Academic publication activities and perspectives of rheumatology practitioners in the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objectives: This study aimed to analyze the research, publication activities, and perspectives on clinical practices of rheumatology practitioners during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Materials and methods: The survey-based cross-sectional study was designed online and included 24 closed-ended questions. After performing a pilot test and validation of survey, it was conducted among clinicians between September 2021 and December 2021. Results: One-hundred fifteen clinicians (54 males, 61 females; 78.1% in rheumatology practice for at least five years) responded to the survey. The respondents indicated that they worked in coronavirus-related departments, comprising inpatient service (50.4%), consultancy (42.6%), and outpatient clinic (27.8%). Around 40% of clinicians stated they spent less time on scientific research (43.1%) and clinical learning activities (43.2%), while almost the same proportion of them spent more (41.1% and 45.0%, respectively). This study revealed that 53.5% published at least one paper covering mostly COVID-19 in the scientific citation index (SCI) or SCI-expanded (SCI-E) indexed journals. However, nearly half of them did not have any papers published in the SCI/SCI-E (46.5%) or non-SCI/SCI-E indexed (44.6%) journals. Regarding the perspectives of clinicians about clinical practices, they considered fewer biological (57.0%) and nonbiological (55.0%) drug usage, reported fewer outpatient clinic visits (88.2%), more newly diagnosed rheumatic diseases (62.5%), and more disease exacerbations (31.2%). Most of the clinicians (range, 76.2 to 86.3%) thought they accurately managed their patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusion: Clinicians published mostly coronavirus-related papers in the pandemic era, and in the self-assessment, clinicians thought that they correctly manage their patients. In addition, this study reflected the frequency of academic publications and clinicians' work routines during the pandemic.

The impact of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic on the management of rheumatic disease: a national clinician-based survey.

This study aims to investigate the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the management of rheumatic diseases (RD). An online survey included 10 questions were designed to assess potential differences in rheumatology practice. The survey was conducted between March 2021 and June 2021. Marginal homogeneity test was used to compare frequencies of outpatient clinic patients between the pre-pandemic and pandemic. Other results were analyzed by descriptive statistics. One hundred three clinicians (75.7% in rheumatology practice for at least five years) responded to the survey. Almost 70% examined < 30 patients per day during the pandemic while nearly 70% examined ≥ 30 patients per day before the pandemic (p < 0.001). They indicated following reasons for decreasing outpatient clinic activity were concerns regarding COVID-19 transmission risk of the patients (95%) and the clinicians (53%), being able to supply chronic medications directly from the pharmacy (85%), lockdown (71%), limited outpatient appointments (64%) and using telemedicine (20%). The frequencies of rheumatology daily routine procedures were decreased as follows; patient hospitalization for diagnosing (80%) and treatment (78%), labial salivary gland biopsy (63%), Schirmer's test/salivary flow rate test (56%), nail bed video-capillaroscopy (52%), musculoskeletal ultrasonography (51%) and Pathergy test (50%). Clinicians hesitated to use rituximab (63%) mostly, followed by cyclophosphamide (53%), glucocorticoids (43%), tofacitinib (41%), mycophenolate mofetil (36%), and azathioprine (33%). In this first national survey, the prominent differences in the management of RD have decreased outpatient clinic activity, reduced rheumatology daily procedures, and hesitancy to use some rheumatic drugs.

Hand strenght and dexterity in interphalangeal hand osteoarthritis and effects of osteophyte formations.

BACKGROUND: Hand osteoarthritis (HOA) is a complex disorder with various subtypes characterized with predominance of different features. It is challenging to estimate the severity of hand disability in HOA, since contribution of different disease components to clinical burden is yet to be clarified. The aim of the study is to investigate hand functions in nonerosive interphalangeal hand osteoarthritis (HOA) without inflammatory features, and search for effects of osteophyte formations detected by radiography and ultrasound on functionality. METHODS: Thirty one HOA patients and 20 healthy subjects with similar age, gender, body mass index were included. Hand functions were evaluated by self-reported questionnaires and objective strength and dexterity measurements. A total of 459 interphalangeal joints were evaluated and scored by radiography and ultrasound for ostephyte formations. RESULTS: Strength and dexterity measurements were similar between groups. Self-reported functionality was hampered in HOA group but not statistically significant. Osteophyte scores obtained by ultrasound and radiography were significantly higher in HOA group. Osteophyte scores obtained by ultrasound were higher than the scores obtained by radiography. Ultrasound scores showed no correlation with any of the parameters while osteophytes scores obtained by radiography partially showed a significant negative correlation with assembly part of dexterity testing. CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference observed in hand strength and dexterity in nonerosive interphalangeal HOA patients withouth signs of inflammation when compared to healthy subjects. Osteophyte formations prominent enough to be deteceted by radiography may have a negative effect on hand dexterity.

Hand strenght and dexterity in interphalangeal hand osteoarthritis and effects of osteophyte formations

Abstract Background: Hand osteoarthritis (HOA) is a complex disorder with various subtypes characterized with predominance of different features. It is challenging to estimate the severity of hand disability in HOA, since contribution of different disease components to clinical burden is yet to be clarified. The aim of the study is to investigate hand functions in nonerosive interphalangeal hand osteoarthritis (HOA) without inflammatory features, and search for effects of osteophyte formations detected by radiography and ultrasound on functionality. Methods: Thirty one HOA patients and 20 healthy subjects with similar age, gender, body mass index were included. Hand functions were evaluated by self-reported questionnaires and objective strength and dexterity measurements. A total of 459 interphalangeal joints were evaluated and scored by radiography and ultrasound for ostephyte formations. Results: Strength and dexterity measurements were similar between groups. Self-reported functionality was hampered in HOA group but not statistically significant. Osteophyte scores obtained by ultrasound and radiography were significantly higher in HOA group. Osteophyte scores obtained by ultrasound were higher than the scores obtained by radiography. Ultrasound scores showed no correlation with any of the parameters while osteophytes scores obtained by radiography partially showed a significant negative correlation with assembly part of dexterity testing. Conclusions: No significant difference observed in hand strength and dexterity in nonerosive interphalangeal HOA patients withouth signs of inflammation when compared to healthy subjects. Osteophyte formations prominent enough to be deteceted by radiography may have a negative effect on hand dexterity.(AU)