Search

Background: Many patients with post COVID-19 condition (PCC) require healthcare services. However, qualitative studies indicate that patients with PCC encounter many barriers to healthcare access. This cross-sectional study aimed to determine how many PCC patients report barriers to healthcare access and which barriers are reported, and to explore differences between subgroups., Methods: Data were collected via an online survey from 10,462 adult patients with a confirmed or suspected COVID-19 infection in the Netherlands, who experienced persisting symptoms ≥ 3 months after the initial infection. To study self-perceived barriers, a list of eleven possible barriers was used, covering multiple aspects of healthcare access. Differences between subgroups based on sociodemographic characteristics, medical characteristics, PCC symptoms (fatigue, dyspnoea, cognitive problems, anxiety and depression), and healthcare use (general practitioner, paramedical professional, medical specialist, occupational physician and mental health professional) were studied through multivariable multinomial (0 vs. 1 vs. > 1 barrier) and binomial regression analyses (for each individual barrier)., Results: A total of 83.2% of respondents reported at least one barrier to healthcare access. Respondents reported a median of 2.0 (IQR = 3.0) barriers. The barriers "I didn't know who to turn to for help" (50.9%) and "No one with the right knowledge/skills was available" (36.8%) were most frequently reported. Respondents with younger age, higher educational level, not hospitalized during acute COVID-19 infection, longer disease duration, who had more severe PCC symptoms, and who did not consult an occupational physician or paramedical professional, were more likely to report barriers. Analyses per barrier showed that women were more likely to report financial and help-seeking barriers, while men were more likely to report barriers related to availability of care. Hospitalized respondents were less likely to report barriers related to availability of care, but not less likely to report financial or help-seeking barriers., Conclusions: This study shows that the majority of patients with PCC experiences barriers to healthcare access. Particular attention should be paid to younger, non-hospitalized patients with a long disease duration and severe PCC symptoms. Efforts to remove barriers should focus not only on improving availability of care, but also on helping patients navigate care pathways., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: Assess the effectiveness of sacral neuromodulation (SNM) versus personalized conservative treatment (PCT) in patients with refractory idiopathic slow-transit constipation (STC)., Background: Evidence on SNM for idiopathic STC is conflicting and of suboptimal methodological quality., Methods: The No.2-Trial was a multicenter, open-label, pragmatic, randomized trial performed in 2 Dutch hospitals. Sixty-seven patients with idiopathic STC, a defecation frequency <3 per week and refractory (ie, unresponsive) to maximal conservative (nonoperative) treatment were included. Exclusion criteria included outlet obstruction, rectal prolapse, and previous colon surgery. Patients were randomized (3:2) to SNM (n=41) or PCT (n=26) with randomization minimization between February 21, 2017 and March 12, 2020. In SNM patients, an implantable pulse generator was implanted after a successful 4-week test stimulation. PCT patients received conservative treatment such as laxatives or retrograde colonic irrigation. The primary outcome was treatment success (defined as average defecation frequency ≥3 per week) after 6 months. Secondary outcomes included constipation severity, fatigue, quality of life, and adverse events. Analysis was according to intention-to-treat., Results: After 6 months, 22 (53.7%) patients were successfully treated with SNM versus 1 (3.8%) patient with PCT (odds ratio 36.4, 95% CI 3.4-387.5, P =0.003). At 6 months, SNM patients reported lower constipation severity and fatigue scores ( P <0.001) and improved quality of life compared with PCT ( P <0.001). Eight serious adverse events (6 SNM, 2 PCT) and 78 adverse events (68 SNM, 10 PCT) were reported., Conclusions: SNM is a promising surgical treatment option in a homogeneous group of adults and adolescents with refractory idiopathic STC. No.2-Trial registered at ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02961582., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Objective: To determine work participation, social roles, and empowerment of QFS patients ≥10-year after infection., Methods: QFS patients ≥10-year after acute infection, who were of working age, participated in a cross-sectional survey study. Work participation, fulfilment of social roles, and empowerment outcomes were studied for the total population, as well as for subgroups based on employment type and current work status. Associations between empowerment, work and social roles were examined., Results: 291 participants were included. Of the 250 participants who had paid work before Q-fever, 80.4% stopped working or worked less hours due to QFS. For each social role, more than half of the participants (56.6-87.8%) spent less time on the role compared to before Q-fever. The median empowerment score was 41.0 (IQR: 37.0-44.0) out of 60. A