P.0494 Which rheumatic patients are more vulnerable to the stressful effects of COVID-19?

2021 ◽  
Vol 53 ◽  
pp. S364-S365
Author(s):  
C. Posio ◽  
F. Ingegnoli ◽  
M. Buoli ◽  
R. Di Taranto ◽  
E. Cumbo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Felix Mühlensiepen ◽  
Sandra Kurkowski ◽  
Martin Krusche ◽  
Johanna Mucke ◽  
Robert Prill ◽  
...  

The global COVID-19 pandemic has led to drastic changes in the management of patients with rheumatic diseases. Due to the imminent risk of infection, monitoring intervals of rheumatic patients have prolonged. The aim of this study is to present insights from patients, rheumatologists, and digital product developers on the ongoing digital health transition in rheumatology. A qualitative and participatory semi-structured fishbowl approach was conducted to gain detailed insights from a total of 476 participants. The main findings show that digital health and remote care are generally welcomed by the participants. Five key themes emerged from the qualitative content analysis: (1) digital rheumatology use cases, (2) user descriptions, (3) adaptation to different environments of rheumatology care, and (4) potentials of and (5) barriers to digital rheumatology implementation. Codes were scaled by positive and negative ratings as well as on micro, meso, and macro levels. A main recommendation resulting from the insights is that both patients and rheumatologists need more information and education to successfully implement digital health tools into clinical routine.


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 147-147
Author(s):  
C. W. S. Chan ◽  
H. Y. Chung ◽  
W. Y. Yeung ◽  
C. S. Lau ◽  
P. H. LI

Background:Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia (PJP) is an opportunistic infection affecting immunocompromised individuals. Due to its high mortality, PJP prophylaxis is commonly recommended for many immunocompromising conditions. However, evidence regarding the burden and role of prophylaxis in PJP among rheumatic patients remains limited. There is lack of consensus for when and for whom to initiate prophylaxis. Delineating the epidemiology, predictors of mortality and efficacy of prophylaxis in PJP among rheumatic patients is urgently needed.Objectives:To delineate the epidemiology of PJP, identify predictors of mortality and evaluate the usefulness of prophylaxis in rheumatology patients.Methods:We performed a big-data cohort study based on the territory-wide healthcare database of the Hong Kong Hospital Authority. All patients with a diagnosis of anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis (AAV), immune-mediated myositis (IMM), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), systemic sclerosis (SSc), or spondyloarthritis (SpA) between 2015-2019 were included. PJP were identified based on physician diagnosis and/or positive microbiological results from deep respiratory tract specimens. Prophylaxis was defined as prescription of a prophylactic dose of co-trimoxazole for at least 2 weeks and/or inhaled pentamidine. Prevalence of PJP, prophylaxis and mortality among rheumatic patients were calculated. Demographics, blood parameters and immunosuppressants use was also collected for multivariate analysis. Number needed to treat (NNT) analysis was performed based on absolute risk reduction of PJP in patients with and without prior PJP prophylaxis.Results:A total of 21,587 unique rheumatic patients were analysed (54% RA, 25% SLE, 13% SpA, 5% IMM, 2% AAV and 1% SSc). Between 2015-2019, 1141 (5.3%) patients were prescribed PJP prophylaxis and 48 (0.2%) developed PJP. None of those patients who developed PJP had received prophylaxis prior to infection. The risk of PJP was highest among SSc (1.8%), AAV (1.4%) and IMM (0.7%) patients, with NNT of SSc 36, AAV 48 and IMM 114. Within these disease entities, the majority of PJP occurred at prednisolone dose of 15mg/day (P15) or above (100% in SSc and IIM, 66.7% in AAV). Overall, PJP was associated with a mortality-rate of 39.6%. Glucocorticoid dose (daily prednisolone dose equivalent 29.1±23.5mg vs 11.4±7.2mg, P<0.01) and lymphopenia (0.44x109/L vs 0.90x109/L, P= 0.04) at PJP diagnosis were associated with PJP mortality in rheumatic patients.Conclusion:PJP is an uncommon but important infection in rheumatic patients associated with significant mortality. PJP prophylaxis is effective and should be considered in patients with SSc, AAV and IMM, especially in those receiving a steroid dose above P15.Disclosure of Interests:None declared


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1869.2-1870
Author(s):  
G. Figueroa-Parra ◽  
A. Moreno-Salinas ◽  
L. Santoyo-Fexas ◽  
C. M. Gamboa-Alonso ◽  
A. L. De-Leon-Ibarra ◽  
...  

