Physician preferences for Online and In-person continuing medical education: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The worldwide market for continuing medical education (CME) was severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, which precipitated an increase in web-based CME course attendance. Virtual education methods may be effective for engaging learners and changing behaviors. However, more information is needed about physician preferences for in-person vs. livestreamed CME courses in the postpandemic era. Because of the paucity of data regarding this topic, the current study was designed to evaluate CME participant characteristics, preferences, engagement, and satisfaction with traditional in-person vs. virtual educational methods. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed of attendees of two large internal medicine CME courses held in 2021. Both CME courses were offered via in-person and livestream options, and were taught by Mayo Clinic content experts. Participants, who consisted of practicing physicians seeking CME, completed a 41-question survey after CME course completion. Statistical comparisons were performed by using Fisher exact tests for all survey items, except for those with ordinal response sets, which were compared with Cochran-Armitage trend tests. RESULTS: A total of 146 participants completed the survey (response rate, 30.2%). Among the 77 respondents who attended in-person courses, the most frequent reasons indicated were the opportunity to travel (66%) and collaboration/networking with others (25%). Among the 68 respondents who attended the livestream courses, the most frequent reasons indicated included COVID-19-related concerns (65%), convenience (46%), and travel costs (34%). The percentage of respondents who indicated that they would choose the same mode of attendance if given the option again was higher for those who attended in person than for those who attended via livestream (91% vs. 65%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that in-person course offerings will continue to be a preferred learning method for some physicians. However, most respondents who attended virtually preferred that method. Therefore, hybrid CME models offering both in-person and virtual options may be most beneficial for meeting the needs of all CME learners.

A post-COVID syndrome curriculum for continuing medical education (CME): in-person versus livestream.

Background: Nearly 30% of patients with COVID-19 infection develop post-COVID Syndrome. Knowledge of post-COVID Syndrome is evolving, creating the need for adaptable curricula. Flipped classrooms (FC) are flexible and dynamic with demonstrated utility in continuing medical education (CME), yet there has been no research on application of FCs, or comparisons between livestream and in-person learning, in post-COVID CME. Methods: We implemented a novel post-COVID curriculum using FCs for in-person and livestream participants at four Mayo Clinic CME conferences. Outcomes were validated measures of knowledge; perceptions of FCs and CME teacher effectiveness; and learner engagement. Pre-conferences surveys were a post-COVID knowledge test and the Flipped Classroom Perception Inventory (FCPI). Post-conference surveys were a post-COVID knowledge test, the FCPI, the CME Teaching Effectiveness Instrument (CMETE), and the Learner Engagement Inventory (LEI). Pre-post knowledge and FCPI scores were analyzed using linear mixed models. CMETE and LEI were compared for in-person versus livestream participants using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Results: Overall, 59 participants completed the pre-test, and 72 participants completed the post-test, surveys. Participants were predominantly female (58%), were in nonacademic group practices (65%), and lacked prior experience with flipped classrooms (83%). Following the presentations, participants showed significant improvements in post-COVID knowledge (47% correct precourse to 54% correct postcourse, p-value = 0.004), and a trend toward improved FCPI scores. Teaching effectiveness, learner engagement, and pre-post change in COVID knowledge did not differ significantly between participants of in-person versus livestream sessions. Conclusion: This post-COVID FC curriculum was feasible and associated with improved knowledge scores among a diverse population of physician learners in CME, without any apparent compromise in learner engagement, or in perceptions of teaching effectiveness and FCs, among livestream versus in-person participants.

Long COVID and hypermobility spectrum disorders have shared pathophysiology.

