Post-COVID-19 assessment in a specialist clinical service: a 12-month, single-centre, prospective study in 1325 individuals.

INTRODUCTION: Post-COVID-19 complications require simultaneous characterisation and management to plan policy and health system responses. We describe the 12-month experience of the first UK dedicated post-COVID-19 clinical service to include hospitalised and non-hospitalised patients. METHODS: In a single-centre, observational analysis, we report the demographics, symptoms, comorbidities, investigations, treatments, functional recovery, specialist referral and rehabilitation of 1325 individuals assessed at the University College London Hospitals post-COVID-19 service between April 2020 and April 2021, comparing by referral route: posthospitalised (PH), non-hospitalised (NH) and post emergency department (PED). Symptoms associated with poor recovery or inability to return to work full time were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: 1325 individuals were assessed (PH: 547, 41.3%; PED: 212, 16%; NH: 566, 42.7%). Compared with the PH and PED groups, the NH group were younger (median 44.6 (35.6-52.8) years vs 58.3 (47.0-67.7) years and 48.5 (39.4-55.7) years), more likely to be female (68.2%, 43.0% and 59.9%), less likely to be of ethnic minority (30.9%, 52.7% and 41.0%) or seen later after symptom onset (median (IQR): 194 (118-298) days, 69 (51-111) days and 76 (55-128) days; all p<0.0001). All groups had similar rates of onward specialist referral (NH 18.7%, PH 16.1% and PED 18.9%, p=0.452) and were more likely to require support for breathlessness (23.7%, 5.5% and 15.1%, p<0.001) and fatigue (17.8%, 4.8% and 8.0%, p<0.001). Hospitalised patients had higher rates of pulmonary emboli, persistent lung interstitial abnormalities and other organ impairment. 716 (54.0%) individuals reported <75% optimal health (median 70%, IQR 55%-85%). Less than half of employed individuals could return to work full time at first assessment. CONCLUSION: Post-COVID-19 symptoms were significant in PH and NH patients, with significant ongoing healthcare needs and utilisation. Trials of interventions and patient-centred pathways for diagnostic and treatment approaches are urgently required.

A double-blind randomised controlled trial of protein supplementation to enhance exercise capacity in COPD during pulmonary rehabilitation: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary rehabilitation is a cost-effective management strategy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) which improves exercise performance and health-related quality of life. Nutritional supplementation may counter malnutrition and enhance pulmonary rehabilitation outcomes but rigorous evidence is absent. We aimed to investigate the effect of high-protein supplementation (Fortisip Compact Protein (FCP)) during pulmonary rehabilitation on exercise capacity. METHODS: This was a double-blind randomised controlled trial comparing FCP (intervention) with PreOp (a carbohydrate control supplement) in COPD patients participating in a pulmonary rehabilitation programme. Participants consumed the supplement twice a day during pulmonary rehabilitation and attended twice-weekly pulmonary rehabilitation sessions, with pre- and post-pulmonary rehabilitation measurements, including the incremental shuttle walk test (ISWT) distance at 6 weeks as the primary outcome. Participants' experience using supplements was assessed. RESULTS: 68 patients were recruited (intervention n=36 and control n=32). The trial was stopped early due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Although statistical significance was not reached, there was the suggestion of a clinically meaningful difference in the ISWT distance at 6 weeks favouring the intervention group (intervention 342±149 m (n=22) versus control 305±148 m (n=22); p=0.1). Individuals who achieved an improvement in the ISWT had a larger mid-thigh circumference at baseline (responders 62±4 cm versus nonresponders 55±6 cm; p=0.006). 79% of the patients were satisfied with the taste and 43% would continue taking the FCP. CONCLUSIONS: Although the data did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in the ISWT, high-protein supplementation in COPD during pulmonary rehabilitation may result in a clinically meaningful improvement in exercise capacity and was acceptable to patients. Large, adequately powered studies are justified.

Operational Modeling with Health Economics to Support Decision Making for COPD Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of interventions for improving the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), specifically increased use of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) on patient outcomes and cost-benefit analysis. DATA SOURCES: We used the national Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) datasets in England, local data and experts from the hospital setting, National Prices and National Tariffs, reports and the literature around the effectiveness of PR programs. STUDY DESIGN: The COPD pathway was modeled using discrete event simulation (DES) to capture the patient pathway to an adequate level of detail as well as randomness in the real world. DES was further enhanced by the integration of a health economic model to calculate the net benefit and cost of treating COPD patients based on key sets of interventions. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: A total of 150 input parameters and 75 distributions were established to power the model using the HES dataset, outpatient activity data from the hospital and community services, and the literature. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The simulation model showed that increasing referral to PR (by 10%, 20%, or 30%) would be cost-effective (with a benefit-cost ratio of 5.81, 5.95, and 5.91, respectively) by having a positive impact on patient outcomes and operational metrics. Number of deaths, admissions, and bed days decreased (ie, by 3.56 patients, 4.90 admissions, and 137.31 bed days for a 30% increase in PR referrals) as well as quality of life increased (ie, by 5.53 QALY among 1540 patients for the 30% increase). CONCLUSIONS: No operational model, either statistical or simulation, has previously been developed to capture the COPD patient pathway within a hospital setting. To date, no model has investigated the impact of PR on COPD services, such as operations, key performance, patient outcomes, and cost-benefit analysis. The study will support policies around extending availability of PR as a major intervention.

Pulmonary rehabilitation, physical activity and aortic stiffness in COPD.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have elevated cardiovascular risk, and cardiovascular disease is a major cause of death in COPD. The current literature indicates that changes in cardiovascular risk during pulmonary rehabilitation (assessed using aortic stiffness) are heterogeneous suggesting that there may be sub-groups of patients who do and do not benefit. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the characteristics of COPD patients who do and do not experience aortic stiffness reduction during pulmonary rehabilitation, examine how changes relate to physical activity and exercise capacity, and assess whether changes in aortic stiffness are maintained at 6 weeks following rehabilitation. METHODS: We prospectively measured arterial stiffness (aortic pulse-wave velocity), exercise capacity (Incremental Shuttle Walk Test) and physical activity (daily step count) in 92 COPD patients who started a six week pulmonary rehabilitation programme, 54 of whom completed rehabilitation, and 29 of whom were re-assessed six weeks later. RESULTS: Whilst on average there was no influence of pulmonary rehabilitation on aortic stiffness (pre- vs. post pulse-wave velocity 11.3 vs. 11.1 m/s p = 0.34), 56% patients responded with a significant reduction in aortic stiffness. Change in aortic stiffness (absolute and/or percentage) during rehabilitation was associated with both increased physical activity (rho = - 0.30, p = 0.042) and change in exercise capacity (rho = - 0.32, p = 0.02), but in multivariable analysis most closely with physical activity. 92% of the responders who attended maintained this response six weeks later. CONCLUSION: Elevated aortic stiffness in COPD is potentially modifiable in a subgroup of patients during pulmonary rehabilitation and is associated with increased physical activity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03003208. Registered 26/12/ 2016.