Access barriers to electroconvulsive therapy during COVID-19 pandemic.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Daniel HH
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7202803 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Access barriers to electroconvulsive therapy during COVID-19 pandemic.
Daniel Hernández-Huerta HH Begoña Alonso-Sánchez Elena AE
Psychiatry research 20200506
Similar Datasets
Project description:Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is an essential treatment for severe mental illnesses such as depression with suicidality and catatonia. However, its availability is being threatened by resource limitations and infection concerns due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This may necessitate the triage of patients for ECT but there is no established ethical framework to prioritise patients. We offer an application of an ethical framework for use of scare medical resources in the ECT setting.
| S-EPMC7492578 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWhile the etiology for the upsurge in testosterone testing and prescriptions is likely multifactorial, increased direct-to-consumer marketing and the expansion of clinical care centers devoted to testosterone treatment likely play a role. Many of these centers require patients to report, in-person, on a regular basis for their injectable therapy and/or lab studies. The purpose of our study was to investigate barriers of care that patients receiving treatment for testosterone deficiency may be experiencing in the setting of COVID-19.MethodsOur survey was posted on a closed Facebook support page for males currently receiving testosterone treatment and members of the group were invited to participate. The survey asked participants several questions related to how they received their injections, if they've experienced difficulties obtaining their injections due to COVID-19 restrictions, and about their interest in telemedicine services for their care.ResultsThe majority of patients were able to receive their treatment despite barriers enforced by the pandemic. Of the 104 participants, almost half received their testosterone prescriptions from an outpatient clinic dedicated to testosterone replacement, while the other half received their therapy from a PCP, endocrinologist, or urologist. Only 5 patients (4.8%) noted difficulties obtaining their injections during this pandemic, 4 of which received their prescriptions from dedicated testosterone clinics, and the other from a PCP. Nearly 90% of respondents self-administered their testosterone therapy. With regards to telemedicine, 57.8% of patients have utilized the technology in some capacity, however 74.4% said that they would prefer to use telemedicine video services with a urologist or APP with expertise in andrology over in-person services.ConclusionsIn our survey, the majority of the respondents have been able to receive their injectable testosterone therapy despite the ongoing pandemic. The majority of respondents self-administer their treatments, which may explain the lack of barriers. This study is the first of its kind to investigate the effect of a pandemic on the receipt of care for those being treated for testosterone deficiency with injectable testosterone.
| S-EPMC8421835 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST1055 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundElectroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a procedural treatment that is potentially life-saving for some patients with severe psychiatric illness. At the start of the global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, ECT practice was remarkably disrupted, putting vulnerable individuals at increased risk of symptom exacerbation and death by suicide. This study aimed to capture the self-reported experiences of psychiatrists based at healthcare facilities across Canadian provinces who were delivering ECT treatments during the first phase of the COVID-19 pandemic (i.e., from mid-March 2020 to mid-May 2020).MethodsA multidisciplinary team of experts developed a survey focusing on five domains: ECT unit operations, decision-making, hospital resources, ECT procedure, and mitigating patient impact. Responses were collected from psychiatrists providing ECT at 67 ECT centres in Canada, grouped by four geographical regions (Ontario, Quebec, Atlantic Canada, and Western Canada).ResultsClinical operations of ECT programs were disrupted across all four regions - however, centres in Atlantic Canada were able to best preserve outpatient and maintenance care, while centres in Western Canada were able to best preserve inpatient and acute care. Similarly, Atlantic and Western Canada demonstrated the best decision-making practices of involving the ECT team and clinical ethicists in the development of pandemic-related guidelines. Across all four regions, ECT practice was affected by the redeployment of professionals, the shortage of personal protective equipment, and the need to enforce social distancing. Attempts to introduce modifications to the ECT delivery room and minimize bag-valve-mask ventilation were consistently reported. All four regions developed a new patient prioritization framework, and Western Canada, notably, aimed to provide ECT to only the most severe cases.ConclusionsThe results suggest that ECT provision was disproportionately affected across different parts of Canada. Possible factors that could explain these interregional differences include population, distribution of urban vs. rural areas, pre-pandemic barriers in access to ECT, number of cases, ability to control the spread of infection, and the general reduction in physicians' activities across different areas of health care. Studying these factors in the future will inform how medical centres should respond to public health emergencies and pandemic-related circumstances in the context of procedural treatments.
