Cargando…
The impact of the COVID‐19 surge on phototherapy in Taiwan: Focusing on the patient profile, adherence, and attitude before and after the surge
BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic has caused changes in the medical practice. However, it is unclear whether the patients receiving phototherapy for their dermatoses have been affected. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to identify the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on phototherap...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10234173/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37113097 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/srt.13314 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic has caused changes in the medical practice. However, it is unclear whether the patients receiving phototherapy for their dermatoses have been affected. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to identify the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on phototherapy, focusing on the patient profile, adherence, and attitude before and after the surge. METHODS: The study encompassed the time 5 months prior to and after the surge of the COVID‐19 pandemic (from May to July, 2021), resulting in the temporary closure of our phototherapeutic unit. RESULTS: Nine hundred eighty‐one patients received phototherapy during this period. Vitiligo, psoriasis (Ps), and atopic dermatitis (AD) represented the groups with the highest patient numbers. For vitiligo, Ps and AD, 39.6%, 41.9%, and 28.4% of the patients resumed phototherapy after the pandemic‐related shutdown (PRS). No significant difference was noted in age, gender, and number of weekly sessions between those who resumed or stopped phototherapy after PRS among three groups. Patients who resumed phototherapy after PRS tended to receive more weekly sessions of phototherapy than those who initiated after PRS. Additionally, patients who resumed phototherapy showed no significant difference in the number of weekly sessions before and after PRS. CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals a significant impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on patients undergoing phototherapy. Although the patient number remained similar before and after PRS, a significant portion of patients discontinued phototherapy after PRS. New strategies and continued education are needed to improve patient management in times of pandemic. |
---|