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.

Prevalence and predictors of persistent cognitive and psychological symptoms in non-hospitalized post-COVID-19 patients seeking care at an outpatient post-COVID-19 clinic.

Introduction: There is still much uncertainty about why some people develop persistent cognitive and mental health problems after SARS-CoV-2 infection and require additional care while others do not. In this study, we investigated the cognitive and psychological outcomes of non-hospitalized post-COVID-19 patients referred to an outpatient post-COVID-19 clinic for persistent symptoms more than 3 months after infection. Additionally, we aimed to explore the influence of demographic, physical, and personal factors on these outcomes. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted at an outpatient post-COVID-19 clinic located at a prominent clinical teaching hospital in the Netherlands. Participants included non-hospitalized patients referred between 2020 and 2022, more than 3 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection, experiencing persistent symptoms. Main outcome measures included levels of anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) (Post-traumatic Stress Symptoms Checklist 14), and cognitive symptoms (Checklist for Cognitive and Emotional Consequences). Data analysis employed Spearman correlation and hierarchical multiple regression analyses. Results: A total of 265 patients (61% female; mean age of 51.7 ± 13.7 years) were included in the study, with an average of 7.6 ± 4.5 months following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among them, 104 patients (40%) reported high levels of anxiety, 111 patients (43%) showed high levels depressive symptoms, and 71 patients (31%) demonstrated high levels of PTSS. Additionally, 200 patients (79%) reported experiencing more than 2 cognitive symptoms. Bivariate analyses indicated associations between psychiatric history and increased cognitive and psychological symptoms. Multivariate analyses revealed positive associations between physical symptoms and cognitive and psychological symptoms, and catastrophizing thoughts were associated with higher anxiety levels (ß = 0.217, p < 0.001). Conversely, positive refocusing was associated with lower depressive symptoms (ß = -0.325, p < 0.001), PTSS (ß = -0.290, p < 0.001), and cognitive symptoms (ß = -0.220, p < 0.001). Discussion: Among non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients seeking care for persistent symptoms, approximately one-third reported high levels of psychological symptoms, and more than three-quarter experienced cognitive symptoms. Physical symptoms, psychiatric history, and a tendency to catastrophize were identified as potential risk factors for persistent psychological and cognitive symptoms. Conversely, positive refocusing demonstrated a protective effect. These findings contribute to the understanding of long-term COVID-19 outcomes and emphasize the importance of integrating a biopsychosocial perspective into treatment approaches.

Direct admission versus interhospital transfer for revascularisation in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: The differences in outcomes and process parameters for NSTEMI patients who are directly admitted to an intervention centre and patients who are first admitted to a general centre are largely unknown. HYPOTHESIS: There are differences in process indicators, but not for clinical outcomes, for NSTEMI who are directly admitted to an intervention centre and patients who are first admitted to a general centre. METHODS: We aim to compare process indicators, costs and clinical outcomes of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients stratified by center of first presentation and revascularisation strategy. Hospital claim data from patients admitted with a NSTEMI between 2017 and 2019 were used for this study. Included patients were stratified by center of admission (intervention vs. general center) and subdivided by revascularisation strategy (PCI, CABG, or no revascularisation [noRevasc]). The primary outcome was length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes included: duration between admission and diagnostic angiography and revascularisation, number of intracoronary procedures, clinical outcomes at 30 days (MACE: all-cause mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction and cardiac readmission) and total costs (accumulation of costs for hospital claims and interhospital ambulance rides). RESULTS: A total of 9641 NSTEMI events (9167 unique patients) were analyzed of which 5399 patients (56%) were admitted at an intervention center and 4242 patients to a general center. Duration of hospitalization was significantly shorter at direct presentation at an intervention centre for all study groups (5 days [2-11] vs. 7 days [4-12], p < 0.001). For PCI, direct presentation at an intervention center yielded shorter time to diagnostic angiography (1 day [0-2] vs. 1 day [1-2], p < 0.01) and revascularisation (1 day [0-3] vs. 4 days [1-7], p < 0.001) and less intracoronary procedures per patient (2 [1-2] vs. 2 [2-2], p < 0.001). For CABG, time to revascularisation was shorter (8 days [5-12] vs. 10 days [7-14], p < 0.001). Total costs were significantly lower in case of direct presentation in an intervention center for all treatment groups €10.211 (8750-18.192) versus €13.741 (11.588-19.381), p < 0.001) while MACE was similar 11.8% versus 12.4%, p = 0.344). CONCLUSION: NSTEMI patients who were directly presented to an intervention center account for shorter duration of hospitalization, less time to revascularisation, less interhospital transfers, less intracoronary procedures and lower costs compared to patients who present at a general center.