Search

The enormous pressure of the increasing case numbers experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic has given rise to a variety of novel digital systems designed to provide solutions to unprecedented challenges in public health. The field of algorithmic contact tracing, in particular, an area of research that had previously received limited attention, has moved into the spotlight as a crucial factor in containing the pandemic. The use of digital tools to enable more robust and expedited contact tracing and notification, while maintaining privacy and trust in the data generated, is viewed as key to identifying chains of transmission and close contacts, and, consequently, to enabling effective case investigations. Scaling these tools has never been more critical, as global case numbers have exceeded 100 million, as many asymptomatic patients remain undetected, and as COVID-19 variants begin to emerge around the world. In this context, there is increasing attention on blockchain technology as a part of systems for enhanced digital algorithmic contact tracing and reporting. By analyzing the literature that has emerged from this trend, the common characteristics of the designs proposed become apparent. An archetypal system architecture can be derived, taking these characteristics into consideration. However, assessing the utility of this architecture using a recognized evaluation framework shows that the added benefits and features of blockchain technology do not provide significant advantages over conventional centralized systems for algorithmic contact tracing and reporting. From our study, it, therefore, seems that blockchain technology may provide a more significant benefit in other areas of public health beyond contact tracing.

Aim: Joint damage due to haemarthrosis can be effectively monitored with point‐of care ultrasound using the Haemophilia Early Arthropathy Detection with US (HEAD‐US) scoring system. A post hoc comparative analysis of the joint status of patients with severe haemophilia A (HA) or B (HB) was performed. Methods: The databases of two observational, cross‐sectional studies that recruited patients with HA or HB from 12 Spanish centres were analysed to compare the status of the elbows, knees and ankles in patients with severe disease according to treatment modality. The HEAD‐US score was calculated in both studies by the same trained operators. Results: Overall, 95 HA and 41 HB severe patients were included, with a mean age of 35.2 ± 11.8 and 32.7 ± 14.2 years, respectively. The percentage of patients who received prophylaxis, over on‐demand (OD) treatment, was much higher in HA (91.6%) than in HB (65.8%) patients. With a similar number of target joints, the HEAD‐US score was zero in 6.3% HA and 22.0% HB patients (p <.01), respectively. The HA population showed significantly worse HEAD‐US scores. Whilst osteochondral damage occurred more frequently in patients OD or tertiary prophylaxis, our data suggest that articular damage is less prominent in primary/secondary prophylaxis, regardless of the type of haemophilia. These latter treatment modalities were also associated with a lower prevalence of synovial hypertrophy, particularly in HB patients. Conclusion: This post hoc analysis indicates that joint status seems to be significantly influenced by haemophilia type (HA or HB) and treatment modality in these severe Spanish populations with severe disease. Continuing HEAD‐US monitoring for the early detection and management of intra‐articular abnormalities, as well as more efficiently tailored therapies should be warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID-19 and telemedicine in haemophilia in a patient with severe haemophilia A and orthopaedic surgery Keywords: COVID-19; haemophilia A; orthopedic; surgery; telemedicine EN COVID-19 haemophilia A orthopedic surgery telemedicine e137 e139 3 02/04/21 20210101 NES 210101 We describe the case of a patient with severe haemophilia A who underwent major orthopaedic surgery managed postoperatively by telemedicine (TM). At that moment, given the progression of the pandemic, the Orthopaedic Surgery Department wards would be handed over to care for COVID-19 patients, at that point 80% occupied by such patients. From the very beginning of the health crisis, our hospital housed a large number of COVID-19 patients, forcing us to set up TM programmes to manage haemophilia patients safely. [Extracted from the article]

Aim: The use of musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSK‐US) following protocols for haemophilic arthropathy and the Haemophilia Early Arthropathy Detection with Ultrasound (HEAD‐US) score can help standardize monitoring in haemophilia. This study evaluated the joint status (elbows, knees and ankles) of patients with haemophilia B (HB) in Spain using MSK‐US and the HEAD‐US score. Methods: Haemophilia B patients ≥14 years old were included in this observational, multicentre, cross‐sectional study, regardless of their clinical condition, HB severity and treatment received. Two blinded observers were involved in image acquisition and scoring in each centre. Results: Eighty‐two patients from 12 centres were enrolled: 27% mild HB, 23% moderate, 50% severe HB. Mean age was 38.9 ± 16.4 years, 60% were treated on demand (OD) and 40% were on prophylaxis. HEAD‐US was zero in all joints in 28.6% OD patients and 36.4% on prophylaxis. Mean scores significantly worsened with HB severity, except for the left knee. Patients on primary and secondary prophylaxis had significantly better joint health vs OD patients in all joints, except the right ankle. Among OD patients, those with severe disease presented significantly worse scores in all HEAD‐US items related to permanent damage. Conclusion: Joint status of HB patients in Spain is influenced by severity and treatment modality, related to the development of arthropathy, which appears prevalent in OD patients with severe HB. Routine assessment with an imaging tool such as ultrasound and HEAD‐US system may help to improve joint health by personalizing and adjusting treatment in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To evaluate joint health, pain and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with moderate/severe haemophilia A in Europe., Design: Multinational, cross-sectional survey, with retrospective data collection. Data were taken from the Adelphi Real World Haemophilia Disease Specific Programme Wave II, using surveys completed by physicians and patients between February 2020 and May 2021., Setting: Haematologists/haemato-oncologists and their patients in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK., Participants: Males aged ≥18 years with moderate or severe haemophilia A (baseline clotting factor level ≤5%), without existing inhibitors and currently receiving prophylaxis. Patients were grouped into those with or without haemophilia-affected joints (HAJs) based on bleeding, radiographic, surgical, mobility and joint pain data., Primary Outcome Measure: Characterisation of humanistic and clinical outcomes in patients with or without HAJs., Results: A total of 120 physicians provided data for 351 eligible patients; 209 (59.5%) patients had HAJs and 142 (40.5%) had no HAJs. Pain/discomfort was significantly different (p=0.01) and reported more frequently in the HAJ (85.7%) vs non-HAJ group (53.3%). Pain medication use was significantly higher in the HAJ versus non-HAJ group (73.2% vs 60.6%; p=0.01). Up to half of the patients with HAJs had synovitis (49.8%) or arthropathy (48.4%), and one-third had undergone joint surgery (35.4%). Overall health status was significantly worse in the HAJ versus non-HAJ group (mean (SD) EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale score: 65.5 (19.3) vs 81.1 (14.6); p=0.01)., Conclusions: In this multinational real-world study, nearly two-thirds of adults with moderate/severe haemophilia A without inhibitors experienced HAJs despite prophylaxis. Individuals with HAJs had higher rates of pain and pain medication use, and lower HRQoL compared with those without HAJs. These data indicate that HAJs represent a clinically relevant burden and early identification/monitoring and management of affected joints should be an important consideration to help prevent long-term joint morbidity., Competing Interests: Competing interests: HDlC-R reports consultancy/advisory, honoraria, expert testimony fees and support for meeting attendance from Bayer, CSL-Behring, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Roche, Sobi and Takeda. LB, ZH and NK are employees of and shareholders in Sobi. NB, SO and KG are employees of Adelphi Real World., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)