Purpose:
The temporary cessation and profound changes in ophthalmic care delivery that occurred as a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have yet to be fully understood. Our objective is to assess patients’ self-reported impact of health care lockdown measures on their fears and anxieties during the crisis period of the COVID-19 pandemic in New York City.
Methods:
We conducted a digital, self-reported, patient care survey distributed by an e-mail at Columbia University’s Department of Ophthalmology outpatient faculty practice. Inclusion criteria were age greater than or equal to 18 years, a diagnosis of either retinal disease or glaucoma, and a canceled or rescheduled ophthalmology established patient appointment during the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in New York City. Patients without an e-mail address listed in their electronic medical records were excluded. The survey occurred between March 2, 2020, to May 30, 2020. Primary measures were survey responses to assess key areas of patient anxiety or concern during the pandemic including the safety of care delivery in a COVID pandemic, difficulties contacting or being seen by their ophthalmologist, concern of vision loss or disease progression, and concern over missed or access to treatments. Secondary measures were correlating survey response to factors such as visual acuity, intraocular pressure, diagnosis, disease severity, follow-up urgency, recent treatments, and diagnostic testing data.
Results:
Of the 2594 surveys sent out, 510 (19.66%) were completed. Over 95% of patients were at least as concerned as in normal circumstances about their ocular health during the peak of the pandemic. Overall, 76% of respondents were more concerned than normal that they could not be seen by their ophthalmologist soon enough. Increased concern over ocular health, disease progression, and access to care all showed positive correlations (
P
<0.05) with worse disease severity as measured with testing such as visual fields and optical coherence tomography. In addition, 55% of patients were afraid of contracting COVID-19 during an office visit.
Conclusion and Relevance:
We found a majority of our patients were concerned about limitations in access to ophthalmic care and were fearful of disease progression. In addition, we found a number of demographic and clinical factors that correlated with increased anxiety in our patients.
Background and Purpose: Mycotic aneurysms (MA) are rare neurovascular complications of infective endocarditis (IE). The natural history and outcomes of MA under contemporary medical therapy have not been well characterized. The purpose of this study is to describe treatments and outcomes of patients with ruptured and unruptured MA in IE, specifically in relation to medical versus surgical/endovascular treatment. Methods: Retrospective chart review was performed at 3 US academic medical centers of adult patients with IE and MA. Information was collected regarding risk factors, imaging, treatments, and outcomes, including ischemic stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, MA size changes, and inhospital mortality. Results: Thirty-five patients with IE had 63 MA. Nineteen patients had at least one ruptured MA; 13 patients underwent invasive treatment and 6 received antibiotics alone. Of 19 patients on antibiotics alone (6 with at least one ruptured MA and 13 with unruptured MA), 14 underwent repeat imaging and 5 had enlarging MA. Of 16 patients treated invasively, 2 had unruptured MA initially treated with antibiotics but ultimately underwent intervention. No MA ruptured after aneurysm discovery. Fifteen patients underwent cardiothoracic surgery (CTS), of which 11 had unsecured MA and 4 had secured MA. No patients suffered perioperiative neurological events attributable to their MA. Three patients treated with antibiotics alone and 3 patients treated invasively died from causes unrelated to their MAs. Conclusions: For patients with unruptured MA, treatment with antibiotics alone may have similar outcomes to invasive treatment. Further investigation is warranted to determine the risk of undergoing CTS with unsecured MA.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.