Patient preference for virtual versus in-person visits in neuromuscular clinical practice.

INTRODUCTION/AIMS: It is unknown if patients with neuromuscular diseases prefer in-person or virtual telemedicine visits. We studied patient opinions and preference on virtual versus in-person visits, and the factors influencing such preferences. METHODS: Telephone surveys, consisting of 11 questions, of patients from 10 neuromuscular centers were completed. RESULTS: Five hundred and twenty surveys were completed. Twenty-six percent of respondents preferred virtual visits, while 50% preferred in-person visits. Sixty-four percent reported physical interaction as "very important." For receiving a new diagnosis, 55% preferred in-person vs 35% reporting no preference. Forty percent were concerned about a lack of physical examination vs 20% who were concerned about evaluating vital signs. Eighty four percent reported virtual visits were sufficiently private. Sixty eight percent did not consider expenses a factor in their preference. Although 92% were comfortable with virtual communication technology, 55% preferred video communications, and 19% preferred phone calls. Visit preference was not significantly associated with gender, diagnosis, disease severity, or symptom management. Patients who were concerned about a lack of physical exam or assessment of vitals had significantly higher odds of selecting in-person visits than no preference. DISCUSSION: Although neither technology, privacy, nor finance burdened patients in our study, more patients preferred in-person visits than virtual visits and 40% were concerned about a lack of physical examination. Interactions that occur with in-person encounters had high importance for patients, reflecting differences in the perception of the patient-physician relationship between virtual and in-person visits.

Thymectomy may not be associated with clinical improvement in MuSK myasthenia gravis.

INTRODUCTION: A randomized trial demonstrated benefit from thymectomy in nonthymomatous acetylcholine receptor (AChR)-antibody positive myasthenia gravis (MG). Uncontrolled observational and histologic studies suggest thymectomy may not be efficacious in anti-muscle-specific kinase (MuSK)-MG. METHODS: The therapeutic impact of thymectomy was evaluated from data collected for a multicenter, retrospective blinded review of rituximab in MuSK-MG. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between thymectomy (n = 26) and nonthymectomy (n = 29) groups, including treatment with rituximab (42% vs. 45%). At last visit, 35% of thymectomy subjects reached the primary endpoint, a Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) post-intervention status (PIS) score of minimal manifestations (MM) or better, compared with 55% of controls (P = 0.17). After controlling for age at onset of MG, rituximab, prednisone, and intravenous immunoglobulin/plasma exchange treatment, thymectomy was not associated with greater likelihood of favorable clinical outcome (odds ratio = 0.43, 95% confidence interval 0.12-1.53, P = 0.19). DISCUSSION: Thymectomy was not associated with additional clinical improvement in this multicenter cohort of MuSK-MG patients. Muscle Nerve 59:404-410, 2019.

Rituximab as treatment for anti-MuSK myasthenia gravis: Multicenter blinded prospective review.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of rituximab in treatment of anti-muscle-specific kinase (MuSK) myasthenia gravis (MG). METHODS: This was a multicenter, blinded, prospective review, comparing anti-MuSK-positive patients with MG treated with rituximab to those not treated with rituximab. The primary clinical endpoint was the Myasthenia Gravis Status and Treatment Intensity (MGSTI), a novel outcome that combines the Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) postintervention status (PIS) and the number and dosages of other immunosuppressant therapies used. A priori, an MGSTI of level ≤2 was used to define a favorable outcome. Secondary outcomes included modified MGFA PIS of minimal manifestations or better, mean/median prednisone dose, and mean/median doses of other immunosuppressant drugs. RESULTS: Seventy-seven of 119 patients with anti-MuSK MG evaluated between January 1, 2005, and January 1, 2015, at 10 neuromuscular centers were selected for analysis after review of limited clinical data by a blinded expert panel. An additional 22 patients were excluded due to insufficient follow-up. Baseline characteristics were similar between the rituximab-treated patients (n = 24) and the controls (n = 31). Median follow-up duration was >3.5 years. At last visit, 58% (14/24) of rituximab-treated patients reached the primary outcome compared to 16% (5/31) of controls (p = 0.002). Number needed to treat for the primary outcome is 2.4. At last visit, 29% of rituximab-treated patients were taking prednisone (mean dose 4.5 mg/day) compared to 74% of controls (mean dose 13 mg/day) (p = 0.001 and p = 0.005). CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class IV evidence that for patients with anti-MuSK MG, rituximab increased the probability of a favorable outcome.