CUBREBOCAS EN TIEMPOS DE PANDEMIA, REVISIÓN HISTÓRICA, CIENTÍFICA Y RECOMENDACIONES PRÁCTICAS

The aim of this article is to present the medical and scientific literature (including an umbrella review) related to the use of face masks for the prevention of viral respiratory infections, to make an informed decision on the use of face masks during a pandemic. Since the beginning of the 20th Century, it was determined that the use of face masks is effective in reducing the transmission of respiratory infections. The first time face masks were used amongst the general public was during the 1918 Pandemic. Research on face masks during the 20th Century focused mainly on the effectiveness of the materials. It was determined that the best protection was achieved by using several layers of different close knit materials, preferably three. Meta-analyses showed that the use of face masks decreased the risk of contagion of respiratory viral diseases, including COVID-19, compared with not using them. Face masks protect both the user and other people in the population by limiting the exposure to SARS-CoV-2, minimizing the viral load, hence decreasing the risk of developing severe COVID-19. It has been established that any type of face mask is better than not using any mask at all. When deciding upon the use of face masks one should consider the risks and benefits. We conclude that there is sufficient evidence to support that the benefits of using face masks outweigh the risks.El objetivo de este artículo es revisar la literatura médica y científica (incluida una revisión paraguas) relacionada con el uso de cubrebocas como medida de prevención en la transmisión de enfermedades respiratorias virales para tomar decisiones informadas durante una pandemia. Desde inicios del siglo XX se estableció que el cubrebocas es efectivo para reducir infecciones respiratorias.  El uso entre la población general inició hasta la pandemia de 1918. Desde entonces, las investigaciones se han enfocado principalmente en determinar los mejores materiales para su elaboración, encontrando que la efectividad del cubrebocas aumenta con el número de las capas, siendo ideal tres, de punto cerrado y de diversos materiales. Los meta-análisis demostraron que el uso de cubrebocas disminuye el riesgo de contagio de enfermedades respiratorias virales, incluido COVID-19, comparado a no usarlo. Los cubrebocas evitan el paso de una gran proporción de partículas del virus SARS-CoV-2 protegiendo tanto al portador como al resto de la población al reducir la carga viral a la que se está expuesto, disminuyendo así el riesgo de desarrollar enfermedad grave de COVID-19. Cuando las personas están en espacios públicos es preferible elegir usar cualquier cubrebocas, a no usar ninguna protección naso bucal. Para decidir sobre el uso del cubrebocas es importante evaluar el riesgo-beneficio. Con este análisis concluimos que según la evidencia, los beneficios del uso del cubrebocas superan los riesgos, por lo que recomendamos que el uso de cubrebocas de forma generalizada

Long-term safety of COVID vaccination in individuals with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: results from the COVAD study

Limited evidence on long-term COVID-19 vaccine safety in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) continues to contribute to vaccine hesitancy. We studied delayed-onset vaccine adverse events (AEs) in patients with IIMs, other systemic autoimmune and inflammatory disorders (SAIDs), and healthy controls (HCs), using data from the second COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study. A validated self-reporting e-survey was circulated by the COVAD study group (157 collaborators, 106 countries) from Feb-June 2022. We collected data on demographics, comorbidities, IIM/SAID details, COVID-19 history, and vaccination details. Delayed-onset (> 7 day) AEs were analyzed using regression models. A total of 15165 respondents undertook the survey, of whom 8759 responses from vaccinated individuals [median age 46 (35-58) years, 74.4% females, 45.4% Caucasians] were analyzed. Of these, 1390 (15.9%) had IIMs, 50.6% other SAIDs, and 33.5% HCs. Among IIMs, 16.3% and 10.2% patients reported minor and major AEs, respectively, and 0.72% (n = 10) required hospitalization. Notably patients with IIMs experienced fewer minor AEs than other SAIDs, though rashes were expectedly more than HCs [OR 4.0; 95% CI 2.2-7.0, p < 0.001]. IIM patients with active disease, overlap myositis, autoimmune comorbidities, and ChadOx1 nCOV-19 (Oxford/AstraZeneca) recipients reported AEs more often, while those with inclusion body myositis, and BNT162b2 (Pfizer) recipients reported fewer AEs. Vaccination is reassuringly safe in individuals with IIMs, with AEs, hospitalizations comparable to SAIDs, and largely limited to those with autoimmune multimorbidity and active disease. These observations may inform guidelines to identify high-risk patients warranting close monitoring in the post-vaccination period

Flares in IIMs and the timeline following COVID-19 vaccination: a combined analysis of the COVAD-1 and 2 surveys.

