Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Prevalence of Symptoms ≤12 Months After Acute Illness, by COVID-19 Testing Status Among Adults — United States, December 2020–March 2023

      research-article
      , MD, PhD 1 , , MD 1 , , PhD 2 , 3 , , MD 4 , 5 , , MS 6 , , MD 7 , 8 , 9 , , MD 10 , , MD 11 , 12 , , DrPH 13 , , PhD 14 , 15 , , MD 16 , , MD 13 , , MD 2 , 3 , , MD 1 , , MSc 8 , , MA 6 , , MD 1 , , MD 17 , 18 , , MD 19 , 20 , , PhD 21 , 22 , , MD 23 , 24 , , MD 3 , 25 , , PhD 10 , , Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry (INSPIRE) Group Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry (INSPIRE) Group, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
      Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
      Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Summary What is already known about this topic? Post-COVID conditions, or long COVID, can persist for months or years after an acute COVID-19 illness and can include emergence of new symptoms or the occurrence of symptoms that come and go. What is added by this report? In a multicenter study of adults with a COVID-like illness, symptom prevalence decreased over time after the acute illness. Approximately 16% of adults with COVID-like symptoms reported persistent symptoms 12 months after a positive or negative SARS-CoV-2 test result. At 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after testing, some symptomatic persons had ongoing symptoms, and others had emerging symptoms not reported during the previous period. What are the implications for public health practice? Health care providers should be aware that symptoms can persist, emerge, reemerge, or resolve after COVID-like illness and are not unique to COVID-19 or to post-COVID conditions. Abstract To further the understanding of post-COVID conditions, and provide a more nuanced description of symptom progression, resolution, emergence, and reemergence after SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-like illness, analysts examined data from the Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry (INSPIRE), a prospective multicenter cohort study. This report includes analysis of data on self-reported symptoms collected from 1,296 adults with COVID-like illness who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 using a Food and Drug Administration–approved polymerase chain reaction or antigen test at the time of enrollment and reported symptoms at 3-month intervals for 12 months. Prevalence of any symptom decreased substantially between baseline and the 3-month follow-up, from 98.4% to 48.2% for persons who received a positive SARS-CoV-2 test results (COVID test–positive participants) and from 88.2% to 36.6% for persons who received negative SARS-CoV-2 test results (COVID test–negative participants). Persistent symptoms decreased through 12 months; no difference between the groups was observed at 12 months (prevalence among COVID test–positive and COVID test–negative participants = 18.3% and 16.1%, respectively; p>0.05). Both groups reported symptoms that emerged or reemerged at 6, 9, and 12 months. Thus, these symptoms are not unique to COVID-19 or to post-COVID conditions. Awareness that symptoms might persist for up to 12 months, and that many symptoms might emerge or reemerge in the year after COVID-like illness, can assist health care providers in understanding the clinical signs and symptoms associated with post-COVID–like conditions. Introduction Post-COVID conditions, or long COVID, comprise a range of symptoms that persist or develop ≥4 weeks after initial SARS-CoV-2 infection, and which are associated with substantial morbidity and reduced quality of life ( 1 ). Estimates of prevalence vary across settings, periods, and patient populations; and many studies lack comparison groups ( 2 ). Symptom trajectory over time using serial measurements has received little attention. Symptoms might either persist or emerge, and previous prevalence estimates typically include both persisting and emerging symptoms, without distinguishing between them ( 1 , 2 ). Methods Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry (INSPIRE) is a prospective study including eight participating major health care systems,* designed to assess long-term symptoms and outcomes among persons with COVID-like illness at study enrollment who received a positive or negative SARS-CoV-2 test result † , § , ¶ (COVID test–positive or COVID test–negative participants, respectively) ( 2 ). Participants could report subsequent SARS-CoV-2 positive test results at each follow-up survey. Participants who completed baseline and 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-month follow-up surveys were included to facilitate distinguishing between emerging and ongoing symptoms. Outcomes included self-reported symptoms across eight symptom categories: 1) head, eyes, ears, nose, and throat (HEENT); 2) constitutional; 3) pulmonary; 4) musculoskeletal; 5) gastrointestinal; 6) cardiovascular; 7) cognitive difficulties; and 8) extreme fatigue (based on fatigue severity scales, which measure the occurrence and severity of eight symptoms associated with postinfectious syndrome; scores range from 10 to 80 and scores ≥25 correspond with previously established threshold for extreme fatigue).** , †† At each period, a participant was defined as having a persistent symptom if he or she had the symptom at that visit and all previous periods. Emerging symptoms were those present at a given time point but not present at the previous time point, including symptoms that resolved and reemerged after an absence. Analyses included descriptions of the participants’ sociodemographic and clinical characteristics; statistical comparisons of the COVID test–positive and COVID test–negative groups were performed using Pearson’s chi-square tests. The prevalence of symptom persistence was defined as the proportion of participants with persistent symptoms at each time point; binomial 95% CIs were calculated for each outcome within each group and Pearson’s chi-square tests were used to test for differences in proportions. Symptom trajectories were reported as symptom prevalences at each time point, and the proportion of participants with emerging symptoms was also reported. All results are presented by symptom category, stratified by participants’ COVID test–positive and COVID test–negative status. Participants who reported a subsequent positive SARS-CoV-2 test result during the follow-up period were excluded from the analysis; as a sensitivity analysis, the same analysis was conducted for the entire cohort. Statistical analyses were performed using SAS software (version 9.4; SAS Institute). This study was approved by the institutional review boards at all eight institutions. §§ Results Among 6,075 enrolled participants, 3,726 (61%) completed the 12-month survey, 1,741 (47%) of whom completed all quarterly surveys through 12 months, including 1,288 COVID test–positive and 453 COVID test–negative participants, and are included in this study. Overall, 271 (21%) COVID test–positive participants reported a reinfection and 174 (38%) COVID test–negative participants reported a new infection during the 12-month follow-up period (p<0.01) and were excluded from the main analysis (Supplementary Figure 1, https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/131538). Approximately two thirds of participants identified as female (842; 67.4%) and 905 (72%) as non-Hispanic White (Table 1). Compared with the COVID test–negative group, a lower percentage of participants in the COVID test–positive group identified as female (65.2% versus 75.2%; p<0.01), and a higher percentage reported being married or living with a partner (60.3% versus 48.9%; p<0.01), and having been hospitalized for acute COVID-like illness (5.6% versus 0.4%; p<0.01). The prevalence of asthma was higher in the COVID test–negative group (18.3% versus 11.6%; p<0.01), as were the prevalences of kidney disease (2.5% versus 0.6%; p<0.01) and other unspecified conditions (20.1% versus 14.5%; p = 0.02). TABLE 1 Self-reported characteristics of adults with acute COVID-like illness, by confirmed SARS-CoV-2 test result status* at time of enrollment — Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry study, United States, December 2020–March 2023 Characteristic† No. (%)§ Overall
(N = 1,296) Positive test result
(n = 1,017) Negative test result
(n = 279) p-value Age group, yrs 18–34 505 (39.3) 388 (38.5) 117 (42.4) 0.31 35–49 402 (31.3) 327 (32.4) 75 (27.2) 50–64 266 (20.7) 210 (20.8) 56 (20.3) ≥65 112 (8.7) 84 (8.3) 28 (10.1) Missing 11 (0.8) 8 (0.8) 3 (1.1) Gender Female 842 (67.4) 642 (65.2) 200 (75.2) <0.01 Male 392 (31.4) 329 (33.4) 63 (23.7) Transgender/Nonbinary/Other 16 (1.3) 13 (1.3) 3 (1.1) Missing 46 (3.5) 33 (3.2) 13 (4.7) Hispanic or Latino¶ No 1,105 (87.1) 869 (87.2) 236 (86.4) 0.73 Yes 164 (12.9) 127 (12.8) 37 (13.6) Missing 27 (2.1) 21 (2.1) 6 (2.2) Race¶ Asian 149 (11.9) 107 (10.9) 42 (15.6) 0.13 Black or African American 96 (7.6) 73 (7.4) 23 (8.5) White 905 (72.1) 724 (73.5) 181 (67.0) Other/Multiple 105 (8.4) 81 (8.2) 24 (8.9) Missing 41 (3.2) 32 (3.1) 9 (3.2) Education Less than high school diploma 11 (0.9) 9 (0.9) 2 (0.7) 0.11 High school graduate or GED certificate 82 (6.5) 65 (6.5) 17 (6.3) Some college but did not complete degree 195 (15.4) 143 (14.4) 52 (19.1) 2-year college degree 100 (7.9) 75 (7.5) 25 (9.2) 4-year college degree 420 (33.1) 348 (35.0) 72 (26.5) More than 4-year college degree 459 (36.2) 355 (35.7) 104 (38.2) Missing 29 (2.2) 22 (2.2) 7 (2.5) Marital status Never married 416 (32.1) 309 (30.4) 107 (38.5) <0.01 Married/Living with a partner 749 (57.8) 613 (60.3) 136 (48.9) Divorced/Widowed/Separated 130 (10.0) 95 (9.3) 35 (12.6) Missing 1 (0.1) 0 (—) 1 (0.4) Where COVID-19 testing was received At-home testing kit 75 (5.8) 57 (5.6) 18 (6.5) <0.01 Tent/Drive-up testing site 726 (56.2) 601 (59.4) 125 (44.8) Clinic including an urgent care clinic 212 (16.4) 161 (15.9) 51 (18.3) Hospital 114 (8.8) 82 (8.1) 32 (11.5) Emergency department 69 (5.3) 46 (4.5) 23 (8.2) Other 95 (7.4) 65 (6.4) 30 (10.8) Missing 5 (0.4) 5 (0.5) 0 (—) Health insurance Private and public 52 (4.0) 34 (3.3) 18 (6.5) <0.01 Private only 935 (72.1) 749 (73.6) 186 (66.7) Public only 264 (20.4) 195 (19.2) 69 (24.7) None 45 (3.5) 39 (3.8) 6 (2.2) Hospitalization No 1,218 (95.5) 943 (94.4) 275 (99.6) <0.01 Yes 57 (4.5) 56 (5.6) 1 (0.4) Missing 21 (1.6) 18 (1.8) 3 (1.1) Preexisting medical condition Asthma (moderate or severe) 169 (13.0) 118 (11.6) 51 (18.3) <0.01 Hypertension or high blood pressure 182 (14.0) 137 (13.5) 45 (16.1) 0.26 Diabetes 72 (5.6) 50 (4.9) 22 (7.9) 0.06 Overweight or obesity 352 (27.2) 272 (26.7) 80 (28.7) 0.52 Emphysema or COPD 12 (0.9) 9 (0.9) 3 (1.1) 0.77 Heart conditions such as CAD, heart failure, or cardiomyopathies 30 (2.3) 19 (1.9) 11 (3.9) 0.04 Tobacco use (currently using any type of tobacco, including smokeless tobacco) 61 (4.7) 44 (4.3) 17 (6.1) 0.22 Kidney disease 13 (1.0) 6 (0.6) 7 (2.5) <0.01 Liver disease 15 (1.2) 9 (0.9) 6 (2.2) 0.08 Other 203 (15.7) 147 (14.5) 56 (20.1) 0.02 Participants reporting emerging symptoms at 6–12 mos** Any symptom†† 11 (0.9) 1 (0.1) 10 (3.7) <0.01 HEENT 30 (2.4) 10 (1.0) 20 (7.5) <0.01 Constitutional 27 (2.1) 9 (0.9) 18 (6.7) <0.01 Pulmonary 51 (4.1) 28 (2.8) 23 (8.6) <0.01 Musculoskeletal 66 (5.3) 42 (4.2) 24 (9.0) <0.01 Gastrointestinal 56 (4.5) 34 (3.4) 22 (8.2) <0.01 Cardiovascular 60 (4.8) 42 (4.2) 18 (6.7) 0.09 Cognitive difficulties 107 (8.3) 68 (6.7) 39 (14.0) <0.01 Extreme fatigue 90 (7.0) 65 (6.5) 25 (9.1) 0.13 Abbreviations: CAD = coronary artery disease; COPD = chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; GED = general educational development; HEENT = head, ears, eyes, nose, and throat. * Excluding participants who reported receiving a negative test result during follow-up. † Data were recorded at time of enrollment. The preexisting conditions data were collected at 3 months follow-up, which resulted in the high level of missingness in these variables. § Calculation of percentage and p-values excluded cases with missing values. ¶ Persons of Hispanic or Latino (Hispanic) origin might be of any race but are categorized as Hispanic; all racial groups are non-Hispanic. ** Symptom categories were any symptom (one or more symptoms), HEENT (headache, runny nose, loss of smell, loss of taste, sore throat, and loss of hair), constitutional (tired, chills, feeling hot, fever, and shakes), pulmonary (cough, shortness of breath, and wheezing), musculoskeletal (aches and joint pains), gastrointestinal (diarrhea, nausea or vomiting, and abdominal pain), cardiovascular (chest pain and palpitations), cognitive difficulties (forgetfulness/memory problems, difficulty thinking, or difficulty concentrating), and extreme fatigue (fatigue severity score ≥25). †† Among participants who did not have any symptom at time of enrollment or 3 months after a COVID-like illness. Symptom prevalence at baseline and persistence through 12 months varied according to symptom category (Table 2). A higher proportion of COVID test–positive participants reported symptoms in each category, except for extreme fatigue, at baseline compared with COVID test–negative participants. Symptom prevalence declined over time within each symptom category: 18.3% of COVID test–positive participants and 16.1% of COVID test–negative participants reported persistent symptoms of any type through 12 months. Symptom persistence through 12 months for a given symptom category ranged from 0.3% (gastrointestinal symptoms) to 5.9% (HEENT symptoms) among COVID test–positive participants and from 1.1% (cardiovascular symptoms or pulmonary symptoms) to 6.8% (extreme fatigue) among COVID test–negative participants. Only the persistence of extreme fatigue was statistically significantly different at 12 months between COVID test–positive participants (3.5%) and COVID test–negative participants (6.8%). TABLE 2 Self-reported symptom* prevalence at baseline and persistence † through 12 months after a COVID-like illness among adults, by SARS-CoV-2 test status § — Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry, United States, December 2020–March 2023 Symptoms Test result Prevalence, % (95% CI) Baseline 3 mos 6 mos 9 mos 12 mos Any symptom Positive 98.4 (97.7–99.2) 48.2 (45.1–51.3) 31.2 (28.3–34.0) 24.4 (21.7–27.0) 18.3 (15.9–20.7) Negative 88.2 (84.4–92.0) 36.6 (30.9–42.2) 22.2 (17.3–27.1) 17.9 (13.4–22.4) 16.1 (11.8–20.4) HEENT Positive 93.2 (91.7–94.8) 30.6 (27.7–33.4) 15.2 (13.0–17.4) 9.2 (7.5–11.0) 5.9 (4.5–7.3) Negative 73.5 (68.3–78.7) 19.0 (14.4–23.6) 10.0 (6.5–13.6) 7.5 (4.4–10.6) 5.4 (2.7–8.0) Constitutional Positive 86.4 (84.3–88.5) 22.5 (20.0–25.1) 9.4 (7.6–11.2) 4.8 (3.5–6.1) 2.9 (1.8–3.9) Negative 62.7 (57.1–68.4) 17.6 (13.1–22.0) 8.2 (5.0–11.5) 5.0 (2.5–7.6) 2.9 (0.9–4.8) Pulmonary Positive 68.0 (65.2–70.9) 11.0 (9.1–12.9) 3.9 (2.7–5.1) 2.0 (1.1–2.8) 1.4 (0.7–2.1) Negative 44.1 (38.3–49.9) 7.2 (4.1–10.2) 2.2 (0.4–3.9) 1.4 (0–2.8) 1.1 (0–2.3) Musculoskeletal Positive 60.6 (57.6–63.6) 13.3 (11.2–15.4) 6.1 (4.6–7.6) 3.6 (2.5–4.8) 2.0 (1.1–2.8) Negative 40.9 (35.1–46.6) 8.6 (5.3–11.9) 3.2 (1.2–5.3) 2.5 (0.7–4.3) 2.2 (0.4–3.9) Gastrointestinal Positive 34.0 (31.1–36.9) 4.8 (3.5–6.1) 1.7 (0.9–2.5) 0.7 (0.2–1.2) 0.3 (0–0.6) Negative 26.5 (21.3–31.7) 5.7 (3.0–8.5) 1.8 (0.2–3.3) 1.4 (0–2.8) 1.1 (0–2.3) Cardiovascular Positive 25.3 (22.6–27.9) 4.7 (3.4–6.0) 1.5 (0.7–2.2) 1.0 (0.4–1.6) 0.7 (0.2–1.2) Negative 17.2 (12.8–21.6) 3.6 (1.4–5.8) 1.4 (0–2.8) 1.1 (0–2.3) 1.1 (0–2.3) Cognitive difficulties Positive 25.0 (22.3–27.6) 9.2 (7.5–11.0) 6.4 (4.9–7.9) 4.5 (3.2–5.8) 3.8 (2.7–5.0) Negative 21.5 (16.7–26.3) 7.5 (4.4–10.6) 5.7 (3.0–8.5) 3.6 (1.4–5.8) 3.2 (1.2–5.3) Extreme fatigue Positive 21.1 (18.6–23.7) 8.1 (6.4–9.7) 6.0 (4.5–7.5) 4.4 (3.2–5.7) 3.5 (2.4–4.7) Negative 25.4 (20.3–30.6) 11.5 (7.7–15.2) 7.5 (4.4–10.6) 7.2 (4.1–10.2) 6.8 (3.9–9.8) Abbreviation: HEENT = head, ears, eyes, nose, and throat. * Symptom categories were any symptom (one or more symptoms), HEENT (headache, runny nose, loss of smell, loss of taste, sore throat, and loss of hair), constitutional (tired, chills, feeling hot, fever, and shakes), pulmonary (cough, shortness of breath, and wheezing), musculoskeletal (aches and joint pains), gastrointestinal (diarrhea, nausea or vomiting, and abdominal pain), cardiovascular (chest pain and palpitations), cognitive difficulties (forgetfulness/memory problems, difficulty thinking, or difficulty concentrating), and extreme fatigue (fatigue severity score ≥25). Percentage of participants reporting symptoms at each of the time points is presented for each symptom category, stratified by SARS-CoV-2 test result status at time of enrollment. † Persistent symptoms were defined as those present at time of enrollment and reported at each follow-up time point. Binomial 95% CIs were calculated for each outcome within each group. Pearson’s chi-square tests were used to test for differences in proportions at each time point. § Without evidence of new SARS-CoV-2 infection. During the follow-up period, the symptom prevalences in each category except for extreme fatigue were similar at each time point for both COVID test–positive and COVID test–negative participants (Figure). Overall, no difference in symptom prevalence between COVID test–positive and COVID test–negative participant groups was observed across the four periods for the nine total symptom categories. Among COVID test–negative participants, prevalence of extreme fatigue was higher at 9 and 12 months compared to the COVID test–positive group. Approximately one half of participants in each group experienced any symptom at 12 months. Emerging symptoms were reported for every symptom category at each follow-up period for both groups. COVID test–negative participants reported higher prevalences of emerging symptoms at 6 and 12 months in each of the symptom categories, except severe fatigue (Table 1). When participants who reported a subsequent positive SARS-CoV-2 test result were included, the observed pattern was similar to that in the primary analysis, with more statistically significant differences in symptom prevalence during the follow-up period (Supplementary Figure 2, https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/131538) (Supplementary Figure 3, https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/131538). FIGURE Self-reported prevalence of emerging and reemerging symptoms,* , † , § by symptom category during 12 months ¶ among adults with an acute COVID-like illness with no evidence of new or reinfection by SARS-CoV-2 test result status** — Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry, United States, December 2020–March 2023 Abbreviation: HEENT = head, ears, eyes, nose, and throat. * Symptom categories were any symptom (one or more symptoms), HEENT (headache, runny nose, loss of smell, loss of taste, sore throat, and loss of hair), constitutional (tired, chills, feeling hot, fever, and shakes), pulmonary (cough, shortness of breath, and wheezing), musculoskeletal (aches and joint pains), gastrointestinal (diarrhea, nausea or vomiting, and abdominal pain), cardiovascular (chest pain and palpitations), cognitive difficulties (forgetfulness/memory problems, difficulty thinking, or difficulty concentrating), and extreme fatigue (fatigue severity score ≥25). † Emerging symptoms were symptoms present at a given time point but not at the previous time point, including symptoms that resolved and reemerged after an absence. § https://www.cdc.gov/me-cfs/pdfs/wichita-data-access/symptom-inventory-doc.pdf ¶ Point prevalence at each time point is presented for the COVID test result–positive and COVID test result–negative groups for each symptom category. ** Without evidence of reinfection. The figure comprises 4 histograms indicating self-reported prevalence of emerging and reemerging symptoms during 12 months among U.S. adults with an acute COVID-like illness with no evidence of new or reinfection by SARS-CoV-2 test result status during December 2020–March 2023 according to the Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry. Discussion In this prospective, multicenter study of 1,296 persons with acute COVID-like illness, approximately 16% of participants reported persistent symptoms 12 months after their illness, irrespective of their SARS-CoV-2 test result status at baseline. A higher proportion of COVID test–positive than COVID test–negative participants reported symptoms in each symptom category at baseline. The prevalence of symptoms declined substantially in both groups from baseline to the 3-month follow-up assessment and continued to gradually decrease at the 6-, 9-, and 12-month follow-up assessments; persistence of any symptom prevalence at 12 months was not statistically significantly different between the COVID test–positive (18.3%) and COVID test–negative (16.1%) participant groups. These findings expand the understanding of post-COVID conditions. Previous studies have reported symptom prevalence estimates across varied, nonstandardized periods or at a single point in time, resulting in challenges comparing studies and difficulty distinguishing among the presence of reported persistent symptoms at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, those that resolved and then reemerged, and those that emerged after initial recovery ( 3 – 9 ). Few previous longitudinal studies have compared symptoms in COVID test–positive participants with those in persons with a COVID-like illness and who received negative SARS-CoV-2 test results. By conducting serial measurements of emerging and ongoing symptoms, this study was able to ascertain that participants who were symptomatic at a given time point included participants with ongoing symptoms as well as those with emerging symptoms (i.e., symptoms that were not present 3 months earlier). The inclusion of participants with COVID-like illness and negative test results guides discussions on characterizing symptoms associated with post-COVID conditions ( 10 ). This differentiation adds nuance and clarity to the natural history of post-COVID conditions and characterizes the fluctuating nature of symptoms over time and recognizes that these symptoms are not unique to COVID-19 or to post-COVID conditions. Many participants experienced new symptoms ≥6 months after the acute illness, suggesting that the prevalence of emerging symptoms in the months after acute COVID-like illness might be considerable. Cognitive difficulties and extreme fatigue were two common symptoms that emerged after 6 months and are often reported to occur with post-COVID conditions ( 1 , 3 , 6 , 9 ). Differentiating between symptoms that resolve and emerge over time helps to characterize post-COVID conditions and suggests that measurements at single time points underestimate or mischaracterize the true effects of disease. Limitations The findings in this report are subject to at least four limitations. First, among the COVID test–negative group, no information on any other condition that might have caused the reported acute symptoms is available. Second, although the number of participants who subsequently reported a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result was higher in the COVID test–negative than in the COVID test–positive group, the rate of nonresponse to the question about having a subsequent SARS-CoV-2 test result was relatively higher in the COVID test–negative group. Testing was not systematically performed and participants with a subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection might have not tested or might have received a false-negative test result. However, analysis including participants who reported subsequent positive test results did not differ substantially; thus, the results are not likely driven by subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infections. Infection with any other pathogen or the occurrence of other medical problems might have been experienced by persons in either group and could account for some reported symptoms. Third, the survey did not include all possible symptoms; therefore, other symptoms might not have been captured. Finally, this study did not report symptom severity or impact on daily activities, thus the functional significance of these findings could not be assessed. Implications for Public Health Practice Given the findings that approximately 16% of persons who have had an acute COVID-like illness might experience persistent symptoms through 12 months, post-COVID–like conditions could represent a substantial impact on health and the health care system. This report highlights the patterns of symptoms after acute COVID-like illness by providing estimates of symptom prevalence for both ongoing and emerging symptoms. Improved understanding of the persistent and fluctuating nature of symptoms could guide clinical care and public health response to post-COVID–like conditions.

          Related collections

          Most cited references9

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          Persistent Symptoms in Patients After Acute COVID-19

          This case series describes COVID-19 symptoms persisting a mean of 60 days after onset among Italian patients previously discharged from COVID-19 hospitalization.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Post-discharge persistent symptoms and health-related quality of life after hospitalization for COVID-19

            Dear editor, In this journal, we recently reported a series of 279 hospitalized patients with novel coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) and their short-term outcome. 1 However, only a few studies have assessed post-discharge persistent symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after hospitalization for COVID-19. 2 , 3 Here, we describe a single-centre study assessing post-discharge persistent symptoms and HRQoL of patients hospitalized in our COVID-19 ward unit more than 100 days after their admission. COVID-19 diagnosis was based on positive SARS-CoV-2 real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction on nasal swabs, and/or typical abnormalities on chest computed tomography. Patients who were directly admitted to the ICU without being hospitalized in our COVID-19 unit were excluded. Demographic and clinical data at admission were extracted from electronic medical records. We designed a short phone questionnaire to collect post-discharge clinical symptoms, modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnoea scale scores, professional and physical activities, and attention, memory and/or sleep disorders. HRQoL was assessed using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire, a widely used, validated European questionnaire 4 . Patients are asked to rate their health state from 1 to 5 in five domains (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression) and on a scale ranging from 0 (“the worst possible health”) to 100 (“the best possible health”) on a visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS). Based on the answers, an EQ-5D- index can be calculated, ranging from states worse than dead (<0) to 1 (full health). 5 All eligible patients were contacted by phone by trained physicians and were asked to answer to the questionnaire. Deceased, unreachable, demented, bedridden and non-French speaking patients were excluded. We compared patients managed in hospital ward without needing intensive care (“ward group”) with those who were transferred in intensive care units (ICU) for artificial ventilation, including non-invasive ventilation, high flow nasal cannula and/or mechanical ventilation (ICU group), with t-tests for quantitative variables and Chi-square tests for qualitative variables. All tests were two-sided, and a P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. All analyses were performed with R version 3.6.1. (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria). The study was approved by the local institutional review board (IRB 00006477). Of the 279 hospitalized patients between March 15th and April 14th, 2020 in our COVID-19 unit, 48 were admitted to ICU, and 57 patients died within the three months following admission (43 in the ward group and 14 in the ICU group) (Supplementary figure 1). After having excluded demented or bedridden (n=18), unreachable (n=69), non-French speaking patients (n=12), and those declining participation (n=2), 120 patients answered the phone questionnaire after a mean (±SD) of 110.9 (±11.1) days following admission: 96 in the ward group and 24 in the ICU group for artificial ventilation (mechanical ventilation for 14, CPAP for 10 and high flow nasal cannula for 7). After a mean of 110.9 days, the most frequently reported persistent symptoms were fatigue (55%), dyspnoea (42%), loss of memory (34%), concentration and sleep disorders (28% and 30.8%, respectively) (Table 1 ). Loss of hair was reported by 24 (20%) patients, including 20 women and 4 men. Comparisons between ward- and ICU patients led to no statistically significant differences regarding those symptoms. Thirty-five (29%) patients had a mMRC grade ≥2 (“Walks slower than people of the same age because of dyspnoea or has to stop for breath when walking at own pace”). Table 1 Post-discharge persistent symptoms and health-related quality of life of 120 patients after a mean of 110.9 days after their admission for COVID-19. Table 1 Overall Ward patients ICU patients P value N=120 N=96 N=24 Age, years 63.2 (15.7) 64.1 (16.1) 59.6 (13.7) 0.208 Sex, male 75 (62.5) 56 (58.3) 19 (79.2) 0.099 Comorbidities  Diabetes 26 (21.7) 22 (22.9) 4 (16.7) 0.698  Hypertension 56 (46.7) 45 (46.9) 11 (45.8) 1.000  Body mass index (kg/m²) <0.001  <25, n (%) 35 (29.2) 32 (33.3) 3 (12.5)  ≥25, n (%) 57 (47.5) 37 (38.5) 20 (83.3)  Missing, n (%) 28 (23.3) 27 (28.1) 1 (4.2) Clinical features at admission  Confusion 7 (5.8) 6 (6.2) 1 (4.2) 1.000  Cough 87 (72.5) 69 (71.9) 18 (75.0) 0.959  Dyspnoea 88 (73.3) 68 (70.8) 20 (83.3) 0.327  Myalgia 19 (15.8) 16 (16.7) 3 (12.5) 0.851  Diarrhoea 29 (24.2) 25 (26.0) 4 (16.7) 0.488 Admission data  Length of stay in hospital, days 11.2 (13.4) 7.4 (5.4) 26.5 (22.3) <0.001  Length of stay in ICU, days - - 17.1 (15.7) - Persistent symptoms  Cough 20 (16.7) 14 (14.6) 6 (25.0) 0.358  Chest pain 13 (10.8) 11 (11.5) 2 (8.3) 0.941  Fatigue 66 (55.0) 52 (54.2) 14 (58.3) 0.891  Dyspnoea 50 (41.7) 38 (39.6) 12 (50.0) 0.487  Ageusia 13 (10.8) 9 (9.4) 4 (16.7) 0.509  Anosmia 16 (13.3) 14 (14.6) 2 (8.3) 0.638  Hair loss 24 (20.0) 18 (18.8) 6 (25.0) 0.690  Attention disorder 32 (26.7) 28 (29.2) 4 (16.7) 0.327  Memory loss 41 (34.2) 36 (37.5) 5 (20.8) 0.194  Sleep disorder 37 (30.8) 29 (30.2) 8 (33.3) 0.535 mMRC dyspnoea scale 0.438  Grade 0 56 (46.7) 47 (49.0) 9 (37.5)  Grade 1 29 (24.2) 22 (22.9) 7 (29.2)  Grade 2 or more 35 (29.2) 27 (28.1) 8 (33.3) Professional and physical activities  Returned to work/worked before hospitalization 38/56 (67.9) 31/41 (75.6) 7/15 (46.7) 0.061  Resumed sport/practiced sport regularly before hospitalization 28/39 (71.8) 23/31 (74.2) 5/8 (62.5) 0.937 EQ-5D-5L  EQ-VAS (%) 70.3 (21.5) 69.9 (21.4) 71.7 (22.2) 0.711  EQ-5D index 0.86 (0.20) 0.86 (0.19) 0.82 (0.21) 0.306 Results are expressed as count (%) for categorical variables and as mean (standard deviation) for quantitative variables. ICU: intensive care unit; mMRC: modified Medical Research Council; Before COVID-19 infection, 56 (46.7%) were active workers. Among them, 38 (69.1%) had gone back to work at the time of the phone interview. Among the 39 patients who had regular sports activity before their hospitalizations for COVID-19, 28 (71.8%) have been able to resume physical activity, but at a lower level for 18 (46%). There was no statistically significant difference between ward and ICU groups, but there was a non-significant trend towards a reduced proportion of patients returning to work among ICU patients (46.7% versus 77.5%, P=0.061). In both group, dimensions of the EQ-5D (mobility, self-care, pain, anxiety or depression, usual activity) were altered with a slight difference in pain in the ICU group, but no statistically significant difference in the other groups (Figure 1 ). Mean EQ-VAS was 70.3% and mean EQ-5D index 0.86, with no difference between ICU and ward patients (Table 1). Figure 1 Health-related quality of life after hospitalization for COVID-19 assessed by the EQ-5D 5L in the ward and the ICU groups. 1A: Distribution of the EQ-5D index (0: death to 1: full health). 1B: EQ-5D 5L scores in the ward and in the ICU groups on each domain. Each domain is scored on a 5-point scale: 1 no problem, 2 slight problem, 3 moderate problem, 4 severe problem, 5 unable to do. *: P=0.032. Figure 1 The present study shows that most patients requiring hospitalization for COVID-19 still have persistent symptoms, even 110 days after being discharged, especially fatigue and dyspnoea. These results highlight the need for a long-term follow-up of those patients and rehabilitation programs. Surprisingly, many patients (mainly women) spontaneously reported significant hair loss, which may correspond to a telogen effluvium, secondary to viral infection and/or a stress generated by the hospitalization and the disease. 6 Nevertheless, HRQoL was quite satisfactory, as most patients who had a professional activity before the infection went back to work. Except pain or discomfort, we found no significant difference regarding persistent symptoms and HRQoL between ward patients versus ICU patients. This clearly supports the interest of a full resuscitation for COVID patients despite heaviness of cares. However, patients from our “ICU group” were relatively non-severe, as those who were directly admitted to ICU (thus corresponding to the most severe forms) were not included in our study. Other limitations of our study include the limited number of patients, the single-centre nature of our series, and the high rate of unreachable patients, which could lead to differential bias. In conclusion, many symptoms persist several months after hospitalization for COVID-19. While there were few differences between HRQoL between ward and ICU patients, our findings must be confirmed in larger cohorts, including more severe ICU patients. AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS All authors have made substantial contributions to this work and have approved the final version of the manuscript. Concept and design: EG, BF, YN. Acquisition of data: all authors. Statistical analysis: YN. Interpretation of data: EG, BF, YN. Writing original draft: EG, YN. Writing review and editing: all authors. FINANCIAL SUPPORT None Declaration of Competing Interest None of the authors declared any competing interest in link with the present study.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Assessment of the Frequency and Variety of Persistent Symptoms Among Patients With COVID-19 : A Systematic Review

              Question What are the frequency and variety of persistent symptoms after COVID-19 infection? Findings In this systematic review of 45 studies including 9751 participants with COVID-19, the median proportion of individuals who experienced at least 1 persistent symptom was 73%; symptoms occurring most frequently included shortness of breath or dyspnea, fatigue or exhaustion, and sleep disorders or insomnia. However, the studies were highly heterogeneous and needed longer follow-up and more standardized designs. Meaning This systematic review found that COVID-19 symptoms commonly persisted beyond the acute phase of infection, with implications for health-associated functioning and quality of life; however, methodological improvements are needed to reliably quantify these risks. Importance Infection with COVID-19 has been associated with long-term symptoms, but the frequency, variety, and severity of these complications are not well understood. Many published commentaries have proposed plans for pandemic control that are primarily based on mortality rates among older individuals without considering long-term morbidity among individuals of all ages. Reliable estimates of such morbidity are important for patient care, prognosis, and development of public health policy. Objective To conduct a systematic review of studies examining the frequency and variety of persistent symptoms after COVID-19 infection. Evidence Review A search of PubMed and Web of Science was conducted to identify studies published from January 1, 2020, to March 11, 2021, that examined persistent symptoms after COVID-19 infection. Persistent symptoms were defined as those persisting for at least 60 days after diagnosis, symptom onset, or hospitalization or at least 30 days after recovery from the acute illness or hospital discharge. Search terms included COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , coronavirus , 2019-nCoV , long-term , after recovery , long-haul , persistent , outcome , symptom , follow-up , and longitudinal . All English-language articles that presented primary data from cohort studies that reported the prevalence of persistent symptoms among individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection and that had clearly defined and sufficient follow-up were included. Case reports, case series, and studies that described symptoms only at the time of infection and/or hospitalization were excluded. A structured framework was applied to appraise study quality. Findings A total of 1974 records were identified; of those, 1247 article titles and abstracts were screened. After removal of duplicates and exclusions, 92 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility; 47 studies were deemed eligible, and 45 studies reporting 84 clinical signs or symptoms were included in the systematic review. Of 9751 total participants, 5266 (54.0%) were male; 30 of 45 studies reported mean or median ages younger than 60 years. Among 16 studies, most of which comprised participants who were previously hospitalized, the median proportion of individuals experiencing at least 1 persistent symptom was 72.5% (interquartile range [IQR], 55.0%-80.0%). Individual symptoms occurring most frequently included shortness of breath or dyspnea (26 studies; median frequency, 36.0%; IQR, 27.6%-50.0%), fatigue or exhaustion (25 studies; median frequency, 40.0%; IQR, 31.0%-57.0%), and sleep disorders or insomnia (8 studies; median 29.4%, IQR, 24.4%-33.0%). There were wide variations in the design and quality of the studies, which had implications for interpretation and often limited direct comparability and combinability. Major design differences included patient populations, definitions of time zero (ie, the beginning of the follow-up interval), follow-up lengths, and outcome definitions, including definitions of illness severity. Conclusions and Relevance This systematic review found that COVID-19 symptoms commonly persisted beyond the acute phase of infection, with implications for health-associated functioning and quality of life. Current studies of symptom persistence are highly heterogeneous, and future studies need longer follow-up, improved quality, and more standardized designs to reliably quantify risks. This systematic review uses data from cohort studies to examine the frequency, variety, and severity of persistent symptoms among individuals with previous COVID-19 infection.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep
                MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep
                WR
                Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
                Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
                0149-2195
                1545-861X
                11 August 2023
                11 August 2023
                : 72
                : 32
                : 859-865
                Affiliations
                Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California; Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut; Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut; Department of Emergency Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois; Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; Department of Internal Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois; Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; Department of Emergency Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; National Center for Immunizations and Respiratory Diseases, CDC; Center for Connected Care, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Department of Emergency Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; UTHealth Houston, Houston, Texas; University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California; Department of Emergency Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut; University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; Division of General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California; Department of Health Policy and Management, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California; Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; Clinical Informatics Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; Department of Family Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; Department of Biomedical Informatics and Medical Education, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois; Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Cook County Hospital, Chicago, Illinois; Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.
                Rush University
                Rush University
                Rush University
                Rush University
                Rush University
                Rush University
                Rush University
                Rush University
                Rush University
                Rush University
                Yale University
                Yale University
                Yale University
                Yale University
                Yale University
                Yale University
                Yale University
                Yale University
                Yale University
                Yale University
                University of Washington
                University of Washington
                University of Washington
                University of Washington
                University of Washington
                University of Washington
                University of Washington
                University of Washington
                University of Washington
                University of Washington
                University of Washington
                University of Washington
                University of Washington
                University of Washington
                Thomas Jefferson University
                Thomas Jefferson University
                Thomas Jefferson University
                Thomas Jefferson University
                Thomas Jefferson University
                Thomas Jefferson University
                Thomas Jefferson University
                Thomas Jefferson University
                Thomas Jefferson University
                Thomas Jefferson University
                Thomas Jefferson University
                Thomas Jefferson University
                Thomas Jefferson University
                University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
                University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
                University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
                University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
                University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
                University of California, Los Angeles
                University of California, Los Angeles
                University of California, Los Angeles
                University of California, Los Angeles
                University of California, Los Angeles
                University of California, San Francisco
                University of California, San Francisco
                University of California, San Francisco
                University of California, San Francisco
                University of California, San Francisco
                CDC
                CDC
                CDC.
                Author notes
                Corresponding author: Sharon Saydah, media@ 123456cdc.gov .
                Article
                mm7232a2
                10.15585/mmwr.mm7232a2
                10415002
                37561663
                e09bd508-daea-442f-a593-d85e692cf53f

                All material in the MMWR Series is in the public domain and may be used and reprinted without permission; citation as to source, however, is appreciated.

                History
                Categories
                Full Report

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content2,371

                Cited by9

                Most referenced authors267