Challenges of patients with intrathecal baclofen pump therapy during COVID-19 pandemic in Saudi Arabia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: This study was carried out to analyze the effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on patients with intrathecal baclofen (ITB) therapy. Methods: Patients who came for ITB refill during the COVID-19 pandemic between March 2020 and August 2020 were contacted, and a survey was conducted regarding challenges faced during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data obtained from the chart review included demographics, diagnoses, pump information, baclofen dose, and COVID triage. Information was collected regarding travel arrangements, appointments, and problems related to ITB therapy or travel. The survey included 12 multiple-choice questions related to travel, appointment scheduling, and difficulties faced during the travel restrictions. Results: The study included 19 patients with ITB (mean age: 38.1±14.4) from outside Riyadh city who came for ITB refill during the COVID-19 pandemic. The majority of the patients were males. Spinal cord injury with paraplegia was the most common diagnosis (52.6%). In total, 7 patients had either clinical (31.6%) or travel-related difficulties (15.8%). No patient had ITB withdrawal at the time of the clinic visit. Nearly half (47.4%) of the patients had to change their appointment for refill. The percentage of patients who used a car as a mode of travel pre-COVID was 42.1%, which increased to 78.9% during the pandemic. They traveled 747.4±356.6 km (7.4±3.7 h) to reach the hospital for refill. Patients needed 1–4 accompanied persons for assistance during travel, with the majority (68.4%) requiring 2 accompanied persons. Statistical analysis did not reveal any significant associations between clinical or travel difficulties and appointment changes. Conclusions: A pandemic or similar disaster can pose challenges to patients on ITB therapy living in areas with limited access to specialized care. In this study, none of the patients had serious complications or adverse outcomes; however, the main difficulties were attributed to travel. It is crucial to establish strategies at institutional, regional, or national levels to formulate guidelines for managing patients with ITB therapy during a pandemic.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".