Croghan, Ivana T

Background: In addition to the morbidity and mortality associated with acute infection, COVID-19 has been associated with persistent symptoms (>30 days), often referred to as Long COVID (LC). LC symptoms often cluster into phenotypes, resembling conditions such as fibromyalgia, postural orthostatic tachycardiac syndrome (POTS), and myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). LC clinics have been established to best address the needs of LC patients and continuity of care. We developed a cross-sectional survey to assess treatment response through our LC Clinic (LCC). Methods: A 25-question survey (1-10 Likert scale) was expert- and content-validated by LCC clinicians, patients, and patient advocates. The survey assessed LC symptoms and the helpfulness of different interventions, including medications and supplements. A total of 852 LCC patients were asked to complete the survey, with 536 (62.9%) responding. Results: The mean time from associated COVID-19 infection to survey completion was 23.2 ± 6.4 months. The mean age of responders was 52.3 ± 14.1 (63% females). Self-reported symptoms were all significantly improved ( P < .001) from the initial visit to the LCC (baseline) to the time of the follow-up survey. However, only 4.5% (24/536) of patients rated all symptoms low (1-2) at the time of the survey, indicating low levels of full recovery in our cohort. The patients rated numerous interventions as being helpful, including low-dose naltrexone (45/77; 58%), vagal nerve stimulation (18/34; 53%), and fisetin (28/44; 64%). Conclusions: Patients report general improvements in symptoms following the initial LCC visit, but complete recovery rates remain low at 23.2 ± 6.4 months.

Background: Over 30% of patients with COVID-19 have persistent symptoms that last beyond 30 days and referred to as Long COVID. Long COVID has been associated with a persistent elevation in peripheral cytokines including interleukin-6, interleukin-1β, and tumor necrosis factor-α. This study reports cytokine profiles of patients in our clinic across SARS-COV-2 variant epochs. Methods: The clinical cytokine panel was analyzed in patients with Long COVID during periods that were stratified according to variant epoch. The 4 variant epochs were defined as: (1) wild-type through alpha, (2) alpha/beta/gamma, (3) delta, and (4) omicron variants. Results: A total of 390 patients had the clinical cytokine panel performed; the median age was 48 years (IQR 38-59) and 62% were female. Distribution by variant was wild-type and alpha, 50% (n = 196); alpha/beta/gamma, 7.9% (n = 31); delta, 18% (n = 72); and omicron, 23% (n = 91). Time to cytokine panel testing was significantly longer for the earlier epochs. Tumor necrosis factor-α ( P < .001) and interleukin 1β ( P < .001) were significantly more elevated in the earlier epochs (median of 558 days in wild-type through Alpha epoch vs 263 days in omicron epoch, P < .001)). Nucleocapsid antibodies were consistently detected across epochs. Discussion: When stratified by variant epoch, patients with early epoch Long COVID had persistently elevated peripheral pro-inflammatory cytokine levels when compared to later epoch Long COVID. Patients with Long COVID have similar clusters of symptoms across epochs, suggesting that the underlying pathology is independent of the peripheral cytokine signature.

Objective: The purpose of this feasibility pilot study was to evaluate safety and adherence of a wearable brain sensing wellness device designed to reduce stress among healthcare professionals (HCP). Methods: A total of 40 HCP were invited to participate in an open-label pilot study. Participants were asked to use a brain sensing wearable device (MUSE-S™) on a daily basis to reduce their stress, for a total of 90 days. Total study participation duration was 180 days. Study enrollment began in August 2021 and ended December 2021. The exploratory outcomes included stress, depression, sleep, burn-out, resilience, quality of life, and cognition. Results: Among the 40 HCP in study, the majority were female (85%), white (87.5%) and with an average age of 41.3 ± 11.0 years (SD). Participants used the wearable device an average of 23.8 times over a 30-day period with a mean duration of 5.8 min with each use. Study results demonstrate the positive impact of guided mindfulness using the wearable device MUSE-S™ and its accompanying application (APP). A statistically significant improvement was found for a reduction in stress ( P < .001) and improvement in resilience ( P = .02), quality of life ( P = .003), and cognition ( P < .001). The majority (91.9%) of the participants indicated they felt more relaxed after using the device, and 73% indicated they would continue to use this device at end-of-study. No adverse effects were reported. Conclusion: Study results show that 3 to 10 min of guided meditation during work hours through the use of a brain sensing wearable device is safe and acceptable, with associated health benefits for HCP.

Introduction/Objectives: A culture of joy in the workplace supports well-being, but less is known about the effect of a shared experience on well-being and burnout in a health care setting. This pilot study investigated personal well-being and occupational burnout among primary care staff who participated in a 3-month virtual book club. Methods: In December 2021, health care workers from a primary care practice were invited to participate in a 3-month virtual book club. Participants were emailed a preintervention survey with questions regarding well-being and burnout, the pandemic’s influence on emotional health, and demographic information. The book club met virtually every month from January 2022 through March 2022. After the March 2022 book club meeting, a paired postintervention survey was sent to participants with additional questions regarding their participation in the book club. Well-being and burnout were measured with the 11-point Well-Being Index, and the pandemic’s influence on emotional health was assessed with the 64-point Pandemic Emotional Impact Scale. Results: Of 12 book club participants, 9 participants (6 physicians and 3 nurses) completed surveys before and after the intervention. Postintervention improvement in the median score of the Pandemic Emotional Impact Scale was significant (7 points, P = .04). Although Well-Being Index results uniformly favored improved well-being after book club participation, the median improvement of 1 point was not significant ( P = .69). Conclusions: Social connection through a virtual workplace activity such as a book club may contribute to well-being and may decrease occupational burnout.

Background: Despite efforts to improve access to Medications for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD), such as buprenorphine, the number of opioid overdoses in the United States continues to rise. In April 2021, the Department of Health and Human Services removed the mandatory training requirement to obtain a buprenorphine waiver; the goal was to encourage more providers to prescribe buprenorphine, thus improving access. Little is known about the attitudes on buprenorphine prescribing after this policy change. Objective: The primary objective was to assess attitudes among primary care providers toward the removal of the buprenorphine waiver training requirement. A secondary objective was to identify other barriers to prescribing buprenorphine. Methods: We conducted a survey between September 15 and October 13, 2021 to assess the overall beliefs on the effectiveness of MOUD and attitudes toward the removal of the waiver training, current knowledge of buprenorphine, current practice styles related to screening for and treating OUD, and attitudes toward prescribing buprenorphine in the future. This survey was sent to 890 Mayo Clinic primary care providers in 5 US states. Results: One hundred twenty-three respondents (13.8%) completed the survey; 35.8% respondents agreed that the removal of the waiver training was a positive step. These respondents expressed a greater familiarity with the different formulations, pharmacology, and titration of buprenorphine. This group was also more likely to prescribe (or continue to prescribe) buprenorphine in the future. Approximately one-third (34.4%) of respondents reported perceived institutional support in prescribing buprenorphine. This group expressed greater confidence in diagnosing OUD, had greater familiarity with the different formulations, pharmacology, and titration of buprenorphine, and was more likely to prescribe (or continue to prescribe) buprenorphine in the future. Respondents who have been in practice for 11 to 20 years since completion of training were most likely to refer all OUD patients to specialists. Conclusions: Results of our survey suggests that simply removing the mandatory waiver training requirement is insufficient in positively changing attitudes toward buprenorphine prescribing. A key barrier is the perceived lack of institutional support. Future studies investigating effective ways to provide such support may help improve providers’ willingness to prescribe buprenorphine.

