ABSTRACT
Background/Aims During the COVID-19 pandemic rheumatology services were advised to limit face to face contact, with remote telemedicine used instead. Although suitable for some people, issues have been highlighted with telemedicine. The frequency and proportion of remote appointments during the pandemic has not been described, or the socio-demographic characteristics of those accessing remote or in-person rheumatology care. This study aims to describe rheumatology healthcare utilisation and mode of appointment (remote/in-person) in people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), prior to, and during the pandemic in England. Methods A retrospective prevalent cohort study of people with RA, identified using a validated algorithm, as of 1st April 2019 using electronic health record data (OpenSAFELY). Outpatient rheumatology appointments between 1st April 2019 and 31st March 2022 were identified. For each year, the number of outpatient appointments, mode of appointment (remote/in-person) and patient socio-demographic characteristics were described. Results 130,884 people with RA were identified. Since the start of the pandemic, the proportion of people without any appointments in a 12-month period increased from 28.5% in 2019/20 to 33.3% in 2020/ 21 and has not recovered. Older people were most frequently not seen (51% of people >80 years in 2020/21 and 2021/22). Of appointments where mode was known, 54.4% of people with appointments in the year from April 2020 were only seen remotely, reducing to 35.1% in the year from April 2021 (Table 1). The proportion with all remote appointments increased with increasing age, comprising 62% of people >80 years in 2020. This age gradient persisted in 2021, though proportions of those >80 years with all-remote appointments was lower (44%). Compared to urban dwellers, a higher proportion of those living in rural areas had all remote appointments in 2020 (58% vs 53%) and 2021 (38% vs 34%). Conclusion During the pandemic, one third of people with RA were not seen at all over a 12-month period and these were more frequently older people. Over half of people were only seen remotely in 2020, decreasing to one-third in 2021. Given the limitations of remote appointments it is unknown whether this increased frequency of remote appointments will impact long-term outcomes.
ABSTRACT
Background/Aims The impact of the pandemic on the incidence and management of inflammatory arthritis (IA) is not understood. Routinely-captured data in secure platforms, such as OpenSAFELY, offer unique opportunities to understand how IA was impacted upon by the pandemic. Our objective was to use OpenSAFELY to assess the effects of the pandemic on diagnostic incidence and care delivery for IA in England, and replicate key metrics from the National Early Inflammatory Arthritis Audit. Methods With the approval of NHS England, we used primary care and hospital data for 17 million adults registered with general practices using TPP health record software, to explore the following outcomes between 1 April 2019 and 31 March 2022: 1) incidence of IA diagnoses (rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, undifferentiated IA) recorded in primary care;2) time to first rheumatology assessment;3) time to first prescription of a conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARD) in primary care, and choice of first csDMARD. Results From 17,683,500 adults (representing 40% of the English population), there were 31,280 incident IA diagnoses recorded between April 2019 and March 2022. New IA diagnoses decreased by 39.7% in the early months of the pandemic. Overall, a 20.3% decrease in IA diagnoses was seen in the year commencing April 2020, relative to the preceding year (5.1 vs. 6.4 diagnoses per 10,000 adults, respectively). Further decreases coincided with rising COVID-19 numbers, before returning to pre-pandemic levels by the end of the study period. No rebound increase in IA incidence was observed as of April 2022. The median time from referral to first rheumatology assessment was shorter during the pandemic (18 days;IQR 8-35 days) than before (21 days;9-41 days). The proportion of patients prescribed csDMARDs in primary care was comparable to before the pandemic;however, fewer people were prescribed methotrexate or leflunomide, and more were prescribed sulfasalazine or hydroxychloroquine. Conclusion IA diagnoses decreased markedly during the early phase of the pandemic;however, the impact on rheumatology assessment times and DMARD prescribing was less marked than might have been anticipated. This study demonstrates the feasibility of using routinelycaptured, near real-time data in the secure OpenSAFELY platform to benchmark care quality on a national scale, without the need for manual data collection.