Using cardiorespiratory fitness assessment to identify pathophysiology in long COVID - Best practice approaches.

Cardio-respiratory fitness (CRF) is well-established in the clinical domains as an integrative measure of the body's physiological capability and capacity to transport and utilise oxygen during controlled bouts of physical exertion. Long COVID is associated with >200 different symptoms and is estimated to affect ∼150 million people worldwide. The most widely reported impact is reduced quality of life and functional status due to highly sensitive and cyclical symptoms that manifest and are augmented following exposure to physical, emotional, orthostatic, and cognitive stimuli, more commonly known as post-exertional symptom exacerbation (PESE) which prevents millions from engaging in routine daily activities. The use of cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) is commonplace in the assessment of integrated physiology; CPET will undoubtedly play an integral role in furthering the pathophysiology and mechanistic knowledge that will inform bespoke Long COVID treatment and management strategies. An inherent risk of previous attempts to utilise CPET protocols in patients with chronic disease is that these are compounded by PESE and have induced a worsening of symptoms for patients that can last for days or weeks. To do this effectively and to meet the global need, the complex multi-system pathophysiology of Long COVID must be considered to ensure the design and implementation of research that is both safe for participants and capable of advancing mechanistic understanding.

Forming a consensus opinion to inform long COVID support mechanisms and interventions: a modified Delphi approach.

Background: Current approaches to support patients living with post-COVID condition, also known as Long COVID, are highly disparate with limited success in managing or resolving a well-documented and long-standing symptom burden. With approximately 2.1 million people living with the condition in the UK alone and millions more worldwide, there is a desperate need to devise support strategies and interventions for patients. Methods: A three-round Delphi consensus methodology was distributed internationally using an online survey and was completed by healthcare professionals (including clinicians, physiotherapists, and general practitioners), people with long COVID, and long COVID academic researchers (round 1 n = 273, round 2 n = 186, round 3 n = 138). Across the three rounds, respondents were located predominantly in the United Kingdom (UK), with 17.3-15.2% (round 1, n = 47; round 2 n = 32, round 2 n = 21) of respondents located elsewhere (United States of America (USA), Austria, Malta, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Finland, Norway, Malta, Netherlands, Iceland, Canada, Tunisie, Brazil, Hungary, Greece, France, Austrailia, South Africa, Serbia, and India). Respondents were given ∼5 weeks to complete the survey following enrolment, with round one taking place from 02/15/2022 to 03/28/22, round two; 05/09/2022 to 06/26/2022, and round 3; 07/14/2022 to 08/09/2022. A 5-point Likert scale of agreement was used and the opportunity to include free text responses was provided in the first round. Findings: Fifty-five statements reached consensus (defined as >80% agree and strongly agree), across the domains of i) long COVID as a condition, ii) current support and care available for long COVID, iii) clinical assessments for long COVID, and iv) support mechanisms and rehabilitation interventions for long COVID, further sub-categorised by consideration, inclusion, and focus. Consensus reached proposes that long COVID requires specialised, comprehensive support mechanisms and that interventions should form a personalised care plan guided by the needs of the patients. Supportive approaches should focus on individual symptoms, including but not limited to fatigue, cognitive dysfunction, and dyspnoea, utilising pacing, fatigue management, and support returning to daily activities. The mental impact of living with long COVID, tolerance to physical activity, emotional distress and well-being, and research of pre-existing conditions with similar symptoms, such as myalgic encephalomyelitis, should also be considered when supporting people with long COVID. Interpretation: We provide an outline that achieved consensus with stakeholders that could be used to inform the design and implementation of bespoke long COVID support mechanisms. Funding: None.

Lived experience of patients with Long COVID: a qualitative study in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Long COVID is a rapidly evolving global health crisis requiring interdisciplinary support strategies that incorporate the lived experience of patients. Currently, there is a paucity of research documenting the day-to-day experiences of patients living with Long COVID. OBJECTIVE: To explore the lived experience of Long COVID patients. STUDY DESIGN: Longitudinal, observation study. SETTING: An inductive, data-driven, qualitative approach was used to evaluate hand-written diaries obtained from individuals who had been referred to a Derbyshire Long COVID clinic. PARTICIPANTS: 12 participants (11 females, age 49±10 years, 11 Caucasians) were recruited. Participants were included if they had a previous confirmed or suspected COVID-19 infection with ongoing recovery, >18 years old, understood the study requirements and provided informed consent. METHOD: Participants were directed to complete self-report diaries over 16 weeks. Responses were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three key themes were highlighted: (1) understanding who helps patients manage symptoms, (2) daily activities and the impact on quality of life and health status and (3) the effect of turbulent and episodic symptom profiles on personal identity and recovery. CONCLUSIONS: The novel challenges presented by Long COVID are complex with varying inter-related factors that are broadly impacting functional status and quality of life. Support mechanisms must incorporate the lived experiences and foster true collaborations between health professionals, patients and researchers to improve patient outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04649957.

A united approach to promoting healthy living behaviours and associated health outcomes: a global call for policymakers and decisionmakers.

Chronic disease pandemics have challenged societies and public health throughout history and remain ever-present. Despite increased knowledge, awareness and advancements in medicine, technology, and global initiatives the state of global health is declining. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has compounded the current perilous state of global health, and the long-term impact is yet to be realised. A coordinated global infrastructure could add substantial benefits to public health and yield prominent and consistent policy resulting in impactful change. To achieve global impact, research priorities that address multi-disciplinary social, environmental, and clinical must be supported by unified approaches that maximise public health. We present a call to action for established public health organisations and governments globally to consider the lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic and unite with true collaborative efforts to address current, longstanding, and growing challenges to public health.

The Impact of COVID-19 on the Social Determinants of Cardiovascular Health.

Cardiovascular disease is the leading noncommunicable disease and cause of premature mortality globally. Despite well established evidence of a cause-effect relationship between modifiable lifestyle behaviours and the onset of risk of chronic disease, preventive approaches to curtail increasing prevalence have been ineffective. This has undoubtedly been exacerbated by the response to COVID-19, which saw widespread national lockdowns implemented to reduce transmission and alleviate pressure on strained health care systems. A consequence of these approaches was a well documented negative impact on population health in the context of both physical and mental well-being. Although the true extent of the impact of the COVID-19 response on global health has yet to be fully realised or understood, it seems prudent to review effective preventative and management strategies that have yielded positive outcomes across the spectrum (ie, from individual to society). There is also a clear need to heed lessons learned from the COVID-19 experience in the power of collaboration and how this can be used in the design, development, and implementation of future approaches to address the longstanding burden of cardiovascular disease.

Cardiovascular disease prevention and management in the COVID-19 era and beyond: An international perspective.

Despite some indicators of a localized curtailing of cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevalence, CVD remains one of the largest contributors to global morbidity and mortality. While the magnitude and impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have yet to be realized in its entirety, an unquestionable impact on global health and well-being is already clear. At a time when the global state of CVD is perilous, we provide a continental overview of prevalence data and initiatives that have positively influenced CVD outcomes. What is clear is that despite attempts to address the global burden of CVD, there remains a lack of collective thinking and approaches. Moving forward, a coordinated global infrastructure that, if developed with appropriate and relevant key stakeholders, could provide significant and longstanding benefits to public health and yield prominent and consistent policy resulting in impactful change. To achieve global impact, research priorities that address multi-disciplinary social, environmental, and clinical perspectives must be underpinned by unified approaches that maximize public health.

Cardiorespiratory fitness as a vital sign of CVD risk in the COVID-19 era.

The severe health consequences of the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have been exacerbated by the prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors, such as physical inactivity, obesity, hypertension, and diabetes. Further, policy decisions during the pandemic augmented unhealthy lifestyle behaviors and health inequalities, likely increasing the global disease burden. Cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) is a well-established biomarker associated with CVD risk. Emerging data demonstrate that high CRF offers some protection against severe outcomes from COVID-19 infection, highlighting the importance of CRF for population health and the potential for limiting the severity of future pandemics. CRF is best assessed by cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET), which will be an important tool for understanding the prolonged pathophysiology of COVID-19, the emergence of long-COVID, and the lasting effects of COVID-19 on CVD risk. Utilization of CRF and CPET within clinical settings should become commonplace because of lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19 and elite sport: Cardiovascular implications and return-to-play.

Curtailing elite sports during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was necessary to prevent widespread viral transmission. Now that elite sport and international competitions have been largely restored, there is still a need to devise appropriate screening and management pathways for athletes with a history of, or current, COVID-19 infection. These approaches should support the decision-making process of coaches, sports medicine practitioners and the athlete about the suitability to return to training and competition activities. In the absence of longitudinal data sets from athlete populations, the incidence of developing prolonged and debilitating symptoms (i.e., Long COVID) that affects a return to training and competition remains a challenge to sports and exercise scientists, sports medicine practitioners and clinical groups. As the world attempts to adjust toward 'living with COVID-19' the very nature of elite and international sporting competition poses a risk to athlete welfare that must be screened for and managed with bespoke protocols that consider the cardiovascular implications for performance.

The need for exercise sciences and an integrated response to COVID-19: A position statement from the international HL-PIVOT network.

COVID-19 is one of the biggest health crises that the world has seen. Whilst measures to abate transmission and infection are ongoing, there continues to be growing numbers of patients requiring chronic support, which is already putting a strain on health care systems around the world and which may do so for years to come. A legacy of COVID-19 will be a long-term requirement to support patients with dedicated rehabilitation and support services. With many clinical settings characterized by a lack of funding and resources, the need to provide these additional services could overwhelm clinical capacity. This position statement from the Healthy Living for Pandemic Event Protection (HL-PIVOT) Network provides a collaborative blueprint focused on leading research and developing clinical guidelines, bringing together professionals with expertise in clinical services and the exercise sciences to develop the evidence base needed to improve outcomes for patients infected by COVID-19.

Number of Directional Changes Alters the Physiological, Perceptual, and Neuromuscular Responses of Netball Players During Intermittent Shuttle Running.

This study investigated whether an increased number of changes in direction altered the metabolic, cardiovascular, perceptual, and neuromuscular responses to intermittent shuttle running (ISR). Using a randomized crossover design, 10 female netball players completed 30 minutes of ISR over a 10-m (ISR10) and 20-m (ISR20) linear course. Measures of expired air, heart rate (HR), rating of perceived exertion, blood lactate concentration ([BLa]), and peak torque of knee extensors and flexors were measured. Differences (%change ± 90% CL) in VO2 (1.5 ± 5.6%) was unclear between conditions, whereas HR was possibly higher (1.5 ± 2.5%) and [BLa] very likely lower in ISR20 compared with ISR10 (-32.7 ± 9.9%). Rating of perceived exertion was likely lower in the ISR20 compared with the ISR10 condition at 15 (-5.0 ± 5.0%) and most likely lower at 30 minutes (-9.4 ± 2.0%). Sprint times over 20 m were likely slower during ISR20 at mid (3.9 ± 3.2%) but unclear after (2.1 ± 5.4%). Changes in muscle function were not different between ISR10 and ISR20 conditions for knee extension (-0.2 ± 0.9%) but were likely different for knee flexion (-5.7 ± 4.9%). More directional changes during shuttle running increase the physiological and perceptual load on female athletes, which also cause a greater reduction in knee extensor torque. These findings have implications for the effective conditioning and injury prevention of female team sport athletes.