Social Stigma, Mental Health, Stress, and Health-Related Quality of Life in People with Long COVID

Abstract:

A considerable amount of people who have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 experience ongoing symptoms, a condition termed long COVID. This study examined nuanced experiences of social stigma in people with long COVID and their associations with perceived stress, depressive symptoms, anxiety, and mental and physical health-related quality of life (hrqol).
A total of N = 253 participants with long COVID symptoms (mean age = 45.49, SD = 12.03; n = 224, 88.5% women) completed a cross-sectional online survey on overall social stigma and the subfacets enacted and perceived external stigma, disclosure concerns, and internalized stigma. Data were analysed using multiple regression and controlling for overall burden of consequences of long COVID, overall burden of symptoms of long COVID, and outcome-specific confounders.
In line with our preregistered hypotheses, total social stigma was related to more perceived stress, more depressive symptoms, higher anxiety, and lower mental hrqol, but—in contrast to our hypothesis—it was unrelated to physical hrqol after controlling for confounders. The three subscales of social stigma resulted in differential associations with the outcomes.
Social stigma experiences go hand in hand with worse mental health in people with long COVID. Future studies should examine potential protective factors to buffer the effects of social stigma on people’s well-being.
Source: Scholz U, Bierbauer W, Lüscher J. Social Stigma, Mental Health, Stress, and Health-Related Quality of Life in People with Long COVID. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023; 20(5):3927. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20053927. https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/5/3927 (Full text)

As a doctor with long covid, I feel abandoned by the NHS

NHS workers with long covid should be given adequate sick pay and the support to work if they can

The covid-19 pandemic has thrown a spotlight on the treatment of NHS staff and their perceived value to their employers. As a recent episode of the BBC’s Panorama programme showed, many NHS staff now find themselves abandoned and in a precarious financial position after being infected with covid-19—most likely at work. The episode, “Forgotten Heroes of the Covid Front Line,” interviewed NHS staff struggling with the ongoing health effects of covid-19 infection, uncovering the stories of people who, despite being too sick to work, are facing reduced sick pay or losing their jobs. For some staff, this has already happened.

An estimated two million people in the UK have long covid,1 including many thousands of NHS workers, so why do we hear so little about it? As a doctor in the NHS who is one of those affected, I’m disappointed by the collective silence and the lack of protections and support mechanisms in place. NHS workers had to put their health and lives on the line when the virus broke out, with only a weekly clap to bolster them. Yet the public’s support hid underlying questions about the inadequacy of the personal protective equipment given to frontline workers in the UK and troubling attitudes to the risks we’d expose these people to.

UK guidance told healthcare workers that flimsy plastic aprons and masks we could see through were enough to protect us when clearly they weren’t. NHS staff had no choice but to continue working and caring for patients, so we carried on. I will never forget the fear in the eyes of those I cared for, and the dawning reality of the virus we were facing as cases continued to climb and more people were admitted to hospital.

I was relatively young, fit, and healthy when the pandemic began. I didn’t take any medications or have a pre-existing illness. I had nothing to worry about, I was told. But I was worried and wanted to protect my family. After coming home from a shift in the community covid hub, I’d strip off in the front porch, put my clothes straight in the washing machine, and shower. Of course, now that we understand more about the transmission of covid-19, I know why this wasn’t enough. Within a few weeks of working during the first wave of the pandemic, I was sick and stuck in bed, my oxygen levels dropping whenever I stood or walked.

Initially, I carried on working, struggling to manage a few hours here and there. One key feature of everyone I know with long covid is that we “pushed through” the initial stages of our illness, believing that we could get better by carrying on and ignoring our bodies. As a doctor, the system I worked in and the martyr complex instilled by medical culture enabled that view. In medicine, being ill, being human, and looking after ourselves is still too often seen as a kind of failure or weakness.

Being a doctor was how I defined my life, but eventually I was unable to carry on working. Now I’m in constant pain. I struggle to sit, walk, or play with my children. Like thousands of other people, I face the stark reality of being left behind—thrown away because I am now disabled.