Hypermobility spectrum disorders (HSD) and hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (hEDS) are the most common joint hypermobility conditions encountered by physicians, with hypermobile and classical EDS accounting for >90% of all cases. Hypermobility has been detected in up to 30-57% of patients with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), and long COVID (LC) compared to the general population. Extrapulmonary symptoms, including musculoskeletal pain, dysautonomia disorders, cognitive disorders, and fatigue, are seen in both LC and HSD. Additionally, ME/CFS has overlapping symptoms with those seen in HSD. Mast cell activation and degranulation occurring in both LC and ME/CFS may result in hyperinflammation and damage to connective tissue in these patients, thereby inducing hypermobility. Persistent inflammation may result in the development or worsening of HSD. Hence, screening for hypermobility and other related conditions including fibromyalgia, POTS, ME/CFS, chronic pain conditions, joint pain, and myalgia is essential for individuals experiencing LC. Pharmacological treatments should be symptom-focused and geared to a patient's presentation. Paced exercise, massage, yoga, and meditation may also provide benefits.

Increased luminal area of large conducting airways in patients with COVID-19 and post-acute sequelae of COVID-19: a retrospective case-control study.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with enlarged luminal areas of large conducting airways. In 10-30% of patients with acute COVID-19 infection, symptoms persist for more than 4 wk (referred to as post-acute sequelae of COVID 19, or PASC), and it is unknown if airway changes are associated with this persistence. Thus, we aim to investigate whether luminal area of large conducting airways is different between patients with PASC and COVID-19 and healthy controls. In this retrospective case-control study, 75 patients with PASC (48 females) were age-, height-, and sex-matched to 75 patients with COVID-19 and 75 healthy controls. Using three-dimensional digital reconstruction from computed tomography imaging, we measured luminal areas of seven conducting airways, including trachea, right and left main bronchi, bronchus intermediate, right and left upper lobe, and left lower lobe bronchi. Kruskal-Wallis H test was used to compare measurements between the three groups, as appropriate. Airway luminal areas between COVID-19 and PASC groups were not different (all, P > 0.66). There were no group differences in airway luminal area (PASC vs. control) for trachea and right main bronchus. However, in the remaining five airways, airway luminal areas were 12-39% larger among patients with PASC than in controls (all, P < 0.05). Patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and PASC have greater airway luminal area in most large conducting airways compared with healthy controls. No differences in luminal area between patients with COVID-19 and PASC suggest persistence of changes or insufficient time for reversal of changes.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Three-dimensional reconstruction of airways has shown increased luminal area in patients with COVID-19 and post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 when compared with healthy controls. These findings suggest the role of large conducting airways in the pathogenesis of post-acute sequelae of COVID 19.

Outpatient remdesivir treatment program for hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease-2019: Patient perceptions, process and economic impact.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir is FDA-approved for the treatment of hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. Many patients improve clinically to allow for hospital dismissal before completing the 5-day course. In a prior work, patients who continued remdesivir in an outpatient setting experienced better 28-day clinical outcomes. Here, we assessed patients' perspectives and the economic impact of this outpatient practice. METHODS: Hospitalized patients who received remdesivir for COVID-19 at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, from 11/6/2020 to 11/5/2021 and were dismissed to continue remdesivir in the outpatient setting were surveyed. The cost of care was compared between those who remained hospitalized versus those who were dismissed. RESULTS: 93 (19.8 %) among 470 eligible patients responded to the electronic survey. Responders were older than non-responders. The majority (70.5 %) had symptoms resolved by the time of the survey. Ten (11.4 %) patients had persistent symptoms attributed to long COVID-19. The majority were satisfied with the quality of care (82.3 %) and overall experience (76.0 %) in the infusion clinic. After adjusting for gender, comorbidity score, and WHO severity scale, the predicted costs for the groups were $16,544 (inpatient) and $9,097 (outpatient) per patient (difference of $7,447; p < .01). An estimate of 1,077 hospital bed-days were made available to other patients as a result of this transition to outpatient. CONCLUSION: An outpatient remdesivir program that allowed for early dismissal was perceived favorably by patients. The program resulted in significant cost and resource savings, the latter in terms of the availability of hospital beds for other patients needing critical services.

Pro Inflammatory Cytokines Profiles of Patients With Long COVID Differ Between Variant Epochs.

