Longitudinal Progression of Patients with Long COVID Treated in a Post-COVID Clinic: A Cross-Sectional Survey 2024 Hurt et al

Discussion in 'Long Covid research' started by Andy, May 31, 2024.

Tags:
  1. Andy

    Andy Committee Member

    Messages:
    22,392
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    Background:
    In addition to the morbidity and mortality associated with acute infection, COVID-19 has been associated with persistent symptoms (>30 days), often referred to as Long COVID (LC). LC symptoms often cluster into phenotypes, resembling conditions such as fibromyalgia, postural orthostatic tachycardiac syndrome (POTS), and myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). LC clinics have been established to best address the needs of LC patients and continuity of care. We developed a cross-sectional survey to assess treatment response through our LC Clinic (LCC).

    Methods:
    A 25-question survey (1-10 Likert scale) was expert- and content-validated by LCC clinicians, patients, and patient advocates. The survey assessed LC symptoms and the helpfulness of different interventions, including medications and supplements. A total of 852 LCC patients were asked to complete the survey, with 536 (62.9%) responding.

    Results:
    The mean time from associated COVID-19 infection to survey completion was 23.2 ± 6.4 months. The mean age of responders was 52.3 ± 14.1 (63% females). Self-reported symptoms were all significantly improved (P < .001) from the initial visit to the LCC (baseline) to the time of the follow-up survey. However, only 4.5% (24/536) of patients rated all symptoms low (1-2) at the time of the survey, indicating low levels of full recovery in our cohort. The patients rated numerous interventions as being helpful, including low-dose naltrexone (45/77; 58%), vagal nerve stimulation (18/34; 53%), and fisetin (28/44; 64%).

    Conclusions:
    Patients report general improvements in symptoms following the initial LCC visit, but complete recovery rates remain low at 23.2 ± 6.4 months.

    Open access, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21501319241258671
     
  2. SNT Gatchaman

    SNT Gatchaman Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,001
    Location:
    Aotearoa New Zealand
  3. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    12,998
    Location:
    Canada
    Damn, it's rare to see this plainly stated rather than distorted. It's so rare and difficult to get basic details right out of medical research. It's still mind-boggling that complete amateurs still pretty much outperform almost everything we've seen so far from professionals. There's so much bias in medicine it's hard to understand how progress even happens other than through mostly random chance.
     

Share This Page