Management of Rheumatic Diseases During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A National Veterans Affairs Survey of Rheumatologists.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To assess the experience, views, and opinions of rheumatology providers at Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities about rheumatic disease health care issues during the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods
We performed an anonymized cross-sectional survey, conducted from April 16 to May 18, 2020, of VA rheumatology providers. We assessed provider perspectives on COVID-19 issues and resilience.Results
Of the 153 eligible VA rheumatologists, 103 (67%) completed the survey. A significant proportion of providers reported a ≥50% increase related to COVID-19 in visits by telephone (53%), video-based VA video connect (VVC; 44%), and clinical video telehealth with a facilitator (29%). A majority of the responders were somewhat or very comfortable with technology for providing health care to established patients during the COVID-19 pandemic using telephone (87%), VVC (64%), and in-person visits (54%). A smaller proportion were comfortable with technology providing health care to new patients. At least 65% of rheumatologists considered telephone visits appropriate for established patients with gout, osteoporosis, polymyalgia rheumatica, stable rheumatoid arthritis, stable spondyloarthritis, or osteoarthritis; 32% reported a rheumatology medication shortage. Adjusted for age, sex, and ethnicity, high provider resilience was associated with significantly higher odds ratios (ORs) of comfort with technology for telephone (OR 3.1 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.1-9.7]) and VVC visits for new patients (OR 4.7 [95% CI 1.4-15.7]).Conclusion
A better understanding of COVID-19 rheumatic disease health care issues using a health-system approach can better inform providers, improve provider satisfaction, and have positive effects on the care of veterans with rheumatic disease.
SUBMITTER: Singh JA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7675431 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused disruptions in treatment for cancer. Less is known about its impact on new cancer diagnoses, where delays could cause worsening long-term outcomes. This study quantifies decreases in encounters related to prostate, lung, bladder and colorectal cancers, procedures that facilitate their diagnosis, and new diagnoses of those cancers in the COVID era compared to pre-COVID era.MethodsAll encounters at Veterans' Affairs facilities nationwide from 2016 through 2020 were reviewed. The authors quantified trends in new diagnoses of cancer and in procedures facilitating their diagnosis, from January 1, 2018 onward. Using 2018 to 2019 as baseline, reductions in procedures and new cancer diagnoses in 2020 were estimated. Calculated absolute and percentage differences in annual volume and observed-to-expected volume ratios were calculated. Heat maps and funnel plots of volume changes were generated.ResultsFrom 2018 through 2020, there were 4.1 million cancer-related encounters, 3.9 million relevant procedures, and 251,647 new cancers diagnosed. Compared to the annual averages in 2018 through 2019, colonoscopies in 2020 decreased by 45% whereas prostate biopsies, chest computed tomography scans, and cystoscopies decreased by 29%, 10%, and 21%, respectively. New cancer diagnoses decreased by 13% to 23%. These drops varied by state and continued to accumulate despite reductions in pandemic-related restrictions.ConclusionThe authors identified substantial reductions in procedures used to diagnose cancer and subsequent reductions in new diagnoses of cancer across the United States because of the COVID-19 pandemic. A nomogram is provided to identify and resolve these unmet health care needs and avoid worse long-term cancer outcomes.Lay summaryThe disruptions due to the COVID-19 pandemic have led to substantial reductions in new cancers being diagnosed. This study quantifies those reductions in a national health care system and offers a method for understanding the backlog of cases and the resources needed to resolve them.
| S-EPMC8837676 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWith improved therapies and management, more women with inflammatory arthritides (IA) are considering pregnancy. Our objective was to survey rheumatologists across Canada about their IA management in pregnancy to identify practice patterns and knowledge gaps.MethodsWe administered an online survey with questions regarding medications for IA treatment including conventional synthetic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) and biologics/small molecules in planned and unplanned pregnancies. Email invitations were sent to members of the Canadian Rheumatology Association. We calculated responses frequencies and a priori set a cut-off of ≥75% to define consensus.ResultsNinety rheumatologists participated in the survey (20% participation rate); 57% have been practicing for > 10 years, 32% for ≤10 years, and 11% in training. There was consensus on discontinuation of 4 csDMARDs - cyclophosphamide (100%), leflunomide (98%), methotrexate (96%), and mycophenolate mofetil (89%) - in planned pregnancies but varied responses on when to discontinue them or what to do in unplanned pregnancies. Respondents agreed that 3 csDMARDs - azathioprine (84%), hydroxychloroquine (95%), and sulfasalazine (77%) - were safe to continue in planned and unplanned pregnancies. There was consensus with use of 4 biologics - adalimumab (81%), certolizumab (80%), etanercept (83%), and infliximab (76%) - in planned pregnancies but uncertainty on when they should be discontinued and their use in unplanned pregnancies.ConclusionsThis national survey shows consensus among rheumatologists on the use of some csDMARDs and biologics/small molecules in IA patients planning pregnancy but varied knowledge on when to discontinue and what to do in unplanned pregnancies.
