Search

Abstract The importance of integrated care for complex, multiple long term conditions was acknowledged before the COVID pandemic but remained a challenge. The pandemic and consequent development of Long COVID required rapid adaptation of health services to address the population’s needs, requiring service redesigns including integrated care. This Delphi consensus study was conducted in the UK and found similar integrated care priorities for Long COVID and complex, multiple long term conditions, provided by 480 patients and health care providers, with an 80% consensus rate. The resultant recommendations were based on more than 1400 responses from survey participants and were supported by patients, health care professionals, and by patient charities. Participants identified the need to allocate resources to: support integrated care, provide access to care and treatments that work, provide diagnostic procedures that support the personalization of treatment in an integrated care environment, and enable structural consultation between primary and specialist care settings including physical and mental health care. Based on the findings we propose a model for delivering integrated care by a multidisciplinary team to people with complex multisystem conditions. These recommendations can inform improvements to integrated care for complex, multiple long term conditions and Long COVID at international level.

Objective To investigate current care for people with Long COVID in England.Design In-depth, semistructured interviews with people living with Long COVID and Long COVID healthcare professionals; data analysed using thematic analysis.Setting National Health Service England post-COVID-19 services in six clinics from November 2022 to July 2023.Participants 15 healthcare professionals and 21 people living with Long COVID currently attending or discharged (18 female; 3 male).Results Health professionals and people with lived experience highlighted the multifaceted nature of Long COVID, including its varied symptoms, its impact on people’s lives and the complexity involved in managing this condition. These impacts encompass physical, social, mental and environmental dimensions. People with Long COVID reported barriers in accessing primary care, as well as negative general practitioner consultations where they felt unheard or invalidated, though some positive interactions were also noted. Peer support or support systems proved highly valuable and beneficial for individuals, aiding their recovery and well-being. Post-COVID-19 services were viewed as spaces where overlooked voices found validation, offering more than medical expertise. Despite initial challenges, healthcare providers’ increasing expertise in diagnosing and treating Long COVID has helped refine care approaches for this condition.Conclusion Long COVID care in England is not uniform across all locations. Effective communication, specialised expertise and comprehensive support systems are crucial. A patient-centred approach considering the unique complexities of Long COVID, including physical, mental health, social and environmental aspects is needed. Sustained access to post-COVID-19 services is imperative, with success dependent on offering continuous rehabilitation beyond rapid recovery, acknowledging the condition’s enduring impacts and complexities.

Abstract Background and Aim Long Covid is often stigmatised, particularly in people who are disadvantaged within society. This may prevent them from seeking help and could lead to widening health inequalities. This coproduced study with a Community Advisory Board (CAB) of people with Long Covid aimed to understand healthcare and wider barriers and stigma experienced by people with probable Long Covid. Methods An active case finding approach was employed to find adults with probable, but not yet clinically diagnosed, Long Covid in two localities in London (Camden and Merton) and Derbyshire, England. Interviews explored the barriers to care and the stigma faced by participants and were analysed thematically. This study forms part of the STIMULATE‐ICP Collaboration. Findings Twenty‐three interviews were completed. Participants reported limited awareness of what Long Covid is and the available pathways to management. There was considerable self‐doubt among participants, sometimes reinforced by interactions with healthcare professionals (HCPs). Participants questioned their deservedness in seeking healthcare support for their symptoms. Hesitancy to engage with healthcare services was motivated by fear of needing more investigation and concerns regarding judgement about the ability to carry out caregiving responsibilities. It was also motivated by the complexity of the clinical presentation and fear of all symptoms being attributed to poor mental health. Participants also reported trying to avoid overburdening the health system. These difficulties were compounded by experiences of stigma and discrimination. The emerging themes reaffirmed a framework of epistemic injustice in relation to Long Covid, where creating, interpreting and conveying knowledge has varied credibility based on the teller's identity characteristics and/or the level of their interpretive resources. Conclusion We have codeveloped recommendations based on the findings. These include early signposting to services, dedicating protected time to listening to people with Long Covid, providing a holistic approach in care pathways, and working to mitigate stigma. Regardless of the diagnosis, people experiencing new symptoms must be encouraged to seek timely medical help. Clear public health messaging is needed among communities already disadvantaged by epistemic injustice to raise awareness of Long Covid, and to share stories that encourage seeking care and to illustrate the adverse effects of stigma. Patient or Public Contribution This study was coproduced with a CAB made up of 23 members including HCPs, people with lived experience of Long Covid and other stakeholders.

Abstract The pathogenesis of exercise intolerance and persistent fatigue which can follow an infection with the SARS‐CoV‐2 virus (“long COVID”) is not fully understood. Cases were recruited from a long COVID clinic (N = 32; 44 ± 12 years; 10 (31%) men), and age‐/sex‐matched healthy controls (HC) (N = 19; 40 ± 13 years; 6 (32%) men) from University College London staff and students. We assessed exercise performance, lung and cardiac function, vascular health, skeletal muscle oxidative capacity, and autonomic nervous system (ANS) function. Key outcome measures for each physiological system were compared between groups using potential outcome means (95% confidence intervals) adjusted for potential confounders. Long COVID participant outcomes were compared to normative values. When compared to HC, cases exhibited reduced oxygen uptake efficiency slope (1847 (1679, 2016) vs. 2176 (1978, 2373) mL/min, p = 0.002) and anaerobic threshold (13.2 (12.2, 14.3) vs. 15.6 (14.4, 17.2) mL/kg/min, p