Background Individuals with chronic conditions require ongoing disease management to reduce risks of adverse health outcomes. During the COVID-19 pandemic, health care for non-COVID-19 cases was affected due to the reallocation of resources towards urgent care for COVID-19 patients, resulting in inadequate ongoing care for chronic conditions. Methods A keyword search was conducted in PubMed, Google Scholar, Science Direct, and Scopus for English language articles published between January 2020 and January 2021. Findings During the COVID-19 pandemic, in-person care for individuals with chronic conditions have decreased due to government restriction of elective and non-urgent healthcare visits, greater instilled fear over potential COVID-19 exposure during in-person visits, and higher utilization rates of telemedicine compared to the pre-COVID-19 period. Potential benefits of a virtual-care framework during the pandemic include more effective routine disease monitoring, improved patient satisfaction, and increased treatment compliance and follow-up rates. However, more needs to be done to ensure timely and effective access to telemedicine, particularly for individuals with lower digital literacy. Capitation primary care models have been proposed as a more financially-robust approach during the COVID-19 pandemic than fee-for-service primary care models; however, the interplay between different primary models and the health outcomes is still poorly understood and warrants further investigation. Shortages of medication used to manage chronic conditions were also observed at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic due to global supply chain disruptions. Finally, patients with chronic conditions faced lifestyle disruptions due to the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically in physical activity, sleep, stress, and mental health, which need to be better addressed. Interpretation Overall, this review elucidates the disproportionately greater barriers to primary and specialty care that patients with chronic diseases face during the COVID-19 pandemic and emphasizes the urgent need for better chronic disease management strategies moving forward.

Background Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a debilitating chronic disease with limited treatment options. Resistant starches may represent a novel treatment for IBD. However, its efficacy and safety remain unclear. Our objective was to perform a systematic review to summarize the preclinical and clinical effects of resistant starch, which may help guide future studies. Methods Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register were searched. Included studies investigated the use of resistant starch therapy in in vivo animal models of IBD or human patients with IBD. Articles were screened, and data extracted, independently and in duplicate. The primary outcomes were clinical remission (clinical) and bowel mucosal damage (preclinical). Results 21 preclinical (n = 989 animals) and seven clinical (n = 164 patients) studies met eligibility. Preclinically, resistant starch was associated with a significant reduction in bowel mucosal damage compared to placebo (standardized mean difference − 1.83, 95% CI − 2.45 to − 1.20). Clinically, five studies reported data on clinical remission but clinical and methodological heterogeneity precluded pooling. In all five, a positive effect was seen in patients who consumed resistant starch supplemented diets. The majority of studies in both the preclinical and clinical settings were at a high or unclear risk of bias due to poor methodological reporting. Conclusions Our review demonstrates that resistant starch is associated with reduced histology damage in animal studies, and improvements in clinical remission in IBD patients. These results need to be tempered by the risk of bias of included studies. Rigorously designed preclinical and clinical studies are warranted. Trial registration The review protocols were registered on PROSPERO (preclinical: CRD42019130896; clinical: CRD42019129513).

Background: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many community palliative healthcare providers shifted from providing care in a patient’s home to providing almost exclusively virtual palliative care, or a combination of in-person and virtual care. Research on virtual palliative care is thus needed to provide evidence-based recommendations aiming to enhance the delivery of palliative care during and beyond the pandemic. Aim: To explore the experiences and perceptions of community palliative care providers, patients and caregivers who delivered or received virtual palliative care as a component of home-based palliative care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design: Qualitative study using phone and video-based semi-structured interviews. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Setting/participants: A total of 37 participants, including community palliative care patients/caregivers ( n = 19) and healthcare providers ( n = 18) recruited from sites in Ottawa and Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Results: Overall, participants preferred in-person palliative care compared to virtual care, but suggested virtual care could be a useful supplement to in-person care. The findings are presented in three main themes: (1) Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on community palliative care services; (2) Factors influencing transition from exclusively virtual model of care back to a blended model of care; and (3) Recommended uses and implementation of virtual palliative care Conclusions: Incorporating virtual palliative care into healthcare provider practice models (blended care models) may be the ideal model of care and standard practice moving forward beyond the COVID-19 pandemic, which has important implications toward organization and delivery of community palliative care services and funding of healthcare providers.

BackgroundThe polytrauma clinical triad (PCT) is a complex disorder composed of three comorbid diagnoses of chronic pain, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and postconcussion syndrome (PCS). PCT has been documented in veterans returning from deployment, but this is the first report on PCT prevalence in nonmilitary personnel after a motor vehicle collision (MVC).MethodsData were drawn from routine intake assessments completed by 71 patients referred to a community-based clinic for chronic pain management. All patients completed the post-traumatic stress disorder checklist for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (PCL-5), and Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire (RPQ) during a standardized intake assessment. An additional modified RPQ score was derived to address previously reported symptom overlap between PCS and chronic pain.ResultsStandard and modified RPQ scores yielded PCS prevalence rates of 100% and 54.9% in our sample, respectively. Results suggest that a modified RPQ score, limited to visual and vestibular symptoms, may be more useful PCS screening criteria in patients with chronic pain. PTSD screening criteria on the PCL-5 were met by 85.9% of the patients. More than half of the patients referred for chronic pain after MVC met criteria for PCT (52.1%). Patients who met PCT criteria reported worse headache, overall pain, and sleep quality outcomes.ConclusionAmong patients in our sample with chronic pain after MVC, more than half met criteria for PCT. A modified approach to RPQ scoring limited to visual and vestibular symptoms may be required to screen for PCS in these patients.

ObjectivesTo determine the clinical and economic impact of a community-based, hybrid model of in-person and virtual care by comparing health-system performance of the rural jurisdiction where this model was implemented with neighbouring jurisdictions without such a model and the broader regional health system.DesignA cross-sectional comparative study.SettingOntario, Canada, with a focus on three largely rural public health units from 1 April 2018 until 31 March 2021.ParticipantsAll residents of Ontario, Canada under the age of 105 eligible for the Ontario Health Insurance Plan during the study period.InterventionsAn innovative, community-based, hybrid model of in-person and virtual care, the Virtual Triage and Assessment Centre (VTAC), was implemented in Renfrew County, Ontario on 27 March 2020.Main outcome measuresPrimary outcome was a change in emergency department (ED) visits anywhere in Ontario, secondary outcomes included changes in hospitalisations and health-system costs, using per cent changes in mean monthly values of linked health-system administrative data for 2 years preimplementation and 1 year postimplementation.ResultsRenfrew County saw larger declines in ED visits (−34.4%, 95% CI −41.9% to −26.0%) and hospitalisations (−11.1%, 95% CI −19.7% to −1.5%) and slower growth in health-system costs than other rural regions studied. VTAC patients’ low-acuity ED visits decreased by −32.9%, high-acuity visits increased by 8.2%, and hospitalisations increased by 30.0%.ConclusionAfter implementing VTAC, Renfrew County saw reduced ED visits and hospitalisations and slower health-system cost growth compared with neighbouring rural jurisdictions. VTAC patients experienced reduced unnecessary ED visits and increased appropriate care. Community-based, hybrid models of in-person and virtual care may reduce the burden on emergency and hospital services in rural, remote and underserved regions. Further study is required to evaluate potential for scale and spread.