The Alfred Health post-COVID-19 service, Melbourne, 2020-2022: an observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the uptake of the Alfred Health Post-COVID service among people hospitalised with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) or referred by general practitioners; to describe their characteristics and symptoms at eight weeks and the clinical services they required. STUDY DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: Outpatient post-COVID-19 follow-up service in a tertiary Melbourne hospital. PARTICIPANTS: All people admitted to Alfred Health (inpatients, hospital-in-the-home) with COVID-19, 19 March 2020 - 28 December 2022; people with persistent symptoms referred by general practitioners in the Alfred Health catchment area during 2022. INTERVENTION: Questionnaire-based symptom assessment eight weeks after onset of COVID-19. Dyspnoea, fatigue, depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder were assessed with standardised tools, as were health status and health-related quality of life; return to work or study, weight loss, and altered cognition and memory were also assessed. Screening was followed by physical assessment and management at the service (specialist general medicine review, physiotherapist, allied health assistant, neuropsychologist) and referral to other specialist medical services as required. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of eligible people who used the service for follow-up at eight weeks; proportions of service users who reported symptoms and return to pre-COVID-19 employment or study; clinical services required by service users. RESULTS: Of 6712 people invited for screening, 726 completed questionnaires (11%). At least one persistent symptom was reported by 385 of 642 respondents (60% of respondents, 5.7% of invitees), most frequently memory (371 of 656, 57%) or concentration problems (431 of 656, 66%), dyspnoea (197 of 703, 28%), and extreme fatigue (189 of 673, 28%). Sixty-seven of 453 respondents had not returned to pre-COVID-19 work or study (15%). People were referred to a variety of medical and non-medical services for management, including specialist medical clinics, allied health, and rehabilitation. Among 71 people who also completed questionnaires at twelve months, the proportions who reported fatigue, anxiety, and memory and concentration changes were similar at both assessments. CONCLUSIONS: After acute COVID-19 that required hospital admission or was followed by persistent symptoms in community care, a small proportion of people (5.7%) reported symptoms that required medical and allied health specialist assessment and management. Our findings may assist planning services for people with long COVID.

Impact of Test Instructions on 6-min Walk Distance in Adults With Chronic Respiratory Disease: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL.

PURPOSE: The 6-min walk test (6MWT) is commonly used to assess functional exercise capacity in people with chronic respiratory disease in both clinical and research settings. However, two tests are required to achieve accurate results, due to a well-documented learning effect for the 6-min walk distance (6MWD). Whether it is possible to reduce or eliminate the learning effect by optimizing 6MWT instructions is not known. METHODS: People with chronic respiratory disease referred to pulmonary rehabilitation undertook two 6MWT with random allocation to modified instructions ( fast -walk as fast as possible; n = 46) or usual instructions ( far -walk as far as possible; n = 49). The primary outcome was the learning effect, defined as the difference in the 6MWD between test one and test two. Subgroup analyses investigated whether effects varied in those who were naïve to the 6MWT or according to diagnosis (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, interstitial lung disease, and bronchiectasis). RESULTS: A learning effect was present in both groups, with a mean improvement in the 6MWD on the second test of 14 m in the fast (modified) group (95% CI, 6-22) and 11 m in the far (usual) group (95% CI, 4-19). There was no statistically or clinically significant difference between groups in the magnitude of the learning effect (between-group difference -3 m, 95% CI, -14 to 8). There was no significant effect of naivety to the 6MWT or diagnosis. CONCLUSION: The current recommended procedures for the 6MWT, including standardized instructions and performance of two tests on each occasion, should be retained.

A self-management package for pulmonary fibrosis: A feasibility study.

Background and objective: There is currently no self-management package designed to meet the needs of people with pulmonary fibrosis (PF). This study evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of a PF-specific self-management package. Methods: Adults with PF were randomly allocated (1:1) to either receive the self-management package with healthcare professional (HCP) support or standardised PF information. Primary outcomes were feasibility and acceptability of the intervention. Secondary outcomes included health-related quality of life, self-efficacy, breathlessness, daily steps, use of PF-related treatments, and healthcare utilisation. Participants' experiences of using the package were explored using qualitative interviews. Results: Thirty participants were included. Recruitment rate was 91% and 100% of those recruited were randomised. Eighty-seven percent of participants who received the package read ≥1 module and set a goal. Secondary outcomes were feasible to collect with high assessment completion rates (87%). Most participants reported the package was easy to use and enhanced knowledge, but suggested some improvements, while HCP support was highly valued. Conclusion: A PF-specific self-management package was feasible to deliver and requires further testing in a trial powered to detect changes in clinical outcomes. Innovation: This is the first self-management package designed specifically for people with PF, informed by patient experience and expert consensus.

Self-management interventions for people with pulmonary fibrosis: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The most effective method for encouraging self-management in individuals with pulmonary fibrosis (PF) is unclear. This review aimed to identify common self-management components, the outcome measures used and the impact of these components in PF. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted according to the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis using Medline, Embase, PsychInfo, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Eligible studies included those with educational, behavioural or support components aimed at facilitating self-management among adults with PF and employed quantitative and/or qualitative methods. RESULTS: 87 studies were included. Common self-management components included education (78%), managing physical symptoms (66%) and enhancing psychosocial wellbeing (54%). Components were predominantly delivered in a pulmonary rehabilitation setting (71%). No studies tested a PF-specific self-management package. Common outcome measures were 6-min walk distance (60%), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (37%) and the Medical Research Council Dyspnoea scale (34%). Clinically significant improvements in these outcomes were seen in ≥50% of randomised controlled trials. Qualitative data highlighted the importance of healthcare professional and peer support and increased confidence in managing PF. CONCLUSION: Self-management components are commonly incorporated into pulmonary rehabilitation programmes rather than being offered as standalone packages. Future research should focus on testing PF-specific self-management packages and employ standardised outcome assessments that include self-efficacy and health-related behaviours.