Explore the vast range of titles available.

ObjectiveTo assess medium-term organ impairment in symptomatic individuals following recovery from acute SARS-CoV-2 infection.DesignBaseline findings from a prospective, observational cohort study.SettingCommunity-based individuals from two UK centres between 1 April and 14 September 2020.ParticipantsIndividuals ≥18 years with persistent symptoms following recovery from acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and age-matched healthy controls.InterventionAssessment of symptoms by standardised questionnaires (EQ-5D-5L, Dyspnoea-12) and organ-specific metrics by biochemical assessment and quantitative MRI.Main outcome measuresSevere post-COVID-19 syndrome defined as ongoing respiratory symptoms and/or moderate functional impairment in activities of daily living; single-organ and multiorgan impairment (heart, lungs, kidneys, liver, pancreas, spleen) by consensus definitions at baseline investigation.Results201 individuals (mean age 45, range 21–71 years, 71% female, 88% white, 32% healthcare workers) completed the baseline assessment (median of 141 days following SARS-CoV-2 infection, IQR 110–162). The study population was at low risk of COVID-19 mortality (obesity 20%, hypertension 7%, type 2 diabetes 2%, heart disease 5%), with only 19% hospitalised with COVID-19. 42% of individuals had 10 or more symptoms and 60% had severe post-COVID-19 syndrome. Fatigue (98%), muscle aches (87%), breathlessness (88%) and headaches (83%) were most frequently reported. Mild organ impairment was present in the heart (26%), lungs (11%), kidneys (4%), liver (28%), pancreas (40%) and spleen (4%), with single-organ and multiorgan impairment in 70% and 29%, respectively. Hospitalisation was associated with older age (p=0.001), non-white ethnicity (p=0.016), increased liver volume (p<0.0001), pancreatic inflammation (p<0.01), and fat accumulation in the liver (p<0.05) and pancreas (p<0.01). Severe post-COVID-19 syndrome was associated with radiological evidence of cardiac damage (myocarditis) (p<0.05).ConclusionsIn individuals at low risk of COVID-19 mortality with ongoing symptoms, 70% have impairment in one or more organs 4 months after initial COVID-19 symptoms, with implications for healthcare and public health, which have assumed low risk in young people with no comorbidities.Trial registration numberNCT04369807; Pre-results.

Long COVID (LC), the persistent symptoms ≥12 weeks following acute COVID-19, presents major threats to individual and public health across countries, affecting over 1.5 million people in the UK alone. Evidence-based interventions are urgently required and an integrated care pathway approach in pragmatic trials, which include investigations, treatments and rehabilitation for LC, could provide scalable and generalisable solutions at pace. This is a pragmatic, multi-centre, cluster-randomised clinical trial of two components of an integrated care pathway (Coverscan™, a multi-organ MRI, and Living with COVID Recovery™, a digitally enabled rehabilitation platform) with a nested, Phase III, open label, platform randomised drug trial in individuals with LC. Cluster randomisation is at level of primary care networks so that integrated care pathway interventions are delivered as \"standard of care\" in that area. The drug trial randomisation is at individual level and initial arms are rivaroxaban, colchicine, famotidine/loratadine, compared with no drugs, with potential to add in further drug arms. The trial is being carried out in 6-10 LC clinics in the UK and is evaluating the effectiveness of a pathway of care for adults with LC in reducing fatigue and other physical, psychological and functional outcomes at 3 months. The trial also includes an economic evaluation which will be described separately. The protocol was reviewed by South Central-Berkshire Research Ethics Committee (reference: 21/SC/0416). All participating sites obtained local approvals prior to recruitment. Coverscan™ has UK certification (UKCA 752965). All participants will provide written consent to take part in the trial. The first participant was recruited in July 2022 and interim/final results will be disseminated in 2023, in a plan co-developed with public and patient representatives. The results will be presented at national and international conferences, published in peer reviewed medical journals, and shared via media (mainstream and social) and patient support organisations. ISRCTN10665760.

