4.3 Article

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic in a cohort of Italian psoriatic patients treated with biological therapies

期刊

JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGICAL TREATMENT
卷 33, 期 2, 页码 1079-1083

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/09546634.2020.1800578

关键词

Psoriasis; biological therapies; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; anxiety; depression; stress

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on a cohort of Italian psoriatic patients treated with biologics. It found that discontinuation of biologics may lead to worsening of psoriasis, and psychological status also directly influences the clinical course of the disease.
Background The beginning of 2020 has been marked by COVID-19 pandemic, with a strong impact on several national health systems worldwide. Objective To describe the impact of COVID-19 pandemic in a cohort of Italian psoriatic patients treated with biologics. Methods A telephone survey was conducted in May 4-10 2020 about the Italian lockdown period (March 9-May 3 2020) in a cohort of psoriatic patients treated with biologics, asking about any exposure to COVID-19, disease status, continuation of therapy, work activity and psychological status through Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) and Brief Resilience Scale (BRS). Results 226 patients were interviewed, with no COVID-19 positive cases. Sixty-three of 226 (27.9%) described worsening of the disease with a correlation to drug withdrawal [43/226 (19%)]. Correlation was also found between the worsening of psoriasis and HADS anxiety, HADS depression, BRS and PSS abnormal scores considered both as categorical and continuous variables. No correlation was found between worsening of psoriasis and work activity. Conclusion Uncertainty about whether biologics could increase the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection led to drug withdrawal with subsequent worsening of psoriasis. Moreover, psychological status also had a direct influence on the clinical course of the disease.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据