A Quality Improvement (QI) Project was initiated, with the aim to increase APP appointment utilisation to at least 85% over a period of four months, and for at least 75% of these appointments to contain patients who had been appropriately triaged. Methods The 'Model for Improvement' was chosen as the QI approach. The project was led by an APP. Firstly, a stakeholder analysis was performed to identify staff with influence and interest in the project. A root cause analysis found lack of awareness of triaging clinicians and challenges with booking processes as potential reasons for lowerthan- expected appointment utilisation. Change interventions were devised and tested over three Plan, Do, Study, Act (PDSA) cycles. PDSA one developed communication with booking and triage staff to clarify these processes with them. PDSA two educated clinical staff about the APP role, triage criteria and the booking procedures confirmed in PDSA one. PDSA three focused upon sustaining change by reinforcement of the topics established in PDSA two among staff. Outcome measures used were the percentage of available APP appointments utilised per week, and the percentage of these which contained patients who were appropriately triaged. Results APP appointment utilisation increased from a mean of 22% pre-project to 61% during the change intervention period. Sixty-three patients were seen over the 17-week change intervention period;of which 86% had been appropriately triaged. Data showed that 70% of the patients directed to the APP were managed by them (24% discharged and 46% reviewed). Of the remaining patients, 13% were followed up by a Rheumatologist, 12% did not attend and 5% had an alternative outcome such as awaiting advice. Conclusion This QI project led to an improvement in Rheumatology care provision locally. Engagement with support staff, education of clinical staff and implementation of clear standard operating procedures improved the utilisation of the Rheumatology APP resource. Results suggest that the APP role was effective locally in managing appropriately triaged patients, without a negative effect on patient care or other services. Continuing to improve utilisation will support management of the Rheumatology waiting list and improve patient care.
ABSTRACT
Current pandemic implies changes in patient care in rheumatology to reduce the risk of coronavirus transmission to patients visiting health-care facilities, by organizing less frequent blood tests, using teleconsultations, and switching from intravenous to subcutaneous drug administration. Patients under immunosuppressive treatment are considered at high risk of severe outcome and are protected accordingly by the Swiss authorities. However, current, scarce scientific evidence suggests that patients under immunosuppressive therapy do not necessarily develop severe COVID-19 presentations. Therefore, the current guidelines recommend pursuing the treatment throughout the pandemic. In case of SARS-CoV-2 infection, immunosuppressive drugs should be temporarily stopped, except for glucocorticoids, hydroxychloroquine and sulfasalazine.Copyright © 2020 Editions Medecine et Hygiene. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) are predisposed to serious infections due to immunocompromise, comorbidities, immunomodulatory and/or immunosuppressive therapy, as well as the lack of these medications faced by patients dependent on the Sistema Unico de Saude (SUS) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Studies revealed a low risk of worsening disease activity after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 and safety in the continuity of immunomodulatory therapy during the vaccination stages. Thus, immunization against COVID-19 is an important pillar in reducingmorbidity and mortality related to infectious conditions and SLE. This study had the objective to understand the disease activity in SLE patients after vaccination against COVID-19. Method(s): This is an observational, longitudinal, ambidirectional study with follow-up of subgroups of patients with immune-mediated rheumatic diseases immunized with vaccines made available by the Programa Nacional de Imunizacao (Butantan Institute, Pfizer/BioNTech, BioManguinhos/Fiocruz and Janssen). Data from the SLE disease activity index 2000 (SLEDAI-2 K) and sociodemographic data were collected and stored via an online platform, with a comparison of the index before and after each dose. This study was approved by the local Research Ethics Committee, and it is associated to the SAFER Project from Brazilian Society of Rheumatology. Result(s): A total of 223 patients were included, of which 83% were female and 39% had SLE, 36.7 +/- 11.76 years old. Regarding the disease activity, at inclusion the mean PGA score(SD) was 2,61 +/- 2,77. After the 1st dose it was 1.38 +/- 2.17, after the 2nd dose it was 2,35 +/- 2,99, after the 3rd dose it was 2,19 +/- 2,58 and after the 4th dose 1.18 +/- 1.88. The mean SLEDAI-2 K score at inclusion was 7,27 +/- 9,70, after the 1st dose it was 2,75 +/- 5,29, after the 2nd dose it was 4,73 +/- 6,40, after the 3rd dose 3,33 +/- 5,51 and after the 4th dose 2.12 +/- 4.27. 6% of the patients referred worsening disease activity after the 1st dose, 14,3%after the 2nd dose, and no patient reportedworsening of disease activity after the 3rd and 4th doses. Conclusion(s): Vaccination did not contribute toworsening disease activity of the SLE patientss studied, according to the indices used to assess disease activity.