Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 11 de 11
Filter
1.
Eur Respir Rev ; 31(166)2022 Dec 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2098297

ABSTRACT

Persistent breathlessness >28 days after acute COVID-19 infection has been identified as a highly debilitating post-COVID symptom. However, the prevalence, risk factors, mechanisms and treatments for post-COVID breathlessness remain poorly understood. We systematically searched PubMed and Embase for relevant studies published from 1 January 2020 to 1 November 2021 (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021285733) and included 119 eligible papers. Random-effects meta-analysis of 42 872 patients with COVID-19 reported in 102 papers found an overall prevalence of post-COVID breathlessness of 26% (95% CI 23-29) when measuring the presence/absence of the symptom, and 41% (95% CI 34-48) when using Medical Research Council (MRC)/modified MRC dyspnoea scale. The pooled prevalence decreased significantly from 1-6 months to 7-12 months post-infection. Post-COVID breathlessness was more common in those with severe/critical acute infection, those who were hospitalised and females, and was less likely to be reported by patients in Asia than those in Europe or North America. Multiple pathophysiological mechanisms have been proposed (including deconditioning, restrictive/obstructive airflow limitation, systemic inflammation, impaired mental health), but the body of evidence remains inconclusive. Seven cohort studies and one randomised controlled trial suggested rehabilitation exercises may reduce post-COVID breathlessness. There is an urgent need for mechanistic research and development of interventions for the prevention and treatment of post-COVID breathlessness.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Female , Humans , Prevalence , Dyspnea/diagnosis , Dyspnea/epidemiology , Dyspnea/therapy , Risk Factors , Exercise Therapy
2.
EuropePMC; 2022.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-337044

ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of sotrovimab (a neutralising monoclonal antibody) vs. molnupiravir (an antiviral) in preventing severe COVID-19 outcomes in non-hospitalised high-risk COVID-19 adult patients. Design: With the approval of NHS England, we conducted a real-world cohort study using the OpenSAFELY-TPP platform. Setting: Patient-level electronic health record data were obtained from 24 million people registered with a general practice in England that uses TPP software. The primary care data were securely linked with data on COVID-19 infection and therapeutics, hospital admission and death within the OpenSAFELY-TPP platform, covering a period where both medications were frequently prescribed in community settings. Participants: Non-hospitalised adult COVID-19 patients at high-risk of severe outcomes treated with sotrovimab or molnupiravir between December 16, 2021 and February 10, 2022. Interventions: Sotrovimab or molnupiravir administered in the community by COVID-19 Medicine Delivery Units. Main outcome measure: COVID-19 related hospitalisation or COVID-19 related death within 28 days after treatment initiation. Results: Patients treated with sotrovimab (n=3288) and molnupiravir (n=2663) were similar with respect to most baseline characteristics. The mean age of all 5951 patients was 52 (SD=16) years;59% were female, 89% White and 87% had three or more COVID-19 vaccinations. Within 28 days after treatment initiation, 84 (1.4%) COVID-19 related hospitalisations/deaths were observed (31 treated with sotrovimab and 53 with molnupiravir). Cox proportional hazards models stratified by area showed that after adjusting for demographics, high-risk cohort categories, vaccination status, calendar time, body mass index and other comorbidities, treatment with sotrovimab was associated with a substantially lower risk than treatment with molnupiravir (hazard ratio, HR=0.53, 95% CI: 0.32-0.88;P=0.014). Consistent results were obtained from propensity score weighted Cox models (HR=0.51, 95% CI: 0.31-0.83;P=0.007) and when restricted to fully vaccinated people (HR=0.52, 95% CI: 0.30-0.90;P=0.020). No substantial effect modifications by other characteristics were detected (all P values for interaction>0.10). Conclusion: In routine care of non-hospitalised high-risk adult patients with COVID-19 in England, those who received sotrovimab were at lower risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes than those receiving molnupiravir.

