Impact of Rapid Transition to Telemedicine-Based Delivery on Allergy/Immunology Care During COVID-19

Assessing Patterns of Telehealth Use Among People with Sickle Cell Disease Enrolled in Medicaid During the Start of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background: Telehealth can be defined as using remote technologies to provide health care. It may increase access to care among people with sickle cell disease (SCD). This study examined (1) telehealth use, (2) characteristics of telehealth use, and (3) differences between telehealth users and nonusers among people with SCD during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of Medicaid claims among four states [California (CA), Georgia (GA), Michigan (MI), Tennessee (TN)] participating in the Sickle Cell Data Collection program. Study participants were individuals ≥1 year old with SCD enrolled in Medicaid September 2019-December 2020. Telehealth encounters during the pandemic were characterized by provider specialty. Health care utilization was compared between those who did (users) and did not (nonusers) use telehealth, stratified by before and during the pandemic. Results: A total of 8,681 individuals with SCD (1,638 CA; 3,612 GA; 1,880 MI; and 1,551 TN) were included. The proportion of individuals with SCD that accessed telehealth during the pandemic varied across states from 29% in TN to 80% in CA. During the pandemic, there was a total of 21,632 telehealth encounters across 3,647 users. In two states (MI and GA), over a third of telehealth encounters were with behavioral health providers. Telehealth users had a higher average number of health care encounters during the pandemic: emergency department (pooled mean = 2.6 for users vs. 1.5 for nonusers), inpatient (1.2 for users vs. 0.6 for nonusers), and outpatient encounters (6.0 for users vs. 3.3 for nonusers). Conclusions: Telehealth was frequently used at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic by people with SCD. Future research should focus on the context, facilitators, and barriers of its implementation in this population.

Trends in telemedicine visits among pediatric asthma patients during COVID-19

Background

Environmental and social factors, including lack of access to asthma care, contribute to persistent inequities in asthma outcomes among children from historically marginalized ethnoracial groups. Telemedicine, which expanded rapidly during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, may be an approach to augment access to pediatric asthma care.

Objectives

We sought to describe characteristics of pediatric (0-17 years) telemedicine users with asthma and characterize use trends throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis using electronic health record data of pediatric patients with asthma seen at University of California, Los Angeles, Medical Center between March 2019 to March 2022 describing telemedicine user characteristics, trends of asthma-related telemedicine use, and associations between user characteristics and having a telemedicine visit.

Results

Among 6,777 patients with asthma, the percentage of asthma-related telemedicine visits peaked early in the pandemic, comprising 74.3% of visits, before decreasing to 13.6% in 2022. Compared to White patients, Black patients had lower odds of an asthma telemedicine visit (odds ratio [OR], 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26, 0.94). Those with public insurance (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.19, 2.43), severe persistent asthma (OR, 3.03; 95% CI, 1.70, 5.42), or comorbidities (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.08, 2.33) had higher odds. Time to first emergency department visit and hospitalization comparing those with at least one telemedicine visit to those with none were similar.

Conclusions

More pediatric asthma patients are using telemedicine since the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly those with medical complexity and comorbidities, and outcomes appear similar. However, Black patients at our institution have lower odds of using telemedicine.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on adults and children with atopic dermatitis and food allergy: Systematic review

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused significant disruptions to health care services and health impacts on patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) and/or food allergy (FA).

Objective

We evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and disease on AD/FA patients.

Methods

A comprehensive systematic literature search was conducted from December 2019 to 2022. Screening and data extraction were done following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, and the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, or MMAT, was used to assess risk of bias.

Results

In total, 159 studies were included. Five of 7 studies reported no significant changes in overall incidence or prevalence of AD during the pandemic, although some studies noted an increase in the elderly and infants. Telehealth served as an effective alternative to face-to-face consultations, with mixed levels of patient and provider satisfaction. Dissatisfaction was most marked in patients with more severe disease, who thought that their disease was inadequately managed through telemedicine. Higher levels of general anxiety were recorded in both AD/FA patients and caregivers, and it was more pronounced in patients with severe disease. Most studies reported no significant differences in postvaccination adverse effects in AD patients; however, results were more varied in FA patients.

Conclusion

Our review identified the impact of COVID-19 pandemic- and disease-driven changes on AD/FA patients. Telemedicine is uniquely suited to manage atopic diseases, and hybrid care may be a suitable approach even in the postpandemic era. COVID-19 vaccines and biologics can be safely administered to patients with atopic diseases, with appropriate patient education to ensure continued care for high-risk patients.

Preparing the Allergist/Immunologist for the Next Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic had a profound impact on society in general and allergists' practices in particular. The adverse effects included a loss of practice productivity and income, staffing, and in-office procedures due to concerns about the spread of infection and the need for social/physical distancing as well as isolation. Allergy training programs and research activities also suffered. Federal financial assistance, rapid adoption of telehealth with Medicare waivers, and adaptation of practice sites, training programs, and research activities allowed for some return to normal, although still with significant restrictions in staffing and in-office procedures. There were positive aspects to the pandemic in the form of telehealth initiatives, pathways for rapid development and approval of tests and treatments, opportunities for new collaborations, and expertise in vaccines. Preparation for the next pandemic needs to be considered now to avoid the mistakes and missteps that occurred with the COVID-19 pandemic. On a national level, a strategy to overcome the societal divisions, misinformation/disinformation, and distrust of science needs to be developed based on better communication, as well as advocacy for continued improvement in our public health system. Practices and training programs as well as research centers need to institutionalize changes made during the pandemic so they can quickly be reinitiated when necessary.

