Prevalence of physical frailty, including risk factors, up to 1 year after hospitalisation for COVID-19 in the UK: a multicentre, longitudinal cohort study.

Background The scale of COVID-19 and its well documented long-term sequelae support a need to understand long-term outcomes including frailty. Methods This prospective cohort study recruited adults who had survived hospitalisation with clinically diagnosed COVID-19 across 35 sites in the UK (PHOSP-COVID). The burden of frailty was objectively measured using Fried's Frailty Phenotype (FFP). The primary outcome was the prevalence of each FFP group—robust (no FFP criteria), pre-frail (one or two FFP criteria) and frail (three or more FFP criteria)—at 5 months and 1 year after discharge from hospital. For inclusion in the primary analysis, participants required complete outcome data for three of the five FFP criteria. Longitudinal changes across frailty domains are reported at 5 months and 1 year post-hospitalisation, along with risk factors for frailty status. Patient-perceived recovery and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were retrospectively rated for pre-COVID-19 and prospectively rated at the 5 month and 1 year visits. This study is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN10980107. Findings Between March 5, 2020, and March 31, 2021, 2419 participants were enrolled with FFP data. Mean age was 57.9 (SD 12.6) years, 933 (38.6%) were female, and 429 (17.7%) had received invasive mechanical ventilation. 1785 had measures at both timepoints, of which 240 (13.4%), 1138 (63.8%) and 407 (22.8%) were frail, pre-frail and robust, respectively, at 5 months compared with 123 (6.9%), 1046 (58.6%) and 616 (34.5%) at 1 year. Factors associated with pre-frailty or frailty were invasive mechanical ventilation, older age, female sex, and greater social deprivation. Frail participants had a larger reduction in HRQoL compared with before their COVID-19 illness and were less likely to describe themselves as recovered. Interpretation Physical frailty and pre-frailty are common following hospitalisation with COVID-19. Improvement in frailty was seen between 5 and 12 months although two-thirds of the population remained pre-frail or frail. This suggests comprehensive assessment and interventions targeting pre-frailty and frailty beyond the initial illness are required. Funding UK Research and Innovation and National Institute for Health Research

Prevalence, risk factors, and treatments for post-COVID breathlessness:a systematic review and meta-analysis

Persistent breathlessness >28 days after acute COVID-19 infection has been identified as a highly debilitating post-COVID symptom. However, the prevalence, risk factors, mechanisms and treatments for post-COVID breathlessness remain poorly understood. We systematically searched PubMed and Embase for relevant studies published from 1 January 2020 to 1 November 2021 (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021285733) and included 119 eligible papers. Random-effects meta-analysis of 42 872 patients with COVID-19 reported in 102 papers found an overall prevalence of post-COVID breathlessness of 26% (95% CI 23-29) when measuring the presence/absence of the symptom, and 41% (95% CI 34-48) when using Medical Research Council (MRC)/modified MRC dyspnoea scale. The pooled prevalence decreased significantly from 1-6 months to 7-12 months post-infection. Post-COVID breathlessness was more common in those with severe/critical acute infection, those who were hospitalised and females, and was less likely to be reported by patients in Asia than those in Europe or North America. Multiple pathophysiological mechanisms have been proposed (including deconditioning, restrictive/obstructive airflow limitation, systemic inflammation, impaired mental health), but the body of evidence remains inconclusive. Seven cohort studies and one randomised controlled trial suggested rehabilitation exercises may reduce post-COVID breathlessness. There is an urgent need for mechanistic research and development of interventions for the prevention and treatment of post-COVID breathlessness

DYNamic assessment of multi‐organ level dysfunction in patients recovering from COVID‐19: DYNAMO COVID‐19