| S-EPMC6530147 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background The current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association women cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk score suboptimally estimates CVD risk for young and minority women in the military. The current study developed an internally validated CVD risk score for women military service members and veterans using the Veterans Affairs (VA) national electronic health records data. Methods and Results The study cohort included 69 574 White, Black, and Hispanic women service members and veterans aged 30 to 79 years in 2007 treated in the VA Health Care System between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2017 (henceforth, VA women). Stratified by race and ethnicity, the new VA women CVD risk model estimated risk coefficients and 10-year CVD risk using a time-variant covariate Cox model. Harrell C-statistics, calibration plots, and net classification index were used to assess accuracy and prognostic performance of the new VA women CVD risk model. The new internally validated VA women CVD risk score performed better in predicting VA women 10-year atherosclerosis cardiovascular disease risk than the pooled cohort American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association risk score in both accuracy (White Harrell C-statistics, 70% versus 61%; Black, 68% versus 63%) and prognostic performance (White net classification index, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.26-0.33; Black net classification index, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.03-0.09). Conclusions The proposed VA women CVD risk score improves accuracy of the existing American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association CVD risk assessment tool in predicting long-term CVD risk for VA women, particularly in young and racial/ethnic minority women.
| S-EPMC8174271 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Cardiovascular procedural treatments were deferred at scale during the COVID-19 pandemic, with unclear impact on patients presenting with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). Methods and Results In a retrospective cohort study of all patients diagnosed with NSTEMI in the US Veterans Affairs Healthcare System from January 1, 2019 to October 30, 2022 (n=67 125), procedural treatments and outcomes were compared between the prepandemic period and 6 unique pandemic phases: (1) acute phase, (2) community spread, (3) first peak, (4) post vaccine, (5) second peak, and (6) recovery. Multivariable regression analysis was performed to assess the association between pandemic phases and 30-day mortality. NSTEMI volumes dropped significantly with the pandemic onset (62.7% of prepandemic peak) and did not revert to prepandemic levels in subsequent phases, even after vaccine availability. Percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting volumes declined proportionally. Compared with the prepandemic period, patients with NSTEMI experienced higher 30-day mortality during Phases 2 and 3, even after adjustment for COVID-19-positive status, demographics, baseline comorbidities, and receipt of procedural treatment (adjusted odds ratio for Phases 2 and 3 combined, 1.26 [95% CI, 1.13-1.43], P<0.01). Patients receiving Veterans Affairs-paid community care had a higher adjusted risk of 30-day mortality compared with those at Veterans Affairs hospitals across all 6 pandemic phases. Conclusions Higher mortality after NSTEMI occurred during the initial spread and first peak of the pandemic but resolved before the second, higher peak-suggesting effective adaptation of care delivery but a costly delay to implementation. Investigation into the vulnerabilities of the early pandemic spread are vital to informing future resource-constrained practices.
