Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Aug 29;12(8):e056568.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056568.

Support after COVID-19 study: a mixed-methods cross-sectional study to develop recommendations for practice

Cathy Bulley  1 , Vaibhav Tyagi  2 , Eleanor Curnow  3 , Kath Nicol  4 , Lisa Salisbury  4 , Kim Stuart  5 , Brendan McCormack  6 , Ruth Magowan  2 , Olivia Sagan  3 , Jan Dewing  6
Affiliations

Support after COVID-19 study: a mixed-methods cross-sectional study to develop recommendations for practice

Cathy Bulley et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Objectives of study stage 1 were to: explore people's experiences of illness due to COVID-19 while feeling socially isolated or socially isolating; identify perceptions of what would support recovery; and synthesise insights into recommendations for supporting people after COVID-19. Study stage 2 objectives were to engage stakeholders in evaluating these recommendations and analyse likely influences on access to the support identified.

Design: A two-stage, multimethod cross-sectional study was conducted from a postpositivist perspective. Stage 1 included an international online survey of people's experiences of illness, particularly COVID-19, in isolation (n=675 full responses). Stage 2 involved a further online survey (n=43), two tweetchats treated as large online focus groups (n=60 and n=27 people tweeting), two smaller focus groups (both n=4) and one interview (both using MS teams).

Setting: Stage 1 had an international emphasis, although 87% of respondents were living in the UK. Stage 2 focused on the UK.

Participants: Anyone aged 18+ and able to complete a survey in English could participate. Stage 2 included health professionals, advocates and people with lived experience.

Main outcome measures: Descriptive data and response categories derived from open responses to the survey and the qualitative data.

Results: Of those responding fully to stage 1 (mean age 44 years); 130 (19%) had experienced COVID-19 in isolation; 45 had recovered, taking a mean of 5.3 (range 1-54) weeks. 85 did not feel they had recovered; fatigue and varied 'other' symptoms were most prevalent and also had most substantial negative impacts. Our draft recommendations were highly supported by respondents to stage 2 and refined to produce final recommendations.

Conclusions: Recommendations support access to progressive intensity and specialism of support, addressing access barriers that might inadvertently increase health inequalities. Multidisciplinary collaboration and learning are crucial, including the person with COVID-19 and/or Long Covid in the planning and decision making throughout.

Keywords: COVID-19; HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION & MANAGEMENT; Health policy; REHABILITATION MEDICINE; SOCIAL MEDICINE.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Diagrammatic summary of the project with participant numbers.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Study stage 1: summary of isolation and illness showing how many people were or felt they were socially isolated, how many felt ill and how many thought this was due to COVID-19.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Perceptions of support from GP and from family/friends while ill with COVID-19. GP, general practitioner.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Frequencies of ongoing symptoms/challenges listed by respondents under ‘other’
Figure 5
Figure 5
Numbers of stakeholder survey respondents within each ‘stakeholder category’.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Summary of services represented in each tweetchat.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Stakeholder survey: summary of overall agreement with each draft recommendation.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Revised recommendations for supporting people after COVID-19.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Umakanthan S, Chattu VK, Ranade AV, et al. . A rapid review of recent advances in diagnosis, treatment and vaccination for COVID-19. AIMS Public Health 2021;8:137–53. 10.3934/publichealth.2021011 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Velavan TP, Meyer CG. The COVID-19 epidemic. Trop Med Int Health 2020;25:278–80. 10.1111/tmi.13383 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Needham DM, Davidson J, Cohen H, et al. . Improving long-term outcomes after discharge from intensive care unit: report from a stakeholders' conference. Crit Care Med 2012;40:502–9. 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318232da75 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chudasama YV, Gillies CL, Zaccardi F, et al. . Impact of COVID-19 on routine care for chronic diseases: a global survey of views from healthcare professionals. Diabetes Metab Syndr 2020;14:965–7. 10.1016/j.dsx.2020.06.042 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Office for National Statistics . Prevalence of ongoing symptoms following coronavirus (COVID-19) infection in the UK, 2021. Available: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/...

Publication types