3.
Pathogens ; 11(2)2022 Feb 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1705975

ABSTRACT

Emerging evidence has shown that COVID-19 survivors could suffer from persistent symptoms. However, it remains unclear whether these symptoms persist over the longer term. This study aimed to systematically synthesise evidence on post-COVID symptoms persisting for at least 12 months. We searched PubMed and Embase for papers reporting at least one-year follow-up results of COVID-19 survivors published by 6 November 2021. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to estimate pooled prevalence of specific post-COVID symptoms. Eighteen papers that reported one-year follow-up data from 8591 COVID-19 survivors were included. Fatigue/weakness (28%, 95% CI: 18-39), dyspnoea (18%, 95% CI: 13-24), arthromyalgia (26%, 95% CI: 8-44), depression (23%, 95% CI: 12-34), anxiety (22%, 95% CI: 15-29), memory loss (19%, 95% CI: 7-31), concentration difficulties (18%, 95% CI: 2-35), and insomnia (12%, 95% CI: 7-17) were the most prevalent symptoms at one-year follow-up. Existing evidence suggested that female patients and those with more severe initial illness were more likely to suffer from the sequelae after one year. This study demonstrated that a sizeable proportion of COVID-19 survivors still experience residual symptoms involving various body systems one year later. There is an urgent need for elucidating the pathophysiologic mechanisms and developing and testing targeted interventions for long-COVID patients.

4.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-323058

ABSTRACT

Background: Sleep quality is crucial for health and wellbeing in all ages and sleep abnormalities may contribute to multimorbidity in older adults. The impact of pandemic-related disruptions to sleep quality in older adults, particularly those deemed “clinically extremely vulnerable” to COVID-19-related complications (COVID-19CEV) remains unknown.Methods: In this cross-sectional study, conducted during the first UK lockdown (April- June 2020), we surveyed 5558 adults aged 50 years and over (of whom 523 met criteria for COVID-19CEV) with assessments of sleep quality, health/medical, lifestyle, psychosocial and sociodemographic factors. We identified associations between these factors and sleep quality and explored interactions of COVID-19CEV status with factors significantly associated with sleep quality to identify potential moderating variables.Findings: 37% of participants reported poor sleep quality which was associated with younger age, female sex and multimorbidity. Significant associations with poor sleep included, among health/medical factors: COVID-19CEV status, higher BMI, arthritis, pulmonary disease, and mental health disorders;.and the following lifestyle and psychosocial factors: living alone, higher alcohol consumption, an unhealthy diet and higher depressive and anxiety symptoms. r Moderators of the COVID-19CEV status - sleep quality relationship included marital status, loneliness, anxiety and diet. Within this subgroup, less anxious and less lonely males, as well as females with healthier diets, reported better sleep quality. Interpretation: Sleep quality in older adults was compromised during the sudden unprecedented nation-wide lockdown due to distinct health/medical, lifestyle and psychosocial factors. Male and female older adults with COVID-19CEV status may benefit from targeted mental health and dietary interventions, respectively. Results inform tailored interventions and policy for older adults deemed COVID-19CEV. Funding Information: This study was sponsored by Imperial College London and partly funded by the ICHT BRC.Declaration of Interests: Dr. Middleton reports clinical trial grants from Janssen R&D, Novartis and Takeda outside the submitted work. All authors declare no competing interests related to this study.Ethics Approval Statement: Data collected as in this study are anonymized and kept strictlyconfidential in accordance with the UK General Data Protection Regulations (2016). The CCRR study was ethically approved by the Imperial College London Joint Research Compliance Office (20IC5942) and by the Health Research Authority (16/EM/0213).

