Background Since the declaration COVID-19 as a pandemic, healthcare systems around the world have faced a huge challenge in managing patients with chronic diseases. Patients with migraine were specifically vulnerable to inadequate medical care. We aimed to investigate the “real-world” impact of COVID-19 pandemic on migraine patients, and to identify risk factors for poor outcome. Methods We administered an online, self-reported survey that included demographic, migraine-related, COVID-19-specific and overall psychosocial variables between July 15 and July 30, 2020. We recruited a sample of patients with migraine from headache clinic registry and via social media to complete an anonymous survey. Outcomes included demographic variables, change in migraine frequency and severity during the lockdown period, communication with treating physician, compliance to migraine treatment, difficulty in getting medications, medication overuse, symptoms of anxiety and/or depression, sleep and eating habits disturbance, screen time exposure, work during pandemic, use of traditional medicine, effect of Botox injection cancellation, and overall worries and concerns during pandemic. Results A total of 1018 patients completed the survey. Of the respondents, 859 (84.3%) were females; 733 (71.9%) were aged 20 to 40 years, 630 (61.8%) were married, and 466 (45.7%) reported working during the pandemic. In comparison to pre-pandemic period, 607 respondents (59.6%) reported increase in migraine frequency, 163 (16%) reported decrease in frequency, and 105 (10.3%) transformed to chronic migraine. Severity was reported to increase by 653 (64.1%) respondents. The majority of respondents; 626 (61.5%) did not communicate with their neurologists, 477 (46.9%) reported compliance to treatment, and 597 (58.7%) reported overuse of analgesics. Botox injections cancellation had a negative impact on 150 respondents (66.1%) from those receiving it. Forty-one respondents (4%) were infected with COVID-19; 26 (63.4%) reported worsening of their headaches amid infection period. Sleep disturbance was reported by 794 (78.1%) of respondents, and 809 (79.5%) reported having symptoms of anxiety and/or depression. Conclusions and relevance COVID-19 pandemic had an overall negative impact on patients with migraine. Several risk factors for poor outcome were identified. Long-term strategies should be validated and implemented to deliver quality care for patients with migraine, with emphasis on psychosocial well-being.

No abstract

Background Since the declaration of COVID-19 pandemic, several case reports of demyelination of both peripheral and central nervous systems have been published. The association between CNS demyelination and viral infection has long been documented, and this link was recently reported following SARS-CoV-2 infection as well. Objectives In this systematic review, we aim to investigate the existing literature on CNS demyelination associated with SARS-CoV-2, and the proposed pathophysiological mechanisms. Methods We conducted a systematic review of articles in PubMed, SCOPUS, EMBASE, Cochrane, Google Scholar and Ovid databases, from 1 January 2020 until June 15, 2021. The following keywords were used: "COVID-19", "SARS-CoV-2", "demyelination", "demyelinating disease", "multiple sclerosis", "neuromyelitis optica", and "transverse myelitis". Results A total of 60 articles were included in the final analysis of this systematic review and included 102 patients: 52 (51%) men and 50 (49%) women, with a median age of 46.5 years. The demyelination mimicked a variety of conditions with a picture of encephalitis/encephalomyelitis being the most common. At the same time other patterns were less frequently reported such as MS, NMOSD and even MOGAD. Longitudinally extensive transverse myelitis (LETM) was the most frequently reported pattern of spinal cord involvement. Conclusion A growing body of literature has shown an association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and the development of different types of CNS demyelination. Although causality cannot readily be inferred, this review may suggest a probable causal relationship, through a para-infectious or post-infectious immune-mediated etiology in COVID-19 patients. This relationship needs to be clarified in future research.

Background Since the declaration of COVID-19 as a pandemic, all scientific medical activities were shifted to an online format, in the form of webinars, to maintain continuing medical education (CME). We aimed to assess physicians’ attitude among different medical specialties towards this sudden and unexpected shift of traditional face-to-face meetings into webinars, and to suggest future recommendations. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional, internet-based survey study using a 25-item questionnaire, from November 1 and November 15, 2020. The survey was created and distributed to physicians from different medical and surgical specialties and from different countries via several social media platforms, using a snowball technique. Results A total of 326 physicians responded; 165 (50.6%) were females, mean age of responders was 38.7 ± 7.5 years. The majority of responses (93.2%) came from Arab countries. Of them, 195 (59.8%) reported attending more webinars compared to the same period last year, with average of 3 per month. As regard to the general impression; 244 (74.8%) were “strongly satisfied” or “satisfied”, with the most satisfaction for “training courses: by 268 (82.2%), and “International conferences” by 218 (66.9%). However, 246 respondents (75.5%) felt overwhelmed with the number and frequency of webinars during the pandemic, 171 (52.5%) reported attending less than 25% of webinars they are invited to, 205 (62.8%) disagreed that webinars can replace in-person meetings after the pandemic, and 239 (73.3%) agreed that online meetings need proper regulations. Conclusions Webinars comprised a major avenue for education during COVID-19 pandemic, with initial general satisfaction among physicians. However, this paradigm shift was sudden and lacked proper regulations. Despite initial satisfaction, the majority of physicians felt overwhelmed with the number and frequency of webinars. Physicians’ satisfaction is crucial in planning future educational activities, and considering that this current crisis will most likely have long lasting effects, webinars should be viewed as complementing traditional in-person methods, rather than replacement. In this study, we are suggesting recommendations to help future regulation of this change.

No abstract

Introduction: Since the declaration of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a pandemic, patients with dementia, were specifically vulnerable to the negative impact of the outbreak. Objective: To examine the association between lockdown amid COVID-19 pandemic and the rate of cognitive decline among patients with dementia and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional observational study on patients with dementia and MCI who attended the outpatient clinic at Ibn Sina Hospital, the main tertiary neurology center in Kuwait, during the month of September 2020. The rate of cognitive decline, estimated by MMSE scores, was compared between the period prior to, and during lockdown. Results: We evaluated 36 consecutive patients with cognitive impairment (23 females [63.9%], mean age 71 ± 10.8 years, mean disease duration 34.6 ± 29 months). Eleven patients (30.6%) progressed to a more severe stage during the study period; 1 MCI (2.8%) converted to mild dementia, 6 (16.6%) mild to moderate, and 4 (11.1%) moderate to severe dementia. Monthly decline of MMSE scores before lockdown was 0.2 ± 0.1 points, while it was 0.53 ± 0.3 points during lockdown, which was statistically significant ( p = .001). The most affected cognitive domain was the memory with a mean decline of 1.5 ± 0.8 points. Conclusions: This study provides “real-world” data suggesting rapid cognitive decline in patients with dementia during the lockdown period. Healthcare systems should pay more attention to this vulnerable group, to help them maintain their mental, physical and social well-being during this crisis.

A 25-year-old woman with no relevant medical history developed fever, generalized body pain, dry cough, anosmia, and ageusia in April 2020. She was diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) by positive findings on polymerase chain reaction assay and positive findings on computed tomography of the chest. Her clinical course was uncomplicated, and she was treated conservatively. Anosmia and

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) booster doses decrease infection transmission and disease severity. This study aimed to assess the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine booster doses in low, middle, and high-income countries of the East Mediterranean Region (EMR) and its determinants using the health belief model (HBM). In addition, we aimed to identify the causes of booster dose rejection and the main source of information about vaccination. Using the snowball and convince sampling technique, a bilingual, self-administered, anonymous questionnaire was used to collect the data from 14 EMR countries through different social media platforms. Logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the key determinants that predict vaccination acceptance among respondents. Overall, 2327 participants responded to the questionnaire. In total, 1468 received compulsory doses of vaccination. Of them, 739 (50.3%) received booster doses and 387 (26.4%) were willing to get the COVID-19 vaccine booster doses. Vaccine booster dose acceptance rates in low, middle, and high-income countries were 73.4%, 67.9%, and 83.0%, respectively (p < 0.001). Participants who reported reliance on information about the COVID-19 vaccination from the Ministry of Health websites were more willing to accept booster doses (79.3% vs. 66.6%, p < 0.001). The leading causes behind booster dose rejection were the beliefs that booster doses have no benefit (48.35%) and have severe side effects (25.6%). Determinants of booster dose acceptance were age (odds ratio (OR) = 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.01–1.03, p = 0.002), information provided by the Ministry of Health (OR = 3.40, 95% CI: 1.79–6.49, p = 0.015), perceived susceptibility to COVID-19 infection (OR = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.21–2.93, p = 0.005), perceived severity of COVID-19 (OR = 2.08, 95% CI: 137–3.16, p = 0.001), and perceived risk of side effects (OR = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.19–0.34, p < 0.001). Booster dose acceptance in EMR is relatively high. Interventions based on HBM may provide useful directions for policymakers to enhance the population’s acceptance of booster vaccination.