The impact of COVID-19 on the management of heart failure: a United Kingdom patient questionnaire study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Aims
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has created significant challenges to healthcare globally, necessitating rapid restructuring of service provision. This questionnaire survey was conducted amongst adult heart failure (HF) patients in the United Kingdom (UK), to understand the impact of COVID-19 upon HF services.Methods and results
The survey was conducted by the Pumping Marvellous Foundation, a UK HF patient charity. 'Survey Monkey' was used to disseminate the questionnaire in the Pumping Marvellous Foundation 's online patient group and in 10 UK hospitals (outpatient hospital and community HF clinics). There were 1050 responses collected (693/1050-66% women); 55% (579/1050) were aged over 60 years. Anxiety level was significantly higher regarding COVID-19 (mean 7 ± 2.5 on anxiety scale of 0 to 10) compared with anxiety regarding HF (6.1 ± 2.4; P < 0.001). Anxiety was higher amongst patients aged ≤60 years about HF (6.3 ± 2.2 vs. 5.9 ± 2.5 in those aged >60 years; P = 0.005) and COVID-19 (7.3 ± 2.3 vs. 6.7 ± 2.6 those aged >60 years; P < 0.001). Sixty-five per cent of respondents (686/1050) reported disruption to HF appointments (cancellation or postponement) during the lockdown period. Thirty-seven per cent reported disruption to medication prescription services, and Thirty-four per cent reported inability to access their HF teams promptly. Thirty-two per cent expressed reluctance to attend hospital (25% stated they would only attend hospital if there was no alternative, and 7% stated that they would not attend hospital at all).Conclusions
The COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant anxiety amongst HF patients regarding COVID-19 and HF. Cancellation or postponement of scheduled clinic appointments, investigations, procedures, prescription, and monitoring services were implicated as sources of anxiety.
SUBMITTER: Sankaranarayanan R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8006619 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionCOVID-19 has impacted dentistry in unprecedented ways.ObjectiveThe following research aimed to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on periodontal practice in the United Kingdom using the COM-B (Capability Opportunity Motivation-Behaviour) model as the basis for a questionnaire.Basic research designAn online survey link was sent to all members of the British Society of Periodontology and Implant Dentistry. A total of 358 responses were received and analysed.ResultsThe great majority of participants thought that the pandemic had an impact on their profession, while only 4.7 % had no concerns. The main worries related to financial concerns and ability to provide appropriate levels of care. More than 80 % of respondents agreed that their establishment was compliant with infection control procedures. Some participants felt benefits mainly in terms of more time for CPD activities. It was felt that some of the changes needed will need to be sustained long-term.ConclusionsRespondents were generally worried. However, they perceived they had the physical and psychological ability to effect changes to their practice, higher than the physical and social opportunities that they were afforded. Although the COVID-19 pandemic is causing profound changes and worries for the profession of Periodontology, clinicians are clear about their capability to control the situation and feel they have the motivation to make the required changes.Clinical significanceCOVID-19 has presented clinicians with novel challenges. Investigating the professional response to change and expected impact is of interest in the current climate as we navigate the 'new normal'. Assessing the results could be useful in informing support strategies moving forward.
| S-EPMC7510560 | biostudies-literature
Project description:COVID-19 was declared a global pandemic on 11 March 2020; the United Kingdom (UK) implemented quarantine measures shortly afterward, resulting in rapid changes in how owners managed and interacted with their horses. This study provides a rapid analysis of the initial impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on the management of UK leisure and competition horses. A 17 question online survey was distributed via equestrian social media sites to ascertain the impact of COVID-19 on horse and yard management and on human-horse interactions. Frequency analysis combined with Chi-squared and thematic analyses identified the impact of COVID-19 on UK horse owners. Major changes within horse management and horse-human interactions were reported for the majority of horse owners (>65%), regardless of the establishment type or region. Social distancing and visiting restrictions were implemented at most yards, but nearly half were not providing hand sanitization or disinfection protocols for the shared areas/equipment to prevent cross-contamination between users. The financial impact of the pandemic combined with restricted access to veterinary professionals resulted in owners expressing concerns that horse health and welfare may be compromised as a result. Horse owners also felt that the reduced opportunities for horse-human interactions were negatively affecting their mental health and wellbeing.
