Rehabilitation post-COVID-19: cross-sectional observations using the Stanford Hall remote assessment tool

INTRODUCTION

The multisystem COVID-19 can cause prolonged symptoms requiring rehabilitation. This study describes the creation of a remote COVID-19 rehabilitation assessment tool to allow timely triage, assessment and management. It hypotheses those with post-COVID-19 syndrome, potentially without laboratory confirmation and irrespective of initial disease severity, will have significant rehabilitation needs.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study of consecutive patients referred by general practitioners (April-November 2020). Primary outcomes were presence/absence of anticipated sequelae. Binary logistic regression was used to test association between acute presentation and post-COVID-19 symptomatology.

RESULTS

155 patients (n=127 men, n=28 women, median age 39 years, median 13 weeks post-illness) were assessed using the tool. Acute symptoms were most commonly shortness of breath (SOB) (74.2%), fever (73.5%), fatigue (70.3%) and cough (64.5%); and post-acutely, SOB (76.7%), fatigue (70.3%), cough (57.4%) and anxiety/mood disturbance (39.4%). Individuals with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 were 69% and 63% less likely to have anxiety/mood disturbance and pain, respectively, at 3 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Rehabilitation assessment should be offered to all patients suffering post-COVID-19 symptoms, not only those with laboratory confirmation and considered independently from acute illness severity. This tool offers a structure for a remote assessment. Post-COVID-19 programmes should include SOB, fatigue and mood disturbance management.

Exercise tolerance, fatigue, mental health, and employment status at 5 and 12 months following COVID-19 illness in a physically trained population

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%.

Cardiopulmonary, Functional, Cognitive and Mental Health Outcomes Post-COVID-19, Across the Range of Severity of Acute Illness, in a Physically Active, Working-Age Population

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/V̇CO₂ 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.

Changing characteristics of post-COVID-19 syndrome: Cross-sectional findings from 458 consultations using the Stanford Hall remote rehabilitation assessment tool

BACKGROUND

In the UK, there have been multiple waves of COVID-19, with a five-tier alert system created to describe the transmission rate and appropriate restrictions. While acute mortality decreased, there continued to be a significant morbidity, with individuals suffering from persistent, life-restricting symptoms for months to years afterwards. A remote rehabilitation tool was created at the Defence Medical Rehabilitation Centre (DMRC) Stanford Hall to assess post-COVID-19 symptoms and their impact on the UK military.This study aims to understand changes in post-COVID-19 syndrome between wave 1 and wave 2, identify interactions between alert level and symptoms and investigate any predictive nature of acute symptoms for postacute symptomology in a young, physically active population.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study of 458 consecutive remote rehabilitation assessments performed at DMRC Stanford Hall between 2 April 2020 and 29 July 2021. Consultations were coded, anonymised, and statistical analysis was performed to determine associations between acute and postacute symptoms, and between symptoms, alert levels and waves.

RESULTS

435 assessments were eligible; 174 in wave 1 and 261 in wave 2. Post-COVID-19 syndrome prevalence reduced from 43% to 2% between the waves. Acutely, widespread pain was more prevalent in wave 2 (p<0.001). Postacutely, there was increased anxiety (p=0.10) in wave 1 and increased sleep disturbance (p<0.001), memory/concentration issues (p<0.001) and shortness of breath/cough (p=0.017) in wave 2. Increasing alert level was associated with increased postacute symptom prevalence (p=0.046), with sleep disturbance increasing at higher alert level (p=0.016). Acute symptoms, including fatigue, sleep disturbance and myalgia, were associated with multiple postacute symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reports the overall prevalence and symptom burden in the UK military in the first two waves of COVID-19. By reporting differences in COVID-19 in different waves and alert level, this study highlights the importance of careful assessment and contextual understanding of acute and postacute illnesses for individual management plans.

Cardiopulmonary exercise testing excludes significant disease in patients recovering from COVID-19

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 (V̇O226.7 (±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 (V̇O2) >100% predicted and minute ventilation (VE)/carbon dioxide elimination (V̇CO2) slope <30.0 or VE/V̇CO2slope <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.

2 Cardiopulmonary exercise testing excludes clinically significant disease in military patients recovering from COVID-19

Background

Post-COVID-19 syndrome presents a challenge when determining the occupational grading of symptomatic military personnel, and their ability to deploy. In particular, the accurate assessment of patients with post COVID-19 syndrome is complicated by health anxiety and coincident symptomatic autonomic dysfunction. We therefore sought to determine whether either symptoms or objective cardiopulmonary exercise testing could predict clinically significant findings in the UK Armed Forces.

