East London NHS Foundation Trust, Bedford, UK.
Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Oxford Epilepsy Research Group, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Epilepsia Open. 2024 Oct;9(5):1931-1947. doi: 10.1002/epi4.13035. Epub 2024 Sep 3.
To characterize the experience of people with epilepsy and aligned healthcare workers (HCWs) during the first 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic and compare experiences in high-income countries (HICs) with non-HICs.
Separate surveys for people with epilepsy and HCWs were distributed online in April 2020. Responses were collected to September 2021. Data were collected for COVID-19 infections, the effect of COVID-related restrictions, access to specialist help for epilepsy (people with epilepsy), and the impact of the pandemic on work productivity (HCWs). The frequency of responses for non-HICs and HICs were compared using non-parametric Chi-square tests.
Two thousand one hundred and five individuals with epilepsy from 53 countries and 392 HCWs from 26 countries provided data. The same proportion of people with epilepsy in non-HICs and HICs reported COVID-19 infection (7%). Those in HICs were more likely to report that COVID-19 measures had affected their health (32% vs. 23%; p < 0.001). There was no difference between non-HICs and HICs in the proportion who reported difficulty in obtaining help for epilepsy. HCWs in non-HICs were more likely to report COVID-19 infection than those in HICs (18% vs 6%; p = 0.001) and that their clinical work had been affected by concerns about contracting COVID-19, lack of personal protective equipment, and the impact of the pandemic on mental health (all p < 0.001). Compared to pre-pandemic practices, there was a significant shift to remote consultations in both non-HICs and HICs (p < 0.001).
While the frequency of COVID-19 infection was relatively low in these data from early in the pandemic, our findings suggest broader health consequences and an increased psychosocial burden, particularly among HCWs in non-HICs. Planning for future pandemics should prioritize mental healthcare alongside ensuring access to essential epilepsy services and expanding and enhancing access to remote consultations.
We asked people with epilepsy about the effects of COVID-19 on their health and healthcare. We wanted to compare responses from people in high-income countries and other countries. We found that people in high-income countries and other countries had similar levels of difficulty in getting help for their epilepsy. People in high-income countries were more likely to say that their general health had been affected. Healthcare workers in non-high-income settings were more likely to have contracted COVID-19 and have the care they deliver affected by the pandemic. Across all settings, COVID-19 associated with a large shift to remote consultations.
描述新冠疫情大流行的头 18 个月期间癫痫患者和相关医护人员(HCWs)的经历,并比较高收入国家(HICs)和非高收入国家(non-HICs)的经历。
2020 年 4 月分别在线向癫痫患者和 HCWs 分发调查问卷。数据收集截至 2021 年 9 月。数据包括 COVID-19 感染情况、与 COVID 相关限制的影响、癫痫专科治疗的可及性(癫痫患者)以及大流行对工作效率的影响(HCWs)。使用非参数卡方检验比较非 HICs 和 HICs 的应答频率。
来自 53 个国家的 2115 名癫痫患者和来自 26 个国家的 392 名 HCWs 提供了数据。非 HICs 和 HICs 中报告 COVID-19 感染的患者比例相同(7%)。HICs 中更可能报告 COVID-19 措施对其健康产生了影响(32%对 23%;p<0.001)。非 HICs 和 HICs 中报告难以获得癫痫治疗的比例无差异。非 HICs 中的 HCWs 比 HICs 更可能报告 COVID-19 感染(18%对 6%;p=0.001),并报告其临床工作受到对感染 COVID-19、缺乏个人防护设备以及大流行对心理健康影响的担忧的影响(均 p<0.001)。与大流行前的做法相比,非 HICs 和 HICs 均显著转向远程咨询(均 p<0.001)。
尽管这些早期大流行数据中 COVID-19 感染的频率相对较低,但我们的研究结果表明,大流行带来了更广泛的健康后果和更大的心理社会负担,尤其是在非 HICs 中的 HCWs 中。为未来的大流行做规划时,除了确保获得基本的癫痫治疗服务外,还应优先关注心理健康,并扩大和加强远程咨询的可及性。