higher empowerment score was significantly associated with lower odds of performing all social roles less due to QFS (OR = 0.871-0.933; p<0.001-0.026), except for parenting and informal care provision (p = 0.070-0.460). No associations were found between empowerment and current work status., Conclusion: Work participation and fulfilment of social roles is generally low in QFS patients. Many of the participants stopped working or are working less hours due to QFS, and most spent less time on social roles compared to before Q-fever. Minor variation was seen in total empowerment scores of participants; however, these slight differences were associated with the fulfilment of social roles, but not work participation. This new insight should be further explored in future studies., Competing Interests: ET, PT and DB were employed by Q-support. To ensure objectivity, they had no role in the data analyses and interpretation of results. The other authors declare no competing interests. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials., (Copyright: © 2024 Brus et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Aim: Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) is a minimally invasive treatment option for functional constipation. Evidence regarding its effectiveness is contradictory, driven by heterogeneous study populations and designs. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of SNM in children and adults with refractory idiopathic slow-transit constipation (STC)., Method: OVID Medline, OVID Embase, Cochrane Library, the KSR Evidence Database, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database and the International HTA Database were searched up to 25 May 2023. For effectiveness outcomes, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected. For safety outcomes, all study designs were selected. For cost-effectiveness outcomes, trial- and model-based economic evaluations were selected for review. Study selection, risk of bias and quality assessment, and data extraction were independently performed by two reviewers. For the intervention 'sacral neuromodulation' effectiveness outcomes included defaecation frequency and constipation severity. Safety and cost-effectiveness outcomes were, respectively, adverse events and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios., Results: Of 1390 records reviewed, 67 studies were selected for full-text screening. For effectiveness, one cross-over and one parallel-group RCT was included, showing contradictory results. Eleven studies on safety were included (four RCTs, three prospective cohort studies and four retrospective cohort studies). Overall infection rates varied between 0% and 22%, whereas reoperation rates varied between 0% and 29%. One trial-based economic evaluation was included, which concluded that SNM was not cost-effective compared with personalized conservative treatment at a time horizon of 6 months. The review findings are limited by the small number of available studies and the heterogeneity in terms of study populations, definitions of refractory idiopathic STC and study designs., Conclusion: Evidence for the (cost-)effectiveness of SNM in children and adults with refractory idiopathic STC is inconclusive. Reoperation rates of up to 29% were reported., (© 2024 The Authors. Colorectal Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Introduction: The variety, time patterns and long-term prognosis of persistent COVID-19 symptoms (long COVID-19) in patients who suffered from mild to severe acute COVID-19 are incompletely understood. Cohort studies will be combined to describe the prevalence of long COVID-19 symptoms, and to explore the pathophysiological mechanisms and impact on health-related quality of life. A prediction model for long COVID-19 will be developed and internally validated to guide care in future patients., Methods and Analysis: Data from seven COVID-19 cohorts will be aggregated in the longitudinal multiple cohort CORona Follow Up (CORFU) study. CORFU includes Dutch patients who suffered from COVID-19 at home, were hospitalised without or with intensive care unit treatment, needed inpatient or outpatient rehabilitation and controls who did not suffer from COVID-19. Individual cohort study designs were aligned and follow-up has been synchronised. Cohort participants will be followed up for a maximum of 24 months after acute infection. Next to the clinical characteristics measured in individual cohorts, the CORFU questionnaire on long COVID-19 outcomes and determinants will be administered digitally at 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months after the infection. The primary outcome is the prevalence of long COVID-19 symptoms up to 2 years after acute infection. Secondary outcomes are health-related quality of life (eg, EQ-5D), physical functioning, and the prevalence of thromboembolic complications, respiratory complications, cardiovascular diseases and endothelial dysfunction. A prediction model and a patient platform prototype will be developed., Ethics and Dissemination: Approval was obtained from the medical research ethics committee of Maastricht University Medical Center+ and Maastricht University (METC 2021-2990) and local committees of the participating cohorts. The project is supported by ZonMW and EuroQol Research Foundation. Results