Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33495972›Full record

ReviewClinical rheumatology2021

Impact of COVID-19 on rheumatology practice in the UK-a pan-regional rheumatology survey.

Arvind Nune, Karthikeyan P Iyengar, Ashar Ahmed, Syed Bilgrami, Hem Raj Sapkota

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical rheumatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. New Diagnoses of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis Early in the COVID-19 Pandemic: Analysis of a Large United States Commercial Insurance Database.Journal of clinical rheumatology : practical reports on rheumatic & musculoskeletal diseases · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Arvind NuneConsultant Rheumatologist, Southport and Ormskirk NHS Trust, Southport, PR8 6PN, UK. arvind.nune@nhs.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3849-614X
Karthikeyan P IyengarConsultant Rheumatologist, Southport and Ormskirk NHS Trust, Southport, PR8 6PN, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4379-1266
Ashar AhmedConsultant Rheumatologist, Southport and Ormskirk NHS Trust, Southport, PR8 6PN, UK.
Syed BilgramiConsultant Rheumatologist, Royal Lancaster Infirmary, Lancaster, LA1 4RP, UK.
Hem Raj SapkotaConsultant Rheumatologist, The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust, Wolverhampton, WV10 0QP, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2314-2637
Southport and Ormskirk Hospital NHS Trust · GBRoyal Lancaster Infirmary · GBThe Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted healthcare services and rheumatology staff were redeployed to the frontline. The purpose of this survey was to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the provision of rheumatology services as viewed by rheumatologists in the UK. Survey monkey questionnaire weblink was sent to 804 clinicians including consultant rheumatologists, speciality trainees, nurse specialists, and allied health professionals in 4 regions of the UK to evaluate personal effects of COVID-19 and redeployment, impact on current out-patient clinic activity, immunosuppressive drug use, and future rheumatology care. Response rate was 21%. One-fifth of the responders reported that their rheumatology departments were functioning less than 50% capacity during the pandemic. Two-third of responders felt anxious about the ill-effects of COVID-19 on their health and well-being, and one-third of them were redeployed. During the peak of the pandemic, 75% of clinicians stopped intravenous biologics. Although access to video consultation was available for up to three-fourths of the clinicians, the majority (90%) used this modality in less than 1 in 4 consultations. This survey highlights rheumatologists' perception in the delivery of future care and anxiety they faced. As demonstrated by this survey, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance did not influence clinician decision making in some aspects of patient care. Underutilization of tele-rheumatology in this survey should be considered whilst planning the restoration of rheumatology services in the post-COVID era. Key points • COVID-19 has generated significant concerns among rheumatology community about their mental well-being. • In over 50% of cases, rheumatologists stopped IV biologic drugs as per patients' wishes during the first wave of the pandemic. • Tele-rheumatology has been used more widely during the pandemic, but the extent of its use in the post-COVID era is less clear. Evolving evidence will determine its future wider use.

Indexed as

COVID-19RheumatologyHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Surveys and QuestionnairesUnited KingdomBiologicsCOVID-19PandemicSurveys and questionnairesTele-rheumatology

Identifiers

PMID33495972
PMCPMC7832421
OpenAlexW3125245326

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.