We evaluated the impacts of COVID‐19 on multi‐organ and metabolic function in patients following severe hospitalised infection compared to controls. Patients (n = 21) without previous diabetes, cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease were recruited 5–7 months post‐discharge alongside controls (n = 10) with similar age, sex and body mass. Perceived fatigue was estimated (Fatigue Severity Scale) and the following were conducted: oral glucose tolerance (OGTT) alongside whole‐body fuel oxidation, validated magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy during resting and supine controlled exercise, dual‐energy X‐ray absorptiometry, short physical performance battery (SPPB), intra‐muscular electromyography, quadriceps strength and fatigability, and daily step‐count. There was a greater insulin response (incremental area under the curve, median (inter‐quartile range)) during the OGTT in patients [18,289 (12,497–27,448) mIU/min/L] versus controls [8655 (7948–11,040) mIU/min/L], P < 0.001. Blood glucose response and fasting and post‐prandial fuel oxidation rates were not different. This greater insulin resistance was not explained by differences in systemic inflammation or whole‐body/regional adiposity, but step‐count (P = 0.07) and SPPB scores (P = 0.004) were lower in patients. Liver volume was 28% greater in patients than controls, and fat fraction adjusted liver T1, a measure of inflammation, was raised in patients. Patients displayed greater perceived fatigue scores, though leg muscle volume, strength, force‐loss, motor unit properties and post‐exercise muscle phosphocreatine resynthesis were comparable. Further, cardiac and cerebral architecture and function (at rest and on exercise) were not different. In this cross‐sectional study, individuals without known previous morbidity who survived severe COVID‐19 exhibited greater insulin resistance, pointing to a need for physical function intervention in recovery

Respiratory sequelae of COVID-19: pulmonary and extrapulmonary origins, and approaches to clinical care and rehabilitation

Although the exact prevalence of post-COVID-19 condition (also known as long COVID) is unknown, more than a third of patients with COVID-19 develop symptoms that persist for more than 3 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. These sequelae are highly heterogeneous in nature and adversely affect multiple biological systems, although breathlessness is a frequently cited symptom. Specific pulmonary sequelae, including pulmonary fibrosis and thromboembolic disease, need careful assessment and might require particular investigations and treatments. COVID-19 outcomes in people with pre-existing respiratory conditions vary according to the nature and severity of the respiratory disease and how well it is controlled. Extrapulmonary complications such as reduced exercise tolerance and frailty might contribute to breathlessness in post-COVID-19 condition. Non-pharmacological therapeutic options, including adapted pulmonary rehabilitation programmes and physiotherapy techniques for breathing management, might help to attenuate breathlessness in people with post-COVID-19 condition. Further research is needed to understand the origins and course of respiratory symptoms and to develop effective therapeutic and rehabilitative strategies

A Comparison Between the Teg 6s and Teg 5000 Analyzers to Assess Coagulation in Trauma Patients

BACKGROUND Trauma-induced coagulopathy is a major driver of mortality following severe injury. Viscoelastic goal-directed resuscitation can reduce mortality after injury. The TEG 5000 system is widely used for viscoelastic testing. However, the TEG 6s system incorporates newer technology, with encouraging results in cardiovascular interventions. The purpose of this study was to validate the TEG 6s system for use in trauma patients. METHODS Multicenter noninvasive observational study for method comparison conducted at 12 US Levels I and II trauma centers. Agreement between the TEG 6s and TEG 5000 systems was examined using citrated kaolin reaction time (CK.R), citrated functional fibrinogen maximum amplitude (CFF.MA), citrated kaolin percent clot lysis at 30 minutes (CK.LY30), citrated RapidTEG maximum amplitude (CRT.MA), and citrated kaolin maximum amplitude (CK.MA) parameters in adults meeting full or limited trauma team criteria. Blood was drawn ≤1 hour after admission. Assays were repeated in duplicate. Reliability (TEG 5000 vs. TEG 6s analyzers) and repeatability (interdevice comparison) was quantified. Linear regression was used to define the relationship between TEG 6s and TEG 5000 devices. RESULTS A total of 475 patients were enrolled. The cohort was predominantly male (68.6%) with a median age of 49 years. Regression line slope estimates (ß) and linear correlation estimates (p) were as follows: CK.R (ß = 1.05, ρ = 0.9), CFF.MA (ß = 0.99, ρ = 0.95), CK.LY30 (ß = 1.01, ρ = 0.91), CRT.MA (TEG 6s) versus CK.MA (TEG 5000) (ß = 1.06, ρ = 0.86) as well as versus CRT.MA (TEG 5000) (ß = 0.93, ρ = 0.93), indicating strong reliability between the devices. Overall, within-device repeatability was better for TEG 6s versus TEG 5000, particularly for CFF.MA and CK.LY30. CONCLUSION The TEG 6s device appears to be highly reliable for use in trauma patients, with close correlation to the TEG 5000 device and equivalent/improved within-device reliability. Given the potential advantages of using the TEG 6s device at the site of care, confirmation of agreement between the devices represents an important advance in diagnostic testing. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Diagnostic test, level II