BACKGROUND: Over 30% of patients with COVID-19 have persistent symptoms that last beyond 30 days and referred to as Long COVID. Long COVID has been associated with a persistent elevation in peripheral cytokines including interleukin-6, interleukin-1ß, and tumor necrosis factor-α. This study reports cytokine profiles of patients in our clinic across SARS-COV-2 variant epochs. METHODS: The clinical cytokine panel was analyzed in patients with Long COVID during periods that were stratified according to variant epoch. The 4 variant epochs were defined as: (1) wild-type through alpha, (2) alpha/beta/gamma, (3) delta, and (4) omicron variants. RESULTS: A total of 390 patients had the clinical cytokine panel performed; the median age was 48 years (IQR 38-59) and 62% were female. Distribution by variant was wild-type and alpha, 50% (n = 196); alpha/beta/gamma, 7.9% (n = 31); delta, 18% (n = 72); and omicron, 23% (n = 91). Time to cytokine panel testing was significantly longer for the earlier epochs. Tumor necrosis factor-α (P < .001) and interleukin 1ß (P < .001) were significantly more elevated in the earlier epochs (median of 558 days in wild-type through Alpha epoch vs 263 days in omicron epoch, P < .001)). Nucleocapsid antibodies were consistently detected across epochs. DISCUSSION: When stratified by variant epoch, patients with early epoch Long COVID had persistently elevated peripheral pro-inflammatory cytokine levels when compared to later epoch Long COVID. Patients with Long COVID have similar clusters of symptoms across epochs, suggesting that the underlying pathology is independent of the peripheral cytokine signature.

Longitudinal Progression of Patients with Long COVID Treated in a Post-COVID Clinic: A Cross-Sectional Survey.

BACKGROUND: In addition to the morbidity and mortality associated with acute infection, COVID-19 has been associated with persistent symptoms (>30 days), often referred to as Long COVID (LC). LC symptoms often cluster into phenotypes, resembling conditions such as fibromyalgia, postural orthostatic tachycardiac syndrome (POTS), and myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). LC clinics have been established to best address the needs of LC patients and continuity of care. We developed a cross-sectional survey to assess treatment response through our LC Clinic (LCC). METHODS: A 25-question survey (1-10 Likert scale) was expert- and content-validated by LCC clinicians, patients, and patient advocates. The survey assessed LC symptoms and the helpfulness of different interventions, including medications and supplements. A total of 852 LCC patients were asked to complete the survey, with 536 (62.9%) responding. RESULTS: The mean time from associated COVID-19 infection to survey completion was 23.2 ± 6.4 months. The mean age of responders was 52.3 ± 14.1 (63% females). Self-reported symptoms were all significantly improved (P < .001) from the initial visit to the LCC (baseline) to the time of the follow-up survey. However, only 4.5% (24/536) of patients rated all symptoms low (1-2) at the time of the survey, indicating low levels of full recovery in our cohort. The patients rated numerous interventions as being helpful, including low-dose naltrexone (45/77; 58%), vagal nerve stimulation (18/34; 53%), and fisetin (28/44; 64%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients report general improvements in symptoms following the initial LCC visit, but complete recovery rates remain low at 23.2 ± 6.4 months.

Outpatient treatment with concomitant vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma for patients with immunosuppression and COVID-19.

Although severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and hospitalization associated with COVID-19 are generally preventable among healthy vaccine recipients, patients with immunosuppression have poor immunogenic responses to COVID-19 vaccines and remain at high risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 and hospitalization. In addition, monoclonal antibody therapy is limited by the emergence of novel SARS-CoV-2 variants that have serially escaped neutralization. In this context, there is interest in understanding the clinical benefit associated with COVID-19 convalescent plasma collected from persons who have been both naturally infected with SARS-CoV-2 and vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 ("vax-plasma"). Thus, we report the clinical outcome of 386 immunocompromised outpatients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 and who received contemporary COVID-19-specific therapeutics (standard-of-care group) and a subgroup who also received concomitant treatment with very high titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma (vax-plasma group) with a specific focus on hospitalization rates. The overall hospitalization rate was 2.2% (5 of 225 patients) in the vax-plasma group and 6.2% (10 of 161 patients) in the standard-of-care group, which corresponded to a relative risk reduction of 65% (P = 0.046). Evidence of efficacy in nonvaccinated patients cannot be inferred from these data because 94% (361 of 386 patients) of patients were vaccinated. In vaccinated patients with immunosuppression and COVID-19, the addition of vax-plasma or very high titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma to COVID-19-specific therapies reduced the risk of disease progression leading to hospitalization.IMPORTANCEAs SARS-CoV-2 evolves, new variants of concern (VOCs) have emerged that evade available anti-spike monoclonal antibodies, particularly among immunosuppressed patients. However, high-titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma continues to be effective against VOCs because of its broad-spectrum immunomodulatory properties. Thus, we report clinical outcomes of 386 immunocompromised outpatients who were treated with COVID-19-specific therapeutics and a subgroup also treated with vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma. We found that the administration of vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma was associated with a significantly decreased incidence of hospitalization among immunocompromised COVID-19 outpatients. Our data add to the contemporary data providing evidence to support the clinical utility of high-titer convalescent plasma as antibody replacement therapy in immunocompromised patients.

Comparable outcomes of outpatient remdesivir and sotrovimab among high-risk patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 during the omicron BA.1 surge.

Studies conducted prior to SARS-CoV-2 Omicron demonstrated that sotrovimab and remdesivir reduced hospitalization among high-risk outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. However, their effectiveness has not been directly compared. This study examined all high-risk outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19 who received either remdesivir or sotrovimab at Mayo Clinic during the Omicron BA.1 surge from January to March 2022. COVID-19-related hospitalization or death within 28 days were compared between the two treatment groups. Among 3257 patients, 2158 received sotrovimab and 1099 received remdesivir. Patients treated with sotrovimab were younger and had lower comorbidity but were more likely to be immunocompromised than remdesivir-treated patients. The majority (89%) had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. COVID-19-related hospitalization (1.5% and 1.0% in remdesivir and sotrovimab, respectively, p = .15) and mortality within 28 days (0.4% in both groups, p = .82) were similarly low. A propensity score weighted analysis demonstrated no significant difference in the outcomes between the two groups. We demonstrated favorable outcomes that were not significantly different between patients treated with remdesivir or sotrovimab.

A Pragmatic Study of Cardiovascular Disease During Long-Term COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Many patients diagnosed with COVID-19 have persistent cardiovascular symptoms, but whether this represents a true cardiac process is unclear. This study assessed whether symptoms associated with long COVID among patients referred for cardiovascular evaluation are associated with objective abnormalities on cardiac testing to explain their clinical presentation. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 40,462 unique patients diagnosed with COVID-19 at our tertiary referral was conducted and identified 363 patients with persistent cardiovascular symptoms a minimum of 4 weeks after polymerase chain reaction confirmed COVID-19 infection. Patients had no cardiovascular symptoms prior to COVID-19 infection. Each patient was referred for cardiovascular evaluation at a tertiary referral center. The incidence and etiology of abnormalities on cardiovascular testing among patients with long COVID symptoms are reported here. The cohort was subsequently divided into 3 categories based on the dominant circulating severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variant at the time of initial infection for further analysis. RESULTS: Among 40,462 unique patients diagnosed with COVID-19 at our tertiary referral center from April 2020 to March 2022, 363 (0.9%) patients with long COVID were evaluated by Cardiology for possible cardiac sequelae from COVID and formed the main study cohort. Of these, 229 (63%) were vaccinated and 47 (12.9%) had severe initial infection, receiving inpatient treatment for COVID prior to developing long COVID symptoms. Symptoms were associated with a cardiac cause in 85 (23.4%), of which 52 (14.3%) were attributed to COVID; 39 (10.7%) with new cardiac disease from COVID, and 13 (3.6%) to worsening of pre-existing cardiac disease after COVID infection. The median troponin change in 45 patients with troponin measurements within 4 weeks of acute infection was +4 ng/dL (9 to 13 ng/dL). Among the total cohort with long COVID, 83.7% were diagnosed during the pre-Delta phase, 13.2% during the Delta phase, and 3.1% during the Omicron phase of the pandemic. There were 6 cases of myocarditis, 11 rhythm disorders, 8 cases of pericarditis, 5 suspected cases of endothelial dysfunction, and 33 cases of autonomic dysfunction. CONCLUSION: This pragmatic retrospective cohort study suggests that patients with long COVID referred for cardiovascular evaluation infrequently have new, objective cardiovascular disease to explain their clinical presentation. A multidisciplinary, patient-centered approach is warranted for symptom management along with conservative use of diagnostic testing.