| S-EPMC10382121 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: In 2018, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) issued Notice 2018-08 requiring facilities to complete "case reviews" for Veterans identified in the Stratification Tool for Opioid Risk Mitigation (STORM) dashboard as high risk for adverse outcomes among patients prescribed opioids. Half of the facilities were randomly assigned to a Notice version including additional oversight. We evaluated implementation strategies used, whether strategies differed by randomization arm, and which strategies were associated with case review completion rates.Methods: Facility points of contact completed a survey assessing their facility's use of 68 implementation strategies based on the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change taxonomy. We collected respondent demographic information, facility-level characteristics, and case review completion rates (percentage of high-risk patients who received a case review). We used Kruskal-Wallis tests and negative binomial regression to assess strategy use and factors associated with case reviews.Results: Contacts at 89 of 140 facilities completed the survey (64%) and reported using a median of 23 (IQR 16-31) strategies. The median case review completion rate was 71% (IQR 48-95%). Neither the number or types of strategies nor completion rates differed by randomization arm. The most common strategies were using the STORM dashboard (97%), working with local opinion leaders (80%), and recruiting local partners (80%). Characteristics associated with case review completion rates included respondents being ? 35?years old (incidence rate ratio, IRR 1.35, 95% CI 1.09-1.67) and having < 5?years in their primary role (IRR 1.23; 95% CI 1.01-1.51), and facilities having more prior academic detailing around pain and opioid safety (IRR 1.40, 95% CI 1.12-1.75). Controlling for these characteristics, implementation strategies associated with higher completion rates included (1) monitoring and adjusting practices (adjusted IRR (AIRR) 1.40, 95% CI 1.11-1.77), (2) identifying adaptations while maintaining core components (AIRR 1.28, 95% CI 1.03-1.60), (3) conducting initial training (AIRR 1.16, 95% CI 1.02-1.50), and (4) regularly sharing lessons learned (AIRR 1.32, 95% CI 1.09-1.59).Conclusions: In this national evaluation of strategies used to implement case reviews of patients at high risk of opioid-related adverse events, point of contact age and tenure in the current role, prior pain-related academic detailing at the facility, and four specific implementation strategies were associated with case review completion rates, while randomization to additional centralized oversight was not.Trial registration: This project is registered at the ISRCTN Registry with number ISRCTN16012111. The trial was first registered on May 3, 2017.
| S-EPMC7313133 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Physician burnout is recognized as a global crisis and an epidemic. However, burnout in rheumatology is an understudied phenomenon. We explored the prevalence of physician burnout among rheumatologists from South Asia in the peri-pandemic period (2021-2022). Rheumatologists from Asian countries were invited to participate in an anonymized, validated, and pilot-tested e-survey via social media platforms from December 2021 to April 2022. Demographic information, social aspects (marital status, income, vacation time, daily exercise), substance abuse, EHR (electronic health record) use, and years in practice were obtained. In addition, burnout was estimated using Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Survey for Medical Personnel (MBI-HSS) in three domains: emotional exhaustion (EE), depersonalization (DP), and personal accomplishment (PA), and intergroup comparisons were made using independent t test and one-way ANOVA using SPSS v27. Of 146 respondents who participated in the survey, 134 belonged to Asian nations. The highest number of respondents was from Pakistan (56/134, 38.36%), followed by India (49/134, 33.56%). Slightly more respondents were male, 75 (51.4%), than females, 71 (48.6%). Over two-thirds of our respondents (99/134, 67.8%) reported burnout in at least one domain. Notably, we found statistically significant increased depersonalization scores in males. (P < 0.05). Females scored significantly higher on the following items: #5 (I feel I treat some patients as if they were impersonal objects), item# 10 (I've become more insensitive toward people since I took this job and item#22 (I feel patients blame me for some of their problems) (P < 0.05). We found differences in monthly salaries among South Asian (1484 ± 2717 USD) and non-South Asian respondents (5672 ± 8874 USD) (P < 0.01). A substantial proportion of rheumatologists in our survey report burnout, suggesting a felt need to introduce organizational measures to prevent and mitigate burnout and preserve the rheumatology workforce.
| S-EPMC10012323 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEmerging data suggest variability in susceptibility and outcome to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Identifying risk factors associated with infection and outcomes in cancer patients is necessary to develop healthcare recommendations.MethodsWe analyzed electronic health records of the US Veterans Affairs Healthcare System and assessed the prevalence of COVID-19 infection in cancer patients. We evaluated the proportion of cancer patients tested for COVID-19 who were positive, as well as outcome attributable to COVID-19, and stratified by clinical characteristics including demographics, comorbidities, cancer treatment, and cancer type. All statistical tests are 2-sided.ResultsOf 22 914 cancer patients tested for COVID-19, 1794 (7.8%) were positive. The prevalence of COVID-19 was similar across age. Higher prevalence was observed in African American (15.0%) compared with White (5.5%; P < .001) and in patients with hematologic malignancy compared with those with solid tumors (10.9% vs 7.8%; P < .001). Conversely, prevalence was lower in current smokers and patients who recently received cancer therapy (<6 months). The COVID-19-attributable mortality was 10.9%. Higher attributable mortality rates were observed in older patients, those with higher Charlson comorbidity score, and in certain cancer types. Recent (<6 months) or past treatment did not influence attributable mortality. Importantly, African American patients had 3.5-fold higher COVID-19-attributable hospitalization; however, they had similar attributable mortality as White patients.ConclusionPreexistence of cancer affects both susceptibility to COVID-19 infection and eventual outcome. The overall COVID-19-attributable mortality in cancer patients is affected by age, comorbidity, and specific cancer types; however, race or recent treatment including immunotherapy do not impact outcome.
