13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on patients with rare disease in Hong Kong

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The COVID-19 pandemic has had significant health, social, and economic consequences internationally. While the pandemic has direct implications on infected patients and families, there is a need to examine the pandemic’s effect on patients with non-COVID-19-related diseases. This study examines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on 272 rare disease patients with 89 distinct rare diseases in Hong Kong using a cross-sectional online survey between April 10 and April 29, 2020 from the patient and caregiver perspective. The pandemic has impacted patient’s health status in 46%, service use patterns in 71%, mental health in 79%, daily living in 82%, social life in 92%, and financial status in 81% of patients. Patient’s health status, medical and rehabilitation, and mental health were more impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic in the group of patients with any level of dependency according to the Barthel Index for Activities of Daily Living compared with that in the group of patients who are fully independent (p<0.0001; p<0.0001; p=0.0420). This study is the first study to examine the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the rare disease population in Hong Kong, and demonstrates the pandemic’s effect on service and resource utilization, and patient’s physical and mental well-being.

          Related collections

          Most cited references6

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outbreak on ST-Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction Care in Hong Kong, China

          Acute ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is a disease of high mortality and morbidity, and primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) is the typical recommended therapy. 1,2 Systems of care have been established to expedite PPCI workflow to minimize ischemic time from symptom onset to definitive treatment in the catheterization laboratory. Little is known about the impact of public health emergencies like a community outbreak of infectious disease on STEMI systems of care. Since December 2019, the emergence of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan, China, has evolved into a regional epidemic, including in Hong Kong, a city in Southern China. We describe the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on STEMI care in Hong Kong through a handful of recent cases of patients with STEMI who underwent PPCI at a single center. We included patients with STEMI admitted via the Accident and Emergency Department and in whom PPCI was performed. We focus on the time period since January 25, 2020, when hospitals in the city started to institute emergency infection protocols to contain COVID-19. This required hospitals to suspend all nonessential visits and adjust clinical in-patient and out-patient services. Indications for PPCI were according to the international guidelines. 1,2 Study exclusion criteria included inpatient STEMI (n=1), STEMI with unknown symptom onset time (n=3), and cardiac arrest patients (n=2). Our hospital has offered 24/7 PPCI service to all eligible patients presenting with acute STEMI since 2010 per standard Accident and Emergency Department protocol. When STEMI is diagnosed, a PPCI team is activated after cardiology evaluation. Data on key time points in STEMI care are recorded in a clinical registry. Symptom-onset-to-first-medical-contact time is defined as the time from patient-reported chest discomfort onset time to the time of first medical contact. Door-to-device time is defined as the time from Accident and Emergency Department arrival to successful wire crossing time during PPCI. Catheterization laboratory arrival-to-device time is defined as the time from patient arrival in the catheterization laboratory to successful wire crossing time. From January 25, 2020, to February 10, 2020, we observed changes in time components of STEMI care among the aggregate group of 7 consecutive patients who underwent PPCI. We compared these with data from 108 patients with STEMI treated with PPCI in the prior year from February 1, 2018, to January 31, 2019 (N=108). These 7 patients did not suffer from COVID-19 infection, and 6 out of 7 presented to our hospital during regular work hours (8 am–8 pm weekdays, excluding public holidays). The Table shows numerically longer median times in all components when compared with historical data from the prior year. The largest time difference was in the time from symptom onset to first medical contact. Table. Time Components of STEMI Care Before and After COVID-19 Outbreak The extent to which a community outbreak of infection like COVID-19 stresses other parts of healthcare system like STEMI care is largely unknown. Contemporary COVID-19 infection affects respiratory tract and is capable of human-to-human transmission presumably via droplets. 3,4 Given these concerns, Hong Kong hospitals implemented stringent infection control measures starting in late January 2020, including but not limited to universal masking, full personal protective equipment (N95 respirator, goggles/face shield, isolated gown, disposable gloves) for aerosol-generating procedures, frequent environmental disinfection, suspension of ward visit, volunteer service, and clinical attachment. Of course, these protocols are essential for limiting the spread of infections like COVID-19 but also may impact healthcare systems in unexpected ways. Most visibly, we found large delays in the small number of patients with STEMI seeking medical help after institution of these infection control measures. It is understandable that people are reluctant to go to a hospital during the COVID-19 outbreak, which explains the potential delays in seeking care. Another concern that we are unable to evaluate is whether some patients with STEMI did not seek care at all. Delays in seeking care or not seeking care could have a detrimental impact on outcomes. We also found delays in evaluating patients with STEMI after hospital arrival that could be explained by several reasons. For example, catheterization laboratories generally have positive pressure ventilation so COVID-19 infection inside these rooms can theoretically cause widespread contamination of the surrounding environment. Precautions such as detailed travel and contact history, symptomatology, and chest X-ray, therefore, are taken before transferring patients to the catheterization laboratory at our hospital. Although these are essential measures for containing COVID-19 infection, this could increase delays in diagnosis, staff activation and transfer if healthcare systems are not prepared. Similarly, even after patients arrived in the catheterization laboratory, staff may need more time to wear protective gear to prepare the patients and interventional cardiologists may not be used to performing PPCI while in full protective gear, leading to longer treatment. This is a preliminary report, and our study should be considered in the context of the following limitations. We describe a single hospital’s experience in STEMI care after instituting emergency infection protocols in a handful of patients. It is possible that patients and staff improve over time as their experiences with these measures mature. Although we cannot make meaningful statistical complications, our description allows for an early examination into how public health emergencies can indirectly affect unrelated hospital areas. In modern society, infectious agents like the COVID-19 outbreak can spread quickly and evolve into a pandemic. Hospitals not only need to consider methods for containing and treating these infections but how infection outbreaks may affect systems of care beyond the immediate infection. Acknowledgment We would like to thank all healthcare workers who have sacrificed themselves in the current coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) outbreak. Disclosures None.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The Untold Toll — The Pandemic’s Effects on Patients without Covid-19

