ABSTRACT
Purpose: We analyzed data collected for ascertaining severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine acceptance, perceptions, and post-vaccination side effects among Kuwaiti inflammatory rheumatic disease (IRD) patients. Methods: The current cross-sectional study was conducted on patients attending governmental rheumatology clinics across seven hospitals in Kuwait between July and September 2021. We included adults of both sexes who are national/residents of the state of Kuwait and who had a confirmed diagnosis of any IRD disease. Data on patients' demographics, history of IRD, SARS-CoV-2 infection, vaccination status, as well as post-vaccination side effects and disease flare were collected from the included participants through a self-administered questionnaire. Stata MP/17 for macOS was used for statistical analyses. Results: We included 501 IRD patients, a group with a mean age of 43.38 years and a mean disease duration of 10.46 years. The majority of the included patients were female (79.8%), and the most common primary rheumatology diagnosis was rheumatoid arthritis (42.5%), followed by spondyloarthritis (19.4%) and systemic lupus erythematosus (19.0%). One hundred and five patients (21.0%) had SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by PCR-positive swab; of them, 17 patients were hospitalized. None of the included patients were using steroids alone. cDMARDs, bDMARDs, and sDMARDs were reported in 37.3%, 18.0%, and 3.8% of the patients, respectively. Three hundred and fifty-one patients (70.1%) were vaccinated; 40.9% received Pfizer/BioNTech, whereas 28.7% received AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccines. Fear that the vaccination will aggravate the condition or interfere with the present therapy and concerns about its effectiveness as well as its side effects were the most prevalent causes for refusing to accept the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Other patients were worried about the paucity of the data because individuals with IRD had been omitted from earlier research, resulting in a dearth of information. The commonly reported post-vaccination side effects were body ache/pain, fatigue, and pain at the injection site (32.1%, 30.3%, and 29.7%, respectively). IRD flare post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was self-reported in only 9 patients, and 342 did not report a flare. Conclusions: This study's findings highlight that SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have an acceptable safety profile, with the majority of their side effects being temporary and mild. The occurrence of flares was low after immunization. Reassurance and trust in the safety of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in IRD patients should be reassuring to rheumatologists and vaccine recipients.
ABSTRACT
The Kuwait Association of Rheumatology members met thrice in April 2020 to quickly address and support local practitioners treating rheumatic disease in Kuwait and the Gulf region during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Because patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease (RMD) may need treatment modifications during the COVID-19 pandemic, we voted online for the general guidance needed by local practitioners. In this review, we have addressed patients' vulnerability with rheumatic disease and issues associated with their optimum management. Our recommendations were based on the formulation of national/international guidelines and expert consensus among KAR members in the context of the Kuwaiti healthcare system for patients with RMD. The most recent reports from the World Health Organization, the Center for Disease Control, the National Institutes of Health-National Medical Library, and the COVID-19 educational website of the United Kingdom National Health Service have been incorporated. We discuss the management of RMD in various clinical scenarios: screening protocols in an infusion clinic, medication protocols for stable patients, and care for patients with suspected or confirmed COVID infection and whether they are stable, in a disease flare or newly diagnosed. Further, we outline the conditions for the hospital admission. This guidance is for the specialist and non-specialist readership and should be considered interim as the virus is relatively new, and we rely on the experience and necessity more than evidence collection. The guidance presented should be supplemented with recent scientific evidence wherever applicable.