ObjectiveTo investigate current care for people with Long COVID in England.DesignIn-depth, semistructured interviews with people living with Long COVID and Long COVID healthcare professionals; data analysed using thematic analysis.SettingNational Health Service England post-COVID-19 services in six clinics from November 2022 to July 2023.Participants15 healthcare professionals and 21 people living with Long COVID currently attending or discharged (18 female; 3 male).ResultsHealth professionals and people with lived experience highlighted the multifaceted nature of Long COVID, including its varied symptoms, its impact on people’s lives and the complexity involved in managing this condition. These impacts encompass physical, social, mental and environmental dimensions. People with Long COVID reported barriers in accessing primary care, as well as negative general practitioner consultations where they felt unheard or invalidated, though some positive interactions were also noted. Peer support or support systems proved highly valuable and beneficial for individuals, aiding their recovery and well-being. Post-COVID-19 services were viewed as spaces where overlooked voices found validation, offering more than medical expertise. Despite initial challenges, healthcare providers’ increasing expertise in diagnosing and treating Long COVID has helped refine care approaches for this condition.ConclusionLong COVID care in England is not uniform across all locations. Effective communication, specialised expertise and comprehensive support systems are crucial. A patient-centred approach considering the unique complexities of Long COVID, including physical, mental health, social and environmental aspects is needed. Sustained access to post-COVID-19 services is imperative, with success dependent on offering continuous rehabilitation beyond rapid recovery, acknowledging the condition’s enduring impacts and complexities.

Background and Aim Long Covid is often stigmatised, particularly in people who are disadvantaged within society. This may prevent them from seeking help and could lead to widening health inequalities. This coproduced study with a Community Advisory Board (CAB) of people with Long Covid aimed to understand healthcare and wider barriers and stigma experienced by people with probable Long Covid. Methods An active case finding approach was employed to find adults with probable, but not yet clinically diagnosed, Long Covid in two localities in London (Camden and Merton) and Derbyshire, England. Interviews explored the barriers to care and the stigma faced by participants and were analysed thematically. This study forms part of the STIMULATE‐ICP Collaboration. Findings Twenty‐three interviews were completed. Participants reported limited awareness of what Long Covid is and the available pathways to management. There was considerable self‐doubt among participants, sometimes reinforced by interactions with healthcare professionals (HCPs). Participants questioned their deservedness in seeking healthcare support for their symptoms. Hesitancy to engage with healthcare services was motivated by fear of needing more investigation and concerns regarding judgement about the ability to carry out caregiving responsibilities. It was also motivated by the complexity of the clinical presentation and fear of all symptoms being attributed to poor mental health. Participants also reported trying to avoid overburdening the health system. These difficulties were compounded by experiences of stigma and discrimination. The emerging themes reaffirmed a framework of epistemic injustice in relation to Long Covid, where creating, interpreting and conveying knowledge has varied credibility based on the teller's identity characteristics and/or the level of their interpretive resources. Conclusion We have codeveloped recommendations based on the findings. These include early signposting to services, dedicating protected time to listening to people with Long Covid, providing a holistic approach in care pathways, and working to mitigate stigma. Regardless of the diagnosis, people experiencing new symptoms must be encouraged to seek timely medical help. Clear public health messaging is needed among communities already disadvantaged by epistemic injustice to raise awareness of Long Covid, and to share stories that encourage seeking care and to illustrate the adverse effects of stigma. Patient or Public Contribution This study was coproduced with a CAB made up of 23 members including HCPs, people with lived experience of Long Covid and other stakeholders.

The importance of integrated care for complex, multiple long term conditions was acknowledged before the COVID pandemic but remained a challenge. The pandemic and consequent development of Long COVID required rapid adaptation of health services to address the population’s needs, requiring service redesigns including integrated care. This Delphi consensus study was conducted in the UK and found similar integrated care priorities for Long COVID and complex, multiple long term conditions, provided by 480 patients and health care providers, with an 80% consensus rate. The resultant recommendations were based on more than 1400 responses from survey participants and were supported by patients, health care professionals, and by patient charities. Participants identified the need to allocate resources to: support integrated care, provide access to care and treatments that work, provide diagnostic procedures that support the personalization of treatment in an integrated care environment, and enable structural consultation between primary and specialist care settings including physical and mental health care. Based on the findings we propose a model for delivering integrated care by a multidisciplinary team to people with complex multisystem conditions. These recommendations can inform improvements to integrated care for complex, multiple long term conditions and Long COVID at international level.

