Abstract
Evidence before this study It is emerging that long-term symptoms are often present in people who have had acute COVID-19 disease. These symptoms affect a range of organ systems including respiratory, cardiovascular and neurological systems. It is not clear how many patients who required hospitalisation develop these symptoms and the impact they have on quality of life. We searched PubMed on 24th March 2021 using the terms ‘COVID-19’, ‘long-Covid’, ‘long-term’ and ‘outcomes’. This was supplemented by hand searching relevant references and news reports. We identified several small studies focussing on specific symptoms or diseases, studies of patients in community settings and studies of patients who were hospitalised for acute COVID-19 in Italy, Russia and China. There were no peer-reviewed published data at the time of searching which captured outcomes of patients within the United Kingdom.
Added Value of this study We found that over half of patients reported not feeling fully recovered several months after onset of Covid-19 symptoms. The most common symptoms reported were fatigue, followed by breathlessness. Patients reported significant increases in new or worse disability, increases in MRC dyspnoea scale and worse quality of life as measured by EQ5D-5L summary index at the time of follow-up compared to before onset of acute COVID-19 symptoms. Our study found that women, in particular women under the age of 50 were significantly more likely to not feel fully recovered, were more breathless, more fatigued and had higher rates of new or worsened disability, even after taking severity of acute disease into account when compared to men of the same age.
Implications of all available evidence Long-term symptoms following hospitalisation for COVID-19 are very common and have significant impacts on quality of life. Women under 50 were most likely to have the worst outcomes. Policy makers need to ensure there is long-term support for people experiencing long-Covid and should plan for lasting long-term population morbidity. Funding for research to understand mechanisms underlying long-Covid and identify potential interventions for testing in randomised trials is urgently required.
Background This study sought to establish the long-term effects of Covid-19 following hospitalisation.
Methods 327 hospitalised participants, with SARS-CoV-2 infection were recruited into a prospective multicentre cohort study at least 3 months post-discharge. The primary outcome was self-reported recovery at least ninety days after initial Covid-19 symptom onset. Secondary outcomes included new symptoms, disability (Washington group short scale), breathlessness (MRC Dyspnoea scale) and quality of life (EQ5D-5L).
Findings 55% of participants reported not feeling fully recovered. 93% reported persistent symptoms, with fatigue the most common (83%), followed by breathlessness (54%). 47% reported an increase in MRC dyspnoea scale of at least one grade. New or worse disability was reported by 24% of participants. The EQ5D-5L summary index was significantly worse at follow-up (median difference 0.1 points on a scale of 0 to 1, IQR: −0.2 to 0.0). Females under the age of 50 years were five times less likely to report feeling recovered (adjusted OR 5.09, 95% CI 1.64 to 15.74), were more likely to have greater disability (adjusted OR 4.22, 95% CI 1.12 to 15.94), twice as likely to report worse fatigue (adjusted OR 2.06, 95% CI 0.81 to 3.31) and seven times more likely to become more breathless (adjusted OR 7.15, 95% CI 2.24 to 22.83) than men of the same age.
Interpretation Survivors of Covid-19 experienced long-term symptoms, new disability, increased breathlessness, and reduced quality of life. These findings were present in young, previously healthy working age adults, and were most common in younger females.
Role of the funder: The study sponsors and funders had no role in the study design, collection, analysis, interpretation of data, writing of the report, or the decision to submit the article for publication. Investigators were independent from funders and the authors have full access to all of the data, including any statistical analysis and tables.
Competing Interest Statement
Malcolm G Semple reports the following Conflict interest: Research Grants from the following entities: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) [award CO-CIN-01]. Medical Research Council [grant MC_PC_19059]. NIHR Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at University of Liverpool in partnership with Public Health England (PHE), in collaboration with Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine and the University of Oxford [award 200907]
Funding Statement
Funding statement: This work is supported by grants from: the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) [award CO-CIN-01], the Medical Research Council [grant MC_PC_19059], the Imperial Biomedical Research Centre (NIHR Imperial BRC, grant P45058), the Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Respiratory Infections at Imperial College London and NIHR HPRU in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at University of Liverpool, both in partnership with Public Health England, [NIHR award 200907], Wellcome Trust and Department for International Development [215091/Z/18/Z], and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1209135], and Liverpool Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre (Grant Reference: C18616/A25153), NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Imperial College London [IS-BRC-1215-20013], EU Platform for European Preparedness Against (Re-) emerging Epidemics 1 [FP7 project 602525] and NIHR Clinical Research Network for providing infrastructure support for this research. LT is a Wellcome Trust clinical career development fellow, supported by grant number 205228/Z/16/Z. This research was funded in part, by the Wellcome Trust. PJMO is supported by a NIHR Senior Investigator Award [award 201385]. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the DHSC, DID, NIHR, MRC, the Wellcome Trust or PHE. Role of the funder: The study sponsors and funders had no role in the study design, collection, analysis, interpretation of data, writing of the report, or the decision to submit the article for publication. Investigators were independent from funders and the authors have full access to all of the data, including any statistical analysis and tables.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval was given by the South Central - Oxford C Research Ethics Committee in England (ref 13/SC/0149) and the Scotland A Research Ethics Committee (ref 20/SS/0028).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Data Availability
Data are available for reuse through a secure data sharing platform. Access is welcome through the ISARIC Independent Data and Material Access Committee (https://isaric4c.net).
