Search

Background and purpose The European Federation of Neurological Associations (EFNA), in partnership with the NeuroCOVID‐19 taskforce of the European Academy of Neurology (EAN), has investigated the impact of the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic on individuals with neurological diseases, as well as the hopes and fears of these patients about the post‐pandemic phase. Methods An EFNA‐EAN survey was available online to any person living with a neurological disorder in Europe. It consisted of 18 items concerning the impact of the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic on the medical care of people with neurological disorders, and the hopes and fears of these individuals regarding the post‐pandemic phase. Results For 44.4% of the 443 survey participants, the overall care of their neurological disease during the pandemic was inappropriate. This perception was mainly due to significant delays in accessing medical care (25.7%), insufficiently reliable information received about the potential impact of COVID‐19 on their neurological disease (49.6%), and a substantial lack of involvement in their disease management decisions (54.3%). Participants indicated that their major concerns for the post‐pandemic phase were experiencing longer waiting times to see a specialist (24.1%), suffering from social isolation and deteriorating mental well‐being (23.1%), and facing delays in clinical trials with disinvestment in neuroscience research (13.1%). Conclusions Despite the great efforts of health services to cope with the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic, individuals with neurological conditions feel they have been left behind. These findings provide invaluable insights for improving the care of patients with neurological disorders in the further course of the COVID‐19 pandemic., For 44.4% of individuals with neurological disorders participating in the survey, the overall care of their neurological disease during the pandemic was inappropriate due to significant delays in accessing medical care, insufficient information about the potential impact of COVID‐19 on their neurological disease, and a lack of involvement in their disease management decisions. Survey participants indicated that their major concerns for the post‐pandemic phase were experiencing longer waiting times to see a specialist, suffering from social isolation and deteriorating mental well‐being, and facing delays in clinical trials. Overall, despite the great efforts of health services to cope with the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic, people with neurological disorders feel they have been left behind.

Background and purpose: Disorders of the autonomic nervous system (ANS) are common conditions, but it is unclear whether access to ANS healthcare provision is homogeneous across European countries. The aim of this study was to identify neurology-driven or interdisciplinary clinical ANS laboratories in Europe, describe their characteristics and explore regional differences. Methods: We contacted the European national ANS and neurological societies, as well as members of our professional network, to identify clinical ANS laboratories in each country and invite them to answer a web-based survey. Results: We identified 84 laboratories in 22 countries and 46 (55%) answered the survey. All laboratories perform cardiovascular autonomic function tests, and 83% also perform sweat tests. Testing for catecholamines and autoantibodies are performed in 63% and 56% of laboratories, and epidermal nerve fiber density analysis in 63%. Each laboratory is staffed by a median of two consultants, one resident, one technician and one nurse. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) number of head-up tilt tests/laboratory/year is 105 (49-251). Reflex syncope and neurogenic orthostatic hypotension are the most frequently diagnosed cardiovascular ANS disorders. Thirty-five centers (76%) have an ANS outpatient clinic, with a median (IQR) of 200 (100-360) outpatient visits/year ; 42 centers (91%) also offer inpatient care (median 20 [IQR 4-110] inpatient stays/year). Forty-one laboratories (89%) are involved in research activities. We observed a significant difference in the geographical distribution of ANS services among European regions: 11 out of 12 countries from North/West Europe have at least one ANS laboratory versus 11 out of 21 from South/East/Greater Europe (p = 0.021). Conclusions: This survey highlights disparities in the availability of healthcare services for people with ANS disorders across European countries, stressing the need for improved access to specialized care in South, East and Greater Europe.

Background and purpose: The recent SARSCoV2 pandemic has posed multiple challenges to the practice of clinical neurology including recognition of emerging neurological complications and management of coexistent neurological diseases. In a fastevolving pandemic, evidencebased studies are lacking in many areas. This paper presents European Academy of Neurology (EAN) expert consensus statements to guide neurologists caring for patients with COVID19. Methods: A refined Delphi methodology was applied. In round 1, statements were provided by EAN scientific panels (SPs). In round 2, these statements were circulated to SP members not involved in writing them, asking for agreement/disagreement. Items with agreement >70% were retained for round 3, in which SP cochairs rated importance on a fivepoint Likert scale. Results were graded by importance and reported as consensus statements. Results: In round one, 70 statements were provided by 23 SPs. In round two, 259/1061 SP member responses were received. Fiftynine statements obtained >70% agreement and were retained. In round three, responses were received from 55 cochairs of 29 SPs. Whilst general recommendations related to prevention of COVID19 transmission had high levels of agreement and importance, opinion was more varied concerning statements related to therapy. Conclusion: This is the first structured consensus statement on good clinical practice in patients with neurological disease during the COVID19 pandemic that provides immediate guidance for neurologists. In this fastevolving pandemic, a rapid response using refined Delphi methodology is possible, but guidance may be subject to change as further evidence emerges. (VLID)5891876 Version of record