| S-EPMC7600939 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEffects of the COVID-19 pandemic on cardiac rhythm management (CRM) services remain poorly quantified.ObjectiveTo describe the impact of COVID-19 on specialist CRM centers in the United Kingdom (UK).MethodsTwo-center study involving the Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and Royal Papworth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. The first nationwide lockdown lasted from April to July 2020 and the second from December 2020 to March 2021.ResultsCompared to the pre-pandemic period, pandemic 1 (April-July 2020) was associated with a 52.2% reduction in electrophysiology (EP) procedures (P = .083), 32.7% reduction in device procedures (P = .003), and 36.8% decrease in CRM referrals (P < .001). There was also a 13.4% increase in the use of conscious sedation (CS) (P < .001) and day-case procedures for EP (P = .003), with no change in day-case device procedures (P = .555). Corresponding numbers for pandemic 2 (August-November 2020) were a 0.7% increase in EP procedures (P = .925), 7.9% reduction in device procedures (P = .232), 13.9% decrease in referrals (P = .014), 5.5% increase in CS for EP (P = .009), 7.1% increase in day-case EP procedures (P < .001), and no change in day-case device procedures (P = .537). Corresponding numbers for pandemic 3 (December 2020-March 2021) were a 31.6% reduction in EP procedures (P = .001), 22.3% reduction in device procedures (P = .006), 8.4% decrease in referrals (P = .094), 11.0% increase in CS for EP (P < .001), 7.6% increase in day-case EP procedures (P = .003), and no change in day-case device procedures (P = .146). By the end of March 2021, the CRM waiting list was 167.8% pre-pandemic levels.ConclusionDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, specialist centers in the UK were affected such that the number of procedures performed was greatly reduced in the initial period with latter improvements as better coping strategies were developed.
| S-EPMC9213026 | biostudies-literature
Project description:During the COVID-19 pandemic, reductions in heart failure (HF) hospitalizations have been widely reported, and there is an urgent need to understand how HF care has been reorganized in countries with different infection levels, vaccination rates and healthcare services. The OPTIMIZE Heart Failure Care program has a global network of investigators in 42 countries, with first-hand experience of the impact of the pandemic on HF management in different care settings. The national coordinators were surveyed to assess: 1) the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic for continuity of HF care, from both a hospital and patient perspective; 2) the organizational changes enacted to ensure continued HF care; and 3) lessons learned for the future of HF care. Contributions were obtained from 37 national coordinators in 29 countries. We summarize their input, highlighting the issues raised and using the example of three very different settings (Italy, Brazil, and Taiwan) to illustrate the similarities and differences across the OPTIMIZE program.
| S-EPMC9217066 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveCOVID-19 has caused a global healthcare crisis with increasing number of people getting infected and dying each day. Different countries have tried to control its spread by applying the basic principles of social distancing and testing. Healthcare professionals have been the frontline workers globally with different opinions regarding the preparation and management of this pandemic. We aim to get the opinion of healthcare professionals in United Kingdom regarding their perceptions of preparedness in their workplace and general views of current pandemic management strategy.MethodA questionnaire survey, drafted using Google Forms, was distributed among healthcare professionals working in the National Health Service (NHS) across the United Kingdom. The study was kept open for the first 2 weeks of April 2020.ResultsA total of 1007 responses were obtained with majority of the responses from England (n = 850, 84.40%). There were 670 (66.53%) responses from doctors and 204 (20.26%) from nurses. Most of the respondents (95.23%) had direct patient contact in day to day activity. Only one third of the respondents agreed that they felt supported at their trust and half of the respondents reported that adequate training was provided to the frontline staff. Two-thirds of the respondents were of the view that there was not enough Personal Protective Equipment available while 80% thought that this pandemic has improved their hand washing practice. Most of the respondents were in the favour of an earlier lockdown (90%) and testing all the NHS frontline staff (94%).ConclusionDespite current efforts, it would seem this is not translating to a sense of security amongst the UK NHS workforce in terms of how they feel trained and protected. It is vital that healthcare professionals have adequate support and protection at their workplace and that these aspects be actively monitored.
| S-EPMC7241367 | biostudies-literature
Project description:COVID-19 has had a global impact on all aspects of healthcare including surgical training. This study aimed to quantify the impact of COVID-19 on operative case numbers recorded by surgeons in training, and annual review of competency progression (ARCP) outcomes in the UK. Anonymized operative logbook numbers were collated from electronic logbook and ARCP outcome data from the Intercollegiate Surgical Curriculum Programme database for trainees in the 10 surgical specialty training specialties.Operative logbook numbers and awarded ARCP outcomes were compared between predefined dates. Effect sizes are reported as incident rate ratios (IRR) with 95 per cent confidence intervals. Some 5599 surgical trainees in 2019, and 5310 in surgical specialty training in 2020 were included. The IRR was reduced across all specialties as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic (0.62; 95 per cent c.i. 0.60 to 0.64). Elective surgery (0.53; 95 per cent c.i. 0.50 to 0.56) was affected more than emergency surgery (0.85; 95 per cent c.i. 0.84 to 0.87). Regional variation indicating reduced operative activity was demonstrated across all specialties. More than 1 in 8 trainees in the final year of training have had their training extended and more than a quarter of trainees entering their final year of training are behind their expected training trajectory. The COVID-19 pandemic has had a major effect on surgical training in the UK. Urgent, coordinated action is required to minimize the impacts from the reduction in training in 2020.
| S-EPMC8226285 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this paper, we use an employer-based survey of earnings and hours to set out the key patterns in UK earnings dynamics from 1975 to 2020, with a particular focus on the most recent recession. We demonstrate that (log) earnings changes exhibit strongly procyclical skewness and have become increasingly leptokurtic, and thus less well approximated by a log-normal distribution, over the period of study. This holds across genders and sectors. Exploiting the long duration of our panel, we then explore the responsiveness of earnings and hours to aggregate and firm-level shocks, finding ample heterogeneity in the exposure of different types of workers to aggregate shocks. Exposure is falling in age, firm size, skill level, and permanent earnings, and is lower for unionized and public sector workers. The qualitative patterns of earnings changes across workers observed in the Covid-19 recession of 2020 are broadly as predicted using the previously estimated exposures and size of the shock. Firm-specific shocks are important for wages given the variation in within-firm productivity and the patterns of heterogeneity are markedly different than for aggregate shocks.
| S-EPMC9877856 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe trajectory of mechanically ventilated patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is essential for clinical decisions, yet the focus so far has been on admission characteristics without consideration of the dynamic course of the disease in the context of applied therapeutic interventions.MethodsWe included adult patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) within 48 h of intensive care unit (ICU) admission with complete clinical data until ICU death or discharge. We examined the importance of factors associated with disease progression over the first week, implementation and responsiveness to interventions used in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and ICU outcome. We used machine learning (ML) and Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) methods to characterise the evolution of clinical parameters and our ICU data visualisation tool is available as a web-based widget ( https://www.CovidUK.ICU ).ResultsData for 633 adults with COVID-19 who underwent IMV between 01 March 2020 and 31 August 2020 were analysed. Overall mortality was 43.3% and highest with non-resolution of hypoxaemia [60.4% vs17.6%; P < 0.001; median PaO2/FiO2 on the day of death was 12.3(8.9-18.4) kPa] and non-response to proning (69.5% vs.31.1%; P < 0.001). Two ML models using weeklong data demonstrated an increased predictive accuracy for mortality compared to admission data (74.5% and 76.3% vs 60%, respectively). XAI models highlighted the increasing importance, over the first week, of PaO2/FiO2 in predicting mortality. Prone positioning improved oxygenation only in 45% of patients. A higher peak pressure (OR 1.42[1.06-1.91]; P < 0.05), raised respiratory component (OR 1.71[ 1.17-2.5]; P < 0.01) and cardiovascular component (OR 1.36 [1.04-1.75]; P < 0.05) of the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score and raised lactate (OR 1.33 [0.99-1.79]; P = 0.057) immediately prior to application of prone positioning were associated with lack of oxygenation response. Prone positioning was not applied to 76% of patients with moderate hypoxemia and 45% of those with severe hypoxemia and patients who died without receiving proning interventions had more missed opportunities for prone intervention [7 (3-15.5) versus 2 (0-6); P < 0.001]. Despite the severity of gas exchange deficit, most patients received lung-protective ventilation with tidal volumes less than 8 mL/kg and plateau pressures less than 30cmH2O. This was despite systematic errors in measurement of height and derived ideal body weight.ConclusionsRefractory hypoxaemia remains a major association with mortality, yet evidence based ARDS interventions, in particular prone positioning, were not implemented and had delayed application with an associated reduced responsiveness. Real-time service evaluation techniques offer opportunities to assess the delivery of care and improve protocolised implementation of evidence-based ARDS interventions, which might be associated with improvements in survival.
| S-EPMC8111053 | biostudies-literature
Project description:CKD is common in patients with heart failure, associated with high mortality and morbidity, which is even higher in people undergoing long-term dialysis. Despite increasing use of evidence-based drug and device therapy in patients with heart failure in the general population, patients with CKD have not benefitted. This review discusses prevalence and evidence of kidney replacement, device, and drug therapies for heart failure in CKD. Evidence for treatment with β-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, and sodium-glucose cotransporter inhibitors in mild-to-moderate CKD has emerged from general population studies in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). β-Blockers have been shown to improve outcomes in patients with HFrEF in all stages of CKD, including patients on dialysis. However, studies of HFrEF selected patients with creatinine <2.5 mg/dl for ACE inhibitors, <3.0 mg/dl for angiotensin-receptor blockers, and <2.5 mg/dl for mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, excluding patients with severe CKD. Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor therapy was successfully used in randomized trials in patients with eGFR as low as 20 ml/min per 1.73 m2 Hence, the benefits of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone axis inhibitor therapy in patients with mild-to-moderate CKD have been demonstrated, yet such therapy is not used in all suitable patients because of fear of hyperkalemia and worsening kidney function. Sodium-glucose cotransporter inhibitor therapy improved mortality and hospitalization in patients with HFrEF and CKD stages 3 and 4 (eGFR>20 ml/min per 1.73 m2). High-dose and combination diuretic therapy, often necessary, may be complicated with worsening kidney function and electrolyte imbalances, but has been used successfully in patients with CKD stages 3 and 4. Intravenous iron improved symptoms in patients with heart failure and CKD stage 3; and high-dose iron reduced heart failure hospitalizations by 44% in patients on dialysis. Cardiac resynchronization therapy reduced death and hospitalizations in patients with heart failure and CKD stage 3. Peritoneal dialysis in patients with symptomatic fluid overload improved symptoms and prevented hospital admissions. Evidence suggests that combined cardiology-nephrology clinics may help improve management of patients with HFrEF and CKD. A multidisciplinary approach may be necessary for implementation of evidence-based therapy.
| S-EPMC8425606 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNationwide data of the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on Heart Failure (HF) hospitalizations is lacking. We conducted this study to elucidate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on HF hospitalizations. Additionally, we assessed the differences in hospitalization characteristics during the pandemic and the impact that a concurrent diagnosis of COVID-19 has on various outcomes and predictors of inpatient mortality among patients admitted for HF.MethodsThe National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database was queried for all hospitalizations with a primary diagnosis of HF between 2017 - 2020. Monthly HF hospitalizations were trended longitudinally over this period. Beginning April 1, 2020, concurrent COVID-19 infections were identified. Subsequently, we stratified HF hospitalizations between April 2020 and December 2020 (HF-2020) based on if concomitant COVID-19 was diagnosed, forming the HF-COVID+ve and HF-COVID-ve groups respectively. HF-2020 was also compared with pre-pandemic HF hospitalizations between April 2019 and December 2019 (HF-2019). Baseline characteristics were compared, and adjusted outcomes were obtained.ResultsDuring the initial COVID-19 surge in April 2020, HF admissions were reduced by 47% compared to January 2020. Following this decline, HF hospitalizations increased but did not reach pre-pandemic levels. HF-2020 admissions had an increased complication burden compared to HF-2019, including acute myocardial infarction (8.9% vs. 6.6%, p<0.005) and pulmonary embolism (4.1% vs. 3.4%, p<0.005) indicating a sicker cohort of patients. HF-COVID+ve hospitalizations had 2.9 times higher odds of inpatient mortality compared to HF-COVID-ve and an increased adjusted length of stay by 2.16 days (p<0.005).ConclusionA pandemic of the same magnitude as COVID-19 can overwhelm even the most advanced health systems. Early resource mobilization and preparedness is essential to provide care to a sick cohort of patients like acute heart failure, who are directly and indirectly effected by the consequences of the pandemic which has worsened hospitalization outcomes.
| S-EPMC10121154 | biostudies-literature