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: Immunization against SARS-CoV-2 is an effective strategy to reduce morbidity and mortality in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. People with Immune-mediated Rheumatic Diseases (IMRD) also benefited from this campaign. However, there is a limited amount of data on the outcome of vaccination in these patients, in terms of those who were infected by the virus. This study had the objective to evaluate the rate of COVID-19 cases in patients with IMRD after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. Method(s): Observational, longitudinal and ambidirectional study with follow-up of subgroups of patients with IMRD immunized with vaccines made available by the National Immunization Plan (inactivated adsorbed vaccine registered by the Instituto Butantan (IB), recombinant vaccines registered by Bio Manguinhos/ Fiocruz and by Janssen, and Pfizer/BioNTech). Sociodemographic data and questionnaires on flu syndrome, laboratory confirmation of infection and need for hospitalization and outcomes were collected and stored via an online platform. This study is associated to the SAFER Project from the Brazilian Society of Rheumatology and it was approved by the local Research Ethics Committee. Result(s): A total of 223 patients aged over 18 years, mean age 42.79 +/- 15.18 years, were included. All were within the inclusion/exclusion criteria, with 83% being female. The main IMRD included were systemic lupus erythematosus (39%) and rheumatoid arthritis (33.6%). After the 1st dose, 1.45% of patients had COVID-19, 50% sought health services (emergency care), without the need for hospitalization and after the 2nd dose, 1.5% had the disease, of which none sought health services, required hospitalization or had a negative outcome. After the 3rd dose,: 2.9%were infected with SARS-CoV-2 one month later, 15.6% two to three months later and 5.5% four to six months later, all with laboratory confirmation;only 4% presenting any serious complication;there were no deaths. After the 4th dose, 9.1%of patients had COVID-19, of which 40%were hospitalized, without the need for assisted ventilation;half of these patients had a serious complication, but there no deaths. Conclusion(s): In this study, we observed the effectiveness of the vaccine in preventing severe cases of COVID-19 and complications of SARS-CoV-2 infection.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: Chronic Inflammatory Immune-mediated Diseases (CIMD) can cause pain and severe discomfort to the patient, leading to significant reductions in his/her quality of life. Vaccination against COVID-19 has proven to be an efficient method in preventing cases and serious repercussions. However, there is insufficient evidence on the safety of these vaccines in the CIMD population. Objective(s): To assess disease activity in adolescent patients with CIMD after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. Method(s): Observational, longitudinal, ambidirectional study with follow-up of groups of adolescent patients with CIMDwho received the vaccine provided by the National Immunization Program -Pfizer/BioNTech. Sociodemographic and clinical disease activity data were collected before and after each vaccine dose. Data were stored through an online platform (REDCap). This study is associated to the SAFER Project from the Brazilian Society of Rheumatology and was approved by the local Research Ethics Committee. Result(s): Nineteen adolescents aged between 12 and 17 years were included, all of whom met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Of the total, 31.6% have Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA)-14.33 +/- 2.25 years of age, whose subtypes included persistent oligoarticular JIA (16.7%), Polyarticular Rheumatoid Factor (RF) negative (33.3%), Polyarticular RF positive (16.7%) and Systemic (33.3%);68.4% have Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) -14.77 +/- 1.96 years of age. Regarding JIA patients, at inclusion, the mean disease activity assessed by the physician was 3 +/- 3.83 and 3.25 +/- 3.77 as assessed by the patient. After the 1st dose, the mean activity assessed by the physician was 2.8 +/- 3.9 and after the 2nd dose it was 3 +/- 4.24. Themean activity after the first dose as assessed by the patient was 3.2 +/- 3.96, and after the 2nd dose it was 2.8 +/- 3.11. In the SLE patients, at inclusion, the mean degree of disease activity was 1.92 +/- 1.83 and of the SLEDAI-2 K was 4.67 +/- 5.14. After the 1st dose, the mean disease activity was 1.11 +/- 1.96, and after the 2nd dose, it was 2.25 +/- 2.76. After the 1st dose, the SLEDAI-2 K was 1.11 +/- 1.76, and after the 2nd dose it was 4.25 +/- 5.28. No reports of worsening of disease activity after the vaccine were found. Conclusion(s): The vaccination proved not to contribute to worsening of clinical activity of rheumatic diseases in adolescents, without significant changes in SLE assessment indices and in the personal and medical assessment of JIA patients.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: In the Chronic Inflammatory Immune-mediated Diseases (CIMD), infections mainly occur in the respiratory tract and their occurrence is related to drug-induced immunosuppression, underlying diseases and comorbidities. To reduce this morbidity and mortality, vaccination is an effective means of prevention. However, the available studies on SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have not addressed this group of patients with CIMD, and there are still many doubts regarding the indications, adverse effects, safety and efficacy of these vaccines. Objective(s): to evaluate the adverse effects of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in adolescent patients with CIMD. Method(s): Research associated to the SAFER Project from Brazilian Society of Rheumatology. It is an observational, longitudinal, ambidirectional study, with follow-up of groups of vaccinated adolescent patients with CIMD, vaccine by Pfizer/BioNTech. Sociodemographic data were collected, stored on an online platform, and adverse events were presented by filling in diaries issued for each patient. This study was approved by the local Research Ethics Committee. Result(s): We included 19 adolescents, aged between 12 to 17 years, who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The mean age was 14.63 +/- 2.01 years. Of these, 68.4% were female. In relation to CIMD, 31.6% have Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis and 68.4% have Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. All were vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine. In the 1st dose, the main adverse effects presented were Pain at the injection site (85.7%), Headache (42.9%), Tiredness (33.3%) and Edema and skin induration at the injection site (26, 7%). After the 2nd dose, the only adverse effect reported was Pain at the injection site (57.1%), with no other complaints. Conclusion(s): The adverse effects reported are of mild tomoderate reactogenicity;no serious adverse events were reported.