Background:Patients with rheumatic diseases (RD) are at increased risk of infections, attributed to the underlying RD, comorbidities and immunosuppressive therapy, including glucocorticoids, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, etc. (1). While many infectious diseases can generally be prevented by vaccines, immunization rates in this specific patient population remain suboptimal (2). Despite being recognized as one of the most successful public health measures, vaccination is perceived as unsafe and unnecessary by a growing number of individuals. Lack of confidence in vaccines is now considered a threat to the success of vaccination programs (3).Objectives:To describe the main causes of non-vaccination in patients with RD.Methods:A self-questionnaire was applied to a sample of patients with RD in the rheumatology clinic of the university hospital “Dr. Jose Eleuterio Gonzalez” in Monterrey, Mexico between September and December 2019. The questionnaire evaluated demographic characteristics (age, gender, diagnosis) and the vaccination status for Influenza (last year), pneumococcal (last 5 years), Herpes zoster (ever), Human papillomavirus (any dose) and Hepatitis B (any dose). It also includes a question asking: If you didn’t receive any of the previous vaccines, what was the reason? (multiple-choice are shown in Table 2). Results are shown in frequencies and percentages.Table 2.Vaccination barriersN=82If you didn’t receive any of the previous vaccines,what was the reason? n (%)1)Did not was recommended22 (26.8)2) Lack of availability21 (25.6)3) Vaccines don’t work13 (15.8)4) Fear of adverse events8 (9.7)5) Previous adverse event3 (3.6)6) Other reason- Own decision8 (9.7)- Disinformation7 (8.5)Results:102 patients were evaluated: Mean age was 51.27 (SD 14.68) years; 84 (82.4%) were females; 71 (69.6%) had rheumatoid arthritis, 13 (12.7%) had systemic lupus erythematosus, 6 (5.8%) had other autoimmune diseases and 12 (11.8%) had osteoarthritis. The rate of vaccination for Influenza was 49 (48%), for pneumococcal 25 (24.5%), for Herpes zoster 5 (4.9%), for Human papillomavirus 9 (8.8%), for Hepatitis B 14 (13.7%) (Table 1). 82 (80.3%) patients reported some barriers in vaccination, from these: 22 (26.8%) did not get the recommendation from the rheumatologist, 21 (25.6%) did not found available the vaccine, 13 (15.8%) believes that vaccines don’t work, 8 (9.7%) had fear of adverse events, 3 (3.6%) reported previous adverse events, and 15 (18.2%) reported other reasons, that we classified as own decision 8 (9.7%) and disinformation 7 (8.5%) (Table 2).Table 1.Demographic characteristicsN= 102Age, years, mean (SD)51.27 (14.68)Female, n (%)84 (82.4)Diagnosis, n (%)-RA71 (69.6)-SLE13 (12.7)-OA12 (11.8)-Other AID6 (5.8)Conclusion:The main barriers in vaccination of rheumatic patients reported were the lack of availability of the indicated vaccines and the medical and patient disinformation. This problem must be combated to ensure the complete vaccination of rheumatic patients.References:[1]Ann Rheum Dis. 2020;79:39-52.[2]J Rheumatol. 2019;46(7):751-754[3]Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2013;9(8):1763-73.Disclosure of Interests:None declared


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Moritz Mühlenfeld ◽  
André Strahl ◽  
Ulrich Bechler ◽  
Nico Maximilian Jandl ◽  
Jan Hubert ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Patients with rheumatic diseases have a high risk for joint destruction and secondary osteoarthritis (OA) as well as low bone mineral density (BMD, i.e., osteoporosis). While several factors may lead to low BMD in these patients, the value of BMD measurements in rheumatic patients with end-stage OA scheduled for total joint arthroplasty is unknown. Methods In this retrospective cross-sectional study of 50 adults with secondary OA due to rheumatic diseases, we evaluated dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measurements of both hips and the spine performed within 3 months prior to arthroplasty (n = 25 total hip arthroplasty, THA; n = 25 total knee arthroplasty, TKA). We analyzed various demographic and disease-specific characteristics and their effect on DXA results by using group comparisons and multivariate linear regression models. Results Although patients undergoing TKA were younger (63.2 ± 14.2 vs. 71.0 ± 10.8 yr., p = 0.035), osteoporosis was observed more frequently in patients scheduled for TKA than THA (32% vs. 12%). Osteopenia was detected in 13/25 patients (52%) in both the THA and TKA cohort. In the THA cohort, female sex, lower BMI and prednisolone use were associated with lower T-score in the hip. In TKA patients, higher OA grade determined by Kellgren-Lawrence score was associated with lower T-score in the hip of the affected side. Conclusions Osteoporosis is present in a considerable frequency of rheumatic patients with end-stage OA, and THA and TKA patients show distinct frequencies and risk factors of low BMD. Our findings point to a potential value of DXA regarding preoperative evaluation of bone status.


2013 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 112-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jolanta Paluch-Oleś ◽  
Agnieszka Magryś ◽  
Maria Kozioł-Montewka ◽  
Arkadiusz Koszarny ◽  
Maria Majdan

2019 ◽  
Vol 157 (3) ◽  
pp. 886-893 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacques Scherman ◽  
Rodgers Manganyi ◽  
Paul Human ◽  
Timothy Pennel ◽  
Andre Brooks ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document