Active vaccination campaign to increase seasonal influenza vaccination coverage: a monocenter experience in a cohort of Italian patients with systemic autoimmune diseases.

Seasonal influenza is a frequent cause of hospitalization and mortality among patients with systemic autoimmune diseases. Despite this evidence, vaccination coverage is generally much lower than the minimum 75% target proposed by the WHO. Therefore, an active campaign was implemented in the years 2019/2020 and 2020/2021 within the Rheumatology Department of the Niguarda Hospital (Milan, Italy) to improve the vaccination coverage in patients with inflammatory arthritis. This study aims to evaluate the vaccination coverage in the 2019/2020 and 2020/2021 (active campaigns) seasons and to compare these results with the 2018/2019 season. A monocenter observational study was conducted among adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis, spondylarthritis, or psoriatic arthropathy, who were referred to the Rheumatology Department of the Niguarda Hospital. Patients were given a questionnaire to investigate previous years' vaccination coverage and to propose an influenza vaccine for the 2020/2021 season. Compared with 2018/2019, a trend for increase in vaccination coverage was reported in 2019/2020 season (+ 10.7%, p = 0.055; 45.5% of coverage) and a statistically significant increase was reported in 2020/2021 (+ 31.2%, p < 0.001; 65.9% of coverage). The increase was also significant when comparing the 2020/2021 and 2019/2020 seasons (+ 20.5%, p < 0.001). The greatest increase in vaccination coverage was observed among under-65-year-old patients. Obtained results support the implementation of active vaccination campaigns to increase vaccination coverage among patients with systemic autoimmune diseases and highlight the importance of external factors (such as the COVID-19 pandemic) in directing the patient to adopt preventive measures to avoid infections and related complications.

Use of telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic in patients with inflammatory arthritis: a retrospective study on feasibility and impact on patient-reported outcomes in a real-life setting.

Close follow-up is mandatory in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, rheumatological care was rapidly reorganized during the first peak from March 1, 2020 to May 31, 2020, and all patients with RA, PsA, and AS being treated with a subcutaneous biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug or oral targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug were followed remotely. A retrospective database analysis of these 431 patients before and after this period is presented herein. A rheumatologist directly contacted all patients by telephone. Patients could also enter data on patient-reported outcomes remotely using the digital platform iAR Plus. General health (GH) and visual analog scale (VAS) pain were the main outcomes along with FACIT and disease-specific questionnaires (RADAI, ROAD, PROCLARA for RA, and BASDAI, BASGI, BASFI for AS). In all, 449 visits were postponed (69.9% of all scheduled visits); telephone evaluation was deemed inadequate in 193 instances, and patients underwent a standard outpatient visit. Comparing patients on telemedicine to those who underwent hospital visits, we found no statistically significant differences in GH (35.3 vs 39.3; p = 0.24), VAS (33.3 vs 37.1; p = 0.29), or other specific outcome measures in patients with RA, PsA, or AS. These results show that telemedicine has undoubted benefits, and in light of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, it is likely that many patients with these diseases may prefer it.

Pixel or Paper? Validation of a Mobile Technology for Collecting Patient-Reported Outcomes in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

BACKGROUND: In the management of chronic disease, new models for telemonitoring of patients combined with the choice of electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePRO) are being encouraged, with a clear improvement of both patients' and parents' quality of life. An Italian study demonstrated that ePRO were welcome in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), with excellent matching data. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the level of agreement between electronic and paper-and-pencil questionnaire responses. METHODS: This is an observational prospective study. Patients were randomly assigned to first complete the questionnaire by paper and pencil and then by tablet or in the opposite order. The questionnaire consisted of 3 independent self-assessment visual rating scales (Visual Analog Scale, Global Health score, Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity) commonly used in different adult patients, including those with rheumatic diseases. RESULTS: A total of 185 consecutive RA patients were admitted to hospital and were enrolled and completed the questionnaire both on paper and on electronic versions. For all the evaluated items, the intrarater degree of agreement between 2 approaches was found to be excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient>0.75, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: An electronic questionnaire is uploaded in a dedicated Web-based tool that could implement a telemonitoring system aimed at improving the follow-up of RA patients. High intrarater reliability between paper and electronic methods of data collection encourage the use of a new digital app with consequent benefit for the overall health care system.

Improving diagnosis of early inflammatory arthritis : results of a novel triage system.

OBJECTIVES: Early treatment of inflammatory arthritis (IA) leads to reduced disease activity, reduced joint damage, decreased functional impairment and increased chance of remission. However, delay often occurs from referral to rheumatology appointment. This survey evaluated whether a preliminary triage carried out by healthcare workers without formal medical training could be effective in identifying patients with or without early IA. METHODS: Patients were recruited during their first call to our centre, before their first visit. A simple questionnaire, including three questions and aimed at investigating the presence of sign and symptoms of IA was developed. The same survey was administered twice: the first time, during patient's first call to our centre (telephone survey), and the second time, during their first visit with the rheumatologist (Ambulatory visit survey). We compared the outcomes of the survey with the actual diagnosis made by the rheumatologist following standard medical examination. RESULTS: In total 484 patients were included in the study, and 34/484 (7.02%) were confirmed to have early IA. The telephone survey was able to detect the non-early IA patients in 99.5% of cases; the same result was reported for the ambulatory visit survey. The median time required to complete the questionnaire was 1 minute in both surveys. CONCLUSIONS: The adoption of a simple survey, also administered by non-medical personnel, may effectively contribute to the early detection of IA.