The contrast in the way that healthcare workers have been treated is stark: from being lauded as heroes when needed by the system and government to being abandoned if they can now no longer work in the way they once did. Where is the leadership from the top, insisting that we care for those who were harmed by covid while working?

NHS workers—from doctors to porters, cleaners to nurses—have held the service together with their goodwill for years. But the personal costs of this are often too great. Even before the pandemic, I frequently neglected my needs or personal life for work. I miscarried at work, and continued with my clinic, not even giving myself time for a brief cry in the toilet. I missed a friend’s funeral because they were not a “first degree relative.” The covid-19 pandemic, and the swell of recognition it prompted for the value of healthcare workers, should have helped us reset these priorities and provide more support for staff. Yet this opportunity hasn’t been taken up by the government or NHS employers and is typified in the response to staff with long covid.

Like many people with long covid, I struggle living in a world where covid-19 has been declared “over” even though I still have not recovered my former health and more people are falling ill all the time. NHS staff, especially those with long covid or other covid-19 sequelae, should be protected from further infections and not have to fear for our lives going to work nearly three years on. Research has shown that FFP3 masks reduce the risk of covid-19 infection2: those who wish to wear them should be given them and supported.

Staff with long covid still have a lot to contribute to the NHS, which is beset by workforce shortages, but they need compassion and understanding. Many workers with long covid are desperately trying to return to work, but they must be met with flexibility and support. Instead of setting rigid time frames, NHS trusts should work with us to use our skills. This will mean making reasonable adjustments where they can, such as offering reduced duties, shorter hours, or the opportunity to work from home where possible.

The NHS has needed to challenge the organisational attitude of “work first, person second” for a long time. It can make a start by providing workers with long covid with adequate sick pay or compensation and the support to work if they are able to. Many of these people are ill because they were trying to save other people’s lives, without looking after their own. To neglect them now because they can no longer provide the same level of productivity is shameful.

Source: BMJ 2023;380:p337 https://www.bmj.com/content/380/bmj.p337 (Full text)

The emotional well-being of Long COVID patients in relation to their symptoms, social support and stigmatization in social and health services: a qualitative study

Abstract:

Background: Long COVID patients have experienced a decline in their quality of life due to, in part but not wholly, its negative emotional impact. Some of the most prevalent mental health symptoms presented by long COVID patients are anxiety, depression, and sleep disorders. As such, the need has arisen to analyze the personal experiences of these patients to understand how they are managing their daily lives while dealing with the condition. The objective of this study is to increase understanding about the emotional well-being of people diagnosed with long COVID.

Methods: A qualitative design was created and carried out using 35 patients, with 17 participants being interviewed individually and 18 of them taking part in two focus groups. The participating patients were recruited in November and December 2021 from Primary Health Care (PHC) centers in the city of Zaragoza (Northern Spain) and from the Association of Long COVID Patients in Aragon. The study topics were emotional well-being, social support networks, and experience of discrimination. All an inductive thematic content analyses were performed iteratively using NVivo software.

Results: The Long COVID patients identified low levels of self-perceived well-being due to their persistent symptoms, as well as limitations in their daily lives that had been persistent for many months. Suicidal thoughts were also mentioned by several patients. They referred to anguish and anxiety about the future as well as a fear of reinfection or relapse and returning to work. Many of the participants reported that they have sought the help of a mental health professional. Most participants identified discriminatory situations in health care.

Conclusions: It is necessary to continue researching the impact that Long COVID has had on mental health, as well as to provide Primary Health Care professionals with evidence that can guide the emotional treatment of these patients.