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found

              Genetic epilepsies and COVID‐19 pandemic: Lessons from the caregiver perspective

              To the Editors: The COVID‐19 pandemic represents an unprecedented international crisis with significant health, economic, and social consequences. This scenario has forced the medical community to face new practical and ethical challenges that require rapid responses. Early data show a variety of neurological manifestations in a significant proportion of patients with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, 1 , 2 although there is little documentation of the effects on people with epilepsy. 2 , 3 In this study, we assess the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic in a particularly vulnerable population: individuals with genetic developmental and epileptic encephalopathies (DEEs) and their caregivers. Although children appear to present milder COVID‐19 manifestations, 4 patients with DEEs present an increased susceptibility to certain triggers related to viral infections and respiratory comorbidities, are at risk of missing medical follow‐up and emergency assistance due to health care resource allocation focus on COVID‐19 patients, and are exposed to broader sociopsychological impact related to lockdown. Therefore, this study evaluates the impact of the pandemic on patients with genetic DEEs and their caregivers in Spain, one of the current hotspots of the pandemic. This study was a cross‐sectional survey open between April 7 and April 11, 2020, 23‐27 days after national lockdown was established in Spain. Participants were caregivers of DEE patients with proven or suspected genetic origin, recruited through patient advocacy groups, using internet‐based sources. They were asked to fill out a structured questionnaire. Informed written consent was obtained from each caregiver. This methodology, previously used for Dravet syndrome and other neurodevelopmental diseases, 5 permits collecting larger samples for rare conditions. Statistical analysis was performed with R v3.6.2. A total of 277 responses from caregivers were collected, covering several different conditions. The most frequent genetic diagnoses were as follows: SCN1A, CDKL5, STXBP1, KCNQ2, PCDH19, and SYNGAP1 (see Table 1). DEEs of suspected genetic origin with negative genetic findings were reported by 36.8%. Mean age was 12.4 years; 58.1% were female. Fifteen patients (5.5%) were reported to present typical COVID‐19 symptoms. Only seven of them were tested with SARS‐CoV‐2 polymerase chain reaction, with a positive result in three cases. The type of DEE of these three patients was Dravet syndrome, STXBP1 encephalopathy, and DEE without genetic diagnosis. All of them had mild symptoms, and none needed hospitalization or showed either seizure or behavioral worsening. Because of the high rate of mild or asymptomatic cases in pediatric populations, we also asked whether there had been confirmed COVID‐19 cases in people with close contact with the patient. That was the case in 30 (10.8%). TABLE 1 Changes in epilepsy and behavior according to type of genetic epilepsy and other relevant variables during the pandemic   Stable epilepsy Epilepsy worsening P Stable behavior Behavioral worsening P Type of genetic epilepsy Dravet syndrome 50 (94.3) 3 (5.7) — 37 (69.8) 16 (30.2) — CDKL5 deficiency disorder 19 (90.5) 2 (9.5) — 18 (85.7) 3 (14.3) — STXBP1 encephalopathy 15 (75) 5 (25) — 17 (85) 3 (15) — KCNQ2 encephalopathy 14 (100) 0 (0) — 7 (50) 7 (50) — PCDH19‐related epilepsy 11 (91.7) 1 (8.3) — 11 (91.7) 1 (8.3) — SYNGAP1 disorder 8 (100) 0 (0) — 3 (37.5) 5 (62.5) — Other genetic DEEs a 39 (83) 8 (17) — 30 (63.8) 17 (36.2) — DEEs without genetic diagnosis 82 (80.4) 20 (19.6) — 70 (68.6) 32 (31.4) — Total 238 (85.9) 39 (14.1) .117 193 (69.7) 84 (30.3) .038 Other relevant variables Current age 10 (6.1) 12 (6.2) .088 10 (6.1) 10 (6.1) .575 COVID‐19 in patient b 11 (73.3) 4 (26.7) .137 11 (73.3) 4 (26.7) .9 COVID‐19 in close contacts b 21 (70) 9 (30) .021 17 (56.7) 13 (42.3) .093 COVID‐19 high‐incidence region 125 (82.7) 26 (17.3) .084 101 (66.9) 50 (33.1) .251 Cancelation of relevant medical visits 38 (74.5) 13 (25.5) .01 30 (58.8) 21 (41.2) .058 Difficulties finding ASM at pharmacy 15 (65.2) 8 (34.8) .008 16 (69.6) 7 (30.4) .968 Home without terrace or yard 146 (83.9) 28 (16.1) .21 113 (65.3) 60 (34.7) .03 New onset anxiety 158 (83.2) 32 (16.8) .051 115 (60.8) 74 (39.2) <.001 Note Quantitative variables are expressed as median (interquartile range), qualitative variables as frequency (%). Abbreviations: ASM, antiseizure medication; DEE, developmental and epileptic encephalopathy. a Other genetic diagnoses with more than one case were: SCN8A and GNAO1 (n = 5 each), SCN2A (n = 4), and CACNA1A, TSC1, and SCN9A (n = 3 each). b COVID‐19 cases are suspected or confirmed in patients, confirmed in contacts. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd This article is being made freely available through PubMed Central as part of the COVID-19 public health emergency response. It can be used for unrestricted research re-use and analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source, for the duration of the public health emergency. Overall, 39 (14.1%) and 87 (30.3%) cases reported seizure frequency increase or behavioral deterioration during the lockdown, respectively. In addition, there was one case of status epilepticus and nine patients who experienced some degree of neurological regression. Caregivers reported a series of partly overlapping factors that could contribute to seizure or behavioral deterioration: (1) new onset symptoms of anxiety (68.6%) or depression (69.7%) in caregivers, (2) inability to reach their neurologist using telemedicine resources (62.8%), (3) living in homes without a terrace or yard (62.8%), (4) economic problems (62.4%), (5) loss of regular stimulation and physical therapies (51.8%), (6) avoidance of seeking medical advice for serious health issues in the emergency department due to fear of COVID‐19 (20.6%), (7) cancelation of essential medical appointments (18.5%), and (8) difficulties finding their antiseizure medication (ASM) at a pharmacy (8.3%). Some of these factors might be affected by the oversaturated health care system, mainly in the Spanish regions with the highest incidence of COVID‐19 (Madrid or Catalonia), where 55.5% of the survey responders live. 6 To explore the association between these factors and epilepsy or behavior worsening we performed bivariate (see Table 1) and multivariate analysis. Multivariate logistic regression showed that the main variables associated with seizure increase were age (P = .034) and difficulties finding ASM (P = .05), whereas the main variables associated with behavioral deterioration were type of epilepsy (P = .015), living in a home without a terrace or yard (P = .009), and caregivers’ anxiety (P < .001). In conclusion, although more research is needed and a cross‐sectional design has obvious limitations, patients with DEEs and their caregivers face multiple challenges during the COVID‐19 pandemic that might lead to worse seizure and psychological outcomes in this population. According to our results, these would be related to both the direct impact on the patients of the COVID‐19 infection and the lockdown, and indirectly to health system barriers (so‐called “secondary harm” 7 ) and sociopsychological and economic burdens of the caregiver. CONFLICT OF INTEREST None of the authors has any conflict of interest to disclose. We confirm that we have read the Journal's position on issues involved in ethical publication and affirm that this letter is consistent with those guidelines.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Eur J Med Genet
                Eur J Med Genet
                European Journal of Medical Genetics
                Elsevier Masson SAS.
                1769-7212
                1878-0849
                12 September 2020
                12 September 2020
                : 104062
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
                [2 ]Rare Disease Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author: Postal address: Department of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 1/F New Clinical Building, Queen Mary Hospital, 102 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong Tel: (852) 2255 4482 Fax: (852) 2855 1523
                Article
                S1769-7212(20)30772-2 104062
                10.1016/j.ejmg.2020.104062
                7486880
                32931946
                648e4c62-360e-42bf-814d-d0f48da7e46a
                © 2020 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 4 August 2020
                : 4 September 2020
                : 5 September 2020
                Categories
                Clinical Research

                Genetics
                covid-19,rare disease,hong kong,adl, activities of daily living,covid-19, coronavirus disease 2019,icd-10, 10th version of the international classification of diseases and related health problems,rdhk, rare disease hong kong

                Comments

                Comment on this article