1-year outcomes in hospital survivors with COVID-19: a longitudinal cohort study

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background

The full range of long-term health consequences of COVID-19 in patients who are discharged from hospital is largely unclear. The aim of our study was to comprehensively compare consequences between 6 months and 12 months after symptom onset among hospital survivors with COVID-19.

Methods

We undertook an ambidirectional cohort study of COVID-19 survivors who had been discharged from Jin Yin-tan Hospital (Wuhan, China) between Jan 7 and May 29, 2020. At 6-month and 12-month follow-up visit, survivors were interviewed with questionnaires on symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and received a physical examination, a 6-min walking test, and laboratory tests. They were required to report their health-care use after discharge and work status at the 12-month visit. Survivors who had completed pulmonary function tests or had lung radiographic abnormality at 6 months were given the corresponding tests at 12 months. Non-COVID-19 participants (controls) matched for age, sex, and comorbidities were interviewed and completed questionnaires to assess prevalent symptoms and HRQoL. The primary outcomes were symptoms, modified British Medical Research Council (mMRC) score, HRQoL, and distance walked in 6 min (6MWD). Multivariable adjusted logistic regression models were used to evaluate the risk factors of 12-month outcomes.

Findings

1276 COVID-19 survivors completed both visits. The median age of patients was 59·0 years (IQR 49·0–67·0) and 681 (53%) were men. The median follow-up time was 185·0 days (IQR 175·0–198·0) for the 6-month visit and 349·0 days (337·0–361·0) for the 12-month visit after symptom onset. The proportion of patients with at least one sequelae symptom decreased from 68% (831/1227) at 6 months to 49% (620/1272) at 12 months (p<0·0001). The proportion of patients with dyspnoea, characterised by mMRC score of 1 or more, slightly increased from 26% (313/1185) at 6-month visit to 30% (380/1271) at 12-month visit (p=0·014). Additionally, more patients had anxiety or depression at 12-month visit (26% [331/1271] at 12-month visit vs 23% [274/1187] at 6-month visit; p=0·015). No significant difference on 6MWD was observed between 6 months and 12 months. 88% (422/479) of patients who were employed before COVID-19 had returned to their original work at 12 months. Compared with men, women had an odds ratio of 1·43 (95% CI 1·04–1·96) for fatigue or muscle weakness, 2·00 (1·48–2·69) for anxiety or depression, and 2·97 (1·50–5·88) for diffusion impairment. Matched COVID-19 survivors at 12 months had more problems with mobility, pain or discomfort, and anxiety or depression, and had more prevalent symptoms than did controls.

Interpretation

Most COVID-19 survivors had a good physical and functional recovery during 1-year follow-up, and had returned to their original work and life. The health status in our cohort of COVID-19 survivors at 12 months was still lower than that in the control population.

Funding

Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences, the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the National Key Research and Development Program of China, Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development of Pulmonary Tuberculosis, the China Evergrande Group, Jack Ma Foundation, Sino Biopharmaceutical, Ping An Insurance (Group), and New Sunshine Charity Foundation.

Related collections

Most cited references 32

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

A Trial of Lopinavir–Ritonavir in Adults Hospitalized with Severe Covid-19

Bin Cao, Yeming Wang, Danning Wen … (2020)

Abstract Background No therapeutics have yet been proven effective for the treatment of severe illness caused by SARS-CoV-2. Methods We conducted a randomized, controlled, open-label trial involving hospitalized adult patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, which causes the respiratory illness Covid-19, and an oxygen saturation (Sao 2) of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air or a ratio of the partial pressure of oxygen (Pao 2) to the fraction of inspired oxygen (Fio 2) of less than 300 mm Hg. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either lopinavir–ritonavir (400 mg and 100 mg, respectively) twice a day for 14 days, in addition to standard care, or standard care alone. The primary end point was the time to clinical improvement, defined as the time from randomization to either an improvement of two points on a seven-category ordinal scale or discharge from the hospital, whichever came first. Results A total of 199 patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection underwent randomization; 99 were assigned to the lopinavir–ritonavir group, and 100 to the standard-care group. Treatment with lopinavir–ritonavir was not associated with a difference from standard care in the time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio for clinical improvement, 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 to 1.72). Mortality at 28 days was similar in the lopinavir–ritonavir group and the standard-care group (19.2% vs. 25.0%; difference, −5.8 percentage points; 95% CI, −17.3 to 5.7). The percentages of patients with detectable viral RNA at various time points were similar. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, lopinavir–ritonavir led to a median time to clinical improvement that was shorter by 1 day than that observed with standard care (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.91). Gastrointestinal adverse events were more common in the lopinavir–ritonavir group, but serious adverse events were more common in the standard-care group. Lopinavir–ritonavir treatment was stopped early in 13 patients (13.8%) because of adverse events. Conclusions In hospitalized adult patients with severe Covid-19, no benefit was observed with lopinavir–ritonavir treatment beyond standard care. Future trials in patients with severe illness may help to confirm or exclude the possibility of a treatment benefit. (Funded by Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development and others; Chinese Clinical Trial Register number, ChiCTR2000029308.)

