Abstract

BACKGROUND Neurological and psychiatric sequelae of COVID-19 have been reported, but more data are needed to adequately assess the effects of COVID-19 on brain health. We aimed to provide robust estimates of incidence rates and relative risks of neurological and psychiatric diagnoses in patients in the 6 months following a COVID-19 diagnosis. METHODS For this retrospective cohort study and time-to-event analysis, we used data obtained from the TriNetX electronic health records network (with over 81 million patients). Our primary cohort comprised patients who had a COVID-19 diagnosis; one matched control cohort included patients diagnosed with influenza, and the other matched control cohort included patients diagnosed with any respiratory tract infection including influenza in the same period. Patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 or a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 were excluded from the control cohorts. All cohorts included patients older than 10 years who had an index event on or after Jan 20, 2020, and who were still alive on Dec 13, 2020. We estimated the incidence of 14 neurological and psychiatric outcomes in the 6 months after a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19: intracranial haemorrhage; ischaemic stroke; parkinsonism; Guillain-Barré syndrome; nerve, nerve root, and plexus disorders; myoneural junction and muscle disease; encephalitis; dementia; psychotic, mood, and anxiety disorders (grouped and separately); substance use disorder; and insomnia. Using a Cox model, we compared incidences with those in propensity score-matched cohorts of patients with influenza or other respiratory tract infections. We investigated how these estimates were affected by COVID-19 severity, as proxied by hospitalisation, intensive therapy unit (ITU) admission, and encephalopathy (delirium and related disorders). We assessed the robustness of the differences in outcomes between cohorts by repeating the analysis in different scenarios. To provide benchmarking for the incidence and risk of neurological and psychiatric sequelae, we compared our primary cohort with four cohorts of patients diagnosed in the same period with additional index events: skin infection, urolithiasis, fracture of a large bone, and pulmonary embolism. FINDINGS Among 236 379 patients diagnosed with COVID-19, the estimated incidence of a neurological or psychiatric diagnosis in the following 6 months was 33·62% (95% CI 33·17-34·07), with 12·84% (12·36-13·33) receiving their first such diagnosis. For patients who had been admitted to an ITU, the estimated incidence of a diagnosis was 46·42% (44·78-48·09) and for a first diagnosis was 25·79% (23·50-28·25). Regarding individual diagnoses of the study outcomes, the whole COVID-19 cohort had estimated incidences of 0·56% (0·50-0·63) for intracranial haemorrhage, 2·10% (1·97-2·23) for ischaemic stroke, 0·11% (0·08-0·14) for parkinsonism, 0·67% (0·59-0·75) for dementia, 17·39% (17·04-17·74) for anxiety disorder, and 1·40% (1·30-1·51) for psychotic disorder, among others. In the group with ITU admission, estimated incidences were 2·66% (2·24-3·16) for intracranial haemorrhage, 6·92% (6·17-7·76) for ischaemic stroke, 0·26% (0·15-0·45) for parkinsonism, 1·74% (1·31-2·30) for dementia, 19·15% (17·90-20·48) for anxiety disorder, and 2·77% (2·31-3·33) for psychotic disorder. Most diagnostic categories were more common in patients who had COVID-19 than in those who had influenza (hazard ratio [HR] 1·44, 95% CI 1·40-1·47, for any diagnosis; 1·78, 1·68-1·89, for any first diagnosis) and those who had other respiratory tract infections (1·16, 1·14-1·17, for any diagnosis; 1·32, 1·27-1·36, for any first diagnosis). As with incidences, HRs were higher in patients who had more severe COVID-19 (eg, those admitted to ITU compared with those who were not: 1·58, 1·50-1·67, for any diagnosis; 2·87, 2·45-3·35, for any first diagnosis). Results were robust to various sensitivity analyses and benchmarking against the four additional index health events. INTERPRETATION Our study provides evidence for substantial neurological and psychiatric morbidity in the 6 months after COVID-19 infection. Risks were greatest in, but not limited to, patients who had severe COVID-19. This information could help in service planning and identification of research priorities. Complementary study designs, including prospective cohorts, are needed to corroborate and explain these findings. FUNDING National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVES Stressful life events contribute to insomnia, psychosocial functioning, and illness. Though individuals with a history of insomnia may be especially vulnerable during stressful life events, risk may be mitigated by prior intervention. This study evaluated the effect of prior digital cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia (dCBT-I) versus sleep education on health resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS COVID impact, insomnia, general- and COVID-related stress, depression, and global health were assessed in April 2020 in adults with a history of insomnia who completed a randomized controlled trial of dCBT-I (n = 102) versus sleep education control (n = 106) in 2016-2017. Regression analyses were used to evaluate the effect of intervention conditions on subsequent stress and health during the pandemic. RESULTS Insomnia symptoms were significantly associated with COVID-19 related disruptions, and those who previously received dCBT-I reported less insomnia symptoms, less general stress and COVID-related cognitive intrusions, less depression, and better global health than those who received sleep education. Moreover, the odds for resurgent insomnia was 51% lower in the dCBT-I versus control condition. Similarly, odds of moderate to severe depression during COVID-19 was 57% lower in the dCBT-I condition. CONCLUSIONS Those who received dCBT-I had increased health resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic in adults with a history of insomnia and ongoing mild to moderate mental health symptoms. These data provide evidence that dCBT-I is a powerful tool to promote mental and physical health during stressors, including the COVID-19 pandemic. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NCT02988375.