Background Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is among the most aggressive and lethal tumors, with a median survival of 12–15 months. Many patients use complementary and integrative medicine (CIM) therapies to supplement their cancer treatment. Objective To determine the prevalence of CIM use and identify the most frequently used types of CIM in a cohort of patients with GBM seen at a tertiary care medical center in the United States. Methods An anonymous survey was mailed through the US Postal Service from August 1, 2019, through February 21, 2020, to patients with GBM. Results A total of 346 surveys were mailed, and 146 responses (42%) were received. The median age of respondents was 61 years (range, 52–68 years), and 85 (58%) were male. Most patients had undergone surgery (90%), chemotherapy (96%), and radiotherapy (95%). The median time from diagnosis of GBM to survey participation was 18 months (range, 12–31 months). Most respondents (81%) used some form of CIM, most frequently meditation (22%), relaxation and other stress management techniques (19%), chiropractic therapy (16%), and acupuncture (12%). Compared with men, women more commonly meditated (32% vs 16%; P = .046) and practiced yoga (20% vs 6%; P = .04). We observed age-based differences, with younger patients more commonly meditating, practicing relaxation and stress management techniques, and receiving chiropractic therapy ( P < .05 for all). Conclusions Providers should encourage patients with GBM to discuss their interest in CIM therapies and guide them to evidence-based treatments that may help improve their quality of life.

Objective: The purpose of this report is to describe the elements of a Covid-19 Care Clinic (CCC), patient demographics, and outcomes. Methods: Descriptive statistics were used to describe demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes. This report is based on 4934 unique patients seen in the CCC who provided research authorization within a 10-month period of time (April 1, 2020-January 31, 2021). The CCC infection control processes consisted of a rooming process that mitigated SARS-COV-2 transmission, preparing examination rooms, using PPE by staff, in room lab drawing, and escorting services to minimize the time in clinic. Results: Of the 4934 unique patients seen (age range newborn-102 years), 76.8% were tested for COVID-19. Of those tested, 11.8% were positive for SARS-CoV-2. Ninety-two percent of the patients with the reason for the visit documented had COVID-19 type symptoms. Cough, shortness of breath, and chest pain were the most common presenting symptom in those with COVID-19. At the time of the visit in the CCC, 5.8% of the patients were actively contagious. Thirty days after being seen in the CCC, 9.1% of the patients were seen in the emergency department (ED) and 0.2% died. During the 10-month period there were no known occupationally related COVID-19 infections. Conclusion: The COVID-19 Care Clinic provided face-to-face access for all ages with COVID-19 type symptoms. A minority of patients had COVID-19 who were seen in the clinic. The clinic provided an additional venue of care outside of the ED. The infectious control measures employed were highly effective in protecting the staff. Lessons learned allow for decentralization of COVID-19 symptom care to the primary care practices employing the infection control measures.

Purpose The purpose of the present study was to investigate body mass index, multi-morbidity, and COVID-19 Risk Score as predictors of severe COVID-19 outcomes. Patients Patients from this study are from a well-characterized patient cohort collected at Mayo Clinic between January 1, 2020 and May 23, 2020; with confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis defined as a positive result on reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) assays from nasopharyngeal swab specimens. Measures Demographic and clinical data were extracted from the electronic medical record. The data included: date of birth, gender, ethnicity, race, marital status, medications (active COVID-19 agents), weight and height (from which the Body Mass Index (BMI) was calculated, history of smoking, and comorbid conditions to calculate the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and the U.S Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) multi-morbidity score. An additional COVID-19 Risk Score was also included. Outcomes included hospital admission, ICU admission, and death. Results Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine the impact on mortality or hospital admission. Age, sex, and race (white/Latino, white/non-Latino, other, did not disclose) were adjusted for in the model. Patients with higher COVID-19 Risk Scores had a significantly higher likelihood of being at least admitted to the hospital (HR = 1.80; 95% CI = 1.30, 2.50; P < .001), or experiencing death or inpatient admission (includes ICU admissions) (HR = 1.20; 95% CI = 1.02, 1.42; P = .028). Age was the only statistically significant demographic predictor, but obesity was not a significant predictor of any of the outcomes. Conclusion Age and COVID-19 Risk Scores were significant predictors of severe COVID-19 outcomes. Further work should examine the properties of the COVID-19 Risk Factors Scale.