Self-perceived barriers to healthcare access for patients with post COVID-19 condition.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with post COVID-19 condition (PCC) require healthcare services. However, qualitative studies indicate that patients with PCC encounter many barriers to healthcare access. This cross-sectional study aimed to determine how many PCC patients report barriers to healthcare access and which barriers are reported, and to explore differences between subgroups. METHODS: Data were collected via an online survey from 10,462 adult patients with a confirmed or suspected COVID-19 infection in the Netherlands, who experienced persisting symptoms ≥ 3 months after the initial infection. To study self-perceived barriers, a list of eleven possible barriers was used, covering multiple aspects of healthcare access. Differences between subgroups based on sociodemographic characteristics, medical characteristics, PCC symptoms (fatigue, dyspnoea, cognitive problems, anxiety and depression), and healthcare use (general practitioner, paramedical professional, medical specialist, occupational physician and mental health professional) were studied through multivariable multinomial (0 vs. 1 vs. > 1 barrier) and binomial regression analyses (for each individual barrier). RESULTS: A total of 83.2% of respondents reported at least one barrier to healthcare access. Respondents reported a median of 2.0 (IQR = 3.0) barriers. The barriers "I didn't know who to turn to for help" (50.9%) and "No one with the right knowledge/skills was available" (36.8%) were most frequently reported. Respondents with younger age, higher educational level, not hospitalized during acute COVID-19 infection, longer disease duration, who had more severe PCC symptoms, and who did not consult an occupational physician or paramedical professional, were more likely to report barriers. Analyses per barrier showed that women were more likely to report financial and help-seeking barriers, while men were more likely to report barriers related to availability of care. Hospitalized respondents were less likely to report barriers related to availability of care, but not less likely to report financial or help-seeking barriers. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that the majority of patients with PCC experiences barriers to healthcare access. Particular attention should be paid to younger, non-hospitalized patients with a long disease duration and severe PCC symptoms. Efforts to remove barriers should focus not only on improving availability of care, but also on helping patients navigate care pathways.

Identification of post-COVID-19 condition phenotypes, and differences in health-related quality of life and healthcare use: a cluster analysis.

The aim of this cross-sectional study was to identify post-COVID-19 condition (PCC) phenotypes and to investigate the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and healthcare use per phenotype. We administered a questionnaire to a cohort of PCC patients that included items on socio-demographics, medical characteristics, health symptoms, healthcare use, and the EQ-5D-5L. A principal component analysis (PCA) of PCC symptoms was performed to identify symptom patterns. K-means clustering was used to identify phenotypes. In total, 8630 participants completed the survey. The median number of symptoms was 18, with the top 3 being fatigue, concentration problems, and decreased physical condition. Eight symptom patterns and three phenotypes were identified. Phenotype 1 comprised participants with a lower-than-average number of symptoms, phenotype 2 with an average number of symptoms, and phenotype 3 with a higher-than-average number of symptoms. Compared to participants in phenotypes 1 and 2, those in phenotype 3 consulted significantly more healthcare providers (median 4, 6, and 7, respectively, p < 0.001) and had a significantly worse HRQoL (p < 0.001). In conclusion, number of symptoms rather than type of symptom was the driver in the identification of PCC phenotypes. Experiencing a higher number of symptoms is associated with a lower HRQoL and more healthcare use.

Long-term health outcomes of Q-fever fatigue syndrome patients.

This study determined long-term health outcomes (≥10 years) of Q-fever fatigue syndrome (QFS). Long-term complaints, health-related quality of life (HRQL), health status, energy level, fatigue, post-exertional malaise, anxiety, and depression were assessed. Outcomes and determinants were studied for the total sample and compared among age subgroups: young (<40years), middle-aged (≥40-<65years), and older (≥65years) patients. 368 QFS patients were included. Participants reported a median number of 12.0 long-term complaints. Their HRQL (median EQ-5D-5L index: 0.63) and health status (median EQ-VAS: 50.0) were low, their level of fatigue was high, and many experienced post-exertional malaise complaints (98.9%). Young and middle-aged patients reported worse health outcomes compared with older patients, with both groups reporting a significantly worse health status, higher fatigue levels and anxiety, and more post-exertional malaise complaints and middle-aged patients having a lower HRQL and a higher depression risk. Multivariate regression analyses confirmed that older age is associated with better outcomes, except for the number of health complaints. QFS has thus a considerable impact on patients' health more than 10 years after infection. Young and middle-aged patients experience more long-term health consequences compared with older patients. Tailored health care is recommended to provide optimalcare for each QFS patient.

Burden of infectious disease studies in Europe and the United Kingdom: a review of methodological design choices.

This systematic literature review aimed to provide an overview of the characteristics and methods used in studies applying the disability-adjusted life years (DALY) concept for infectious diseases within European Union (EU)/European Economic Area (EEA)/European Free Trade Association (EFTA) countries and the United Kingdom. Electronic databases and grey literature were searched for articles reporting the assessment of DALY and its components. We considered studies in which researchers performed DALY calculations using primary epidemiological data input sources. We screened 3053 studies of which 2948 were excluded and 105 studies met our inclusion criteria. Of these studies, 22 were multi-country and 83 were single-country studies, of which 46 were from the Netherlands. Food- and water-borne diseases were the most frequently studied infectious diseases. Between 2015 and 2022, the number of burden of infectious disease studies was 1.6 times higher compared to that published between 2000 and 2014. Almost all studies (97%) estimated DALYs based on the incidence- and pathogen-based approach and without social weighting functions; however, there was less methodological consensus with regards to the disability weights and life tables that were applied. The number of burden of infectious disease studies undertaken across Europe has increased over time. Development and use of guidelines will promote performing burden of infectious disease studies and facilitate comparability of the results.

