Royal Society of Medicine, Colt Foundation Research & Clinical Innovation Meeting 2022

Correspondence to Wg Cdr Robert M Barker-Davies, Academic Department of Military Rehabilitation, Defence Medical Rehabilitation Centre Stanford Hall, Loughborough, LE12 5BR, UK;Robert.barker-davies@nhs.net The Royal Society of Medicine (RSM–Military Medicine Section), Colt Foundation Research & Clinical Innovation Meeting has been at the core of Defence Medical Services (DMS) academic activity since its inception in 2007. Initially, the meeting sought submissions from medical officers, typically undertaking higher degrees, but in recent years the scope of the meeting has been broadened to include all healthcare professional disciplines.1 2 This reflects the strategic directions of both UK Healthcare and the DMS towards greater interdisciplinary healthcare delivery models and integrated research3 in which shared role understanding and supportive team structures have been identified as themes that promote collaborative success in military medical teams.4 The top six s for the Colt Research prize, published here in BMJ Military Health, reflect this diversity as they span several disciplines and both academic and Defence institutions. [...]we heard from Captain Kat Matthews, army physiotherapist and professional triathlete.

Cardiopulmonary, functional, cognitive and mental health outcomes post covid, across the range of severity of acute illness, in a physically active working age population: baseline findings from the MCOVID study

BackgroundThe medium-long impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on active populations is yet to be fully understood, with potential individual and operational impact on military service personnel (SP). The M-COVID study was established to investigate cardiopulmonary, functional, cognitive, and mental health post-COVID-19 SP outcomes, across the spectrum of acute COVID-19 severity.MethodObservational four-cohort study;hospitalised, community-based illness with on-going symptoms (communitysymptomatic), community-based illness now recovered (community-recovered) and age, sex, job-role matched control. Participants underwent extensive clinical assessment involving cardiopulmonary imaging, submaximal and maximal exercise testing, pulmonary function, cognitive assessment, blood tests, electrocardiogram and questionnaires on mental health and physical function.Results113 participants (aged 39±9, 86% male) were recruited;Hospitalised (n=35), community-symptomatic (n=34), community-recovered (n=18) and control (n=26), 159±72 days following acute illness. Hospitalised and community-symptomatic groups were older (p=0.003), with a higher body mass index (p<0.001), and worse mental health (anxiety,p=0.011;depression,p<0.001;post-traumatic stress, p<0.001), fatigue (p<0.001), and quality of life scores (p=0.001), with a mean of 2±2 and 2±1 symptoms, respectively. Hospitalised and community-symptomatic participants also performed less well on sub-maximal (p<0.001) and maximal exercise testing, with hospitalised individuals displaying impaired ventilatory efficiency (p<0.001), less work at the anaerobic threshold and at peak (both p<0.001), and significantly reduced forced vital capacity (p=0.004). Clinically significant abnormal cardiopulmonary imaging findings were present in 6% of hospitalised participants, lower than those seen in other studies. Those who recovered from communitybased, mild-moderate COVID-19 had no significant differences from controls on any parameter.ConclusionsRecovered SP who suffered mild-moderate COVID-19 do not differ from an age, sex and job-role matched controls. This is reassuring for the vast majority of individuals who have had acute COVID-19 not requiring hospital management. Individuals who were hospitalised or continue to suffer symptoms may require a specific, comprehensive clinical and occupational assessment prior to a full return to duty.

Reduced athletic performance post-COVID-19 is associated with reduced anaerobic threshold.

Detailed characterisation of cardiopulmonary limitations in patients post-COVID-19 is currently limited, particularly in elite athletes. A male elite distance runner in his late 30s experienced chest pain following confirmed COVID-19. He underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) at 5 months postacute illness. Subjective exercise tolerance was reduced compared with normal, he described inability to 'kick' (rapidly accelerate). His CPET was compared with an identical protocol 15 months prior to COVID-19. While supranormal maximal oxygen uptake was maintained (155% of peak predicted V̇O2) anaerobic threshold (AT), a better predictor of endurance performance, reduced from 84% to 71% predicted peak V̇O2 maximum. Likewise, fat oxidation at AT reduced by 21%, from 0.35 to 0.28 g/min. Focusing exclusively on V̇O2 maximum risks missing an impairment of oxidative metabolism. Reduced AT suggests a peripheral disorder of aerobic metabolism. This finding may result from virally mediated mitochondrial dysfunction beyond normal 'deconditioning', associated with impaired fat oxidation.

Exercise tolerance, fatigue, mental health, and employment status at 5 and 12 months following COVID-19 illness in a physically trained population.