The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated rapid adaptation of healthcare providers to new clinical and logistical challenges. Following identification of high levels of emergency department (ED) reattendance among patients with suspected COVID-19 at our centre, we piloted a rapid remote follow-up service for this patient group. We present our service framework and evaluation of our pilot cohort of 192 patients. We followed up patients by telephone within 36 hours of their ED attendance. Pulse oximetry was used for remote monitoring of a subset of patients. Patients required between one and six consecutive telephone assessments, dependent on illness severity, and 23 patients were recalled for in-person assessment. Approximately half of patients with confirmed or probable COVID-19 required onward referral for respiratory follow-up. This framework reduced unplanned ED reattendances in comparison with a retrospective comparator cohort (4.7% from 22.6%). We reproduced these findings in a validation cohort with a high prevalence of acute COVID-19, managed through the clinic in September–October 2020, where we identified an unplanned ED reattendance rate of 5.2%. We propose that rapid remote follow-up is a mechanism by which ambulatory patients can be clinically supported during the acute phase of illness, with benefits both to patient care and to health service resilience.

Introduction Individuals with Long Covid represent a new and growing patient population. In England, fewer than 90 Long Covid clinics deliver assessment and treatment informed by NICE guidelines. However, a paucity of clinical trials or longitudinal cohort studies means that the epidemiology, clinical trajectory, healthcare utilisation and effectiveness of current Long Covid care are poorly documented, and that neither evidence-based treatments nor rehabilitation strategies exist. In addition, and in part due to pre-pandemic health inequalities, access to referral and care varies, and patient experience of the Long Covid care pathways can be poor. In a mixed methods study, we therefore aim to: (1) describe the usual healthcare, outcomes and resource utilisation of individuals with Long Covid; (2) assess the extent of inequalities in access to Long Covid care, and specifically to understand Long Covid patients' experiences of stigma and discrimination. Methods and analysis A mixed methods study will address our aims. Qualitative data collection from patients and health professionals will be achieved through surveys, interviews and focus group discussions, to understand their experience and document the function of clinics. A patient cohort study will provide an understanding of outcomes and costs of care. Accessible data will be further analysed to understand the nature of Long Covid, and the care received. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval was obtained from South Central-Berkshire Research Ethics Committee (reference 303958). The dissemination plan will be decided by the patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) group members and study Co-Is, but will target 1) policy makers, and those responsible for commissioning and delivering Long Covid services, 2) patients and the public, and 3) academics.

IntroductionPost-COVID-19 complications require simultaneous characterisation and management to plan policy and health system responses. We describe the 12-month experience of the first UK dedicated post-COVID-19 clinical service to include hospitalised and non-hospitalised patients.MethodsIn a single-centre, observational analysis, we report the demographics, symptoms, comorbidities, investigations, treatments, functional recovery, specialist referral and rehabilitation of 1325 individuals assessed at the University College London Hospitals post-COVID-19 service between April 2020 and April 2021, comparing by referral route: posthospitalised (PH), non-hospitalised (NH) and post emergency department (PED). Symptoms associated with poor recovery or inability to return to work full time were assessed using multivariable logistic regression.Results1325 individuals were assessed (PH: 547, 41.3%; PED: 212, 16%; NH: 566, 42.7%). Compared with the PH and PED groups, the NH group were younger (median 44.6 (35.6–52.8) years vs 58.3 (47.0–67.7) years and 48.5 (39.4–55.7) years), more likely to be female (68.2%, 43.0% and 59.9%), less likely to be of ethnic minority (30.9%, 52.7% and 41.0%) or seen later after symptom onset (median (IQR): 194 (118–298) days, 69 (51–111) days and 76 (55–128) days; all p<0.0001). All groups had similar rates of onward specialist referral (NH 18.7%, PH 16.1% and PED 18.9%, p=0.452) and were more likely to require support for breathlessness (23.7%, 5.5% and 15.1%, p<0.001) and fatigue (17.8%, 4.8% and 8.0%, p<0.001). Hospitalised patients had higher rates of pulmonary emboli, persistent lung interstitial abnormalities and other organ impairment. 716 (54.0%) individuals reported <75% optimal health (median 70%, IQR 55%–85%). Less than half of employed individuals could return to work full time at first assessment.ConclusionPost-COVID-19 symptoms were significant in PH and NH patients, with significant ongoing healthcare needs and utilisation. Trials of interventions and patient-centred pathways for diagnostic and treatment approaches are urgently required.

