Search

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, psoriasis care underwent significant changes in consultation methods and treatment management. However, comprehensive data on these changes and patient perceptions are limited., Aims: To evaluate the pandemic's implications on psoriasis patients, focusing on access to information, consultation methods, patient satisfaction, disease control assessment, and treatment management changes., Methods: A multicenter cross-sectional survey was performed in psoriasis patients from 4 dutch hospitals during the second wave of the pandemic., Results: Among 551 respondents, approximately 55% received information their treatment in relation to COVID-19 from their treating physician, while 16.3% sought information online. Consultation methods were shifted to remote formats for 43.6% of patients, primarily via phone and the shift was often initiated by physicians. Overall patient satisfaction during the pandemic scored high (8.0), with remote consultations scoring between 8.0-9.0. Patients on biological treatment reported better disease control (8.0), compared to those on topical (6.0) or conventional systemic treatments (7.0). However, within the systemic treatment group and biologics group, a notable percentage interrupted (16.3% resp. 12.9%) or discontinued treatment (14.1 resp. 10.6%) during the pandemic. Disease control was moderate-to-good assessed by 75% of patients receiving face-to-face and 68% receiving remote consultations., Conclusion: Remote care appears to be a viable alternative to face-to-face consultations, with potential benefits in enhancing access to information provided by treating physicians.

Background: The risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection does not appear to be increased for psoriasis patients using biologics compared to those on other treatments, but evidence is still limited., Objectives: (1) to estimate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with psoriasis, (2) to compare SARS-CoV-2 infection rates for different psoriasis treatments groups (biologic vs. systemic conventional vs. topical therapy) corrected for confounders and (3) to describe patients with severe COVID-19 for all treatment groups., Methods: In this cross-sectional cohort study all patients received a questionnaire to gather data on psoriasis treatment, SARS-CoV-2 infections and related risk factors. Simultaneously, they underwent a blood test to screen for antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen. Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infections was calculated and logistic regression and Cox proportional-hazards models were performed to determine the association between treatment group and SARS-CoV-2 infection risk, corrected for confounders. Patients with severe COVID-19 disease were described and the mortality rate per treatment group was calculated for the target population., Results: Patients were included between April 12 2021 and October 31 2021. Of 551 patients, 59 (10.7% (CI95% 8.3-13.6)) had experienced a SARS-CoV-2 infection, based on questionnaire data combined with serological data. In our study cohort, corrected for confounders, biologic or non-biologic systemic therapy users did not appear to have increased SARS-CoV-2 infection risk compared to patients using other treatment. Only 4 hospitalizations (0.7% (CI95% 0.2-1.0) were reported in our study population and no ICU admissions were reported. The rough mortality rate in the target cohort was 0.32% (CI95% 0.13-0.66) in all treatment groups., Conclusions: Corrected for risk-mitigating behavior and vaccination status, a higher SARS-CoV-2 incidence for biologics or non-biologics systemics compared to other treatments could not be proven. Severe cases were infrequent in all treatment groups. This finding further strengthens treatment recommendations that systemic therapies for patients with psoriasis do not require preventive cessation for reduction of SARS-CoV-2 infection risk.