Balancing the value and risk of exercise-based therapy post-COVID-19: a narrative review

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can lead to ongoing symptoms such as breathlessness, fatigue and muscle pain, which can have a substantial impact on an individual. Exercise-based rehabilitation programmes have proven beneficial in many long-term conditions that share similar symptoms. These programmes have favourably influenced breathlessness, fatigue and pain, while also increasing functional capacity. Exercise-based rehabilitation may benefit those with ongoing symptoms following COVID-19. However, some precautions may be necessary prior to embarking on an exercise programme. Areas of concern include ongoing complex lung pathologies, such as fibrosis, cardiovascular abnormalities and fatigue, and concerns regarding post-exertional symptom exacerbation. This article addresses these concerns and proposes that an individually prescribed, symptom-titrated exercise-based intervention may be of value to individuals following infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2

Submaximal Eccentric Cycling in People With COPD: Acute Whole-Body Cardiopulmonary and Muscle Metabolic Responses

© 2020 American College of Chest Physicians Background: Eccentric cycling (ECC) may be an attractive exercise method in COPD because of both low cardiorespiratory demand and perception of effort compared with conventional concentric cycling (CON) at matched mechanical loads. However, it is unknown whether ECC can be performed by individuals with COPD at an intensity able to cause sufficient metabolic stress to improve aerobic capacity. Research Question: What are the cardiopulmonary and metabolic responses to ECC in people with COPD and healthy volunteers when compared with CON at matched mechanical loads? Study Design and Methods: Thirteen people with COPD (mean ± SD age, 64 ± 9 years; FEV1, 45 ± 19% predicted; BMI, 24 ± 4 kg/m2; oxygen uptake at peak exercise [V̇O2peak], 15 ± 3 mL/kg/min) and 9 age-matched control participants (FEV1, 102 ± 13% predicted; BMI, 28 ± 5 kg/m2; V̇O2peak, 23 ± 5 mL/kg/min), performed up to six 4-min bouts of ECC and CON at matched mechanical loads of increasing intensity. In addition, 12 individuals with COPD underwent quadriceps muscle biopsies before and after 20 min of ECC and CON at 65% peak power. Results: At matched mechanical loads, oxygen uptake, minute ventilation, heart rate, systolic BP, respiratory exchange ratio (all P < .001), capillary lactate, perceived breathlessness, and leg fatigue ( P < .05) were lower in both groups during ECC than CON. Muscle lactate content increased ( P = .008) and muscle phosphocreatine decreased ( P = .012) during CON in COPD, which was not evident during ECC.Interpretation:Cardiopulmonary and blood lactate responses during submaximal ECC were less compared with during CON at equivalent mechanical workloads in healthy participants and COPD patients, and this was confirmed at a muscle level in COPD patients. Submaximal ECC was well tolerated and allowed greater mechanical work at lower ventilatory cost. However, in people with COPD, a training intervention based on ECC is unlikely to stimulate cardiovascular and metabolic adaptation to the same extent as CON

Acute blood biomarker profiles predict cognitive deficits 6 and 12 months after COVID-19 hospitalization

Post-COVID cognitive deficits, including ‘brain fog’, are clinically complex, with both objective and subjective components. They are common and debilitating, and can affect the ability to work, yet their biological underpinnings remain unknown. In this prospective cohort study of 1,837 adults hospitalized with COVID-19, we identified two distinct biomarker profiles measured during the acute admission, which predict cognitive outcomes 6 and 12 months after COVID-19. A first profile links elevated fibrinogen relative to C-reactive protein with both objective and subjective cognitive deficits. A second profile links elevated D-dimer relative to C-reactive protein with subjective cognitive deficits and occupational impact. This second profile was mediated by fatigue and shortness of breath. Neither profile was significantly mediated by depression or anxiety. Results were robust across secondary analyses. They were replicated, and their specificity to COVID-19 tested, in a large-scale electronic health records dataset. These findings provide insights into the heterogeneous biology of post-COVID cognitive deficits