OBJECTIVES Disease flares in the post COVID-19 vaccination period represent a prominent concern, though risk factors are poorly understood. We studied these flares among patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) and other autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs). METHODS The COVAD-1 and -2 global surveys were circulated in early 2021 and 2022 respectively, and we captured demographics, comorbidities, AIRDs details, COVID-19 infection history, and vaccination details.Flares of IIMs were defined as a. patient self-reported, b. immunosuppression (IS) denoted, c. clinical sign directed, and d. with >7.9-point MCID worsening of PROMISPF10a score. Risk factors of flares were analyzed using regression models. RESULTS Of 15165 total respondents, 1278 IIMs (age 63 years, 70.3% female, 80.8% Caucasians), and 3453 AIRDs were included. Flares of IIM were seen in 9.6%, 12.7%, 8.7%, and 19.6% patients by definitions a-d respectively with a median time to flare of 71.5 (10.7-235) days, similar to AIRDs. Patients with active IIMs pre-vaccination (OR:1.2; 95%CI:1.03-1.6, p = 0.025) were prone to flares, while those receiving Rituximab (OR:0.3; 95%CI:0.1-0.7, p = 0.010) and Azathioprine (OR:0.3, 95%CI:0.1-0.8, p = 0.016) were at lower risk. Female gender and comorbidities predisposed to flares requiring changes in immunosuppression. Asthma (OR: 1.62; 95%CI: 1.05-2.50, p = 0.028) and higher pain VAS (OR: 1.19; 95%CI: 1.11-1.27, p < 0.001) were associated with disparity between self-reported and IS-denoted flares. CONCLUSION A diagnosis of IIMs confers an equal risk of flares in the post COVID-19 vaccination period to AIRDs, with active disease, female gender, and comorbidities conferring a higher risk. Disparity between patient and physician reported outcomes represents a future avenue for exploration

Vaccine hesitancy decreases, long term concerns remain in myositis, rheumatic disease patients: A comparative analysis of the COVAD surveys

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 vaccines have a favorable safety profile in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) such as idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs), however hesitancy continues to persist among these patients.Therefore, we studied the prevalence, predictors, and reasons for hesitancy in patients with IIMs, other AIRDs, non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs) and healthy controls (HCs), using data from the two international COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) e-surveys. METHODS: The 1st and 2nd COVAD patient self-reported e-surveys were circulated from March to December 2021, and February to June 2022 (ongoing). We collected data on demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 infection and vaccination history, reasons for hesitancy, and patient reported outcomes. Predictors of hesitancy were analyzed using regression models in different groups. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 18,882 (COVAD-1) and 7666 (COVAD-2) respondents. Reassuringly, hesitancy decreased from 2021 (16.5%) to 2022 (5.1%) [OR 0.26; 95%CI: 0.24-0.30, p < 0.001]. However, concerns/fear over long-term safety had increased [OR 3.6;95% CI:2.9-4.6, p < 0.01].We noted with concern greater skepticism over vaccine science among patients with IIMs than AIRDs [OR:1.8; 95%CI: 1.08-3.2, p = 0.023] and HCs [OR: 4; 95%CI: 1.9-8.1, p < 0.001], as well as more long-term safety concerns/fear [IIMs vs AIRDs; OR: 1.9; 95%CI: 1.2-2.9, p = 0.001; IIMs vs HCs; OR: 5.4 95%CI: 3-9.6), p < 0.001].Caucasians [OR 4.2 (1.7-10.3)] were likely to be more hesitant, while those with better PROMIS physical health score were less hesitant [OR 0.9 (0.8-0.97)]. CONCLUSION: Vaccine hesitancy has decreased from 2021 to 2022, long-term safety concerns remain among patients with IIMs, particularly in Caucasians and those with poor physical function