BackgroundLong COVID is associated with multiple symptoms and impairment in multiple organs. Cross-sectional studies have reported cardiac impairment to varying degrees by varying methodologies. Using cardiac MR (CMR), we investigated a 12-month trajectory of abnormalities in Long COVID.ObjectivesTo investigate cardiac abnormalities 1-year post-SARS-CoV-2 infection.Methods534 individuals with Long COVID underwent CMR (T1/T2 mapping, cardiac mass, volumes, function and strain) and multiorgan MRI at 6 months (IQR 4.3–7.3) since first post-COVID-19 symptoms. 330 were rescanned at 12.6 (IQR 11.4–14.2) months if abnormal baseline findings were reported. Symptoms, questionnaires and blood samples were collected at both time points. CMR abnormalities were defined as ≥1 of low left or right ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), high left or right ventricular end diastolic volume, low 3D left ventricular global longitudinal strain (GLS), or elevated native T1 in ≥3 cardiac segments. Significant change over time was reported by comparison with 92 healthy controls.ResultsTechnical success of multiorgan and CMR assessment in non-acute settings was 99.1% and 99.6% at baseline, and 98.3% and 98.8% at follow-up. Of individuals with Long COVID, 102/534 (19%) had CMR abnormalities at baseline; 71/102 had complete paired data at 12 months. Of those, 58% presented with ongoing CMR abnormalities at 12 months. High sensitivity cardiac troponin I and B-type natriuretic peptide were not predictive of CMR findings, symptoms or clinical outcomes. At baseline, low LVEF was associated with persistent CMR abnormality, abnormal GLS associated with low quality of life and abnormal T1 in at least three segments was associated with better clinical outcomes at 12 months.ConclusionCMR abnormalities (left entricular or right ventricular dysfunction/dilatation and/or abnormal T1mapping), occurred in one in five individuals with Long COVID at 6 months, persisting in over half of those at 12 months. Cardiac-related blood biomarkers could not identify CMR abnormalities in Long COVID.Trial registration numberNCT04369807.

The pathogenesis of exercise intolerance and persistent fatigue which can follow an infection with the SARS‐CoV‐2 virus (“long COVID”) is not fully understood. Cases were recruited from a long COVID clinic (N = 32; 44 ± 12 years; 10 (31%) men), and age‐/sex‐matched healthy controls (HC) (N = 19; 40 ± 13 years; 6 (32%) men) from University College London staff and students. We assessed exercise performance, lung and cardiac function, vascular health, skeletal muscle oxidative capacity, and autonomic nervous system (ANS) function. Key outcome measures for each physiological system were compared between groups using potential outcome means (95% confidence intervals) adjusted for potential confounders. Long COVID participant outcomes were compared to normative values. When compared to HC, cases exhibited reduced oxygen uptake efficiency slope (1847 (1679, 2016) vs. 2176 (1978, 2373) mL/min, p = 0.002) and anaerobic threshold (13.2 (12.2, 14.3) vs. 15.6 (14.4, 17.2) mL/kg/min, p < 0.001), and lower oxidative capacity, measured using near infrared spectroscopy (τ: 38.7 (31.9, 45.6) vs. 24.6 (19.1, 30.1) s, p = 0.001). In cases, ANS measures fell below normal limits in 39%. Long COVID is associated with reduced measures of exercise performance and skeletal muscle oxidative capacity in the absence of evidence of microvascular dysfunction, suggesting mitochondrial pathology. There was evidence of attendant ANS dysregulation in a significant proportion. These multisystem factors might contribute to impaired exercise tolerance in long COVID sufferers.