|
1
|
Al-Oraibi A, Woolf K, Naidu J, Nellums LB, Pan D, Sze S, Tarrant C, Martin CA, Gogoi M, Nazareth J, Divall P, Dempsey B, Lamb D, Pareek M. Global prevalence of long COVID and its most common symptoms among healthcare workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ PUBLIC HEALTH 2025; 3:e000269. [PMID: 40260126 PMCID: PMC12010341 DOI: 10.1136/bmjph-2023-000269] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2023] [Accepted: 03/17/2025] [Indexed: 04/23/2025]
Abstract
Objectives Long COVID, a condition where symptoms persist after the acute phase of COVID-19, is a significant concern for healthcare workers (HCWs) due to their higher risk of infection. However, there is limited knowledge regarding the prevalence, symptoms and clustering of long COVID in HCWs. We aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence and identify the most common symptoms of long COVID among HCWs who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 virus globally, and investigate any differences by geographical region and other factors. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO CRD42022312781). Data sources We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO and the grey literature from 31 December 2019 until 18 February 2022. Eligibility criteria We included studies reporting primary data on long COVID prevalence and symptoms in adult HCWs who had SARS-CoV-2 infection. Data extraction and synthesis Methodological quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist. Meta-analysis was performed for prevalence data of long COVID following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results Out of 5737 articles, 28 met the inclusion criteria, with a combined sample size of 6 481 HCWs. 15 articles scored equal to or above the median score for methodological quality. The pooled prevalence of long COVID among HCWs who had SARS-CoV-2 infection was 40% (95% CI: 29% to 51%, I2: 97.2%; 12 studies), with a mean follow-up period of 22 weeks. The most prevalent symptoms reported were fatigue (35%), neurologic symptoms (25%), loss/decrease of smell and/or taste (25%), myalgia (22%) and shortness of breath (19%). Conclusion This review highlights the substantial burden of long COVID among HCWs worldwide. However, limitations in data quality and inconsistent definitions of long COVID impact the generalisability of these findings. To improve future interventions, we recommend enhanced cohort study designs for better characterisation of long COVID prevalence and symptoms in HCWs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amani Al-Oraibi
- Respiratory Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
- Lifespan and Population Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
- Development Centre for Population Health, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Katherine Woolf
- Research Department of Medical Education, University College London, London, UK
| | - Jatin Naidu
- University College London Medical School, London, UK
| | | | - Daniel Pan
- Department of Respiratory Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
- Department of Infectious Diseases and HIV Medicine, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK
- Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Information and Discovery, University of Oxford Big Data Institute, Oxford, UK
- NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre, Leicester, UK
| | - Shirley Sze
- Development Centre for Population Health, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
- Cardiovascular Research Centre, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK
| | - Carolyn Tarrant
- Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Christopher A Martin
- Development Centre for Population Health, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
- Department of Respiratory Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
- Department of Infectious Diseases and HIV Medicine, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK
| | - Mayuri Gogoi
- Development Centre for Population Health, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
- Department of Respiratory Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Joshua Nazareth
- Development Centre for Population Health, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
- Department of Respiratory Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
- Department of Infectious Diseases and HIV Medicine, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK
| | - Pip Divall
- University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK
| | - Brendan Dempsey
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Danielle Lamb
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Manish Pareek
- Development Centre for Population Health, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
- Department of Respiratory Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
- NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre, Leicester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
|
2
|
López-Ramón MF, Moreno-Campos V, Alonso-Esteban Y, Navarro-Pardo E, Alcantud-Marín F. Mindfulness Interventions and Surveys as Tools for Positive Emotional Regulation During COVID-19: A Scoping Review. Mindfulness (N Y) 2023; 14:2583-2601. [DOI: 10.1007/s12671-023-02234-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/28/2023] [Indexed: 01/16/2025]
Abstract
Abstract
Objectives
The COVID-19 pandemic has caused high mortality rates worldwide, as well as consequent psychological and physical stress. The present study aimed to review the main existing scientific research studies conducted since the onset of the COVID-19 that have used mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) as tools for emotional regulation, aiming to improve individuals’ ability to cope with general stress caused by pandemic periods and their consequences (e.g., contagion, confinement, loss of loved ones or job stability) especially related with anxiety, stress, depression, or emotional dysregulation.
Method
To this aim, six databases (i.e., PubMed, Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Science Direct) were consulted and analyzed following PRISMA-Sc guidelines.
Results
Of the 16 studies selected, 7 are clinical trials that used MBIs, and 9 are online surveys in which mindfulness and emotional regulation variables were assessed to explore their interrelations. Generally, the analysis suggested that the cultivation of MBI strategies for treating anxiety and depression during COVID-19 confinement periods resulted in improved psychological well-being.
Conclusions
MBI techniques can be considered useful intervention tools in current and future worldwide changing situations, in which personal development and resilience should be considered an urgent issue for both educational and preventive health practices. Conversely, there are also some limitations that arose from the field of MBI research that hopefully might be addressed in future research (such as the diversity of intervention techniques used across studies).
Pre registration
This study is not preregistered.
Collapse
|