Prerequisites, barriers and opportunities in care for Q-fever patients: a Delphi study among healthcare workers.

BACKGROUND: Q-fever is a zoonotic disease that can lead to illness, disability and death. This study aimed to provide insight into the perspectives of healthcare workers (HCWs) on prerequisites, barriers and opportunities in care for Q-fever patients. METHODS: A two-round online Delphi study was conducted among 94 Dutch HCWs involved in care for Q-fever patients. The questionnaires contained questions on prerequisites for high quality, barriers and facilitators in care, knowledge of Q-fever, and optimization of care. For multiple choice, ranking and Likert scale questions, frequencies were reported, while for rating and numerical questions, the median and interquartile range (IQR) were reported. RESULTS: The panel rated the care for Q-fever patients at a median score of 6/10 (IQR = 2). Sufficient knowledge of Q-fever among HCWs (36%), financial compensation of care (30%) and recognition of the disease by HCWs (26%) were considered the most important prerequisites for high quality care. A lack of knowledge was identified as the most important barrier (76%) and continuing medical education as the primary method for improving HCWs' knowledge (76%). HCWs rated their own knowledge at a median score of 8/10 (IQR = 1) and the general knowledge of other HCWs at a 5/10 (IQR = 2). According to HCWs, a median of eight healthcare providers (IQR = 4) should be involved in the care for Q-fever fatigue syndrome (QFS) and a median of seven (IQR = 5) in chronic Q-fever care. CONCLUSIONS: Ten years after the Dutch Q-fever epidemic, HCWs indicate that the long-term care for Q-fever patients leaves much room for improvement. Facilitation of reported prerequisites for high quality care, improved knowledge among HCWs, clearly defined roles and responsibilities, and guidance on how to support patients could possibly improve quality of care. These prerequisites may also improve care for patients with persisting symptoms due to other infectious diseases, such as COVID-19.

The economic burden of knee and hip osteoarthritis: absenteeism and costs in the Dutch workforce.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to quantify the absenteeism costs of knee and hip osteoarthritis in the Netherlands for the Dutch workforce and specific groups of workers. METHODS: We used a longitudinal, dynamic database from a large occupational health service in which occupational physicians register information about personal information and sick leave of workers with the diagnosis of knee- and/or hip osteoarthritis. We included all employees aged 15 to 75 years performing paid work and diagnosed with knee and/or hip osteoarthritis. Costs were calculated annually and per episode for different subgroups from an employer's perspective using the Human Capital Approach. In the Netherlands, the employer has to pay 70% of the employee's wage out of pocket for the first two years of sick leave and also for the occupational health care. In this way, employers receive information about the costs of workers on sick leave due to knee or hip osteoarthritis. This might stimulate investments in targeted prevention and work-directed care. RESULTS: For the period 2015-2017, 1399 workers fulfilled the inclusion criteria. An average sick leave episode of knee osteoarthritis had a duration of 186 calendar days and was associated with €15,550 in costs. For hip osteoarthritis these data were 159 calendar days and €12,482 in costs. These costs are particularly high among male workers and workers with a higher number of weekly working hours. The average annual costs for the Dutch workforce due to sick leave for knee and hip osteoarthritis were €26.9 million and €13.8 million, respectively. Sick leave costs decreased for hip and not for knee osteoarthritis during 2015-2017. CONCLUSIONS: Annual sick leave costs due to knee and hip osteoarthritis are about €40 million for the Dutch workforce and approximately twice as high for knee compared to hip osteoarthritis. Average costs per sick leave episode are particularly high among male workers and workers with a higher number of weekly working hours.

The prolonged impact of COVID-19 on symptoms, health-related quality of life, fatigue and mental well-being: a cross-sectional study.

Background: A subset of patients experience persisting symptoms after an acute COVID-19 infection, referred to as "post COVID-19 condition". This cross-sectional study aimed to compare symptoms, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), fatigue, mental well-being, and determinants of diminished HRQoL, between patients with post COVID-19 condition categorized by time since acute infection. Methods: We performed an online survey and analyzed responses of 10,194 adult respondents with a confirmed or suspected COVID-19 infection, who experienced persisting symptoms ≥3 months after the initial infection. The most debilitating symptoms and health outcomes were studied separately for respondents 3-6, 7-9, 10-12, 13-18, 19-24, and >24 months after acute infection. Results: At each time period, fatigue, sensory-processing problems, and concentration problems were the most debilitating symptoms reported by respondents, although the proportion of respondents who reported these symptoms differed significantly between time periods. Respondents 3-6 months post-acute infection had the lowest HRQoL (median EQ-5D utility score: 0.59), the highest fatigue level (median score: 110.0) and the highest proportion with a likely depressive disorder (32.4%), whereas respondents 13-18 months post-infection had the highest HRQoL (0.65), the lowest fatigue level (106.0), and the second lowest proportion with a likely depressive disorder (25.0%) (p = 0.000-0.007). Compared to those 13-18 and 19-24 months post-infection, respondents >24 months post-infection had a slightly lower HRQoL (0.60), lower fatigue level (108.0), and lower proportion with a likely depressive disorder (29.2%), although only the differences in HRQoL were statistically significant (p = 0.001-0.010). Younger age, female gender, lower level of education, not having paid work before COVID-19, comorbidity, and not being vaccinated, seemed to be associated with lower HRQoL. Conclusion: Regardless of time since infection, respondents considered fatigue, sensory processing problems and concentration problems the most debilitating symptoms. They experienced a low HRQoL and severe fatigue, even more than two years after acute COVID-19 infection. Respondents 3-6 months post-infection had the worst health outcomes, whereas respondents 13-18 months post-infection had the best outcomes, indicating that, at least for a subgroup of patients, health status may improve over time.