Accessing health services for musculoskeletal diseases during early COVID-19 lockdown: Results from a UK population survey
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Sir, restricting the spread of COVID-19 in the UK required radical changes to the structure of society and the delivery of health care. This has the potential for wide-ranging adverse consequences for people with musculoskeletal diseases. For the period between 23 March and 1 August 2020, those determined to be most at risk were required to ‘shield’ at home, avoiding all social contact. Primary and secondary care services postponed or cancelled non-urgent appointments. Remote consultations were provided by telephone or video [1]. The public were encouraged only to use health-care services for urgent needs. Local pharmacies, although remaining open, reported reduced patient consultations. Non-National Health Service (NHS) providers of musculoskeletal health services, including physiotherapists and podiatrists, closed [2]. In late April 2020, 5 weeks after the start of the UK ‘lockdown’, we conducted an online survey in a group of patients with a range of musculoskeletal diseases to assess the impact that the measures had on their wellbeing and ability to access health care. The survey was conducted using the Qualtrics platform (XM Platform, Qualtrics LLC, USA). It targeted 1376 subjects enrolled on the Norfolk Arthritis Register (NOAR), a large population-based cohort of patients originally identified as having inflammatory arthritis [3], and was also distributed to the wider UK population through social media and email lists from organizations including Arthritis Action, National RA Society, National Ankylosing Spondylitis Society, Fibromyalgia UK and Scope. The survey was open from 28 April 2020 to 27 May 2020. Respondents provided informed consent and were asked a series of questions relating to demographic characteristics, use of health-care services, disease activity, disability status, perceived isolation (measured using the Lubben Social Network Scale-6 [4]) and loneliness (measured using the revised UCLA Loneliness Score-3 item [5]). Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the characteristics of the sample and their access to health service provision. Student’s unpaired t-tests were used to assess the association between participants’ access to health care (yes/no) and continuous measures of pain, stiffness, perceived general health, Lubben Social Isolation (scored from 0 to 30; higher scores equate to greater social isolation) and UCLA loneliness score (scored from 3 to 9; higher scores equate to greater loneliness). The statistical analyses were conducted on STATA v.16.0 (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA). The study was approved by the University of East Anglia’s Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee (reference: 2019/20-104; 2019/20-105). In total, 264 responded from the NOAR cohort (19%), and 414 from the wider population completed the survey. This provided a combined cohort of 678 respondents for analysis. Their characteristics and survey responses are summarized in Table 1. A wide range of inflammatory and non-inflammatory diseases were represented, with RA (43.5%) and OA (21.7%) reported most commonly. There were no important differences in the characteristics or responses in the NOAR and non-NOAR RA patients, and the results were pooled for analysis. Respondent characteristics and responses to health provision access from April to May 2020 A&E: accident and emergency; GP, general practitioner; NHS: National Health Service; UCLA: University of California Los Angeles. The majority (52.1%) reported that their musculoskeletal symptoms had increased since the start of ‘lockdown’. Most respondents (88.2%) reported little difficulty accessing medication. Forty-four per cent of respondents needed the assistance of others to do this. A third of patients reported needing to access either their general practitioner or hospital rheumatology department in this period. The respondents gave equivocal responses when asked about the challenges in obtaining advice from health professionals. As might be expected, those who accessed health care reported significantly greater pain, stiffness and poorer general health (P < 0.01). Individuals who reported greater social isolation (mean difference 1.0 points; P = 0.02) and greater loneliness (mean difference 0.6 points; P < 0.01) were less likely to access health care. Although these differences reflect relatively small differences in degrees of social isolation, their statistical significance indicates the wider impact on the health-seeking behaviours of patients. This survey, conducted in the early stages of the UK ‘lockdown’, suggests that there have been immediate negative consequences for people with musculoskeletal disease. Despite the swift transformations in the configuration of health care that have taken place, patients have, in the main, been able to access primary care and hospital rheumatology departments. However, those with higher levels of social isolation access health care the least. Should further isolation measures need to be enforced as the pandemic continues, particular efforts should be made to protect and support the socially isolated as a vulnerable group. In designing musculoskeletal services, health-care providers need to use their resources to reach out to individual patients who do not come forward for advice and who might be struggling silently with their disease. The authors thank the following organizations that assisted in distributing the survey across their networks: Pain Concern; Arthritis Action; National Rheumatoid Arthritis Society; National Ankylosing Spondylitis Society; Paget’s Association; Parathyroid UK; The Health Policy Partnership; and Scope. Funding: This study was supported by funding from Action Arthritis and the University of East Anglia, UK. Disclosure statement: The authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».