| S-EPMC10170445 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To understand and analyse the global impact of COVID-19 on outpatient services, inpatient care, elective surgery, and perioperative colorectal cancer care, a DElayed COloRectal cancer surgery (DECOR-19) survey was conducted in collaboration with numerous international colorectal societies with the objective of obtaining several learning points from the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on our colorectal cancer patients which will assist us in the ongoing management of our colorectal cancer patients and to provide us safe oncological pathways for future outbreaks.
| 2346925 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a hereditary condition caused by mutations in the lipid pathway. The goal in managing FH is to reduce circulating low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and, therefore, reduce the risk of developing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Because FH patients were considered high risk groups due to an increased susceptible for contracting COVID-19 infection, we hypothesized whether the effects of the pandemic hindered access to cardiovascular care. In this review, we conducted a literature search in databases Pubmed/Medline and ScienceDirect. We included a comprehensive analysis of findings from articles in English related and summarized the effects of the pandemic on cardiovascular care through direct and indirect effects. During the COVID-19 pandemic, FH patients presented with worse outcomes and prognosis, especially those that have suffered from early ASCVD. This caused avoidance in seeking care due to fear of transmission. The pandemic severely impacted consultations with lipidologists and cardiologists, causing a decline in lipid profile evaluations. Low socioeconomic communities and ethnic minorities were hit the hardest with job displacements and lacked healthcare coverage respectively, leading to treatment nonadherence. Lock-down restrictions promoted sedentary lifestyles and intake of fatty meals, but it is unclear whether these factors attenuated cardiovascular risk in FH. To prevent early atherogenesis in FH patients, universal screening programs, telemedicine, and lifestyle interventions are important recommendations that could improve outcomes in FH patients. However, the need to research in depth on the disproportionate impact within different subgroups should be the forefront of FH research.
| S-EPMC10436799 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to determine the public's likelihood of being willing to use an emergency department (ED) for urgent/emergent illness during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.MethodsAn institutional review board-approved, cross-sectional survey of a non-probability sample from Amazon Mechanical Turk was administered May 24-25, 2020. Change in self-reported willingness to use an ED before and during the pandemic (primary outcome) was assessed via McNemar's test; COVID-19 knowledge and perceptions were secondary outcomes.ResultsThere were 855 survey participants (466 [54.5%] male; 699 [81.8%] White; median age 39). Proportion reporting likelihood to use the ED pre-pandemic (71% [604/855]) decreased significantly during the pandemic (49% [417/855]; P < 0.001); those unlikely to visit the ED increased significantly during the pandemic (41% [347/855] vs 22% [417/855], P < 0.001). Participants were unlikely to use the ED during the pandemic if they were unlikely to use it pre-pandemic (adjusted odds ratio, 4.55; 95% confidence interval, 3.09-6.7) or correctly answered more COVID-19 knowledge questions (adjusted odds ratio, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-1.60). Furthermore, 23.4% (n = 200) of respondents believed the pandemic was not a serious threat to society. Respondents with higher COVID-19 knowledge scores were more likely to view the pandemic as serious (odds ratio, 1.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.36-1.82).ConclusionsThis survey study investigated the public's willingness to use the ED during the COVID-19 pandemic. Only 49% of survey respondents were willing to visit the ED during a pandemic if they felt ill compared with 71% before the pandemic.