0 comments Cited 2603 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L)

M. Herdman, C. Gudex, S Lloyd … (2011)

Purpose This article introduces the new 5-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) health status measure. Methods EQ-5D currently measures health using three levels of severity in five dimensions. A EuroQol Group task force was established to find ways of improving the instrument’s sensitivity and reducing ceiling effects by increasing the number of severity levels. The study was performed in the United Kingdom and Spain. Severity labels for 5 levels in each dimension were identified using response scaling. Focus groups were used to investigate the face and content validity of the new versions, including hypothetical health states generated from those versions. Results Selecting labels at approximately the 25th, 50th, and 75th centiles produced two alternative 5-level versions. Focus group work showed a slight preference for the wording ‘slight-moderate-severe’ problems, with anchors of ‘no problems’ and ‘unable to do’ in the EQ-5D functional dimensions. Similar wording was used in the Pain/Discomfort and Anxiety/Depression dimensions. Hypothetical health states were well understood though participants stressed the need for the internal coherence of health states. Conclusions A 5-level version of the EQ-5D has been developed by the EuroQol Group. Further testing is required to determine whether the new version improves sensitivity and reduces ceiling effects.

0 comments Cited 2366 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

6-month consequences of COVID-19 in patients discharged from hospital: a cohort study

Chaolin Huang, Lixue Huang, Yeming Wang … (2021)

Background The long-term health consequences of COVID-19 remain largely unclear. The aim of this study was to describe the long-term health consequences of patients with COVID-19 who have been discharged from hospital and investigate the associated risk factors, in particular disease severity. Methods We did an ambidirectional cohort study of patients with confirmed COVID-19 who had been discharged from Jin Yin-tan Hospital (Wuhan, China) between Jan 7, 2020, and May 29, 2020. Patients who died before follow-up, patients for whom follow-up would be difficult because of psychotic disorders, dementia, or re-admission to hospital, those who were unable to move freely due to concomitant osteoarthropathy or immobile before or after discharge due to diseases such as stroke or pulmonary embolism, those who declined to participate, those who could not be contacted, and those living outside of Wuhan or in nursing or welfare homes were all excluded. All patients were interviewed with a series of questionnaires for evaluation of symptoms and health-related quality of life, underwent physical examinations and a 6-min walking test, and received blood tests. A stratified sampling procedure was used to sample patients according to their highest seven-category scale during their hospital stay as 3, 4, and 5–6, to receive pulmonary function test, high resolution CT of the chest, and ultrasonography. Enrolled patients who had participated in the Lopinavir Trial for Suppression of SARS-CoV-2 in China received severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 antibody tests. Multivariable adjusted linear or logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between disease severity and long-term health consequences. Findings In total, 1733 of 2469 discharged patients with COVID-19 were enrolled after 736 were excluded. Patients had a median age of 57·0 (IQR 47·0–65·0) years and 897 (52%) were men. The follow-up study was done from June 16, to Sept 3, 2020, and the median follow-up time after symptom onset was 186·0 (175·0–199·0) days. Fatigue or muscle weakness (63%, 1038 of 1655) and sleep difficulties (26%, 437 of 1655) were the most common symptoms. Anxiety or depression was reported among 23% (367 of 1617) of patients. The proportions of median 6-min walking distance less than the lower limit of the normal range were 24% for those at severity scale 3, 22% for severity scale 4, and 29% for severity scale 5–6. The corresponding proportions of patients with diffusion impairment were 22% for severity scale 3, 29% for scale 4, and 56% for scale 5–6, and median CT scores were 3·0 (IQR 2·0–5·0) for severity scale 3, 4·0 (3·0–5·0) for scale 4, and 5·0 (4·0–6·0) for scale 5–6. After multivariable adjustment, patients showed an odds ratio (OR) 1·61 (95% CI 0·80–3·25) for scale 4 versus scale 3 and 4·60 (1·85–11·48) for scale 5–6 versus scale 3 for diffusion impairment; OR 0·88 (0·66–1·17) for scale 4 versus scale 3 and OR 1·77 (1·05–2·97) for scale 5–6 versus scale 3 for anxiety or depression, and OR 0·74 (0·58–0·96) for scale 4 versus scale 3 and 2·69 (1·46–4·96) for scale 5–6 versus scale 3 for fatigue or muscle weakness. Of 94 patients with blood antibodies tested at follow-up, the seropositivity (96·2% vs 58·5%) and median titres (19·0 vs 10·0) of the neutralising antibodies were significantly lower compared with at the acute phase. 107 of 822 participants without acute kidney injury and with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 90 mL/min per 1·73 m2 or more at acute phase had eGFR less than 90 mL/min per 1·73 m2 at follow-up. Interpretation At 6 months after acute infection, COVID-19 survivors were mainly troubled with fatigue or muscle weakness, sleep difficulties, and anxiety or depression. Patients who were more severely ill during their hospital stay had more severe impaired pulmonary diffusion capacities and abnormal chest imaging manifestations, and are the main target population for intervention of long-term recovery. Funding National Natural Science Foundation of China, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences, National Key Research and Development Program of China, Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development of Pulmonary Tuberculosis, and Peking Union Medical College Foundation.