ABSTRACT
Background/Aims It is recognised that immunosuppressive medications, often relied upon in the management of autoimmune rheumatic disease, inhibit vaccine-induced immunity against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. A key challenge for rheumatologists is maximising immunity provided by the vaccine in their patients. Recent data has implicated methotrexate (MXT), a commonly used disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD), in reducing patients' vaccine-induced immunity against the virus and studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of pausing MXT medication for 2-weeks after receiving the vaccine in boosting patients' immunity. There is a lack of data exploring the impact of concurrent biologic-DMARD (b-DMARD) use with MXT on COVID-19 infection rates in vaccinated individuals. This analysis forms part of a larger programme of research (clinicaltrials.gov NCT04542031) exploring COVID-19 in patients with rheumatic disease. Here we provide a comparative analysis of COVID-19 infection rates between patients taking MXT either with or without b-DMARD therapy and those on no immunosuppression. Methods We distributed two web-based questionnaires via SMS-messaging in April 2020 and December 2021 and two interim monitoring questionnaires in December 2020 and June 2021. All rheumatology patients with a valid mobile telephone number under follow up at the Royal Wolverhampton Trust were invited to participate in the study;those that consented received follow up questionnaires. We collected information on demographics, rheumatology diagnosis and treatment, vaccination status, and COVID-19 infection rates. Data were collected 7-days following questionnaire distribution. Results Initial questionnaires were sent to 7911 active follow up patients, 1636/ 7911 (21%) responded and consented to further follow up;906/1636 (55.4%) provided a complete response to the final survey which was subsequently linked to survey one enabling analysis. Responders were female (622/906, 68.7%), white (865, 95.5%), 60 years or above (519, 57.3%), and vaccinated (898/906;99.1%). Of those vaccinated significantly more patients that were on any immunosuppressive therapy compared to those on no immunosuppression (92/530 (17.4%) vs. 26/368 (7.1%);p<0.001), and more in the MXT monotherapy group compared to no immunosuppression (33/222 (14.9%) vs. 26/368 (7.1%);p=0.001) contracted COVID-19. Similar numbers in the MTX and b-DMARD and b-DMARD without MXT groups (23/140 (16.4%) vs. 36/168 (21.4%);p=0.23) contracted COVID-19. Conclusion Recent trial data from the VROOM study has demonstrated that omitting a patients MXT therapy for a 2-week period following administration of the COVID-19 vaccine doubles their antibody response. This data highlights that the risk of COVID-19 infection in vaccinated rheumatology patients is doubled in patients on any immunosuppressive medication compared to those on no immunosuppression, while there is no significant difference in infection rates between patients on MXT and a b-DMARD and b-DMARD therapy without MXT. Further work exploring the impact of different types of immunosuppression on COVID-19 vaccine-induced immunity and simple interventions to maximise this immunity in immunosuppressed individuals is required.
ABSTRACT
Background/Aims During the COVID-19 pandemic rheumatology services were advised to limit face to face contact, with remote telemedicine used instead. Although suitable for some people, issues have been highlighted with telemedicine. The frequency and proportion of remote appointments during the pandemic has not been described, or the socio-demographic characteristics of those accessing remote or in-person rheumatology care. This study aims to describe rheumatology healthcare utilisation and mode of appointment (remote/in-person) in people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), prior to, and during the pandemic in England. Methods A retrospective prevalent cohort study of people with RA, identified using a validated algorithm, as of 1st April 2019 using electronic health record data (OpenSAFELY). Outpatient rheumatology appointments between 1st April 2019 and 31st March 2022 were identified. For each year, the number of outpatient appointments, mode of appointment (remote/in-person) and patient socio-demographic characteristics were described. Results 130,884 people with RA were identified. Since the start of the pandemic, the proportion of people without any appointments in a 12-month period increased from 28.5% in 2019/20 to 33.3% in 2020/ 21 and has not recovered. Older people were most frequently not seen (51% of people >80 years in 2020/21 and 2021/22). Of appointments where mode was known, 54.4% of people with appointments in the year from April 2020 were only seen remotely, reducing to 35.1% in the year from April 2021 (Table 1). The proportion with all remote appointments increased with increasing age, comprising 62% of people >80 years in 2020. This age gradient persisted in 2021, though proportions of those >80 years with all-remote appointments was lower (44%). Compared to urban dwellers, a higher proportion of those living in rural areas had all remote appointments in 2020 (58% vs 53%) and 2021 (38% vs 34%). Conclusion During the pandemic, one third of people with RA were not seen at all over a 12-month period and these were more frequently older people. Over half of people were only seen remotely in 2020, decreasing to one-third in 2021. Given the limitations of remote appointments it is unknown whether this increased frequency of remote appointments will impact long-term outcomes.
ABSTRACT
Background/Aims Baricitinib is the most common Janus Kinase inhibitor (JAKi) used in the treatment of rheumatological conditions. Whilst randomised controlled trials have demonstrated the efficacy and safety profile of baricitinib, real-world data on the experience of JAKi use in clinical practice is lacking. The aim of this analysis was to evaluate baricitinib use in a real-world patient population in South London. Methods We looked at two rheumatology departments in South London (St George's Hospital;a tertiary teaching centre and Kingston Hospital;a district general hospital). All patients prescribed baricitinib between January 2017 to June 2022 were included. A retrospective assessment of electronic patient notes was performed to evaluate disease activity (determined by DAS-28 scores at baseline, 3-6 months and presently);adverse effects including side effects, rates of and reasons for discontinuation;and prescribing practice, including previous use of other biological disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). Baseline data including age, gender, co-morbidities and rheumatological diagnoses were also included. Results 233 patients were included in this evaluation, with seropositive rheumatoid arthritis being the most common diagnosis (58%) and with a significant female population (87%). Baricitinib improved average DAS-28 scores from 5.75 (range 3.57-8.3) at baseline to 3.23 (range 0.28-7.49) at 3-6 months post-baricitinib, with the most recent DAS-28 score of 2.90 (range 0.56-6.77). Rates of adverse effects were low as shown in Table 1. Baricitinib was discontinued in 60/233 patients, with average duration to discontinuation of 9.5 months. The most common reasons for discontinuation were: ineffective disease control (28/60), recurrent bacterial infection (5/60), deranged liver function (3/60) and venous thromboembolism (2/60). Eight patients died whilst taking baricitinib. Where documented, the causes of death were Covid-19 (4/8) and malignancy (1/8). 110 out of 233 patients had received other bDMARDs before starting baricitinib. Documented reasons for baricitinib choice over tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) included: previous lack of response to TNFi (89/233), contra-indication to TNFi (11/233) and preference of oral route (10/ 233). Conclusion Our real-world study of JAKi use shows that baricitinib is efficacious in the treatment of rheumatological conditions. Moreover, baricitinib is well tolerated, with low rates of adverse effects and subsequent discontinuation. (Table Presented).
ABSTRACT
The proceedings contain 343 papers. The topics discussed include: implementation of a disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug blood monitoring software: 8 years of experience in a single center;effectiveness of colchicine among patients with COVID-19 infection: a randomized, open labelled, clinical trial;rheumatic autoimmune diseases following COVID-19 infection: an observational study in Iraqi Kurdistan region;COVID-19 in male elite Irish-based athletes at a national sports institute;the effects of a pain management program for patients with an inflammatory arthritis;a retrospective analysis of the effectiveness safety of platelet rich plasma injections in primary osteoarthritis in knee joint, in patients attending a tertiary care hospital, Sri Lanka;a cohort study;do proformas used in fracture liaison service appointments reflect national osteoporosis clinical standards? a content analysis;calcium pyrophosphate dihydrate crystal in operated rheumatoid arthritis of the knee;cardiac amyloidosis: a case series of 31 patients with a comprehensive literature review;scoping review for the application of center of pressure for patient or intervention assessment in rheumatoid conditions;and four SNPs associated with monocyte/macrophage cell lineage uniquely associated with CRPS-1 in discovery and replication cohorts and suggest predisposition to regional osteopenia and digit misperception.