| S-EPMC7771795 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, health systems rapidly introduced in-home telehealth to maintain access to care. Evidence is evolving regarding telehealth's impact on health disparities. Our objective was to evaluate associations between socioeconomic factors and rurality with access to ambulatory care and telehealth use during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective study at an academic medical centre in midwestern United States. We included established and new patients who received care during a one-year COVID-19 period vs pre-COVID-19 baseline cohorts. The primary outcome was the occurrence of in-person or telehealth visits during the pandemic. Multivariable analyses identified factors associated with having a health care provider visit during the COVID-19 vs pre-COVID-19 period, as well as having at least one telehealth visit during the COVID-19 period.ResultsAll patient visit types were lower during the COVID-19 vs the pre-COVID-19 period. During the COVID-19 period, 125 855 of 255 742 established patients and 53 973 new patients had at least one health care provider visit, with 41.1% of established and 23.5% of new patients having at least one telehealth visit. Controlling for demographic and clinical characteristics, established patients had 30% lower odds of having any health care provider visit during COVID-19 vs pre-COVID-19 (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.698-0.71) period. Factors associated with lower odds of having a telehealth visit during COVID-19 period for established patients included older age, self-pay or other insurance vs commercial insurance, Black or Asian vs White race and non-English preferred languages. Female patients, patients with Medicare or Medicaid coverage, and those living in lower income zip codes were more likely to have a telehealth visit. Living in a zip code with higher average internet access was associated with telehealth use but living in a rural zip code was not. Factors affecting telehealth visit during the COVID-19 period for new patients were similar, although new patients living in more rural areas had a higher odds of telehealth use.ConclusionHealthcare inequities existed during the COVID-19 pandemic, despite the availability of in-home telehealth. Patient-level solutions targeted at improving digital literacy, interpretive services, as well as increasing access to stable high-speed internet are needed to promote equitable health care access.
| S-EPMC9718446 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate patient experience with a prenatal telemedicine visit and identify barriers to accessing telemedicine among rural pregnant people in northern New England during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic.Materials and methodsWe conducted a postvisit electronic survey of pregnant people who successfully participated in a prenatal telemedicine visit at a rural academic medical center in Northern New England. Nineteen questions were included in 5 domains: (1) engagement with prenatal care; (2) barriers to telemedicine and in person healthcare; (3) experience of prenatal care; (4) remote pregnancy surveillance tools; and (5) sources of COVID-19 information.ResultsResponses were obtained from 164 pregnant people. Forty percent of participants had participated in an audio-only telemedicine visit, and 60% in a video telemedicine visit. The visit was easy or somewhat easy for 79% of respondents and somewhat difficult or difficult for 6.8%. The most common barrier to accessing telemedicine was poor internet or phone connectivity, followed by childcare responsibilities, lack of equipment, and lack of privacy. Participants also engaged in additional remote prenatal care including phone calls with registered nurses (7.6%), communication with the obstetrics team through a secure health messaging portal (21.1%), and home health monitoring (76.3%).Discussion and conclusionsIn this survey, evaluating the experience of pregnant people participating in a prenatal telemedicine visit during the COVID-19 pandemic, respondents had a positive experience with telemedicine overall, but also identified significant barriers to participation including issues with connectivity and lack of equipment for the visit. Most participants used telemedicine in combination with other tools for remote self-care.
| S-EPMC8822407 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAfter COVID-19 restrictions on nonessential procedures were lifted and safety protocols established, utilization rates of endoscopic procedures remained reduced.AimsThis study assessed patient attitudes and barriers to scheduling endoscopy during the pandemic.MethodsA survey was administered to patients with ordered procedures at a hospital-based setting (7/21/2020-2/19/2021) collecting demographic data, body mass index, COVID-19 relevant comorbidities, level of procedural urgency (defined by recommended scheduling window), scheduling and attendance, concerns, and awareness of safety measures.ResultsThe average respondent was female (63.8%), age 57.6 ± 14, White (72.3%), married (76.7%), insured (99.3%), affluent English speakers (92.3%) and highly educated (at least college 90.2%). Most reported moderate to excellent COVID-19 knowledge (96.6%). Of 1039 procedures scheduled, emergent cases accounted for 5.1%, urgent 55.3% and elective 39.4%. Respondents identified appointment convenience (48.53%) as the most frequent factor impacting scheduling, also noting concern for results (28.4%). Age (p = .022), native language (p = .04), education (p = .007), self-reported COVID knowledge (p = .002), and a desire to be COVID tested pre-procedure (p = .023) were associated with arrival, more commonly in an ambulatory surgical center than hospital (p = .008). Diabetes mellitus (p = .004) and an immunocompromised state (p = .009) were adversely related to attendance. Attitudes towards safety protocols did not affect scheduling. Multivariate analysis demonstrated age, education and COVID knowledgeability were associated with procedure completion.ConclusionsSafety protocols and urgency levels were not associated with procedure completion. Pre-pandemic barriers to endoscopy persisted as dominant factors amid pandemic concerns.
| S-EPMC10018624 | biostudies-literature