5.
EuropePMC; 2020.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-311948

ABSTRACT

Previous studies suggested that public trust in government is vital for implementations of social policies that rely on public's behavioural responses. This study examined associations of trust in government regarding COVID-19 control with recommended health behaviours and prosocial behaviours. Data from an international survey with representative samples (N=23,733) of 23 countries were analysed. Specification curve analysis showed that higher trust in government was significantly associated with higher adoption of health and prosocial behaviours in all reasonable specifications of multilevel linear models (median standardised β=0.173 and 0.244, P<0.001). We further used structural equation modelling to explore potential determinants of trust in government regarding pandemic control. Governments perceived as well organised, disseminating clear messages and knowledge on COVID-19, and perceived fairness were positively associated with trust in government (standardised β=0.358, 0.230, 0.055, and 0.250, P<0.01). These results highlighted the importance of trust in government in the control of COVID-19.

6.
Curr Opin Pulm Med ; 28(3): 174-179, 2022 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1672376

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Persistence of symptoms after acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), often described as long- COVID, is common and debilitating. In this article, we review the epidemiology, clinical features, and research priorities for long-COVID focusing on the respiratory system. RECENT FINDINGS: Breathlessness, cough and chest pain were the most commonly reported respiratory symptoms associated with long-COVID. In hospitalised patients, abnormalities on lung function testing or chest imaging were observed less commonly at 12 months compared to six months since discharge. Clinical assessment of patients with persisting symptoms after acute COVID-19 requires a comprehensive evaluation to exclude other possible causes for symptoms. With no robust current evidence for interventions to treat long-COVID respiratory symptoms, symptomatic treatment, supported self-management and pulmonary rehabilitation should be considered to help individuals with respiratory symptoms associated with long-COVID. SUMMARY: Long-COVID is a debilitating syndrome that often includes persisting respiratory symptoms and to a lesser degree, abnormalities in lung physiology or imaging. Respiratory features of long-COVID may reduce over time, yet resolution is not seen in all cases. Future research is needed to understand the natural history of long-COVID, identify factors associated with spontaneous improvement/persistence, investigate mechanisms for persisting symptoms, and test interventions to prevent and treat long-COVID.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cough , Humans , Respiratory System , SARS-CoV-2
7.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-296652

ABSTRACT

Background: There are currently no effective pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions for Long-COVID. To identify potential therapeutic targets, we focussed on previously described four recovery clusters five months after hospital discharge, their underlying inflammatory profiles and relationship with clinical outcomes at one year. Methods PHOSP-COVID is a prospective longitudinal cohort study, recruiting adults hospitalised with COVID-19 across the UK. Recovery was assessed using patient reported outcomes measures (PROMs), physical performance, and organ function at five-months and one-year after hospital discharge. Hierarchical logistic regression modelling was performed for patient-perceived recovery at one-year. Cluster analysis was performed using clustering large applications (CLARA) k-medoids approach using clinical outcomes at five-months. Inflammatory protein profiling from plasma at the five-month visit was performed. Findings 2320 participants have been assessed at five months after discharge and 807 participants have completed both five-month and one-year visits. Of these, 35.6% were female, mean age 58.7 (SD 12.5) years, and 27.8% received invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). The proportion of patients reporting full recovery was unchanged between five months 501/165 (25.6%) and one year 232/804 (28.9%). Factors associated with being less likely to report full recovery at one year were: female sex OR 0.68 (95% CI 0.46-0.99), obesity OR 0.50 (95%CI 0.34-0.74) and IMV OR 0.42 (95%CI 0.23-0.76). Cluster analysis (n=1636) corroborated the previously reported four clusters: very severe, severe, moderate/cognitive, mild relating to the severity of physical, mental health and cognitive impairments at five months in a larger sample. There was elevation of inflammatory mediators of tissue damage and repair in both the very severe and the moderate/cognitive clusters compared to the mild cluster including interleukin-6 which was elevated in both comparisons. Overall, there was a substantial deficit in median (IQR) EQ5D-5L utility index from pre-COVID (retrospective assessment) 0.88 (0.74-1.00), five months 0.74 (0.60-0.88) to one year: 0.74 (0.59-0.88), with minimal improvements across all outcome measures at one-year after discharge in the whole cohort and within each of the four clusters. Interpretation The sequelae of a hospital admission with COVID-19 remain substantial one year after discharge across a range of health domains with the minority in our cohort feeling fully recovered. Patient perceived health-related quality of life remains reduced at one year compared to pre-hospital admission. Systematic inflammation and obesity are potential treatable traits that warrant further investigation in clinical trials.

8.
Front Public Health ; 9: 753964, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526799

ABSTRACT

Background: Several studies have assessed the impact of COVID-19-related lockdowns on sleep quality across global populations. However, no study to date has specifically assessed at-risk populations, particularly those at highest risk of complications from coronavirus infection deemed "clinically-extremely-vulnerable-(COVID-19CEV)" (as defined by Public Health England). Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we surveyed 5,558 adults aged ≥50 years (of whom 523 met criteria for COVID-19CEV) during the first pandemic wave that resulted in a nationwide-lockdown (April-June 2020) with assessments of sleep quality (an adapted sleep scale that captured multiple sleep indices before and during the lockdown), health/medical, lifestyle, psychosocial and socio-demographic factors. We examined associations between these variables and sleep quality; and explored interactions of COVID-19CEV status with significant predictors of poor sleep, to identify potential moderating factors. Results: Thirty-seven percent of participants reported poor sleep quality which was associated with younger age, female sex and multimorbidity. Significant associations with poor sleep included health/medical factors: COVID-19CEV status, higher BMI, arthritis, pulmonary disease, and mental health disorders; and the following lifestyle and psychosocial factors: living alone, higher alcohol consumption, an unhealthy diet and higher depressive and anxiety symptoms. Moderators of the negative relationship between COVID-19CEV status and good sleep quality were marital status, loneliness, anxiety and diet. Within this subgroup, less anxious and less lonely males, as well as females with healthier diets, reported better sleep. Conclusions: Sleep quality in older adults was compromised during the sudden unprecedented nation-wide lockdown due to distinct modifiable factors. An important contribution of our study is the assessment of a "clinically-extremely-vulnerable" population and the sex differences identified within this group. Male and female older adults deemed COVID-19CEV may benefit from targeted mental health and dietary interventions, respectively. This work extends the available evidence on the notable impact of lack of social interactions during the COVID-19 pandemic on sleep, and provides recommendations toward areas for future work, including research into vulnerability factors impacting sleep disruption and COVID-19-related complications. Study results may inform tailored interventions targeted at modifiable risk factors to promote optimal sleep; additionally, providing empirical data to support health policy development in this area.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , Communicable Disease Control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Life Style , Male , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Determinants of Health , United Kingdom/epidemiology
9.
PLoS One ; 16(7): e0255373, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1334777

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Blood pressure (BP) categories are useful to simplify preventions in public health, and diagnostic and treatment approaches in clinical practice. Updated evidence about the associations of BP categories with cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and its subtypes is warranted. METHODS AND FINDINGS: About 0.5 million adults aged 30 to 79 years were recruited from 10 areas in China during 2004-2008. The present study included 430 977 participants without antihypertension treatment, cancer, or CVD at baseline. BP was measured at least twice in a single visit at baseline and CVD deaths during follow-up were collected via registries and the national health insurance databases. Multivariable Cox regression was used to estimate the associations between BP categories and CVD mortality. Overall, 16.3% had prehypertension-low, 25.1% had prehypertension-high, 14.1% had isolated systolic hypertension (ISH), 1.9% had isolated diastolic hypertension (IDH), and 9.1% had systolic-diastolic hypertension (SDH). During a median 10-year follow-up, 9660 CVD deaths were documented. Compared with normal, the hazard ratios (95% CI) of prehypertension-low, prehypertension-high, ISH, IDH, SDH for CVD were 1.10 (1.01-1.19), 1.32 (1.23-1.42), 2.04 (1.91-2.19), 2.20 (1.85-2.61), and 3.81 (3.54-4.09), respectively. All hypertension subtypes were related to the increased risk of CVD subtypes, with a stronger association for hemorrhagic stroke than for ischemic heart disease. The associations were stronger in younger than older adults. CONCLUSIONS: Prehypertension-high should be considered in CVD primary prevention given its high prevalence and increased CVD risk. All hypertension subtypes were independently associated with CVD and its subtypes mortality, though the strength of associations varied substantially.


