Predictors of non-recovery from fatigue and cognitive deficits after COVID-19: a prospective, longitudinal, population-based study 2024 Hartung et al

Discussion in 'Long Covid research' started by Andy, Feb 10, 2024.

  1. Andy

    Andy Committee Member

    Messages:
    22,209
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    Summary

    Background
    Despite the high prevalence and major disability associated with fatigue and cognitive deficits after SARS-CoV-2 infection, little is known about long-term trajectories of these sequelae. We aimed to assess long-term trajectories of these conditions and to identify risk factors for non-recovery.

    Methods
    We analyzed longitudinal data from the population-based COVIDOM/NAPKON-POP cohort in Germany. Participants with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were assessed at least 6 months (baseline) and again at least 18 months (follow-up) after infection using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) Scale (cutoff ≤ 30) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA, cutoff ≤ 25). Predictors of recovery from fatigue or cognitive deficits between assessments were identified through univariate and multivariable logistic regression models. The COVIDOM study is registered at the German registry for clinical studies (DRKS00023742) and at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04679584).

    Findings
    Between 15 November 2020 and 9 May 2023, a total of 3038 participants were assessed at baseline (median 9 months after infection) and 83% responded to invitations for follow-up (median 26 months after infection). At baseline, 21% (95% confidence interval (CI) [20%, 23%]) had fatigue and 23% (95% CI [22%, 25%]) had cognitive deficits according to cutoff scores on the FACIT-Fatigue or MoCA. Participants with clinically relevant fatigue (at baseline) showed significant improvement in fatigue scores at follow-up (Hedges’ g [95% CI] = 0.73 [0.60, 0.87]) and 46% (95% CI [41%, 50%]) had recovered from fatigue. Participants with cognitive deficits showed a significant improvement in cognitive scores (g [95% CI] = 1.12 [0.90, 1.33]) and 57% (95% CI [50%, 64%]) had recovered from cognitive deficits. Patients with fatigue exhibiting a higher depressive symptom burden and/or headache at baseline were significantly less likely to recover. Significant risk factors for cognitive non-recovery were male sex, older age and <12 years of school education. Importantly, SARS-CoV-2 reinfection had no significant impact on recovery from fatigue or cognitive deficits.

    Interpretation
    Fatigue and cognitive deficits are common sequelae after SARS-CoV-2 infection. These syndromes improved over time and about half of the patients recovered within two years. The identified risk factors for non-recovery from fatigue and cognitive deficits could play an important role in shaping targeted strategies for treatment and prevention.

    Open access, https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(24)00035-X/fulltext
     
    Trish likes this.
  2. poetinsf

    poetinsf Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    283
    Location:
    Western US
    I don't know why they have the need for "interpretation" when the study only found the depressive symptoms, whatever they are, correlates the outcome. The new media will pick this up and write a headline like "Treating depression will prevent Long COVID". If they were compelled, they should've included headache in the interpretation. (It's possible that what's causing the headache is also causing the depressive symptoms). Head pressure is one thing that gets worse in my PEM and that is why I've been taking Sudafed.

     
    alktipping and oldtimer like this.

Share This Page