International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: Allergic rhinitis - 2023

BACKGROUND

In the 5 years that have passed since the publication of the 2018 International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2018), the literature has expanded substantially. The ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update presents 144 individual topics on allergic rhinitis (AR), expanded by over 40 topics from the 2018 document. Originally presented topics from 2018 have also been reviewed and updated. The executive summary highlights key evidence-based findings and recommendation from the full document.

METHODS

ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 employed established evidence-based review with recommendation (EBRR) methodology to individually evaluate each topic. Stepwise iterative peer review and consensus was performed for each topic. The final document was then collated and includes the results of this work.

RESULTS

ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 includes 10 major content areas and 144 individual topics related to AR. For a substantial proportion of topics included, an aggregate grade of evidence is presented, which is determined by collating the levels of evidence for each available study identified in the literature. For topics in which a diagnostic or therapeutic intervention is considered, a recommendation summary is presented, which considers the aggregate grade of evidence, benefit, harm, and cost.

CONCLUSION

The ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update provides a comprehensive evaluation of AR and the currently available evidence. It is this evidence that contributes to our current knowledge base and recommendations for patient evaluation and treatment.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: A Decade of Progress?

The concepts of diversity, equity, and inclusion are fundamental and more recently heavily discussed within medicine, research, and the larger society. There is increasing awareness that diversity of thoughts, perspectives, and backgrounds yields stronger teams and more effective results. There is also increasing awareness that stark inequities from systemic, institutional, and individual levels exist that limit the baseline opportunities for many populations. To close disparity gaps, broad aspects of diversity and promoting equity are required and efforts must be inclusive of those most marginalized. In this Clinical Commentary, we discuss, "How and If progress has been made in Diversity, Equity, Inclusion within the field of Allergy/Asthma/Immunology in the past decade?" We discuss the current state of clinical practice and what has been revealed over the past 10 years; describe our current workforce and what progress has or has not occurred there; and finally, review the state of scientific and medical research.

Transition to Virtual Asthma Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Observational Study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic increased reliance on virtual care for patients with persistent asthma.

OBJECTIVE

This retrospective cohort study assessed changes from in-person to virtual care during the pandemic. In patients with persistent asthma, compared with the same period before the pandemic.

METHODS

Kaiser Permanente Colorado members aged 18 to 99 years with persistent asthma were evaluated during two periods (March to October 2019 and March to October 2020). Comparison of asthma exacerbations (hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and courses of oral prednisone) and asthma medication metrics were evaluated between the two periods and by type of care received during the pandemic (no care, virtual care only, in-person care only, or a mix of virtual and in-person care). Population characteristics by type of care received during the pandemic were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 7,805 adults with persistent asthma, those who used more virtual care or sought no care during the pandemic were younger and had fewer comorbidities, mental health diagnoses, or financial barriers. Exacerbations decreased (0.264 to 0.214; P <.001) as did courses of prednisone (0.213 to 0.169). Asthma medication adherence (0.53 to 0.54; P <.001) and the asthma medication ratio, a quality-of-care metric (0.755 to 0.762; P = .019), increased slightly. Patients receiving a mix of in-person and virtual care had the highest rate of exacerbations (0.83) and a lower asthma medication ratio (0.74) despite having the highest adherence (.57).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite an increase in virtual care, asthma exacerbations decreased except among individuals who received both in-person and virtual care, likely because they had more severe disease.

The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on severe asthma care in Europe: will care change for good?

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has put pressure on healthcare services, forcing the reorganisation of traditional care pathways. We investigated how physicians taking care of severe asthma patients in Europe reorganised care, and how these changes affected patient satisfaction, asthma control and future care.

Methods

In this European-wide cross-sectional study, patient surveys were sent to patients with a physician-diagnosis of severe asthma, and physician surveys to severe asthma specialists between November 2020 and May 2021.

Results

1101 patients and 268 physicians from 16 European countries contributed to the study. Common physician-reported changes in severe asthma care included use of video/phone consultations (46%), reduced availability of physicians (43%) and change to home-administered biologics (38%). Change to phone/video consultations was reported in 45% of patients, of whom 79% were satisfied or very satisfied with this change. Of 709 patients on biologics, 24% experienced changes in biologic care, of whom 92% were changed to home-administered biologics and of these 62% were satisfied or very satisfied with this change. Only 2% reported worsening asthma symptoms associated with changes in biologic care. Many physicians expect continued implementation of video/phone consultations (41%) and home administration of biologics (52%).

Conclusions

Change to video/phone consultations and home administration of biologics was common in severe asthma care during the COVID-19 pandemic and was associated with high satisfaction levels in most but not all cases. Many physicians expect these changes to continue in future severe asthma care, though satisfaction levels may change after the pandemic.

Systemic Allergic Reactions and Anaphylaxis Associated with Allergen Immunotherapy

Subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT) is a proven treatment of allergic rhinitis, asthma, atopic dermatitis, and prevention of Hymenoptera venom anaphylaxis. The known benefit of SCIT, however, must be considered in each patient relative to the potential risks of systemic allergic reactions (SRs). A mean of 1 SR per 1000 injection visits (0.1%) was estimated to occur between 2008 and 2018. Life-threatening anaphylactic events are estimated to occur in 1/160,000 injection visits. The factors that contribute to SRs and fatal reactions (FRs) are reviewed. Risk management strategies are proposed to prevent and decrease future SCIT associated with SRs, anaphylaxis, and FR.