0 comments Cited 2076 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Lancet

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Lancet

Title: Lancet (London, England)

Publisher: Elsevier Ltd.

ISSN (Print): 0140-6736

ISSN (Electronic): 1474-547X

Publication date PMC-release: 26 August 2021

Publication date (Print): 28 August-3 September 2021

Publication date (Electronic): 26 August 2021

Volume: 398

Issue: 10302

Pages: 747-758

Affiliations

[a ]Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China

[b ]Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, National Center for Respiratory Medicine, Center of Respiratory Medicine, National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Diseases, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, China

[c ]Jin Yin-tan Hospital, Wuhan, Hubei Province, China

[d ]Wuhan Research Center for Communicable Disease Diagnosis and Treatment, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Wuhan, Hubei Province, China

[e ]Institute of Clinical Medical Sciences, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, China

[f ]Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease Pathogenomics, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China

[g ]NHC Key Laboratory of Systems Biology of Pathogens and Christophe Merieux Laboratory, Institute of Pathogen Biology, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China

[h ]Department of Radiology, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, China

[i ]Tsinghua University School of Medicine, Beijing, China

[j ]Institute of Respiratory Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Beijing, China

[k ]Tsinghua University-Peking University Joint Center for Life Sciences, Beijing, China

Author notes

[* ]Correspondence to: Prof Bin Cao, Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, National Center for Respiratory Medicine, Center of Respiratory Medicine, National Clinical Reasearch Center for Respiratory Diseases, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing 100029, China

[*]

These authors contributed equally

[†]

These authors contributed equally

Article

Publisher Item ID: S0140-6736(21)01755-4

DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01755-4

PMC ID: 8389999

PubMed ID: 34454673

SO-VID: fbf209e5-4194-4583-bd2c-471bbcc48459

License:

Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

1-year outcomes in hospital survivors with COVID-19: a longitudinal cohort study

Read this article at

Abstract

Background

Methods

Findings

Interpretation

Funding

Related collections

Novel Coronavirus Disease COVID-19

Most cited references 32

A Trial of Lopinavir–Ritonavir in Adults Hospitalized with Severe Covid-19

Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L)

6-month consequences of COVID-19 in patients discharged from hospital: a cohort study

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Article

History

Categories

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 296

Cited by 449

Most referenced authors 1,003