Search

Introduction: Abnormal cardiorespiratory symptoms and investigative findings in service personnel typically result in prolonged investigation and occupational restriction. This analysis aimed to assess the impact of the O xford M ilitary Cardiopulmonary E xercise Testing C linic (OMEC), which investigates such symptoms and findings, on occupational recommendations., Methods: A service evaluation was conducted on all OMEC attendances over a 5-year period. Referral indication and occupational grading, demographics, exercise testing parameters, clinical diagnosis and occupational recommendation were recorded., Results: 141 individuals were reviewed. Mean age was 36 (±11.3) years, and 91% were male. Median waiting time for an appointment was 14.4 weeks (cf NHS 17.4 weeks).Individuals were referred for dyspnoea (22.1%), syncope (11.4%), chest pain (8.1%) (referred to as 'higher risk' symptom group), and pre-syncope (8.1%), palpitations (8.1%), and fatigue and/or exercise intolerance (6.0%) (referred to as 'lower risk' symptom group). 34% were asymptomatic with incidental findings on cardiac screening investigations. Reduced exercise capacity was rare, affecting only 11% of individuals, which was borderline/mild at worst.Median peak VO 2 (as a percentage of the predicted peak) was lower in the higher-risk symptom group than in the lower-risk symptom group (97.8% vs 121%; p<0.001). This was also seen for median workload as %PP (82.6% vs 98.0%; p<0.001). 80.5% of patients were given an immediate occupational recommendation; 78% of which were favourable outcomes (ie, a recommended occupational upgrade (72%) or to remain fully deployable (6%))., Conclusion: OMEC is tailored to the unique needs of the military population, providing outcomes that support operational requirements. Despite geographical distribution and operational commitments, OMEC waiting time is equivalent to the NHS, with the great majority of patients upgraded after attendance. These findings establish OMEC as a benchmark for military-specific clinical services based in public (NHS) hospitals, highlighting its role in facilitating rapid and effective occupational management., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2025. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ Group.)

Objective: Post-COVID-19 syndrome presents a health and economic challenge affecting ~10% of patients recovering from COVID-19. Accurate assessment of patients with post-COVID-19 syndrome is complicated by health anxiety and coincident symptomatic autonomic dysfunction. We sought to determine whether either symptoms or objective cardiopulmonary exercise testing could predict clinically significant findings., Methods: 113 consecutive military patients were assessed in a comprehensive clinical pathway. This included symptom reporting, history, examination, spirometry, echocardiography and cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) in all, with chest CT, dual-energy CT pulmonary angiography and cardiac MRI where indicated. Symptoms, CPET findings and presence/absence of significant pathology were reviewed. Data were analysed to identify diagnostic strategies that may be used to exclude significant disease., Results: 7/113 (6%) patients had clinically significant disease adjudicated by cardiothoracic multidisciplinary team (MDT). These patients had reduced fitness (V̇O 2 26.7 (±5.1) vs 34.6 (±7.0) mL/kg/min; p=0.002) and functional capacity (peak power 200 (±36) vs 247 (±55) W; p=0.026) compared with those without significant disease. Simple CPET criteria (oxygen uptake (V̇O 2 ) >100% predicted and minute ventilation (VE)/carbon dioxide elimination (V̇CO 2 ) slope <30.0 or VE/V̇CO 2 slope <35.0 in isolation) excluded significant disease with sensitivity and specificity of 86% and 83%, respectively (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) 0.89). The addition of capillary blood gases to estimate alveolar-arterial gradient improved diagnostic performance to 100% sensitivity and 78% specificity (AUC 0.92). Symptoms and spirometry did not discriminate significant disease., Conclusions: In a population recovering from SARS-CoV-2, there is reassuringly little organ pathology. CPET and functional capacity testing, but not reported symptoms, permit the exclusion of clinically significant disease., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Failure to recover following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) may have a profound impact on individuals who participate in high-intensity/volume exercise as part of their occupation/recreation. The aim of this study was to describe the longitudinal cardiopulmonary exercise function, fatigue, and mental health status of military-trained individuals (up to 12-mo postinfection) who feel recovered, and those with persistent symptoms from two acute disease severity groups (hospitalized and community-managed), compared with an age-, sex-, and job role-matched control. Eighty-eight participants underwent cardiopulmonary functional tests at baseline (5 mo following acute illness) and 12 mo; 25 hospitalized with persistent symptoms (hospitalized-symptomatic), 6 hospitalized and recovered (hospitalized-recovered); 28 community-managed with persistent symptoms (community-symptomatic); 12 community-managed, now recovered (community-recovered), and 17 controls. Cardiopulmonary exercise function and mental health status were comparable between the 5 and 12-mo follow-up. At 12 mo, symptoms of fatigue (48% and 46%) and shortness of breath (SoB; 52% and 43%) remain high in hospitalized-symptomatic and community-symptomatic groups, respectively. At 12 mo, COVID-19-exposed participants had a reduced capacity for work at anaerobic threshold and at peak exercise levels of deconditioning persist, with many individuals struggling to return to strenuous activity. The prevalence considered "fully fit" at 12 mo was lowest in symptomatic groups (hospitalized-symptomatic, 4%; hospitalized-recovered, 50%; community-symptomatic, 18%; community-recovered, 82%; control, 82%) and 49% of COVID-19-exposed participants remained medically nondeployable within the British Armed Forces. For hospitalized and symptomatic individuals, cardiopulmonary exercise profiles are consistent with impaired metabolic efficiency and deconditioning at 12 mo postacute illness. The long-term deployability status of COVID-19-exposed military personnel is uncertain. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Subjective exercise limiting symptoms such as fatigue and shortness of breath reduce but remain prevalent in symptomatic groups. At 12 mo, COVID-19-exposed individuals still have a reduced capacity for work at the anaerobic threshold (which best predicts sustainable intensity), despite oxygen uptake comparable to controls. The prevalence of COVID-19-exposed individuals considered "medically non-deployable" remains high at 47%.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to significant morbidity and mortality, with the former impacting and limiting individuals requiring high physical fitness, including sportspeople and emergency services., Methods: Observational cohort study of 4 groups: hospitalised, community illness with on-going symptoms (community-symptomatic), community illness now recovered (community-recovered) and comparison. A total of 113 participants (aged 39 ± 9, 86% male) were recruited: hospitalised (n = 35), community-symptomatic (n = 34), community-recovered (n = 18) and comparison (n = 26), approximately five months following acute illness. Participant outcome measures included cardiopulmonary imaging, submaximal and maximal exercise testing, pulmonary function, cognitive assessment, blood tests and questionnaires on mental health and function., Results: Hospitalised and community-symptomatic groups were older (43 ± 9 and 37 ± 10, P = 0.003), with a higher body mass index (31 ± 4 and 29 ± 4, P < 0.001), and had worse mental health (anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress), fatigue and quality of life scores. Hospitalised and community-symptomatic participants performed less well on sub-maximal and maximal exercise testing. Hospitalised individuals had impaired ventilatory efficiency (higher VE/V̇CO 2 slope, 29.6 ± 5.1, P < 0.001), achieved less work at anaerobic threshold (70 ± 15, P < 0.001) and peak (231 ± 35, P < 0.001), and had a reduced forced vital capacity (4.7 ± 0.9, P = 0.004). Clinically significant abnormal cardiopulmonary imaging findings were present in 6% of hospitalised participants. Community-recovered individuals had no significant differences in outcomes to the comparison group., Conclusion: Symptomatically recovered individuals who suffered mild-moderate acute COVID-19 do not differ from an age-, sex- and job-role-matched comparison population five months post-illness. Individuals who were hospitalised or continue to suffer symptoms may require a specific comprehensive assessment prior to return to full physical activity., (© 2023. Crown.)

Introduction: There have been more than 425 million COVID-19 infections worldwide. Post-COVID illness has become a common, disabling complication of this infection. Therefore, it presents a significant challenge to global public health and economic activity., Methods: Comprehensive clinical assessment (symptoms, WHO performance status, cognitive testing, CPET, lung function, high-resolution CT chest, CT pulmonary angiogram and cardiac MRI) of previously well, working-age adults in full-time employment was conducted to identify physical and neurocognitive deficits in those with severe or prolonged COVID-19 illness., Results: 205 consecutive patients, age 39 (IQR30.0-46.7) years, 84% male, were assessed 24 (IQR17.1-34.0) weeks after acute illness. 69% reported ≥3 ongoing symptoms. Shortness of breath (61%), fatigue (54%) and cognitive problems (47%) were the most frequent symptoms, 17% met criteria for anxiety and 24% depression. 67% remained below pre-COVID performance status at 24 weeks. One third of lung function tests were abnormal, (reduced lung volume and transfer factor, and obstructive spirometry). HRCT lung was clinically indicated in <50% of patients, with COVID-associated pathology found in 25% of these. In all but three HRCTs, changes were graded 'mild'. There was an extremely low incidence of pulmonary thromboembolic disease or significant cardiac pathology. A specific, focal cognitive deficit was identified in those with ongoing symptoms of fatigue, poor concentration, poor memory, low mood, and anxiety. This was notably more common in patients managed in the community during their acute illness., Conclusion: Despite low rates of residual cardiopulmonary pathology, in this cohort, with low rates of premorbid illness, there is a high burden of symptoms and failure to regain pre-COVID performance 6-months after acute illness. Cognitive assessment identified a specific deficit of the same magnitude as intoxication at the UK drink driving limit or the deterioration expected with 10 years ageing, which appears to contribute significantly to the symptomatology of long-COVID., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

A failure to fully recover following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may have a profound impact on high-functioning populations ranging from frontline emergency services to professional or amateur/recreational athletes. The aim of the study is to describe the medium-term cardiopulmonary exercise profiles of individuals with "persistent symptoms" and individuals who feel "recovered" after hospitalization or mild-moderate community infection following COVID-19 to an age, sex, and job-role matched control group. A total of 113 participants underwent cardiopulmonary functional tests at a mean of 159 ± 7 days (∼5 mo) following acute illness; 27 hospitalized with persistent symptoms (hospitalized-symptomatic), 8 hospitalized and now recovered (hospitalized-recovered); 34 community managed with persistent symptoms (community-symptomatic); 18 community managed and now recovered (community-recovered); and 26 controls. Hospitalized groups had the least favorable body composition (body mass, body mass index, and waist circumference) compared with controls. Hospitalized-symptomatic and community-symptomatic individuals had a lower oxygen uptake (V̇o 2 ) at peak exercise (hospitalized-symptomatic, 29.9 ± 5.0 mL/kg/min; community-symptomatic, 34.4 ± 7.2 mL/kg/min; vs. control 43.9 ± 3.1 mL/kg/min, both P < 0.001). Hospitalized-symptomatic individuals had a steeper V̇e/V̇co 2 slope (lower ventilatory efficiency) (30.5 ± 5.3 vs. 25.5 ± 2.6, P = 0.003) versus. controls. Hospitalized-recovered had a significantly lower oxygen uptake at peak (32.6 ± 6.6 mL/kg/min vs. 43.9 ± 13.1 mL/kg/min, P = 0.015) compared with controls. No significant differences were reported between community-recovered individuals and controls in any cardiopulmonary parameter. In conclusion, medium-term findings suggest that community-recovered individuals did not differ in cardiopulmonary fitness from physically active healthy controls. This suggests their readiness to return to higher levels of physical activity. However, the hospitalized-recovered group and both groups with persistent symptoms had enduring functional limitations, warranting further monitoring, rehabilitation, and recovery. NEW & NOTEWORTHY At 5 mo postinfection, community-treated individuals who feel recovered have comparable cardiopulmonary exercise profiles to the physically trained and active controls, suggesting a readiness to return to higher intensity/volumes of exercise. However, both symptomatic groups and the hospital-recovered group have persistent functional limitations when compared with active controls, supporting the requirement for ongoing monitoring, rehabilitation, and recovery.

Background: Individuals who contract coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can suffer with persistent and debilitating symptoms long after the initial acute illness. Heart rate (HR) profiles determined during cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) and delivered as part of a post-COVID recovery service may provide insight into the presence and impact of dysautonomia on functional ability., Objective: Using an active, working-age, post-COVID-19 population, the purpose of this study was to (1) determine and characterize any association between subjective symptoms and dysautonomia; and (2) identify objective exercise capacity differences between patients classified "with" and those "without" dysautonomia., Methods: Patients referred to a post-COVID-19 service underwent comprehensive clinical assessment, including self-reported symptoms, CPET, and secondary care investigations when indicated. Resting HR >75 bpm, HR increase with exercise <89 bpm, and HR recovery <25 bpm 1 minute after exercise were used to define dysautonomia. Anonymized data were analyzed and associations with symptoms, and CPET outcomes were determined., Results: Fifty-one of the 205 patients (25%) reviewed as part of this service evaluation had dysautonomia. There were no associations between symptoms or perceived functional limitation and dysautonomia (P >.05). Patients with dysautonomia demonstrated objective functional limitations with significantly reduced work rate (219 ± 37 W vs 253 ± 52 W; P <.001) and peak oxygen consumption (V̇o 2 : 30.6 ± 5.5 mL/kg/min vs 35.8 ± 7.6 mL/kg/min; P <.001); and a steeper (less efficient) V̇e/V̇co 2 slope (29.9 ± 4.9 vs 27.7 ± 4.7; P = .005)., Conclusion: Dysautonomia is associated with objective functional limitations but is not associated with subjective symptoms or limitation., (Crown Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)