Persisting Symptoms After COVID-19-Prevalence and Risk Factors in a Population-Based Cohort, 2022, Förster et al

Abstract

Background: After recovering from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a considerable number of patients report long-term sequelae. The epidemiologic data vary widely in the studies published to date, depending on the study design and the patient cohorts analyzed. Using a population-based approach, we report symptoms and clinical characteristics following COVID-19 (long COVID), focusing on symptoms ≥12 weeks (post-COVID-19).

Methods: In three German administrative districts, all adult patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 confirmed by PCR between March and September 2020 (n = 4632) were invited to complete a questionnaire. Predictors for post-COVID-19 were identified by multiple ordinal regression analysis. Study registration: DRKS00023069.

Results: A total of 1459 patients were included in the study, 175 (12%) of whom had been hospitalized for treatment of the acute phase of COVID-19. The prevalence of post-COVID-19 was 72.6% (n = 127) and 46.2% (n = 588) for hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients, respectively. The most frequent long-term symptoms were fatigue (41.5% of all symptoms ≥12 weeks, n = 297), physical exhaustion (40.8%, n = 292), difficulty in concentrating (30.6%, n = 219), ageusia (25.9%, n = 185), and anosmia (25.5%, n = 182). Quality of life was significantly impaired in patients with post-COVID-19. The strongest risk factors for post-COVID-19 were female sex, overall severity of comorbidities, and severity of acute COVID-19.

Conclusion: Patients who are not hospitalized also frequently experience continued symptoms following COVID-19. The heterogeneity of symptoms calls for a multidisciplinary stepped-care approach, for which identification of patients at risk is crucial. A limitation of the study is the lack of a control group.

English language abstract, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35236547/
"For technical reasons, the English full text will be published approximately two weeks after the German print edition has been published.", https://www.aerzteblatt.de/int/archive/article/223765

 

Is it possible for anyone to undertake any form of medical research without concluding a need for multidisciplinary management regardless of the fact that the study may not tell us anything about the need for or the effectiveness of any specific management strategy?

 

"multidisciplinary management" are just the normal buzz words of the last decade or so basically not my problem someone else must do something . as far as i am concerned a multidisciplinary team means no individual takes on responsibility for the patient buck passing at its finest .

 

This is not a population based cohort - that would require prospective inclusion of healthy people who never had COVID in the first place.