1. Sign our petition calling on Cochrane to withdraw their review of Exercise Therapy for 'CFS'.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Guest, the 'News in Brief' for the week beginning 15th July 2024 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Welcome! Read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum.
    Dismiss Notice

Cardiopulmonary, Functional, Cognitive and Mental Health Outcomes Post-COVID-19, 2023, O’Sullivan et al

Discussion in 'Long Covid research' started by CRG, May 4, 2023.

Tags:
  1. CRG

    CRG Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,857
    Location:
    UK
    Cardiopulmonary, Functional, Cognitive and Mental Health Outcomes Post-COVID-19, Across the Range of Severity of Acute Illness, in a Physically Active, Working-Age Population

    Oliver O’Sullivan, David A. Holdsworth, Peter Ladlow, Robert M. Barker-Davies, Rebecca Chamley, Andrew Houston, Samantha May, Dominic Dewson, Daniel Mills, Kayleigh Pierce, James Mitchell, Cheng Xie, Edward Sellon, Jon Naylor, Joseph Mulae, Mark Cranley, Nick P. Talbot,,0 Oliver J. Rider, Edward D. Nicol, Alexander N. Bennett

    Abstract

    Background

    The COVID-19 pandemic has led to significant morbidity and mortality, with the former impacting and limiting individuals requiring high physical fitness, including sportspeople and emergency services.

    Methods

    Observational cohort study of 4 groups: hospitalised, community illness with on-going symptoms (community-symptomatic), community illness now recovered (community-recovered) and comparison. A total of 113 participants (aged 39 ± 9, 86% male) were recruited: hospitalised (n = 35), community-symptomatic (n = 34), community-recovered (n = 18) and comparison (n = 26), approximately five months following acute illness. Participant outcome measures included cardiopulmonary imaging, submaximal and maximal exercise testing, pulmonary function, cognitive assessment, blood tests and questionnaires on mental health and function.

    Results

    Hospitalised and community-symptomatic groups were older (43 ± 9 and 37 ± 10, P = 0.003), with a higher body mass index (31 ± 4 and 29 ± 4, P < 0.001), and had worse mental health (anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress), fatigue and quality of life scores. Hospitalised and community-symptomatic participants performed less well on sub-maximal and maximal exercise testing. Hospitalised individuals had impaired ventilatory efficiency (higher VE/V̇CO2 slope, 29.6 ± 5.1, P < 0.001), achieved less work at anaerobic threshold (70 ± 15, P < 0.001) and peak (231 ± 35, P < 0.001), and had a reduced forced vital capacity (4.7 ± 0.9, P = 0.004). Clinically significant abnormal cardiopulmonary imaging findings were present in 6% of hospitalised participants. Community-recovered individuals had no significant differences in outcomes to the comparison group.

    Conclusion

    Symptomatically recovered individuals who suffered mild-moderate acute COVID-19 do not differ from an age-, sex- and job-role-matched comparison population five months post-illness. Individuals who were hospitalised or continue to suffer symptoms may require a specific comprehensive assessment prior to return to full physical activity.
     
    CRG, May 4, 2023
    #1
    ahimsa, Sean, Hutan and 2 others like this.
  2. SNT Gatchaman

    SNT Gatchaman Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,004
    Location:
    Aotearoa New Zealand
    SNT Gatchaman, May 4, 2023
    #2
    CRG, ahimsa, RedFox and 1 other person like this.
  3. Hutan

    Hutan Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    27,999
    Location:
    Aotearoa New Zealand
    86% male?
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2023
    Hutan, May 4, 2023
    #3
    It's M.E. Linda, Sean and alktipping like this.
  4. Hutan

    Hutan Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    27,999
    Location:
    Aotearoa New Zealand
    So, the four groups:
    hospitalised (H)
    community managed infection, ongoing symptoms at 5 months (C-S)
    community managed infection, recovered at 5 months (C-R)
    healthy controls

    The sample sizes are fairly small for this sort of study, especially considering the male skew. Weirdly, apart from that one 86% number for the total male/female split in the sample, there is no separate reporting by sex. Detailed demographic comparisons are made, including on height and BMI, but we don't even know what percentage of females were in each group.

    "Allows the effect of COVID-19 to be seen" is a big call to make, with 14% female representation.

    This is an interesting study though, and worth a look. Findings of prevalence of fatigue in the groups; resting heart rate; CPET parameters; cognition.
     
    Hutan, May 4, 2023
    #4
    It's M.E. Linda, Trish, Wyva and 3 others like this.
  5. Ebb Tide

    Ebb Tide Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    254
    Interesting looking at the 6MWT scores and remembering the post treatment scores in the PACE trial which were a group with similar age profile.

    This study's groups H:603m, C-S:624, C-R:689, COM (comparison group):719m
    PACE trial
    Baseline CBT: 333m, APT:314m, SMC:326m, GET:312m
    52 weeks CBT: 354m, APT:334m, SMC:348m, GET:379m
     
    Ebb Tide, May 5, 2023
    #5
    NelliePledge and RedFox like this.

Share This Page