Symptom presentation by phenotype of postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome.

Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) presents heterogeneously and is diagnosed when appropriate symptoms are present in conjunction with a heart rate increase of at least 30 beats-per-minute upon standing without orthostatic hypotension. Much of the current understanding of POTS is based on clinical expertise, particularly regarding POTS phenotypes and their potential role in targeting pharmacologic treatment. This study describes the symptom presentation of POTS by phenotypes at a subspecialty POTS clinic. Data was collected prospectively during clinical visits between April 17, 2014 and February 8, 2021. This data was abstracted retrospectively by chart review. Most of the 378 study participants were female (89.9%) with a mean age 23.0 ± 4.9 years. Lightheadedness was the most common (97.6%) symptom and the most disruptive of quality of life (29.9%). Patients reported substantial functional impairment across multiple life domains, with 3.0 ± 2.8 days lost and 4.7 ± 2.3 unproductive days per week. There were no differences in symptom presentation among POTS phenotypes. POTS phenotypes are not distinguishable based on symptoms alone; if phenotyping is sought, testing is necessary. Further research is needed in better classifying POTS phenotypes with the potential goal of tailoring treatment.

Complementary and alternative medicine for long COVID: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Background: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) interventions are growing in popularity as possible treatments for long COVID symptoms. However, comprehensive analysis of current evidence in this setting is still lacking. Objective: This study aims to review existing published studies on the use of CAM interventions for patients experiencing long COVID through a systematic review. Design: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: A comprehensive electronic literature search was performed in multiple databases and clinical trial registries from September 2019 to January 2023. RCTs evaluating efficacy and safety of CAM for long COVID were included. Methodological quality of each included trial was appraised with the Cochrane 'risk of bias' tool. A qualitative analysis was conducted due to heterogeneity of included studies. Results: A total of 14 RCTs with 1195 participants were included in this review. Study findings demonstrated that CAM interventions could benefit patients with long COVID, especially those suffering from neuropsychiatric disorders, olfactory dysfunction, cognitive impairment, fatigue, breathlessness, and mild-to-moderate lung fibrosis. The main interventions reported were self-administered transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation, neuro-meditation, dietary supplements, olfactory training, aromatherapy, inspiratory muscle training, concurrent training, and an online breathing and well-being program. Conclusion: CAM interventions may be effective, safe, and acceptable to patients with symptoms of long COVID. However, the findings from this systematic review should be interpreted with caution due to various methodological limitations. More rigorous trials focused on CAM for long COVID are warranted in the future.

Rates Among Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 Treated With Convalescent Plasma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objective: To examine the association of COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion with mortality and the differences between subgroups in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Patients and Methods: On October 26, 2022, a systematic search was performed for clinical studies of COVID-19 convalescent plasma in the literature from January 1, 2020, to October 26, 2022. Randomized clinical trials and matched cohort studies investigating COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion compared with standard of care treatment or placebo among hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 were included. The electronic search yielded 3841 unique records, of which 744 were considered for full-text screening. The selection process was performed independently by a panel of 5 reviewers. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Data were extracted by 5 independent reviewers in duplicate and pooled using an inverse-variance random effects model. The prespecified end point was all-cause mortality during hospitalization. Results: Thirty-nine randomized clinical trials enrolling 21,529 participants and 70 matched cohort studies enrolling 50,160 participants were included in the systematic review. Separate meta-analyses reported that transfusion of COVID-19 convalescent plasma was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with the control cohort for both randomized clinical trials (odds ratio [OR], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-1.00) and matched cohort studies (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66-0.88). The meta-analysis of subgroups revealed 2 important findings. First, treatment with convalescent plasma containing high antibody levels was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with convalescent plasma containing low antibody levels (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.99). Second, earlier treatment with COVID-19 convalescent plasma was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with the later treatment cohort (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.82). Conclusion: During COVID-19 convalescent plasma use was associated with a 13% reduced risk of mortality, implying a mortality benefit for hospitalized patients with COVID-19, particularly those treated with convalescent plasma containing high antibody levels treated earlier in the disease course.

