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