will be published in open access peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at (inter)national conferences., Trial Registration Number: NCT05240742., Competing Interests: Competing interests: BCTvB, BH, BLJHK, JH, DK, EB, EBNJJ, GJB, ICCvdH, JH, JWLC, LHW, MSJNW, MW, RW, SCMH, SMJK, SvS and BH declare no competing interests. FAK received research support from Bayer, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, MSD, Daiichi-Sankyo, Actelion, Boston Scientific, The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMW), The Dutch Thrombosis Association, and The Dutch Heart Foundation. FWA is supported by the National Institute of Health Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre. For the CAPACITY-COVID cohort participating in CORFU, FWA and ML received support from Dutch Heart Foundation (2020B006 CAPACITY) an The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMW) (grant number 10430102110006 DEFENCE). HTC received support from Bayer, received consulting fees from Pfizer, Leo, Alveron, Viatris, Astra Zeneca, and Galapagos, and has stock (options) in Coagulation Profile. KV has royalities or licences for Philips, Medtronic, Abbott, and Biosense Webster, received consulting fees from Philips, Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic, and has a role in the European Heart Rhythm Association congress organization and digital committee. MDdK received a presentation fee from Glaxo Smith Kline. ML is supported by the Alexandre Suerman Stipend of the University Medical Center Utrecht., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background and Aim: Standardizing evaluative outcomes and their assessment facilitates comparisons between clinical studies and provides a basis for comparing direct effects of different treatment options. The aim of this study was to systematically review types of outcomes and measurement instruments used in studies regarding treatment options for slow-transit constipation (STC) in adults., Methods: In this systematic review of the literature, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO from inception through February 2018, for papers assessing any STC treatment in adult patients. Outcomes were systematically extracted and categorized in domains using the conceptual framework of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology filter 2.0. Outcome reporting was stratified by decade of publication, intervention, and study type., Results: Forty-seven studies were included in this systematic review. Fifty-nine different types of outcomes were identified. The outcomes were structured in three core areas and 18 domains. The most commonly reported domains were defecation functions (94%), gastrointestinal transit (53%), and health-care service use (51%). The most frequently reported outcomes were defecation frequency (83%), health-related quality of life (43%), and adverse events and complications (43%). In 62% of the studies, no primary outcome was defined, whereas in two studies, more than one primary outcomes were selected. A wide diversity of measurement instruments was used to assess the reported outcomes., Conclusion: Outcomes reported in studies on STC in adults are heterogeneous. A lack of standardization complicates comparisons between studies. Developing a core outcome set for STC in adults could contribute to standardization of outcome reporting in (future) studies., (© 2019 The Authors. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology published by Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Purpose: The evidence regarding the (cost-)effectiveness of sacral neuromodulation (SNM) in patients with therapy-resistant idiopathic slow-transit constipation is of suboptimal quality. The Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports has granted conditional reimbursement for SNM treatment. The objective is to assess the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and budget impact of SNM compared to personalized conservative treatment (PCT) in patients with idiopathic slow-transit constipation refractory to conservative treatment., Methods: This study is an open-label, multicenter randomized controlled trial. Patients aged 14 to 80 with slow-transit constipation, a defecation frequency (DF) < 3 per week and meeting at least one other Rome-IV criterion, are eligible. Patients with obstructed outlet, irritable bowel syndrome, bowel pathology, or rectal prolapse are excluded. Patients are randomized to SNM or PCT. The primary outcome is success at 6 months (DF ≥ 3 a week), requiring a sample size of 64 (α = 0.05, β = 0.80, 30% difference in success). Secondary outcomes are straining, sense of incomplete evacuation, constipation severity, fatigue, constipation specific and generic quality of life, and costs at 6 months. Long-term costs and effectiveness will be estimated by a decision analytic model. The time frame is 57 months, starting October 2016. SNM treatment costs are funded by the Dutch conditional reimbursement program, research costs by Medtronic., Conclusions: The results of this trial will be used to make a final decision regarding reimbursement of SNM from the Dutch Health Care Package in this patient group., Trial Registration: This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov , identifier NCT02961582, on 12 October 2016.