Diagnosis and Management of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.

Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) is a chronic neurologic disease often preceded by infection. There has been increased interest in ME/CFS recently because of its significant overlap with the post-COVID syndrome (long COVID or post-acute sequelae of COVID), with several studies estimating that half of patients with post-COVID syndrome fulfill ME/CFS criteria. Our concise review describes a generalist approach to ME/CFS, including diagnosis, evaluation, and management strategies.

Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders.

Functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) are an extremely common set of more than 50 disorders characterized by persistent and recurring gastrointestinal symptoms. Most of these patients can be diagnosed and managed by primary care physicians. Treatment includes patient education and reassurance, eliminating triggers, dietary modification, and pharmacologic management. Primary care physicians should consider referral to gastroenterologists when patients exhibit red flag symptoms such as blood in stool, abnormal laboratory findings, involuntary weight loss, age of presentation greater than 50 years, or certain concerning family history.

Post-COVID Conditions.

Postinfectious syndromes have been described since the Spanish influenza pandemic of 1918. A similar syndrome-post-COVID condition (PCC)-is common; it occurs months after COVID-19 infection and involves fatigue, postexertional malaise, dyspnea, memory loss, diffuse pain, and orthostasis. The medical, psychosocial, and economic impact of PCC is immense. In the United States, PCC has caused widespread unemployment and billions in lost wages. Risk factors for development of PCC are female sex and severity of acute COVID-19 infection. Proposed pathophysiologic mechanisms include central nervous system inflammation, viral reservoirs, persistent spike protein, cell receptor dysregulation, and autoimmunity. Because presenting symptoms are often vague, the approach to evaluation should be comprehensive with consideration of other diseases that could masquerade as PCC. Treatments of PCC are little researched, are largely expert based, and are likely to evolve as more evidence emerges. Current therapies, which are symptom targeted, include medications and nonpharmacologic therapies such as optimizing fluid intake, compression garments, progressive activity, meditation, biofeedback, cognitive rehabilitation, and addressing concomitant mood disorders. Many patients will enjoy significant improvements in their quality of life with multimodal treatments and longitudinal care.

Potential reduction of post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 symptoms via vaccination.

The objective of this observational study is to determine whether vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 alters the clinical presentation of post-COVID conditions (PCC). Self-reported data provided by patients requesting care for PCC at the Mayo Clinic were analyzed to assess for a relationship between vaccination status prior to COVID infection and PCC symptoms. In all, 477 subjects were included in this study. In total, 245 (51.4%) were vaccinated. Vaccinated subjects with PCC reported less abdominal pain, anosmia, parosmia, chest pain/tightness, dizziness, numbness/tingling, dyspnea, spells/tremors, and weakness. For hospitalized patients who developed PCC, vaccinated patients reported less chest pain, cough, dizziness, and dyspnea. After applying Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons, decreased abdominal pain remained significant. We conclude that vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 may reduce the symptoms of PCC, leading to improved morbidity and function. Further studies on the impact of vaccination on PCC and recovery are needed.

Risk factors for post-acute sequelae of COVID-19: Survey results from a tertiary care hospital.

