Severe Asthma Patients Experience and Satisfaction with Virtual Clinics in a Large Tertiary Care Hospital During COVID-19 Period

H. Al-Jahdali, Mohammad A Khan, A. Al-Harbi, R. Rajkumar, M. Al-Gamedi
{"title":"Severe Asthma Patients Experience and Satisfaction with Virtual Clinics in a Large Tertiary Care Hospital During COVID-19 Period","authors":"H. Al-Jahdali, Mohammad A Khan, A. Al-Harbi, R. Rajkumar, M. Al-Gamedi","doi":"10.1164/AJRCCM-CONFERENCE.2021.203.1_MEETINGABSTRACTS.A1271","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Enforced social distancing (i.e. lockdowns) greatly facilitated control of COVID-19. Whilst access to hospitals was restricted, outpatient care continued remotely. At our institute, the biologic therapy for severe asthma patients is administered on-site by specialist nurses who follow manufacturers' recommendations. Aim: The aim of this study was to determine the satisfaction of patients with severe asthma with telemedicine, and the impact of COVID-19 lockdown on their receipt of biologics and other treatments for asthma. Methods: A crosssectional survey of 58 patients with severe asthma scheduled to receive biologic therapy at our hospital during the lockdown was performed with ethical approval. Results: Fifty-four patients participated (F 37;mean age 46.7 years;response rate 93.1%). Meantime since diagnosis was 19.2 years (SD 11.5 years). All had been on biologic therapy Omalizumab (45), Mepolizumab (7), or Dupilumab (2) for over three months (mean 38.4 months ± SD 26.5 months). Fifty (92.6%) had telephone follow-up, 31 (57.4%) were satisfied with telemedicine, 45 (81.4%) agreed that biologic therapy improved their asthma, and 40 (74.1%) received scheduled biologic therapy. Of the 45 patients living in the city, nine did not receive biologic therapy, two cited the lockdown as the reason for this;two did not receive an appointment;two did not perceive any benefit;2 had other reasons. Five of the nine patients living outside the city did not receive biologic therapy, 3 because of the lockdown, and 1 for fear of acquiring COVID-19. Alarmingly, 16 (29.6%) suggested that they had insufficient medications, and 27 (50%) reported difficulty obtaining medications. Conclusions: Many patients were satisfied with telemedicine, so this could be used to deliver routine outpatient tertiary care post-pandemic. However, logistics around supplying medications, and biologics must be considered in plans preparing for the second wave of COVID-19.","PeriodicalId":320542,"journal":{"name":"TP3. TP003 COVID-19 INFECTIONS, MECHANISMS, AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TP3. TP003 COVID-19 INFECTIONS, MECHANISMS, AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1164/AJRCCM-CONFERENCE.2021.203.1_MEETINGABSTRACTS.A1271","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Enforced social distancing (i.e. lockdowns) greatly facilitated control of COVID-19. Whilst access to hospitals was restricted, outpatient care continued remotely. At our institute, the biologic therapy for severe asthma patients is administered on-site by specialist nurses who follow manufacturers' recommendations. Aim: The aim of this study was to determine the satisfaction of patients with severe asthma with telemedicine, and the impact of COVID-19 lockdown on their receipt of biologics and other treatments for asthma. Methods: A crosssectional survey of 58 patients with severe asthma scheduled to receive biologic therapy at our hospital during the lockdown was performed with ethical approval. Results: Fifty-four patients participated (F 37;mean age 46.7 years;response rate 93.1%). Meantime since diagnosis was 19.2 years (SD 11.5 years). All had been on biologic therapy Omalizumab (45), Mepolizumab (7), or Dupilumab (2) for over three months (mean 38.4 months ± SD 26.5 months). Fifty (92.6%) had telephone follow-up, 31 (57.4%) were satisfied with telemedicine, 45 (81.4%) agreed that biologic therapy improved their asthma, and 40 (74.1%) received scheduled biologic therapy. Of the 45 patients living in the city, nine did not receive biologic therapy, two cited the lockdown as the reason for this;two did not receive an appointment;two did not perceive any benefit;2 had other reasons. Five of the nine patients living outside the city did not receive biologic therapy, 3 because of the lockdown, and 1 for fear of acquiring COVID-19. Alarmingly, 16 (29.6%) suggested that they had insufficient medications, and 27 (50%) reported difficulty obtaining medications. Conclusions: Many patients were satisfied with telemedicine, so this could be used to deliver routine outpatient tertiary care post-pandemic. However, logistics around supplying medications, and biologics must be considered in plans preparing for the second wave of COVID-19.
2019冠状病毒病疫情期间某大型三级医院重症哮喘患者对虚拟诊所的体验及满意度
背景:强制保持社交距离(即封锁)极大地促进了COVID-19的控制。虽然进入医院受到限制,但门诊服务仍在远程进行。在我们的研究所,严重哮喘患者的生物治疗是由专业护士根据制造商的建议进行现场管理。目的:本研究的目的是确定重症哮喘患者对远程医疗的满意度,以及COVID-19封锁对他们接受生物制剂和其他哮喘治疗的影响。方法:经伦理批准,对封锁期间在我院接受生物治疗的58例重度哮喘患者进行横断面调查。结果:54例患者(f37,平均年龄46.7岁,有效率93.1%)。同期自诊断19.2年(SD 11.5年)。所有患者接受生物治疗超过3个月(平均38.4个月±标准差26.5个月),分别为Omalizumab(45例)、Mepolizumab(7例)或Dupilumab(2例)。50例(92.6%)接受电话随访,31例(57.4%)对远程医疗满意,45例(81.4%)认为生物治疗改善了哮喘,40例(74.1%)接受了预定的生物治疗。在居住在该市的45名患者中,有9人没有接受生物治疗,其中2人认为是封锁的原因;2人没有预约;2人认为没有任何好处;2人有其他原因。住在城外的9名患者中,有5名没有接受生物治疗,3名是因为封锁,1名是因为害怕感染COVID-19。令人震惊的是,16人(29.6%)表示他们没有足够的药物,27人(50%)报告难以获得药物。结论:许多患者对远程医疗感到满意,因此可以将其用于大流行后的常规门诊三级保健。但是,在应对第二次新冠疫情的计划中,必须考虑到药品和生物制剂供应的物流问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信