Failure to recover following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) may have a profound impact on individuals who participate in high-intensity/volume exercise as part of their occupation/recreation. The aim of this study was to describe the longitudinal cardiopulmonary exercise function, fatigue, and mental health status of military-trained individuals (up to 12-mo postinfection) who feel recovered, and those with persistent symptoms from two acute disease severity groups (hospitalized and community-managed), compared with an age-, sex-, and job role-matched control. Eighty-eight participants underwent cardiopulmonary functional tests at baseline (5 mo following acute illness) and 12 mo; 25 hospitalized with persistent symptoms (hospitalized-symptomatic), 6 hospitalized and recovered (hospitalized-recovered); 28 community-managed with persistent symptoms (community-symptomatic); 12 community-managed, now recovered (community-recovered), and 17 controls. Cardiopulmonary exercise function and mental health status were comparable between the 5 and 12-mo follow-up. At 12 mo, symptoms of fatigue (48% and 46%) and shortness of breath (SoB; 52% and 43%) remain high in hospitalized-symptomatic and community-symptomatic groups, respectively. At 12 mo, COVID-19-exposed participants had a reduced capacity for work at anaerobic threshold and at peak exercise levels of deconditioning persist, with many individuals struggling to return to strenuous activity. The prevalence considered "fully fit" at 12 mo was lowest in symptomatic groups (hospitalized-symptomatic, 4%; hospitalized-recovered, 50%; community-symptomatic, 18%; community-recovered, 82%; control, 82%) and 49% of COVID-19-exposed participants remained medically nondeployable within the British Armed Forces. For hospitalized and symptomatic individuals, cardiopulmonary exercise profiles are consistent with impaired metabolic efficiency and deconditioning at 12 mo postacute illness. The long-term deployability status of COVID-19-exposed military personnel is uncertain.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Subjective exercise limiting symptoms such as fatigue and shortness of breath reduce but remain prevalent in symptomatic groups. At 12 mo, COVID-19-exposed individuals still have a reduced capacity for work at the anaerobic threshold (which best predicts sustainable intensity), despite oxygen uptake comparable to controls. The prevalence of COVID-19-exposed individuals considered "medically non-deployable" remains high at 47%.

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.

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.

High-Volume Image-Guided Injections in Achilles and Patellar Tendinopathy in a Young Active Military Population: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: Chronic Achilles and patellar tendinopathy are a significant burden in physically active populations. High-volume image-guided injection (HVIGI) proposes to strip away associated neovascularity, disrupt painful nerve ingrowth, and facilitate rehabilitation. Purpose: To investigate the efficacy of HVIGI with and without steroid relative to placebo. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: A total of 62 participants were recruited between May 25, 2016, and March 5, 2020. Participants were men aged 18 to 55 years with Achilles or patellar tendinopathy of at least 6-month chronicity that had not improved with nonoperative management (including physical therapy and shockwave therapy), with ultrasound evidence of neovascularization, tendon thickening, and echogenic changes. They were assigned to the following groups: control (3 mL of subcutaneous 0.5% bupivacaine), HVIGI (10 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine and 30 mL of normal saline, ultrasound-guided between tendon and underlying fat pad), or HVIGI with steroid (HVIGIwSteroid; 0.25 mL of 100 mg/mL hydrocortisone). Clinicians and assessors were blinded. All participants were supervised through a pain-guided progressive loading program for 6 months postinjection. The main outcome measures were the Victoria Institute of Sport Assessments (VISA) for Achilles and patellar tendinopathy and the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain at 6 months postinjection. Results: The VISA score improved by a mean of 22.8 points (95% CI, 10.4-35.3 points; effect size [ES], 1.51) in the control group (n = 21), 18.6 points (95% CI, 9.1-28.0 points; ES, 1.31) in the HVIGI group (n = 21), and 18.5 points (95% CI, 3.4-33.6 points; ES, 0.88) in the HVIGIwSteroid group (n = 20). VAS pain improved by a mean of 15 points (interquartile range [IQR], -38.75, 8 points; ES, 0.39) in controls, 13 points (IQR,-34.0, 3.75 points; ES, 0.47) in the HVIGI group, and 27 points (IQR,-38.0, -1.0 points; ES, 0.54) in the HVIGIwSteroid group. The main effects were significant for time (P < .001) but not group (P ≥ .48), with no group × time interaction (P = .71). One participant was lost to follow-up from each group, multiple imputation was used for missing data points. No adverse events occurred. Conclusion: Study findings did not demonstrate superiority of HVIGI over control injection. Registration: EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT: 2015-003587-36).

The Stanford Hall consensus statement for post-COVID-19 rehabilitation.

The highly infectious and pathogenic novel coronavirus (CoV), severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV-2, has emerged causing a global pandemic. Although COVID-19 predominantly affects the respiratory system, evidence indicates a multisystem disease which is frequently severe and often results in death. Long-term sequelae of COVID-19 are unknown, but evidence from previous CoV outbreaks demonstrates impaired pulmonary and physical function, reduced quality of life and emotional distress. Many COVID-19 survivors who require critical care may develop psychological, physical and cognitive impairments. There is a clear need for guidance on the rehabilitation of COVID-19 survivors. This consensus statement was developed by an expert panel in the fields of rehabilitation, sport and exercise medicine (SEM), rheumatology, psychiatry, general practice, psychology and specialist pain, working at the Defence Medical Rehabilitation Centre, Stanford Hall, UK. Seven teams appraised evidence for the following domains relating to COVID-19 rehabilitation requirements: pulmonary, cardiac, SEM, psychological, musculoskeletal, neurorehabilitation and general medical. A chair combined recommendations generated within teams. A writing committee prepared the consensus statement in accordance with the appraisal of guidelines research and evaluation criteria, grading all recommendations with levels of evidence. Authors scored their level of agreement with each recommendation on a scale of 0-10. Substantial agreement (range 7.5-10) was reached for 36 recommendations following a chaired agreement meeting that was attended by all authors. This consensus statement provides an overarching framework assimilating evidence and likely requirements of multidisciplinary rehabilitation post COVID-19 illness, for a target population of active individuals, including military personnel and athletes.