Patient-led integrated CBT for management of long COVID with comorbid depression and anxiety in primary care - A case study, 2022, Skilbeck

Abstract

Objective
Long COVID affects approximately ten-percent of people following post-acute Coronavirus infection. Long COVID is a complex, multisystemic recent illness. Therefore, there are currently no unitary guidelines on its management. The UK national guidelines currently recommended that interventions are guided by objective research evidence and subjective experiences of patients. They also emphasise multidisciplinary/interdisciplinary professional care and patient self-management.

Methods
The current case study applied patient-led integrated cognitive behavioural therapy in a 36-year-old male presenting with long COVID symptoms with comorbid depression and anxiety. It applied integrated interdisciplinary CBT with emphasis on enhancing patient self-management. The patient attended twelve, individual, 60 min video sessions, via Microsoft Teams over a period of five months. The treatment was conducted in collaboration with the patient’s general practitioner, physiotherapists and cardiopulmonary specialists. In line with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines, it applied symptom monitoring, graded pacing and behavioural experiments.

Results
At the end of therapy, the patient showed reliable change in his somatic symptoms, depression and anxiety symptoms. He also showed improved quality of life.

Discussion
This case illustrates the effective use of patient-led CBT for managing symptoms of long COVID with comorbid depression and anxiety in primary care.

Paywall, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/17423953221113605

 

There have been literally hundreds of trials of this already, probably amounting to over $100M in research alone, not even counting how much has been wasted on those services, it probably exceeds $1B by now. It's been officially, and at times coercively, pushed onto hundreds of thousands by now. There is no way this person doesn't know this.

And yet this thing which is "proven" and "effective" is still subject to single case studies like this. There are systematic reviews of systematic reviews, because the process is sheer quantity with no quality, there are literally too many to compare.

No one tests things that work this way, only things that don't. It's so infuriating to see how everyone is fully aware that this is all a bunch of nonsense and they just pretend anyway.

 

Searching Lilian Skilbeck's publication history reveals that all of it seems to be published in the same journal!?!