Subject(s)
Blood Pressure , Hemorrhagic Stroke , Hypertension , Myocardial Ischemia , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , China/epidemiology , Disease-Free Survival , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Hemorrhagic Stroke/mortality , Hemorrhagic Stroke/physiopathology , Humans , Hypertension/mortality , Hypertension/physiopathology , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Ischemia/mortality , Myocardial Ischemia/physiopathology , Survival Rate
10.
Psychol Med ; : 1-11, 2021 Mar 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1152768

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The effective implementation of government policies and measures for controlling the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic requires compliance from the public. This study aimed to examine cross-sectional and longitudinal associations of trust in government regarding COVID-19 control with the adoption of recommended health behaviours and prosocial behaviours, and potential determinants of trust in government during the pandemic. METHODS: This study analysed data from the PsyCorona Survey, an international project on COVID-19 that included 23 733 participants from 23 countries (representative in age and gender distributions by country) at baseline survey and 7785 participants who also completed follow-up surveys. Specification curve analysis was used to examine concurrent associations between trust in government and self-reported behaviours. We further used structural equation model to explore potential determinants of trust in government. Multilevel linear regressions were used to examine associations between baseline trust and longitudinal behavioural changes. RESULTS: Higher trust in government regarding COVID-19 control was significantly associated with higher adoption of health behaviours (handwashing, avoiding crowded space, self-quarantine) and prosocial behaviours in specification curve analyses (median standardised ß = 0.173 and 0.229, p < 0.001). Government perceived as well organised, disseminating clear messages and knowledge on COVID-19, and perceived fairness were positively associated with trust in government (standardised ß = 0.358, 0.230, 0.056, and 0.249, p < 0.01). Higher trust at baseline survey was significantly associated with lower rate of decline in health behaviours over time (p for interaction = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These results highlighted the importance of trust in government in the control of COVID-19.

11.
J Affect Disord ; 284: 247-255, 2021 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1046352

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Although there are increasing concerns on mental health consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, no large-scale population-based studies have examined the associations of risk perception of COVID-19 with emotion and subsequent mental health. METHODS: This study analysed cross-sectional and longitudinal data from the PsyCorona Survey that included 54,845 participants from 112 countries, of which 23,278 participants are representative samples of 24 countries in terms of gender and age. Specification curve analysis (SCA) was used to examine associations of risk perception of COVID-19 with emotion and self-rated mental health. This robust method considers all reasonable model specifications to avoid subjective analytical decisions while accounting for multiple testing. RESULTS: All 162 multilevel linear regressions in the SCA indicated that higher risk perception of COVID-19 was significantly associated with less positive or more negative emotions (median standardised ß=-0.171, median SE=0.004, P<0.001). Specifically, regressions involving economic risk perception and negative emotions revealed stronger associations. Moreover, risk perception at baseline survey was inversely associated with subsequent mental health (standardised ß=-0.214, SE=0.029, P<0.001). We further used SCA to explore whether this inverse association was mediated by emotional distress. Among the 54 multilevel linear regressions of mental health on risk perception and emotion, 42 models showed a strong mediation effect, where no significant direct effect of risk perception was found after controlling for emotion (P>0.05). LIMITATIONS: Reliance on self-reported data. CONCLUSIONS: Risk perception of COVID-19 was associated with emotion and ultimately mental health. Interventions on reducing excessive risk perception and managing emotional distress could promote mental health.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Cross-Sectional Studies , Emotions , Humans , Mental Health , Perception , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL