Substitution of Nonpharmacologic Therapy With Opioid Prescribing for Pain During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: During the pandemic, access to medical care unrelated to COVID-19 was limited because of concerns about viral spread and corresponding policies. It is critical to assess how these conditions affected modes of pain treatment, given the addiction risks of prescription opioids. Objective: To assess the trends in opioid prescription and nonpharmacologic therapy (ie, physical therapy and complementary medicine) for pain management during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 compared with the patterns in 2019. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, cross-sectional study used weekly claims data from 24 million US patients in a nationwide commercial insurance database (Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart Database) from January 1, 2019, to September 31, 2020. Among patients with diagnoses of limb, extremity, or joint pain, back pain, and neck pain for each week, patterns of treatment use were identified and evaluated. Data analysis was performed from April 1, 2021, to September 31, 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes of interest were weekly rates of opioid prescriptions, the strength and duration of related opioid prescriptions, and the use of nonpharmacologic therapy. Transition rates between different treatment options before the outbreak and during the early months of the pandemic were also assessed. Results: A total of 21 430 339 patients (mean [SD] age, 48.6 [24.0] years; 10 960 507 [51.1%] female; 909 061 [4.2%] Asian, 1 688 690 [7.9%] Black, 2 276 075 [10.6%] Hispanic, 11 192 789 [52.2%] White, and 5 363 724 [25.0%] unknown) were enrolled during the first 3 quarters in 2019 and 20 759 788 (mean [SD] age, 47.0 [23.8] years; 10 695 690 [51.5%] female; 798 037 [3.8%] Asian; 1 508 023 [7.3%] Black, 1 976 248 [9.5%] Hispanic, 10 059 597 [48.5%] White, and 6 417 883 [30.9%] unknown) in the first 3 quarters of 2020. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the proportion of patients receiving a pain diagnosis was smaller than that for the same period in 2019 (mean difference, -15.9%; 95% CI, -16.1% to -15.8%). Patients with pain were more likely to receive opioids (mean difference, 3.5%; 95% CI, 3.3%-3.7%) and less likely to receive nonpharmacologic therapy (mean difference, -6.0%; 95% CI, -6.3% to -5.8%), and opioid prescriptions were longer and more potent during the early pandemic in 2020 relative to 2019 (mean difference, 1.07 days; 95% CI, 1.02-1.17 days; mean difference, 0.96 morphine milligram equivalents; 95% CI, 0.76-1.20). Analysis of individuals' transitions between treatment options for pain found that patients were more likely to transition out of nonpharmacologic therapy, replacing it with opioid prescriptions for pain management during the COVID-19 pandemic than in the year before. Conclusions and Relevance: Nonpharmacologic therapy is a benign treatment for pain often recommended instead of opioid therapy. The decrease in nonpharmacologic therapy and increase in opioid prescription during the COVID-19 pandemic found in this cross-sectional study, especially given longer days of prescription and more potent doses, may exacerbate the US opioid epidemic. These findings suggest that it is imperative to investigate the implications of limited medical access on treatment substitution, which may increase patient risk, and implement policies and guidelines to prevent those substitutions.

Safety, Feasibility, and Outcomes of Frequent, Long-Duration Rehabilitation in an Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility After Prolonged Hospitalization for Severe COVID-19: An Observational Study.

OBJECTIVE: he objective of this study was to evaluate safety, feasibility, and outcomes of 30 patients within an inpatient rehabilitation facility following hospitalization for severe Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19) infection. METHODS: This was an observational study of 30 patients (ages 26-80 years) within a large, metropolitan, academic hospital following hospitalization for complications from severe COVID-19. Ninety percent of the participants required critical care, and 83% required mechanical ventilation during their hospitalization. Within an inpatient rehabilitation facility and model of care, frequent, long-duration rehabilitation was provided by occupational therapists, physical therapists, and speech language pathologists. RESULTS: The average inpatient rehabilitation facility length of stay was 11 days (ranging from 4-22 days). Patients averaged 165 min/d (ranging from 140-205 minutes) total of physical therapy, occupational therapy, and speech therapy. Twenty-eight of the 30 patients (93%) were discharged to the community. One patient required readmission from an inpatient rehabilitation facility to an acute hospital. All 30 patients improved their functional status with inpatient rehabilitation. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of 30 patients, inpatient rehabilitation after severe COVID-19 was safe and feasible. Patients were able to participate in frequent, long-duration rehabilitation with nearly all patients discharging to the community. Clinically, inpatient rehabilitation should be considered for patients with functional limitations following severe COVID-19. Given 90% of our cohort required critical care, future studies should investigate the efficacy and effectiveness of inpatient rehabilitation following hospitalization for critical illness. Frequent, long-duration rehabilitation shows promising potential to address functional impairments following hospitalization for severe COVID-19. IMPACT: Inpatient rehabilitation facilities should be considered as a discharge location for hospitalized survivors of COVID-19, especially severe COVID-19, with functional limitations precluding community discharge. Clinicians and administrators should consider inpatient rehabilitation and inpatient rehabilitation facilities to address the rehabilitation needs of COVID-19 and critical illness survivors.

[Physiotherapy and COVID-19. From intensive care unit to home care-An overview of international guidelines]. / Kinésithérapie et COVID-19 : de la réanimation à la réhabilitation à domicile. Synthèse des recommandations internationales.

INTRODUCTION: The new coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is responsible for a global pandemic and many deaths. This context requires an adaptation of health systems as well as the role of each healthcare professional, including physiotherapists. STATE OF THE ART: In order to optimize the management of people with COVID-19, many savant societies published guidelines about physiotherapy interventions within the crisis but none offered a global overview from the intensive care unit to home care. Therefore, the aim of this review is to offer an overview of recommended physiotherapy interventions in order to facilitate the management of these patients, whatever the stage of the disease. PERSPECTIVES: Owing to the emergent character of the COVID-19, actual guidelines will have to be adjusted according to the evolution of the pandemic and the resources of the hospital and liberal sectors, in particular for the long-term follow-up of these patients. Current and future research will aim to assess the effectiveness of physiotherapy interventions for people with COVID-19. CONCLUSION: The emergence of COVID-19 required a very rapid adaptation of the health system. The role of physiotherapists is justified at every stage of patients care in order to limit the functional consequences of the disease.

Impact of COVID-19 on hand surgery in Italy: A comparison between the Northern and the Southern regions.

The aims of this study were to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on emergency and elective hand surgery in four Italian regions that had either a high (Lombardy and Piemonte) or a low (Sicilia and Puglia) COVID-19 case load to discuss problems and to elaborate strategies to improve treatment pathways. A panel of hand surgeons from these different regions compared and discussed data from the centers they work in. The COVID-19 pandemic had an enormous impact on both elective and emergency surgery in Italy, not only in highly affected regions but also - and paradoxically even at a higher extent - in regions with a low COVID-19 case load. A durable and flexible redesign of hand surgery activities should be promoted, while changing and hopefully increasing human resources and enhancing administrative support. Telematics must also be implemented, especially for delivering rehabilitation therapy.

Evaluation of Pragmatic Telehealth Physical Therapy Implementation During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to evaluate implementation of telehealth physical therapy in response to COVID-19 and identify implementation strategies to maintain and scale up telehealth physical therapy within a large urban academic medical center. METHODS: The Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework was used to evaluate telehealth physical therapy implementation. Patient-level data were extracted from electronic medical records between March 16, 2020, and May 16, 2020 (implementation phase). Reach was defined as the proportion of physical therapy sessions completed via telehealth. Effectiveness was assessed using a patient-reported satisfaction survey with a 5-point Likert scale. Adoption was defined as the proportion of physical therapists who used telehealth. Implementation was assessed through qualitative analysis of patient and clinician perspectives to identify emergent themes, retrospectively classify strategies used during the implementation phase, and prospectively identify evidence-based strategies to increase telehealth maintenance and scale-up. Maintenance of telehealth was defined as the proportion of patients who indicated they would attend another telehealth session. RESULTS: There were 4548 physical therapy sessions provided by 40 therapists from March 22, 2020, to May 16, 2020, of which 3883 (85%) were telehealth. Ninety-four percent of patients were satisfied. All physical therapists (100%) used telehealth technology at least once. Retrospectively classified and prospectively identified evidence-based strategies were organized into 5 qualitative themes that supported implementation: organizational factors (policies, preexisting partnerships), engaging external stakeholders (satisfaction survey), champions (clinician leaders), clinician education (dynamic, ongoing training), and process (promote adaptability, small tests of change). Ninety-two percent of patients reported they would attend another telehealth session. CONCLUSION: Findings from this study suggest that implementation of telehealth physical therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic was feasible and acceptable in this setting. IMPACT: These results can be used to guide future health policy, quality improvement, and implementation science initiatives to expand the use and study of telehealth for physical therapy.

How to Conduct an Outpatient Telemedicine Rehabilitation or Prehabilitation Visit.

The novel coronavirus pandemic is resulting in an accelerated conversion of in-person physician visits to virtual visits. As barriers to adoption of telemedicine are rapidly decreasing, it is important to recognize the need for practical and immediately deployable information that can improve doctor-patient interactions, facilitate accurate documentation, and increase confidence in the transition to virtual visits. In this article we aim to outline the components of an outpatient telemedicine visit for physiatrists, with a particular focus on an adapted virtual physical examination. Uses of telemedicine may include future large scale concerns such as natural disasters or climate change. We describe a general approach to the visit, review definitions of terms commonly used in telemedicine, and offer tips for optimizing the encounter.