Abstract

BACKGROUND In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, experts in mental health science emphasized the importance of developing and evaluating approaches to support and maintain the mental health of older adults. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to assess whether a group-based exercise program relative to a personal exercise program (both delivered online) and waitlist control (WLC) can improve the psychological health of previously low active older adults during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS The Seniors COVID-19 Pandemic and Exercise (SCOPE) trial was a 3-arm, parallel randomized controlled trial conducted between May and September 2020 in which low active older adults (aged ≥65 years) were recruited via media outlets and social media. After baseline assessments, consented participants were randomized to one of two 12-week exercise programs (delivered online by older adult instructors) or a WLC condition. A total of 241 older adults (n=187 women) provided baseline measures (via online questionnaires), were randomized (ngroup=80, npersonal=82, ncontrol=79), and completed measures every 2 weeks for the duration of the trial. The trial's primary outcome was psychological flourishing. Secondary outcomes included global measures of mental and physical health, life satisfaction, and depression symptoms. RESULTS The results of latent growth modeling revealed no intervention effects for flourishing, life satisfaction, or depression symptoms (P>.05 for all). Participants in the group condition displayed improved mental health relative to WLC participants over the first 10 weeks (effect size [ES]=0.288-0.601), and although the week 12 effect (ES=0.375) was in the same direction the difference was not statistically significant (P=.089). Participants in the personal condition displayed improved mental health, when compared with WLC participants, in the same medium ES range (ES=0.293-0.565) over the first 8 weeks, and while the effects were of a similar magnitude at weeks 10 (ES=0.455, P=.069) and 12 (ES=0.258, P=.353), they were not statistically significant. In addition, participants in the group condition displayed improvements in physical health when compared with the WLC (ES=0.079-0.496) across all 12 weeks of the study following baseline. No differences were observed between the personal exercise condition and WLC for physical health (slope P=.271). CONCLUSIONS There were no intervention effects for the trial's primary outcome (ie, psychological flourishing). It is possible that the high levels of psychological flourishing at baseline may have limited the extent to which those indicators could continue to improve further through intervention (ie, potential ceiling effects). However, the intervention effects for mental and physical health point to the potential capacity of low-cost and scalable at-home programs to support the mental and physical health of previously inactive adults in the COVID-19 pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04412343; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04412343.

Abstract

Eating behaviour is a complex construct that is liable to be modified by external factors. Due to the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many restrictive measures were carried out with the aim of reducing the impact of this disease. As a result, lifestyles were disrupted, which could affect eating behaviours. The aim of this systematic review of longitudinal studies was to assess changes in eating behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic by establishing a comparison of eating behaviours before and after the outbreak of the pandemic. This study followed the PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO CRD42020203246), whereas to assess the quality of the studies, the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS) was applied. Out of a set of 826 studies, 23 were included in this systematic review. The main findings provided information about a shift towards modified eating behaviours, characterized by an increased snack frequency and a preference for sweets and ultra-processed food rather than fruits, vegetables, and fresh food. Additionally, an increased alcohol consumption was found among different countries. Consequently, adherence to healthy diets decreased. These findings are relevant to future policies and strategies to assess nutrition in cases of alarming situations such as the current COVID-19 pandemic.

Abstract

There has been concern about possible long-term sequelae resembling myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome in COVID-19 patients. Clarifying the mechanisms underlying such a "post-COVID-19 fatigue syndrome" is essential for the development of preventive and early treatment methods for this syndrome. In the present paper, by integrating insights pertaining to the glymphatic system and the nasal cerebrospinal fluid outflow pathway with findings in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome, idiopathic intracranial hypertension, and COVID-19, I provide a coherent conceptual framework for understanding the pathophysiology of post-COVID-19 fatigue syndrome. According to this hypothesis, this syndrome may result from damage to olfactory sensory neurons, causing reduced outflow of cerebrospinal fluid through the cribriform plate, and further leading to congestion of the glymphatic system with subsequent toxic build-up within the central nervous system. I further postulate that patients with post-COVID-19 fatigue syndrome may benefit from cerebrospinal fluid drainage by restoring glymphatic transport and waste removal from the brain. Obviously, further research is required to provide further evidence for the presence of this post-viral syndrome, and to provide additional insight regarding the relative contribution of the glymphatic-lymphatic system to it. Other mechanisms may also be involved. If confirmed, the glymphatic-lymphatic system could represent a target in combating post-COVID-19 fatigue syndrome. Moreover, further research in this area could also provide new insights into the understanding of chronic fatigue syndrome.

Abstract

We performed quantitative metabolic phenotyping of blood plasma in parallel with cytokine/chemokine analysis from participants who were either SARS-CoV-2 (+) (n = 10) or SARS-CoV-2 (-) (n = 49). SARS-CoV-2 positivity was associated with a unique metabolic phenotype and demonstrated a complex systemic response to infection, including severe perturbations in amino acid and kynurenine metabolic pathways. Nine metabolites were elevated in plasma and strongly associated with infection (quinolinic acid, glutamic acid, nicotinic acid, aspartic acid, neopterin, kynurenine, phenylalanine, 3-hydroxykynurenine, and taurine; p < 0.05), while four metabolites were lower in infection (tryptophan, histidine, indole-3-acetic acid, and citrulline; p < 0.05). This signature supports a systemic metabolic phenoconversion following infection, indicating possible neurotoxicity and neurological disruption (elevations of 3-hydroxykynurenine and quinolinic acid) and liver dysfunction (reduction in Fischer's ratio and elevation of taurine). Finally, we report correlations between the key metabolite changes observed in the disease with concentrations of proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines showing strong immunometabolic disorder in response to SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Abstract

Background. COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2, can involve sequelae and other medical complications that last weeks to months after initial recovery, which has come to be called Long-COVID or COVID long-haulers. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to identify studies assessing long-term effects of COVID-19 and estimates the prevalence of each symptom, sign, or laboratory parameter of patients at a post-COVID-19 stage. Methods . LitCOVID (PubMed and Medline) and Embase were searched by two independent researchers. All articles with original data for detecting long-term COVID-19 published before 1 st of January 2021 and with a minimum of 100 patients were included. For effects reported in two or more studies, meta-analyses using a random-effects model were performed using the MetaXL software to estimate the pooled prevalence with 95% CI. Heterogeneity was assessed using I 2 statistics. This systematic review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviewers and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, although the study protocol was not registered. Results. A total of 18,251 publications were identified, of which 15 met the inclusion criteria. The prevalence of 55 long-term effects was estimated, 21 meta-analyses were performed, and 47,910 patients were included. The follow-up time ranged from 14 to 110 days post-viral infection. The age of the study participants ranged between 17 and 87 years. It was estimated that 80% (95% CI 65-92) of the patients that were infected with SARS-CoV-2 developed one or more long-term symptoms. The five most common symptoms were fatigue (58%), headache (44%), attention disorder (27%), hair loss (25%), and dyspnea (24%). All meta-analyses showed medium (n=2) to high heterogeneity (n=13). Conclusions . In order to have a better understanding, future studies need to stratify by sex, age, previous comorbidities, the severity of COVID-19 (ranging from asymptomatic to severe), and duration of each symptom. From the clinical perspective, multi-disciplinary teams are crucial to developing preventive measures, rehabilitation techniques, and clinical management strategies with whole-patient perspectives designed to address long COVID-19 care.

Abstract

AIMS: In response to the rapid spread of COVID-19, this paper provides health professionals with better accessibility to available evidence, summarising findings from a systematic overview of systematic reviews of the neurological symptoms seen in patients with COVID-19. Implications of so-called 'Long Covid' on neurological services and primary care and similarities with other neurological disorders are discussed. METHODS Firstly, a systematic overview of current reviews of neurological symptoms of COVID-19 was conducted. Secondly, the implications of these findings are discussed in relation to the potential effect on neurological services and the similarities in the experience of patients with COVID-19 and those with other neurological disorders. A total of 45 systematic reviews were identified within seven databases, published between 11 April 2020 and 15 October 2020, following a search in June 2020, updated on 20 October 2020. RESULTS The results indicated that COVID-19 exhibits two types of neurological symptoms; life-threatening symptoms such as Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) and encephalitis, and less devastating symptoms such as fatigue and myalgia. Many of these so-called lesser symptoms appear to be emerging as longer-term for some sufferers and have been recently labelled Long Covid. When compared, these less devastating symptoms are very similar to other neurological conditions such as chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) and functional neurological disorder (FND). CONCLUSION Implications for neurological healthcare services in the United Kingdom (UK) may include longer waiting times and a need for more resources (including more qualified health professionals). There is also a possible change-effect on health professionals' perceptions of other neurological conditions such as CFS and FND. Future research is recommended to explore changes in health professionals' perceptions of neurological symptoms because of COVID-19.

Abstract

Long-term sequelae of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are now recognized. However, there is still a lack of consensus regarding the terminology for this emerging chronic clinical syndrome, which includes long COVID, chronic COVID syndrome, post-COVID-19 syndrome, post-acute COVID-19, and long-hauler COVID-19. In this review, I will use the term "long COVID". A review of the medical history and epidemiology of past pandemics and epidemics in modern literature review identifies common long-term post-infectious disorders, with the common finding of altered cognition. In the brain, the cerebral hypoxia induced by SARS-CoV-2 infection may be caused by mitochondrial dysfunction, resulting in "brain fog". Historically, the common symptom of altered cognition has been reported during earlier pandemics, which include the influenza pandemics of 1889 and 1892 (Russian flu), the Spanish flu pandemic (1918-1919), encephalitis lethargica, diphtheria, and myalgic encephalomyelitis (chronic fatigue syndrome or post-viral fatigue syndrome). There are similarities between chronic fatigue syndrome and the "brain fog" described in long COVID. During past viral epidemics and pandemics, a commonality of neural targets may have increased viral survival by conformational matching. The neurological and psychiatric sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection, or long COVID, may have emerged from neural effects that have emerged from an invertebrate and vertebrate virosphere. This review aims to present a historical overview of infections and disorders associated with neurological and psychiatric sequelae that have shown similarities with long COVID.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Coronavirus disease once thought to be a respiratory infection is now recognised as a multi-system disease affecting the respiratory, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, neurological, immune, and hematopoietic systems. An emerging body of evidence suggests the persistence of COVID-19 symptoms of varying patterns among some survivors. This study aimed to describe persistent symptoms in COVID-19 survivors and investigate possible risk factors for these persistent symptoms. METHODS The study used a retrospective study design. The study population comprised of discharged COVID-19 patients. Demographic information, days since discharge, comorbidities, and persistent COVID-19 like symptoms were assessed in patients attending the COVID-19 outpatient clinic in Lagos State. Statistical analysis was done using STATA 15.0 software (StataCorp Texas) with significance placed at p-value < 0.05. RESULTS A total of 274 patients were enrolled in the study. A majority were within the age group > 35 to ≤49 years (38.3%), and male (66.1%). More than one-third (40.9%) had persistent COVID-19 symptoms after discharge, and 19.7% had more than three persistent COVID-like symptoms. The most persistent COVID-like symptoms experienced were easy fatigability (12.8%), headaches (12.8%), and chest pain (9.8%). Symptomatic COVID-19 disease with moderate severity compared to mild severity was a predictor of persistent COVID-like symptoms after discharge (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION Findings from this study suggests that patients who recovered from COVID-19 disease may still experience COVID-19 like symptoms, particularly fatigue and headaches. Therefore, careful monitoring should be in place after discharge to help mitigate the effects of these symptoms and improve the quality of life of COVID-19 survivors.