Long COVID and return to work: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has given rise to an increasing number of patients with 'long COVID'. Long COVID is the persistence of symptoms for weeks or months after an infection by SARS-CoV-2. It often impacts on the professional life of affected people. AIMS: The aim of this study is to understand the experiences and needs of people with long COVID in relation to their return to work. METHODS: A qualitative study, combining individual interviews and online forum discussions, was performed early 2021, as part of a larger mixed method study on the needs of long COVID patients in Belgium. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-four people participated in the study. Participants described various clinical symptoms precluding their return to work. They also face sceptical reactions from employers and colleagues and a lack of support from the social welfare system to facilitate their return to work. These barriers have various impacts, including psychological ones, likely to compromise the professional future of long COVID patients. CONCLUSIONS: While the analysis of patients' experiences shows variation in long COVID patients' experiences with return to work, it may help occupational physicians and healthcare practitioners to better take up their crucial role in the return to work of long COVID patients, including raising employers' and colleagues' awareness of the specific difficulties related to long COVID.

Pathophysiology and mechanism of long COVID: a comprehensive review.

BACKGROUND: After almost 2 years of fighting against SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the number of patients enduring persistent symptoms long after acute infection is a matter of concern. This set of symptoms was referred to as "long COVID", and it was defined more recently as "Post COVID-19 condition" by the World health Organization (WHO). Although studies have revealed that long COVID can manifest whatever the severity of inaugural illness, the underlying pathophysiology is still enigmatic. AIM: To conduct a comprehensive review to address the putative pathophysiology underlying the persisting symptoms of long COVID. METHOD: We searched 11 bibliographic databases (Cochrane Library, JBI EBP Database, Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, CINHAL, Ovid Nursing Database, Journals@Ovid, SciLit, EuropePMC, and CoronaCentral). We selected studies that put forward hypotheses on the pathophysiology, as well as those that encompassed long COVID patients in their research investigation. RESULTS: A total of 98 articles were included in the systematic review, 54 of which exclusively addressed hypotheses on pathophysiology, while 44 involved COVID patients. Studies that included patients displayed heterogeneity with respect to the severity of initial illness, timing of analysis, or presence of a control group. Although long COVID likely results from long-term organ damage due to acute-phase infection, specific mechanisms following the initial illness could contribute to the later symptoms possibly affecting many organs. As such, autonomic nervous system damage could account for many symptoms without clear evidence of organ damage. Immune dysregulation, auto-immunity, endothelial dysfunction, occult viral persistence, as well as coagulation activation are the main underlying pathophysiological mechanisms so far. CONCLUSION: Evidence on why persistent symptoms occur is still limited, and available studies are heterogeneous. Apart from long-term organ damage, many hints suggest that specific mechanisms following acute illness could be involved in long COVID symptoms. KEY MESSAGESLong-COVID is a multisystem disease that develops regardless of the initial disease severity. Its clinical spectrum comprises a wide range of symptoms.The mechanisms underlying its pathophysiology are still unclear. Although organ damage from the acute infection phase likely accounts for symptoms, specific long-lasting inflammatory mechanisms have been proposed, as well.Existing studies involving Long-COVID patients are highly heterogeneous, as they include patients with various COVID-19 severity levels and different time frame analysis, as well.

Cultural competence and social relationships: a social network analysis.

AIM: This study investigated the role of social relationships in the sharing of cultural competence by testing two hypotheses: cultural competence is a socially shared behaviour; and central healthcare professionals are more culturally competent than non-central healthcare professionals. BACKGROUND: Sustaining cultural competence in healthcare services relies on the assumption that being culturally competent is a socially shared behaviour among health professionals. This assumption has never been tested. INTRODUCTION: Organizational aspects surrounding cultural competence are poorly considered. This therefore leads to a heterogeneous implementation of cultural competence - especially in continental Europe. METHODS: We carried out a social network analysis in 24 Belgian inpatient and outpatient health services. All healthcare professionals (ego) were requested to fill in a questionnaire (Survey on social relationships of health care professionals) on their level of cultural competence and to identify their professional relationships (alter). We fitted regression models to assess whether (1) at the dyadic level, ego cultural competence was associated with alter cultural competence, and (2) health professionals of greater centrality had greater cultural competence. RESULTS: At the dyadic level, no significant associations were found between ego cultural competence and alter cultural competence, with the exception of subjective exposure to intercultural situations. No significant associations were found between centrality and cultural competence, except for subjective exposure to intercultural situations. DISCUSSION: Being culturally competent is not a shared behaviour among health professionals. The most central healthcare professionals are not more culturally competent than less central health professionals. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICIES: Culturally competent health care is not yet a norm in health services. Health care and training authorities should either make cultural competent health care a licensing criteria or reward culturally competent health care.

Health services and the treatment of immigrants: data on service use, interpreting services and immigrant staff members in services across Europe.

BACKGROUND: The number of immigrants using health services has increased across Europe. For assessing and improving the quality of care provided for immigrants, information is required on how many immigrants use services, what interpreting services are provided and whether staff members are from immigrant groups. METHODS: Structured interviews were conducted with 15 health services (9 primary care, 3 emergency departments, 3 mental health) located in areas with high immigrant populations in each of 16 European countries (n=240). Responses were collected on the availability of data on service use by immigrant patients, the provision of interpreting services and immigrant staff members. RESULTS: Data on service use by immigrants were recorded by only 15% of services. More than 40% of services did not provide any form of interpreting service and 54% of the services reported having no immigrant staff. Mental health services were more likely to use direct interpreting services, and both mental health and emergency services were more likely to have immigrant staff members. DISCUSSION: For assessing and improving the quality of care provided for immigrants, there is a need to improve the availability of data on service use by immigrants in health services throughout Europe and to provide more consistent access to interpreting services.