Methods

113 consecutive patients were assessed in a post COVID-19 military clinical assessment pathway. This included symptom reporting, history, examination, spirometry, echocardiography and cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) in all, with chest CT, dual-energy CTPA 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 multi-disciplinary team. These patients had reduced fitness (&Vdot;O2 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) Watts; p = 0·026) compared to those without significant disease. Simple CPET criteria (&Vdot;O2 <100% predicted and VE/&Vdot;CO2 slope >30.0 or VE/&Vdot;CO2 slope >35.0 in isolation) excluded significant disease with sensitivity and specificity of 86% and 83% respectively (AUC 0.89). The addition of capillary blood gases to estimate A-a gradient improved diagnostic performance to 100% sensitivity and 78% specificity (AUC 0.92). Symptoms and spirometry did not discriminate significant disease.

Conclusion

UK Armed Forces personnel with persistent symptoms post SARS-CoV-2 infection demonstrate reassuringly little organ pathology. CPET and functional capacity testing, but not reported symptoms, allow the exclusion of clinically significant disease.

Comprehensive clinical assessment identifies specific neurocognitive deficits in working-age patients with long-COVID

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.

The Stanford Hall consensus statement for post-COVID-19 rehabilitation

The highly infectious and pathogenic novel coronavirus (CoV), severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV-2, has emerged causing a global pandemic. Although COVID-19 predominantly affects the respiratory system, evidence indicates a multisystem disease which is frequently severe and often results in death. Long-term sequelae of COVID-19 are unknown, but evidence from previous CoV outbreaks demonstrates impaired pulmonary and physical function, reduced quality of life and emotional distress. Many COVID-19 survivors who require critical care may develop psychological, physical and cognitive impairments. There is a clear need for guidance on the rehabilitation of COVID-19 survivors. This consensus statement was developed by an expert panel in the fields of rehabilitation, sport and exercise medicine (SEM), rheumatology, psychiatry, general practice, psychology and specialist pain, working at the Defence Medical Rehabilitation Centre, Stanford Hall, UK. Seven teams appraised evidence for the following domains relating to COVID-19 rehabilitation requirements: pulmonary, cardiac, SEM, psychological, musculoskeletal, neurorehabilitation and general medical. A chair combined recommendations generated within teams. A writing committee prepared the consensus statement in accordance with the appraisal of guidelines research and evaluation criteria, grading all recommendations with levels of evidence. Authors scored their level of agreement with each recommendation on a scale of 0-10. Substantial agreement (range 7.5-10) was reached for 36 recommendations following a chaired agreement meeting that was attended by all authors. This consensus statement provides an overarching framework assimilating evidence and likely requirements of multidisciplinary rehabilitation post COVID-19 illness, for a target population of active individuals, including military personnel and athletes.

Trauma-related amputations in war and at a civilian major trauma centre-comparison of care, outcome and the challenges ahead

The Afghanistan conflict has resulted in a large number of service personnel sustaining amputations. Whilst obvious differences exist between military and civilian trauma-related amputations both settings result in life changing injuries. Comparisons offer the potential of advancement and protection of the knowledge gained during the last 12 years. This paper compares the military and civilian trauma-related amputee cohorts' demographics, management and rehabilitation outcomes measures. The UK military Joint Theatre Trauma Registry and a civilian major trauma centre database of trauma-related amputees were analysed. 255 military and 24 civilian amputees were identified. A significant difference (p>0.05) was seen in median age (24, range 18-43, vs. 48, range 24-87 years), mean number of amputations per casualty (1.6±SD 0.678 vs. 1±SD 0.0), mean ISS (22±SD 12.8 vs. 14.7±SD 15.7) and gender (99% males vs. 78%). Rehabilitation outcome measures recorded included the Special Interest Group in Amputee Medicine score where the military group demonstrated significantly better scores (91% Grade E+ compared to 19%). Differences in patients underlying physiology and psychology, the military trauma system and a huge sustained investment in rehabilitation are all contributing factors for these differing outcomes. However the authors also believe that the use of a consultant-led MDT and central rehabilitation have benefited the military cohort in the acute rehabilitation stage and is reflected in the good short-term outcomes.