Flares in autoimmune rheumatic diseases in the post-COVID-19 vaccination period - A Cross-sequential study based on COVAD surveys

OBJECTIVE: Flares of autoimmune rheumatic disease (AIRDs) following COVID-19 vaccination are an outstanding concern in vaccine-hesitant individuals. Therefore, we investigated the incidence, predictors and patterns of flares following vaccination in individuals living with AIRDs using global COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) surveys. METHODS: The COVAD surveys were used to extract data on flare demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 history, and vaccination details among patients with AIRDs. Flares following vaccination were identified as patient-reported(a), increased immunosuppression(b), clinical exacerbations(c) and worsening of PROMIS scores(d). We studied flare characteristics and used regression models to differentiate flares among various AIRDs. RESULTS: Of 15165 total responses, the incidence of flares in 3453 patients with AIRDs was 11.3%, 14.8%, 9.5%, and 26.7% by definitions a-d, respectively. There was moderate agreement between patient-reported and immunosuppression-defined flares (K = 0.403, p = 0.022). Arthritis (61.6%) and fatigue (58.8%) were the most commonly reported symptoms. Self-reported flares were associated with higher comorbidities (p = 0.013), mental health disorders (MHD) (p < 0.001), and autoimmune multimorbidity (AIDm) (p < 0.001).In regression analysis, the presence of AIDm (OR = 1.4;95%CI:1.1-1.7;p=0.003), MHD (OR = 1.7;95%CI:1.1-2.6;p=0.007), and Moderna vaccine (OR = 1.5;95%CI:1.09-2.2;p=0.014) recipients were predictors of flares. Mycophenolate (OR = 0.5;95%CI:0.3-0.8;p=0.009) and glucocorticoids (OR = 0.6;95%CI:0.5-0.8;p=0.003) were protective.A higher frequency of patients with AIRDs reported overall active disease post-vaccination compared to before vaccination (OR = 1.3;95%CI:1.1-1.5;p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Flares occur in nearly one in ten individuals with AIRDs after COVID vaccination, with people with comorbidities, especially AID multimorbidity, mental health disorders and use of the Moderna vaccine being particularly vulnerable. Future avenues include exploring flare profiles and optimizing vaccine strategies for this group

Long-term safety of COVID vaccination in individuals with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: results from the COVAD study

Limited evidence on long-term COVID-19 vaccine safety in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) continues to contribute to vaccine hesitancy. We studied delayed-onset vaccine adverse events (AEs) in patients with IIMs, other systemic autoimmune and inflammatory disorders (SAIDs), and healthy controls (HCs), using data from the second COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study. A validated self-reporting e-survey was circulated by the COVAD study group (157 collaborators, 106 countries) from Feb-June 2022. We collected data on demographics, comorbidities, IIM/SAID details, COVID-19 history, and vaccination details. Delayed-onset (> 7 day) AEs were analyzed using regression models. A total of 15165 respondents undertook the survey, of whom 8759 responses from vaccinated individuals [median age 46 (35-58) years, 74.4% females, 45.4% Caucasians] were analyzed. Of these, 1390 (15.9%) had IIMs, 50.6% other SAIDs, and 33.5% HCs. Among IIMs, 16.3% and 10.2% patients reported minor and major AEs, respectively, and 0.72% (n = 10) required hospitalization. Notably patients with IIMs experienced fewer minor AEs than other SAIDs, though rashes were expectedly more than HCs [OR 4.0; 95% CI 2.2-7.0, p < 0.001]. IIM patients with active disease, overlap myositis, autoimmune comorbidities, and ChadOx1 nCOV-19 (Oxford/AstraZeneca) recipients reported AEs more often, while those with inclusion body myositis, and BNT162b2 (Pfizer) recipients reported fewer AEs. Vaccination is reassuringly safe in individuals with IIMs, with AEs, hospitalizations comparable to SAIDs, and largely limited to those with autoimmune multimorbidity and active disease. These observations may inform guidelines to identify high-risk patients warranting close monitoring in the post-vaccination period