ABSTRACT
Background/Aims COVID-19 challenged traditional care models and necessitated introduction of remote consultations. We wanted to understand the experiences of people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA)/adult juvenile idiopathic arthritis (AJIA) on accessing healthcare remotely, and how well people understood their condition and treatment. Methods This collaborative work between the National Rheumatoid Arthritis Society (NRAS) and clinicians in Oxford led to the development of an electronic questionnaire that was disseminated in July 2021 for four weeks through e-newsletters and all NRAS social media platforms. Those living in the UK with RA and AJIA aged 18 and over were eligible. Analyses of data were performed in Microsoft Excel and IBM SPSSv28. Results We analysed 316 responses. There was a middle-aged (ages 46 to 54, 54.1%, n=171), Caucasian (97.5%, n=306), female (92.4%, n=292) preponderance. Most had RA (93%, n=294) followed by another inflammatory arthritis (4.1%, n=13) and AJIA (2.8%, n=9). The majority had their condition for >10 years (43.4%, n=137) but some were diagnosed <12 months ago (3.2%, n=10). Two thirds of participants (66.5%, n=210) did not know their DAS28 score. Of the remaining third, the most commonly reported measure was moderate disease activity (12%, n=38). Those with higher self-reported DAS28 scores were using analgesia more regularly (p<0.01) but we found no difference in NSAID, DMARD or steroid use. Age did not influence steroid usage (p=0.35), but those who had their condition for longer used more steroids and regular analgesia. Only 33.9% (n=107) of responders felt their condition had been managed adequately in the pandemic, with more reporting poor status (40.8%, n=129) rather than good (16.8%, n=53). Those living in the South of England reported statistically better disease control than those from the North, despite having more virtual assessments (p=0.02). Travelling and fear of Covid appeared more important than consultation skills. Just over a fifth (20.3%, n=64) felt greater focus should be given to patient concerns. Of the 9.1% of patients (n=29) with a new diagnosis made during the pandemic, 24.1% (n=7) unable to book a GP appointment easily. Patients experienced a median symptom time of 4-10 weeks before consulting GPs. Once assessed, 31% (n=9) were referred immediately while the median time was 4-8 weeks. We found 58.6% (n=17) of patients received their diagnosis within their initial rheumatology consultation and 76.5% (n=13) of these started a DMARD immediately. Conclusion Despite a greater emphasis on patient education and PROMs influencing clinical decision-making, it is staggering that two-thirds did not know their DAS28 score. Analgesia and steroid use were common in patients with well-established disease which remains a concern. Accessing appointments was a significant barrier to patients and delays in care were experienced at every step in the NHS management pathways. Remote consultations need greater emphasis on patient concerns.
ABSTRACT
Background/Aims Significant changes to working practices within rheumatology have occurred since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic: virtual consultations have now become commonplace. This audit was undertaken as part of ongoing quality improvement work to assess the standards of care provided to patients with SLE attending rheumatology departments across Wales. Care was audited against the standards outlined in the 2018 British Society of Rheumatology guideline for the management of adults with SLE. Results were compared with the previous multi-centre audits of SLE care in Wales and the UK. We were interested to see whether changes to working practices had significantly affected the care of patients with SLE across Wales. Methods Rheumatology services in Wales were invited via email to participate. Data collection occurred between June and August 2021. Data was collected via online questionnaire, held securely by the Dudley Group NHSFT. Unit questionnaires were submitted by a lead clinician in each centre. Five centres across Wales submitted data from 62 clinical encounters with patients with SLE. Result(s): Conclusion Results of this multi-centre audit do not demonstrate any widespread significant changes in care for patients with SLE in Wales between 2019 and 2021, despite 48% of consultations audited being undertaken virtually. Blood pressure and urinalysis were not consistently measured in 2021, likely secondary to the increased prevalence of virtual consultations. Group education has been undertaken as to the importance of facilitating observations in the virtual environment and centres have shared their experiences of how they tackle this challenge locally. (Table Presented).