| S-EPMC7665587 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To assess adult rheumatologists' comfort level, current practices, and barriers to provision of optimal care in supporting young adults with pediatric-onset rheumatic conditions in Canada. Survey questions were informed by literature review, a needs assessment, and using milestones listed by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada for the entrustable professional activities (EPAs) applicable to care for rheumatology patients transitioning to adult practice. The electronic survey was distributed to adult rheumatology members of the Canadian Rheumatology Association over 4 months. Four hundred and fifty-one rheumatologists received the survey, with a response rate of 15.2%. Most respondents were from Ontario and had been in practice ≥ 10 years. Three quarters reported a lack of training in transition care although the same proportion were interested in learning more about the same. Approximately 40% felt comfortable discussing psychosocial concerns such as gender identity, sexuality, contraception, drug and alcohol use, vaping, and mental health. Despite this, 45-50% reported not discussing vaping or gender identity at all. The most frequently reported barriers to providing transition care were lack of primary care providers, allied health support, and training in caring for this age group. Most adult rheumatologists lack formal training in transition care and view it as a barrier to providing care for this unique patient population. Future educational initiatives for adult rheumatology trainees should include issues pertaining to adolescents and young adults. More research is needed to assess the effectiveness of resources such as transition navigators in ensuring a successful transition process.
| S-EPMC10171159 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveIndividuals with autoimmune rheumatic disease (RD) are considered to be at increased risk for infection. However, few US population-based studies have assessed whether these patients are at increased risk of hospitalization or death due to COVID-19 compared with those without RD.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study using national Veterans Affairs Health Care System data for individuals who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Outcomes of interest were hospitalization or death due to any cause within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis. Outcomes were compared among veterans with RD and those without RD by using propensity score matching (PSM) and mixed-effects multivariate logistic regression.ResultsOf 26,116 veterans with COVID-19, 501 (1.9%) had an underlying RD. Prior to matching, patients with RD were more likely to have poor outcomes compared with controls (37.7% vs. 28.5% hospitalized; 6.4% vs. 4.5% died). In the PSM analysis, RD was not a significant predictor for poor outcomes; however, patients with prescriptions for glucocorticoids had increased odds of poor outcomes in a dose-dependent manner (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] for hospitalization or death: 1.33 [1.20-1.48] for doses >0 and ≤10 mg/day; 1.29 [1.09-1.52] for doses >10 mg/day).ConclusionAmong US veterans with COVID-19, we did not find a significant association between RD and hospitalization or death. Poor outcomes appear to be mostly driven by age and other comorbidities, similar to the general veteran population. However, we observed an increased risk for poor outcomes among patients who received glucocorticoids, even at daily doses less than or equal to 10 mg.
| S-EPMC8593772 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHeterogeneity of existing physician burnout studies impairs analyses of longitudinal trends, geographic distribution, and organizational factors impacting physician burnout. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is one of the largest integrated healthcare systems in the USA, offering a unique opportunity to study burnout across VA sites and time.ObjectiveTo characterize longitudinal burnout trends of VA physicians and assess organizational characteristics and geographic distribution associated with physician burnout.DesignLongitudinal study of the VA All Employee Survey during 2013-2017.ParticipantsSelf-identified physicians practicing in one of nine clinical service areas at 140 VA sites nationwide.Main measuresWe identified burnout using a validated definition adapted from the Maslach Burnout Inventory and characterized burnout trends for physicians in different clinical service areas. We used clustering analysis to categorize sites based on their burnout rates over time, and compared organizational characteristics and geographic distribution of high, medium, and low burnout categories.Key resultsWe identified 40,382 physician responses from 140 VA sites. Mean burnout rates across all physicians ranged from 34.3% in 2013 to a high of 39.0% in 2014. Primary care physicians had the highest burnout. High burnout sites were more likely to be rural and non-teaching, have lower complexity (i.e., offer fewer advanced clinical services), and have fewer unique patients per site.ConclusionsVA physician burnout was lower than previously described in many non-VA studies and was relatively stable over time. These findings may be due to unique characteristics of the VA practice environment. Nonetheless, with over a third of VA physicians reporting burnout, organizational interventions are needed. Primary care physicians and those practicing at small, rural sites have higher rates of burnout and may warrant more focused attention. Our results can guide targeted interventions to promote VA physician well-being and inform efforts to address burnout in diverse clinical settings.
| S-EPMC7210363 | biostudies-literature