Emma Ladds1, Alex Rushforth1, Sietse Wieringa1, Sharon Taylor2,3, Clare Rayner4, Laiba Husain1, Trisha Greenhalgh5. 1. Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK. 2. Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. 3. Imperial College School of Medicine, London, UK. 4. Independent Occupational Physician, Manchester, UK. 5. Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK. trish.greenhalgh@phc.ox.ac.uk.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Approximately 10% of patients with Covid-19 experience symptoms beyond 3-4 weeks. Patients call this "long Covid". We sought to document such patients' lived experience, including accessing and receiving healthcare and ideas for improving services. METHODS: We held 55 individual interviews and 8 focus groups (n = 59) with people recruited from UK-based long Covid patient support groups, social media and snowballing. We restricted some focus groups to health professionals since they had already self-organised into online communities. Participants were invited to tell their stories and comment on others' stories. Data were audiotaped, transcribed, anonymised and coded using NVIVO. Analysis incorporated sociological theories of illness, healing, peer support, clinical relationships, access, and service redesign. RESULTS: Of 114 participants aged 27-73 years, 80 were female. Eighty-four were White British, 13 Asian, 8 White Other, 5 Black, and 4 mixed ethnicity. Thirty-two were doctors and 19 other health professionals. Thirty-one had attended hospital, of whom 8 had been admitted. Analysis revealed a confusing illness with many, varied and often relapsing-remitting symptoms and uncertain prognosis; a heavy sense of loss and stigma; difficulty accessing and navigating services; difficulty being taken seriously and achieving a diagnosis; disjointed and siloed care (including inability to access specialist services); variation in standards (e.g. inconsistent criteria for seeing, investigating and referring patients); variable quality of the therapeutic relationship (some participants felt well supported while others felt "fobbed off"); and possible critical events (e.g. deterioration after being unable to access services). Emotionally significant aspects of participants' experiences informed ideas for improving services. CONCLUSION: Suggested quality principles for a long Covid service include ensuring access to care, reducing burden of illness, taking clinical responsibility and providing continuity of care, multi-disciplinary rehabilitation, evidence-based investigation and management, and further development of the knowledge base and clinical services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04435041.
BACKGROUND: Approximately 10% of patients with Covid-19 experience symptoms beyond 3-4 weeks. Patients call this "long Covid". We sought to document such patients' lived experience, including accessing and receiving healthcare and ideas for improving services. METHODS: We held 55 individual interviews and 8 focus groups (n = 59) with people recruited from UK-based long Covidpatient support groups, social media and snowballing. We restricted some focus groups to health professionals since they had already self-organised into online communities. Participants were invited to tell their stories and comment on others' stories. Data were audiotaped, transcribed, anonymised and coded using NVIVO. Analysis incorporated sociological theories of illness, healing, peer support, clinical relationships, access, and service redesign. RESULTS: Of 114 participants aged 27-73 years, 80 were female. Eighty-four were White British, 13 Asian, 8 White Other, 5 Black, and 4 mixed ethnicity. Thirty-two were doctors and 19 other health professionals. Thirty-one had attended hospital, of whom 8 had been admitted. Analysis revealed a confusing illness with many, varied and often relapsing-remitting symptoms and uncertain prognosis; a heavy sense of loss and stigma; difficulty accessing and navigating services; difficulty being taken seriously and achieving a diagnosis; disjointed and siloed care (including inability to access specialist services); variation in standards (e.g. inconsistent criteria for seeing, investigating and referring patients); variable quality of the therapeutic relationship (some participants felt well supported while others felt "fobbed off"); and possible critical events (e.g. deterioration after being unable to access services). Emotionally significant aspects of participants' experiences informed ideas for improving services. CONCLUSION: Suggested quality principles for a long Covid service include ensuring access to care, reducing burden of illness, taking clinical responsibility and providing continuity of care, multi-disciplinary rehabilitation, evidence-based investigation and management, and further development of the knowledge base and clinical services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04435041.
Authors: Nida Ziauddeen; Deepti Gurdasani; Margaret E O'Hara; Claire Hastie; Paul Roderick; Guiqing Yao; Nisreen A Alwan Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-03-08 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Edith L Graham; Jeffrey R Clark; Zachary S Orban; Patrick H Lim; April L Szymanski; Carolyn Taylor; Rebecca M DiBiase; Dan Tong Jia; Roumen Balabanov; Sam U Ho; Ayush Batra; Eric M Liotta; Igor J Koralnik Journal: Ann Clin Transl Neurol Date: 2021-03-30 Impact factor: 4.511
Authors: Hannah E Davis; Gina S Assaf; Lisa McCorkell; Hannah Wei; Ryan J Low; Yochai Re'em; Signe Redfield; Jared P Austin; Athena Akrami Journal: EClinicalMedicine Date: 2021-07-15
Authors: Sarah Houben-Wilke; Jeannet M Delbressine; Anouk W Vaes; Yvonne Mj Goërtz; Roy Meys; Felipe Vc Machado; Maarten Van Herck; Chris Burtin; Rein Posthuma; Frits Me Franssen; Nicole Hp van Loon; Bita Hajian; Herman Vijlbrief; Yvonne Spies; Alex van 't Hul; Daisy Ja Janssen; Martijn A Spruit Journal: J Patient Exp Date: 2021-03-08