Identifying risk factors for post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) is important. We conducted a multicenter cross-sectional survey study to define and characterize risk factors for severe COVID-19 in adults (≥18 years) treated at our virtual COVID-19 clinic from March 1, 2020, through March 31, 2021. We assessed patient demographics, symptom types, and persistence, incidence of PASC, and COVID-19-caused hospitalizations. Surveyed patients were also asked to rate their perception of the severity of their acute COVID-19 symptoms. Continuous variables were summarized descriptively. Differences among groups categorized by acute COVID-19 symptom severity level (mild/very mild, moderate, and severe/very severe) were evaluated with the Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test for continuous measures and the Pearson χ2 test for categorical measures. A total of 3094 adults completed the survey. More respondents with severe/very severe acute COVID-19 symptoms reported having PASC than did those with mild/very mild and moderate acute symptoms. A significantly greater proportion of respondents with PASC were women (68.4% vs 56.7%, p < 0.001), had been hospitalized (12.2% vs 4.4%, p < 0.001), reported having negative psychological COVID-19-related repercussions (39.9% vs 15.3%, p < 0.001), and required more than 1 month to resume normal activities (38.8% vs 12.9%, p < 0.001) than did those without PASC. These findings may improve our understanding of PASC and provide a framework for early recognition of and intervention for patients at higher risk for PASC. Further research is needed to understand the predictors of persistent symptoms after acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and the risk of PASC.

Inflammatory Arthritis After COVID-19: A Case Series.

BACKGROUND Some patients who have recovered from acute infection with SARS-CoV-2 develop persistent symptoms that have been termed post-COVID syndrome (PoCoS). PoCoS can affect the musculoskeletal system, with arthralgia and myalgia being common. Preliminary evidence suggests that PoCoS is an immune-mediated condition that not only predisposes but also precipitates pre-existing inflammatory joint diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and reactive arthritis. Here, we describe a series of patients who presented to our Post-COVID Clinic and were found to have inflammatory arthritis (reactive and rheumatoid arthritis). CASE REPORT We present 5 patients who developed joint pain several weeks after recovery from acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. These patients were seen in our Post-COVID Clinic and came from locations across the United States. All 5 patients were women, with age of diagnosis of COVID-19 disease between 19 and 61 years (mean 37.8 years). All patients presented with joint pain as the primary concern to the Post-COVID Clinic. Abnormal joint imaging was present in all patients. Treatments varied and included non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen, corticosteroids, immunomodulators (golimumab), methotrexate, leflunomide, and hydroxychloroquine. CONCLUSIONS COVID-19 disease is a potential cause of inflammatory arthritis, with both rheumatoid arthritis and reactive arthritis demonstrated in our PoCoS population. Care must be taken to identify these conditions, as there are treatment ramifications.

Cardiopulmonary testing in long COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 patients with undifferentiated Dyspnea on exertion.

BACKGROUND: Dyspnea and fatigue are characteristics of long SARS-CoV-2 (COVID)-19. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) can be used to better evaluate such patients. RESEARCH QUESTION: How significantly and by what mechanisms is exercise capacity impaired in patients with long COVID who are coming to a specialized clinic for evaluation? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed a cohort study using the Mayo Clinic exercise testing database. Subjects included consecutive long COVID patients without prior history of heart or lung disease sent from the Post-COVID Care Clinic for CPET. They were compared to a historical group of non-COVID patients with undifferentiated dyspnea also without known cardiac or pulmonary disease. Statistical comparisons were performed by t-test or Pearson's chi2 test controlling for age, sex, and beta blocker use where appropriate. RESULTS: We found 77 patients with long COVID and 766 control patients. Long COVID patients were younger (47 ± 15 vs 50 ± 10 years, P < .01) and more likely female (70% vs 58%, P < .01). The most prominent difference on CPETs was lower percent predicted peak V̇O2 (73 ± 18 vs 85 ± 23%, p < .0001). Autonomic abnormalities (resting tachycardia, CNS changes, low systolic blood pressure) were seen during CPET more commonly in long COVID patients (34 vs 23%, P < .04), while mild pulmonary abnormalities (mild desaturation, limited breathing reserve, elevated V̇E/V̇CO2) during CPET were similar (19% in both groups) with only 1 long COVID patient showing severe impairment. INTERPRETATION: We identified severe exercise limitation among long COVID patients. Young women may be at higher risk for these complications. Though mild pulmonary and autonomic impairment were common in long COVID patients, marked limitations were uncommon. We hope our observations help to untangle the physiologic abnormalities responsible for the symptomatology of long COVID.