Protocol The effectiveness and acceptability of face-to-face rehabilitation for patients with Long Covid who were not hospitalised…, 2026, Kontou+

SNT Gatchaman

Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Staff member
The effectiveness and acceptability of face-to-face rehabilitation for patients with Long Covid who were not hospitalised with their acute infection: a mixed-methods study comprising a randomised controlled trial RCT with embedded qualitative component
Kontou, Kate; Daynes, Enya; Singh, Sally J; Evans, Rachael A; Gardiner, Nikki; Chaplin, Emma; Richardson, Matthew; Bishop, Nicolette; Creese, Jennifer; Bateman, Nicola; Wright, Adam; Zivtins, Elga; Houchen-Wolloff, Linzy

BACKGROUND
Long Covid is a term used to describe a multisystem condition that presents with a myriad of physical and psychological symptoms that continue or develop after acute COVID-19. Long Covid is a significant public health problem because of the nature of the illness, its negative impfact on everyday functioning, and the healthcare inequalities evident in access and experience, notably in terms of ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Evidence in patients hospitalised with their acute infection suggests exercise-based rehabilitation could be helpful to improve exercise tolerance, respiratory symptoms, fatigue, and cognition; however, research is needed to determine whether exercise-based rehabilitation is effective and acceptable for patients with Long Covid who were not hospitalised.

METHODS
This mixed-methods study comprises a single-centre, randomised controlled trial to determine whether face-to-face rehabilitation increases exercise capacity compared to usual care alone in non-hospitalised patients with Long Covid, with embedded qualitative components to explore intervention acceptability in the context of healthcare inequalities. Usual care is as defined by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) Covid-19 guidance. The rehabilitation intervention will take place twice a week for 6 weeks and will combine symptom-titrated exercise with self-management education. The proposed sample size of 56 for the randomised controlled trial is calculated on the primary outcome of Incremental Shuttle Walking Test (ISWT) distance, with a change of 50metres (m) at 90% power, a standard deviation of 17 m, and a 0.05 type 1 error.

DISCUSSION
A mixed-methods approach has been chosen as quantitative data alone would be insufficient to answer the research question, and mixing the data will enable a more comprehensive understanding and ensure there is an equal focus on outcomes and experiences of a face-to-face exercise-based rehabilitation programme. A healthcare inequalities lens will explore who may be under-represented, with the qualitative work providing further evidence as to why this may be the case. It is recognised that meeting recruitment targets in the context of reducing referral rates and funding for Long Covid services may prove challenging. Trial registration ISRCTN trial registry (ISRCTN33340595). Registered on 30 September 2024.

Web | DOI | PDF | Trials | Open Access
 
Participants will be carefully monitored with particular attention to those displaying signs of post exertional malaise (PEM) and post exertional symptom exacerbation (PESE) via the DePaul outcome measure. Steps have been taken to ensure those with known PEM / PESE are not recruited to this trial to ensure their symptoms are not worsened by rehabilitation. If it appears that someone is experiencing PEM / PESE during the intervention phase, then they will be suspended from the trial, upon discussion with the individual, and referred to the appropriate clinic(s).
 
Yet another rehab trial with either subjective outcomes with no blinding or irrelevant objective outcomes that for the most part only measure adherence by proxy.

Why not look at potentially useful data like step count, hours worked, wages or other things that might tell us if the patients are actually doing better and not just being slightly fitter?

And why so short follow-up?
 
A standard of 50m gain over 6 weeks rehab is pathetic.

Either this is a fundamentally different form of deconditioning being experienced by patients, which would require a fundamentally different approach.

Or there is no significant deconditioning to reverse.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom