Isfahan COVID cohort study: Rationale, methodology, and initial results

7Citations
Citations of this article
27Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Background: The Isfahan COVID Cohort (ICC) study was designed to investigate the short- and long-term consequences of patients with COVID-19 in Iran. This report presents the rationale, methodology, and initial results of ICC. Materials and Methods: ICC is a 5-year multicentric prospective cohort study that is ongoing on two groups including 5000 patients hospitalized with moderate or severe and 800 nonhospitalized patients with mild or asymptomatic COVID-19 in Isfahan. The ICC endpoints are morbidity, mortality, incident cases, or worsening of underlying noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) and their risk factors. In the current analysis, we examined the persistent symptoms and incident NCDs or risk factors in 819 previously hospitalized patients who completed 1-year follow-up. Results: The two most common symptoms were joint pain/myalgia (19.7%) and dry cough/dyspnea (18.7%). Around 60% of patients had at least one symptom which was more common among women than men and in middle aged than younger or older patients. Female (odds ratio [OR] =1.88, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.39-2.55) and highly-educated patients (OR = 2.18, 95% CI: 1.56-3.04) had higher risk of having any symptom in 1-year follow-up. New cases of hypertension followed by diabetes then coronary heart disease (CHD) were the most common incident NCDs. Conclusion: During 1-year follow-up after hospital discharge, about 60% of patients experienced persistent symptoms. Incident hypertension, diabetes, and CHD were the most common events seen. Close monitoring and extensive health services with integrative approaches are needed to improve the health status of these patients.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sarrafzadegan, N., Mohammadifard, N., Javanmard, S. H., Haghighatdoost, F., Nouri, F., Ahmadian, M., … Changiz, T. (2022). Isfahan COVID cohort study: Rationale, methodology, and initial results. Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, 27(1), 65. https://doi.org/10.4103/jrms.jrms_552_21

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free