Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Original article

Vol. 154 No. 8 (2024)

Evaluation of the post-COVID multidisciplinary outpatient clinic at the Pulmonary Division of the Cantonal Hospital Winterthur from the patient’s perspective: a mixed-methods study

DOI
https://doi.org/10.57187/s.3622
Cite this as:
Swiss Med Wkly. 2024;154:3622
Published
28.08.2024

Summary

AIMS OF THE STUDY: This prospective study, conducted with patients from the multidisciplinary post-COVID outpatient clinic at the Pulmonary Division of the Cantonal Hospital Winterthur, aimed to investigate changes in patients’ main symptoms, elements that aided in coping with the condition and satisfaction with the consulting and therapeutic interventions.

METHODS: After obtaining ethical approval, fifty patients were consecutively included in this longitudinal study, which incorporated three survey times post-consultation: t1 (0–7 days), t2 (4–8 weeks) and t3 (4–6 months). The survey comprised standardised questionnaires, including the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the Post-COVID-19 Functional Status scale and the Chalder Fatigue scale, along with study-specific questions regarding symptoms and reasons for consulting the post-COVID outpatient clinic. Additionally, ten patients were invited to participate in qualitative individual interviews at t2 and t3.

RESULTS: The study was conducted between November 2021 and February 2023. The median age of the 50 participants was 47 years (IQR: 36–55), with 66% (33/50) being female. Most participants (66% or 33/50) reported no pre-existing conditions prior to COVID-19 infection, and only six patients required hospitalisation during the acute phase of their infection. Visits to the multidisciplinary post-COVID clinic occurred approximately eight months post-infection, with referrals primarily made by primary care physicians (82% or 41/50). The majority of patients experienced persistent tiredness, exhaustion and fatigue (94% or 47/50), along with reduced physical performance (82% or 41/50), while pain or breathing difficulties were less frequently mentioned. At t1, around half of the patients were fully or partially unable to work, a proportion that reduced to around a third by t3. Symptoms generally decreased over time, with significant improvements observed between t2 and t3. However, subjectively perceived cognitive limitations worsened or were reported more frequently over time. Most patients (96% or 48/50) felt well cared for throughout their consultations. In qualitative interviews, patients highlighted the medical staff’s attentiveness and the time dedicated to consultations, which made them feel that their complaints were taken seriously and that they received appropriate information.

CONCLUSIONS: The results confirmed that the multidisciplinary post-COVID outpatient clinic met most respondents’ expectations. Patients found that the attentive interprofessional coaching was most helpful in coping with their illness. However, participants also noted long waiting times and expressed a desire for earlier admission to the clinic.

References

  1. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) – World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019
  2. Products - COVID-19 | Topic | NICE. NICE; 2023. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/conditions-and-diseases/respiratory-conditions/covid19/products?ProductType = Guidance&Status = Published
  3. COVID-19 rapid guideline: managing the long-term effects of COVID-19. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (UK); 2020. (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence: Clinical Guidelines). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK567261/
  4. Emergency use ICD codes for COVID-19 disease outbreak. https://www.who.int/standards/classifications/classification-of-diseases/emergency-use-icd-codes-for-covid-19-disease-outbreak
  5. Hanson SW, Abbafati C, Aerts JG, Al-Aly Z, Ashbaugh C, Ballouz T, et al. A global systematic analysis of the occurrence, severity, and recovery pattern of long COVID in 2020 and 2021. medRxiv. 2022 May 27;2022.05.26.22275532.
  6. Nalbandian A, Sehgal K, Gupta A, Madhavan MV, McGroder C, Stevens JS, et al. Post-acute COVID-19 syndrome. Nat Med. 2021 Apr;27(4):601–15. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-021-01283-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-021-01283-z
  7. Jacobs LG, Gourna Paleoudis E, Lesky-Di Bari D, Nyirenda T, Friedman T, Gupta A, et al. Persistence of symptoms and quality of life at 35 days after hospitalization for COVID-19 infection. Madeddu G, editor. PLoS ONE. 2020 Dec 11;15(12):e0243882. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0243882
  8. Lopez-Leon S, Wegman-Ostrosky T, Perelman C, Sepulveda R, Rebolledo PA, Cuapio A, et al. More than 50 Long-term effects of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS); 2021 Jan. http://medrxiv.org/lookup/doi/10.1101/2021.01.27.21250617 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.27.21250617
  9. Hossain MM, Das J, Rahman F, Nesa F, Hossain P, Islam AM, et al. Living with “long COVID”: A systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative evidence. PLoS One. 2023 Feb;18(2):e0281884. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281884 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281884
  10. Macpherson K, Cooper K, Harbour J, Mahal D, Miller C, Nairn M. Experiences of living with long COVID and of accessing healthcare services: a qualitative systematic review. BMJ Open. 2022 Jan;12(1):e050979. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050979 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050979
  11. Creswell JW, Clark VL. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc; 2007. xviii, 275 p.
  12. Klok FA, Boon GJ, Barco S, Endres M, Geelhoed JJ, Knauss S, et al. The Post-COVID-19 Functional Status scale: a tool to measure functional status over time after COVID-19. Eur Respir J. 2020 Jul;56(1):2001494. doi: https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.01494-2020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.01494-2020
  13. Stern AF. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Occup Med (Lond). 2014 Jul;64(5):393–4. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqu024 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqu024
  14. Chalder T, Berelowitz G, Pawlikowska T, Watts L, Wessely S, Wright D, et al. Development of a fatigue scale. J Psychosom Res. 1993;37(2):147–53. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3999(93)90081-P DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3999(93)90081-P
  15. Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, Elliott V, Fernandez M, O’Neal L, et al.; REDCap Consortium. The REDCap consortium: building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform. 2019 Jul;95:103208. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103208 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103208
  16. Smith JA, Osborn M. Interpretative phenomenological analysis as a useful methodology for research on the lived experience of pain. Br J Pain. 2015 Feb;9(1):41–2. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/2049463714541642 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2049463714541642
  17. Flick U. Qualitative Sozialforschung: eine Einführung. 10. Auflage, Originalausgabe. Reinbek bei Hamburg: rowohlts enzyklopädie im Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag; 2021. 623 p. (Rororo Rowohlts Enzyklopädie).
  18. Bailey J, Lavelle B, Miller J, Jimenez M, Lim PH, Orban ZS, et al.; Northwestern Medicine Comprehensive COVID Center Investigators. Multidisciplinary Center Care for Long COVID Syndrome-A Retrospective Cohort Study. Am J Med. 2023 May;(May):S0002934323003285. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2023.05.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm-conference.2023.207.1_MeetingAbstracts.A4386
  19. Kristman V, Manno M, Côté P. Loss to follow-up in cohort studies: how much is too much? Eur J Epidemiol. 2004;19(8):751–60. doi: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EJEP.0000036568.02655.f8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EJEP.0000036568.02655.f8
  20. Berger B, Lenz M, Mühlhauser I. Patient zufrieden, Arzt gut? Inwiefern ist Patientenzufriedenheit ein Indikator für die Qualität der hausärztlichen Versorgung? Eine systematische Ubersichtsarbelt. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2008;102(5):299–306. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.zgesun.2008.01.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.zgesun.2008.01.004

Most read articles by the same author(s)