Prescription practices, experiences, and perspectives on the usage of hydroxychloroquine among rheumatologists and other specialists

• Main Authors: R Naveen, Alka Verma, Hussain Ahmed Raza, K G Chengappa, G S K R Naidu, Supriya Sharma, Ashish Goel, Durga Prasanna Misra, Aman Sharma, Latika Gupta, Vikas Agarwal
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2021-01-01
• Series: Indian Journal of Rheumatology
• Subjects: covid-19; drug-related side effects and adverse reactions; hydroxychloroquine; practices; surveys and questionnaires
• Online Access: http://www.indianjrheumatol.com/article.asp?issn=0973-3698;year=2021;volume=16;issue=2;spage=169;epage=178;aulast=Naveen

Background/Objectives: The use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for COVID-19 has raised concerns for adverse effects. We aimed to understand the practice, perceptions, and experience of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) with HCQ use for COVID-19 and other indications. Methods: A validated e-survey with 30 questions was circulated among rheumatologists and other specialists using SurveyMonkey. Responses from rheumatologists were compared with other doctors (odds ratio [OR], median, interquartile range), and ADRs encountered based on their indications. Results: Among 410 respondents (71.2% rheumatologists, 27% academicians) with a lifetime experience of 17886 (4884–52074) patients over 12 (7–20) years, and 148 (48–349) prescription of HCQ per month, one-third (135) were managing COVID-19 with 10 (0–60) prescriptions per physician. Electrocardiograms were seldom ordered preprescription (5%), but visual scans were requested by one-thirds, especially by rheumatologists (OR-1.9). Agreement on the safety of HCQ for non-COVID indications was nearly unanimous (99%), but only two-third (64%) perceived it to be safe for COVID-19, with most (72%) being uncomfortable using HCQ with macrolides. ADRs were most often encountered after middle-age with skin pigmentation (554 [123–2063]) being the most frequent, followed by gastrointestinal intolerance (222 [42–980] per million prescriptions). Cardiac toxicity was rarely reported. ADRs other than cutaneous and visual were noted more frequently by nonrheumatologists. Rheumatologists were less likely to consider HCQ unsafe (OR-0.04) and reportedly faced a greater challenge in drug procurance (OR-2.6) during the pandemic. Conclusions: Most ADRs are rare with HCQ use in our respondent population with a large user experience. HCQ use was considered unsafe by one-thirds in the setting of COVID-19 but not outside it, lesser so by rheumatologists.