Rehabilitation post-COVID-19: Cross-sectional observations using the Stanford Hall remote assessment tool

18Citations
Citations of this article
102Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Introduction The multisystem COVID-19 can cause prolonged symptoms requiring rehabilitation. This study describes the creation of a remote COVID-19 rehabilitation assessment tool to allow timely triage, assessment and management. It hypotheses those with post-COVID-19 syndrome, potentially without laboratory confirmation and irrespective of initial disease severity, will have significant rehabilitation needs. Methods Cross-sectional study of consecutive patients referred by general practitioners (April-November 2020). Primary outcomes were presence/absence of anticipated sequelae. Binary logistic regression was used to test association between acute presentation and post-COVID-19 symptomatology. Results 155 patients (n=127 men, n=28 women, median age 39 years, median 13 weeks post-illness) were assessed using the tool. Acute symptoms were most commonly shortness of breath (SOB) (74.2%), fever (73.5%), fatigue (70.3%) and cough (64.5%); and post-acutely, SOB (76.7%), fatigue (70.3%), cough (57.4%) and anxiety/mood disturbance (39.4%). Individuals with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 were 69% and 63% less likely to have anxiety/mood disturbance and pain, respectively, at 3 months. Conclusions Rehabilitation assessment should be offered to all patients suffering post-COVID-19 symptoms, not only those with laboratory confirmation and considered independently from acute illness severity. This tool offers a structure for a remote assessment. Post-COVID-19 programmes should include SOB, fatigue and mood disturbance management.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

O’Sullivan, O., Barker-Davies, R. M., Thompson, K., Bahadur, S., Gough, M., Lewis, S., … Cranley, M. (2023). Rehabilitation post-COVID-19: Cross-sectional observations using the Stanford Hall remote assessment tool. BMJ Military Health, 169(3), 243–248. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjmilitary-2021-001856

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