ABSTRACT
Objectives: Immunization against COVID-19 in Paraguay began in February 2021, and patients with rheumatic diseases were the preferred population to get vaccinated. Up to December 2022 the immunization coverage in Paraguay was 59.4%, with at least one vaccine dose. 52.4% accessed the primary immunization schedule (two doses), while 28.6% had at least one booster dose. Only 7.1% received the complete schedule. The aim of this study was to describe the frequency of vaccination, the number of doses, and the type of vaccines against COVID-19 in Paraguayan patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). Method(s): Descriptive, cross sectional, observational study, in a Paraguayan cohort of RA patients meeting the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria, under follow-up in two Rheumatology reference centers, from October to December 2022. A standardized questionnaire according to the variables included (clinical, vaccination, vaccine type, number of doses)was made. Quantitative variables were presented as means and qualitative as frequencies. Result(s): 568 patients with RA were included, 84.1% were female, mean age 55.48 +/- 13.94 years. The average number vaccinations doses received was 2.54 +/- 1.19. 88.7% of patients acquired at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine, 85%obtained two doses;and, while 60.9% of patients received the first booster, 21.2% had the second one. The table describes the characteristics of the received vaccines. Conclusion(s): In this series of Paraguayan RA patients, vaccination against COVID-19 was higher than the general population, perhaps due to priority of patients with rheumatic diseases receiving immunization, and frequent access to medical care with physician's prompting them to receive the vaccine. While over 80% of patients have a complete primary schedule, and more than 60% received the first booster;only 21% have a complete immunization schedule, which is still much higher than the general population of Paraguay.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: To determine the leading causes for non-adherence to rheumatology consults in a tertiary care hospital. Method(s): Patients who did not show up for their programmed consult were identified using the rheumatology service database, from January 2021 to July 2022, and they were contacted by telephone to determine reasons for their absence. Result(s): During 2021, we identified 2487 patients who did not show for their rheumatology consult. Sixty percent of patients referred that their absence was related to COVID-19 (38% were sick or in contact with a sick relative, and 22% were afraid of getting sick). Meanwhile, 40% mentioned different reasons: 10% have economic problems, and 30% forgot their consult date. On the other hand, during January-July 2022 period, 1529 patients were identified as no shows for their rheumatology consult. Seventy percent of these patients satted that economic problems were the main cause (impossibility to pay for transportation, consultation, requested studies and/or treatment), while 15% said that they forgot about their appointment date, and the other 15% referred to a reason related to the pandemic (mostly, afraid of getting sick with COVID-19). Conclusion(s): The COVID-19 pandemic harmed consult adherence in rheumatology. Initially, this problem was caused by pandemic-related issues, however, reasons for these 'no shows' have changed, being more recently economic troubles the leading cause, which was induced by the pandemic.
ABSTRACT
Background/Aims In the recent past, there has been growing research interest in COVID- 19 vaccines and their impact on the disease dynamics of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). The intersection of COVID-19 and autoimmunity has led to the theoretical possibility of flare-ups of autoimmune diseases with COVID vaccines. This study was conducted to evaluate the occurrence and the nature of flare-ups following the COVID vaccination on patients with RMDs. Methods This cross-sectional analytical study was conducted at Ragama Rheumatology and Rehabilitation Hospital, Sri Lanka involving 248 clinic patients using a structured questionnaire. Results The mean age of the study population was 52.69 and 75.4% were females. 12 patients (4.7%) reported flare symptoms following 1st dose of vaccination. Of them, 67% were females and 41.7% were within the 40-45 years age group. 75% of patients have experienced the onset of the flare symptoms following 1 week of the vaccination and 41.7% of symptoms have lasted more than 8 weeks. 66.7% who had this flare have received Sinopharm, while 25% received Covishield. In this flare 58.3% got polyarthritis,16.7% monoarthritis, 8.3% oligoarthritis and 16.7% generalized rash. By contrast, 42 (16.9%) patients who received the 2nd dose of the vaccine had flare symptoms. 90.5% of this population were females and 38.1% were within the 50-59 years age group. 42% got flare following 1st week of the vaccination and 57% of symptoms have lasted more than 8 weeks. 5 patients who had flare symptoms following the first dose reported having flare after the 2nd dose too. None of the flare symptoms following 1st or 2nd dose of the vaccinations needed hospitalization. Interestingly gender (p=0.012), use of methotrexate (p=0.043), and the presence of flare to the first dose (p=0.02) were found to be significantly correlated with the occurrence of flare symptoms following 2nd dose of vaccination. Conclusion This study reveals a considerable incidence of non-severe RMD flareups following COVID vaccination, mainly with the 2nd dose. Further studying on the effects of repeated and periodic COVID vaccination among patients with RMDs is timely to reassure and to improve vaccine acceptance in this group of patients.
ABSTRACT
Background/Aims The immune response to SARS-CoV-2 is known to be reduced in the immunocompromised. However, extent to which immunity is affected by immunosuppression in specific disease cohorts remains poorly characterised. Furthermore, implications of the ongoing vaccination booster programme require further study. Individuals with lupus nephritis (LN) require prolonged high-dose immunosuppression in order to maintain disease control, rendering them important to study in this context. We evaluated SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid and spike antibody response in this cohort during the Spring/Summer 2022 booster vaccine campaign. Nucleocapsid antibody indicates previous infection whilst spike antibody indicates previous infection and/or vaccination response. Titre of spike antibody to prevent infection is not known, but presence of antibodies is likely to protect against severe disease. Methods SARS-CoV-2 spike and nucleocapsid antibody were measured in adult patients with LN attending a tertiary centre rheumatology clinic. Data was collected retrospectively on disease, immunosuppression, vaccine status and history of natural exposure. Results 35 cases of LN were investigated, of which LN III, IV and V were predominant biopsy diagnoses. Regarding immunosuppressants, the Eurolupus Cyclophosphamide protocol had been used in the majority of patients to achieve initial control, with 3/35 patients still receiving pulsed courses at data collection. 18/35 were on Mycophenolate Mofetil;a further 13/35 had previously received this. 31/35 took at least 5mg Prednisolone daily;25/35 took Hydroxychloroquine;7/35 took Azathioprine;7/35 had previously been on Methotrexate, 3/35 took Tacrolimus;1/35 took Ciclosporin. Regarding B-cell depleting monoclonal antibody therapy, 13/35 had received Rituximab and 8/35 were receiving Belimumab. Antibody levels were measured between 4 weeks and 13 months after last dose of vaccination;mean duration was 6 months. 11/35 had confirmed COVID-19 infection;a further 8/35 reported a possible history. Of the 35, 32 (91%) had mounted detectable SARS-CoV-2 spike antibody above the bottom 10% of assay detection, indicating some immunity to vaccination or natural exposure. 20 (57%) had detectable nucleocapsid antibody, suggesting natural infection with antibody response. Only 2 (6%) had not mounted any antibody response. Of note, neither were fully vaccinated: one had 1 vaccination with blood test 8 months subsequent;one had 2 vaccinations with blood test 7 months subsequent. The latter was also notably on haemodialysis. All who received 3+ vaccinations had detectable spike antibody responses, as well as 75% of those who had received 2 vaccinations. Conclusion Our study is the first analysis, to our knowledge, of SARS-CoV-2 antibody response in a LN cohort. Whilst neutralising capacity and level of antibody providing protection remains under research, these findings provide at least some reassurance that individuals with LN on immunosuppression are capable of mounting an immune response against SARS-CoV-2. Further work is required to establish extent and duration of protection with serial vaccinations in this cohort.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: Backgroud: Patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID), have an increased risk of presenting infections, this arises from immunosuppression related to the disease and its treatments. Vaccination in patients with autoimmune diseases is highly recommended by various clinical practice guidelines(1). Studies in Latin America show low rates of adherence, both in patients vaccine application and doctor's recommendations. One study shows that the lack of vaccination in 43% of their patients was due to their rheumatologist not recommending it (2). This is an eye opener on the key role physicians play in the overall outcome. Objective(s): To determine the adherence rate rheumatologists have, when it comes to recommending their patients vaccinations, suggested by clinical practice guidelines. Method(s): A descriptive study was performed, with previous authorization by the research department of the Colombian rheumatology association (ASOREUMA). A survey was sent via email to all its members asking about general knowledge about the subject and percentages on recommendations in their daily practice. Result(s): The survey was sent to 214 rheumatologist members of ASOREUMA, 34 (16%) of whom responded. In clinical practice there is a universal knowledge on the vaccination requirements for patients with IMID, nevertheless just 38.2% of clinicians tell patients to vaccinate against influenza of the 80%-100% of patients they see. For pneumococcus its 26.5%, hepatitis B 20.6%, human papilloma virus 8.8%, herpes zoster 2.9%. When it comes to SARS CoV2 vaccines it's by far the most recommended with 79.4%, and most physicians consider its mechanism of action before prescribing it. In table 1 we are summarizing the primary results. Conclusion(s): Despite the fact that rheumatologists are widely aware of the indications for vaccination in patients with IMID, these recommendations are not transmitted to all patients, due to the limited care time for each patient;in addition to the fact that the vast majority consider that the health system does not allow quick and timely access to these services.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: Latest recommendation on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with systemic rheumatic diseases (SRD) by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) is 3 doses while the Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends 5 doses. Method(s): We performed a cross-sectional study from April to November 2022 about SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in an outpatient rheumatology clinic in northeast Mexico. Consecutive SRD patients with a history of COVID-19 vaccination were invited to participate. Patients without SRD were excluded. Eligible participants completed a survey that included demographic data (age, sex, rheumatic disease diagnosis) and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination history (number of doses, and type of vaccine). Result(s): We recruited 252 patients.Vaccine types administered were: BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) 55 (23.11%);ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/AZD1222 (Oxford-AstraZeneca) 130 (54.62%);Ad5-nCoV (CanSinoBIO) 31 (13.03%);Coronavac (Sinovac) 9 (3.78%);mRNA-1273 (Moderna)13 (5.46%). (See Table 1 and Table 2) Conclusion(s): Two thirds of our patients met SARS-CoV-2 vaccination recommendations by ACR and EULAR and 5.95% met CDC criteria. Population without any dose represents 6.74%. SARS-CoV-2 infection in vaccinated patients with SRD is associated with a better outcome compared with unvaccinated. Efforts to increase vaccination coverage need to be done.
ABSTRACT
Background/Aims Through the COVID pandemic there have emerged reports of autoimmunity or new rheumatic diseases presenting in patients after they had COVID-19. This is thought to be caused by cross-reactivity of the COVID-19 spike protein to human antigens. Given the use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccinations which express the spike protein we might expect to see presentation of new rheumatic diseases following their use. We discuss a case where this appears to have occurred. Methods Our patient is a 24-year-old male with mixed phenotype acute leukaemia who had been treated with allogenic stem cell transplant and was currently in remission. He presented with fevers, palpitations, myalgia and bilateral arm and leg swelling. Symptoms began the day after receiving the first dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (Pfizer/BioNTech.) There were no other symptoms or recent change in medications. Physical examination revealed tender oedema in his forearms, biceps and thighs bilaterally with sparring of the hands. He had reduced power with shoulder (MRC 3/5), elbow (4), wrist (4+) and hip (4) movements. Observations revealed tachycardia and fevers up to 40C. Results Laboratory studies showed markedly elevated C-reactive protein (202), creatinine kinase (6697) and troponin (593) whilst investigations for infection were negative. An autoimmune panel was positive for anti- PM-SCL-75-Ab. An electrocardiogram showed sinus tachycardia. Echocardiogram was normal. Bilateral upper limb dopplers revealed no deep vein thrombus. An MRI of his thighs showed diffuse symmetrical oedema within the muscles, in keeping with an inflammatory myositis. A quadricep muscle biopsy showed evidence of MHC class 1 up-regulation, suggesting an inflammatory process. In addition, there were numerous macrophages evident in the endomysium. While this can be seen in graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), they would usually be found in the perimysium. After discussion between haematology, rheumatology and neurology, this was felt to be a case of vaccine induced myositis and myocarditis. Autoimmune myositis was thought to be less likely due to the relative sparing of the hands and the absence of Raynaud's phenomenon. 1 gram of intravenous methylprednisolone was then given for 3 days. The patient had a marked response with defervescence, improving laboratory markers, improved myalgia and decreased limb swelling. The patient was stepped down to a reducing regime of prednisolone and discharged. Due to relapse whilst weaning he has started on mycophenalate mofetil and rituximab and now continues to improve. Conclusion There are case reports of myositis following COVID-19 vaccination but our patient's case is complicated by the differential diagnosis of GVHD and concurrent myocarditis. Ongoing work is needed to clarify the exact link between vaccination and the presentation of a new inflammatory myositis, but it is important to recognise and start treatment early in order to preserve muscle bulk and ensure recovery.
ABSTRACT
Background/Aims Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is the most common vasculitis in adults aged over 50 years old with the highest incidence among persons aged 70- 79. It is more commonly seen in female patients. Most cases have been reported in whites of Northern European descent. A broad range of symptoms can be reported including headache, jaw or tongue claudication, visual disturbances, PMR and other systemic features including weight loss, fever and sweats. In recent years new evidence has emerged regarding the investigation and treatment of GCA. This audit is to review the demographics, symptoms and investigations of patients who presented to the Rheumatology Department in SEHSCT with features concerning for possible GCA. Methods Retrospective collection of data from January 2020 to July 2021 using the regional Electronic Care Record NI with reference to presentations, investigation results, clinic records and follow-up letters. Results 70 patients were included (24 males and 46 females). Mean age was 72 years old. Table 1 shows the percentages of clinical symptoms reported. All patients investigated had an ESR (mean 57.8) and CRP (mean 54.1) checked. 43 patients had ANCA checked with 3 positive results. 40 patients underwent CT brain with 2 abnormalities reported unrelated to GCA. TA ultrasound was performed on one occasion with a positive result demonstrating ''halo'' sign recorded. 6 patients underwent CTPET with 3 diagnoses of LVV and 1 of PMR. 70 TAB performed with 12 positive results and 4 'suggestive' of GCA. Conclusion Our cohort of patients demonstrated demographics similar to the current global geographic trends in GCA. There are a broad range of clinical symptoms that can present in GCA, none of which are entirely specific or pathognomonic. Clinical diagnosis is based on clinical symptoms, signs and laboratory tests, each of which are imperfect markers for GCA. Our audit demonstrated that the use of additional confirmatory diagnostic tests including temporal artery ultrasound and CTPET was being under-utilized in the SEHSCT. Use of these tests may improve the diagnostic yield in this challenging condition. As a result of this audit, a quality improvement project to provide a rapid access GCA pathway is being designed. (Table Presented).