Source: Samper-Pardo M, Oliván-Blázquez B, Magallón-Botaya R, Méndez-López F, Bartolomé-Moreno C, León-Herrera S. The emotional well-being of Long COVID patients in relation to their symptoms, social support and stigmatization in social and health services: a qualitative study. BMC Psychiatry. 2023 Jan 25;23(1):68. doi: 10.1186/s12888-022-04497-8. PMID: 36698111; PMCID: PMC9875186. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9875186/ (Full text)

Doctors’ attitudes toward specific medical conditions

Abstract:

This study uses machine learning and natural language processing tools to examine the language used by healthcare professionals on a global online forum. It contributes to an underdeveloped area of knowledge, that of physician attitudes toward their patients. Using comments left by physicians on Reddit’s ”Medicine” subreddit (r/medicine), we test if the language from online discussions can reveal doctors’ attitudes toward specific medical conditions. We focus on a set of chronic conditions that usually are more stigmatized and compare them to ones well accepted by the medical community.

We discovered that when comparing diseases with similar traits, doctors discussed some conditions with more negative attitudes. These results show bias does not occur only along the dimensions traditionally analyzed in the economics literature of gender and race, but also along the dimension of disease type. This is meaningful because the emotions associated with beliefs impact physicians’ decision making, prescribing behavior, and quality of care. First, we run a binomial LASSO-logistic regression to compare a range of 21 diseases against myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), depression, and the autoimmune diseases multiple sclerosis and rheumatoid arthritis.

Next, we use dictionary methods to compare five more chronic diseases: Lyme disease, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS), Alzheimer’s disease, osteoporosis, and lupus. The results show physicians discuss ME/CFS, depression, and Lyme disease with more negative language than the other diseases in the set. The results for ME/CFS included over four times more negative words than the results for depression.

Source: Brooke Scoles, Catia Nicodemo. Doctors’ attitudes toward specific medical conditions. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Volume 204, December 2022, Pages 182-199. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016726812200347X (Full text)

Long Covid stigma: estimating burden and validating scale in a UK-based sample

Abstract:

Background: Stigma can be experienced as perceived or actual disqualification from social and institutional acceptance on the basis of one or more physical, behavioural or other attributes deemed to be undesirable. Long Covid is a predominantly multisystem condition that occurs in people with a history of SARSCoV2 infection, often resulting in functional disability.

Aim: To develop and validate a Long Covid Stigma Scale (LCSS); and to quantify the burden of Long Covid stigma.

Design and Setting: Follow-up of a co-produced community-based Long Covid online survey using convenience non-probability sampling.

Method: Thirteen questions on stigma were designed to develop the LCSS capturing three domains – enacted (overt experiences of discrimination), internalised (internalising negative associations with Long Covid and accepting them as self-applicable) and anticipated (expectation of bias/poor treatment by others) stigma. Confirmatory factor analysis tested whether LCSS consisted of the three hypothesised domains. Model fit was assessed and prevalence was calculated.

Results: 966 UK-based participants responded (888 for stigma questions), with mean age 48 years (SD: 10.7) and 85% female. Factor loadings for enacted stigma were 0.70-0.86, internalised 0.75-0.84, anticipated 0.58-0.87, and model fit was good. The prevalence of experiencing stigma at least ‘sometimes’ and ‘often/always’ was 95% and 76% respectively. Anticipated and internalised stigma were more frequently experienced than enacted stigma. Those who reported having a clinical diagnosis of Long Covid had higher stigma prevalence than those without.

Conclusion: This study establishes a scale to measure Long Covid stigma and highlights common experiences of stigma in people living with Long Covid.

Source: Marija PantelicNida ZiauddeenMark BoyesMargaret E O’HaraClaire HastieNisreen A Alwan. Long Covid stigma: estimating burden and validating scale in a UK-based sample. 

Exploring invisibility and epistemic injustice in Long Covid-A citizen science qualitative analysis of patient stories from an online Covid community

Abstract:

Background: In 2020, the long-lasting effects of the Covid-19 virus were not included in public messages of risks to public health. Long Covid emerged as a novel and enigmatic illness with a serious and life-changing impact. Long Covid is poorly explained by objective medical tests, leading to widespread disbelief and stigma associated with the condition. The aim of this organic research is to explore the physical and epistemic challenges of living with Long Covid.

Methods: Unlike any previous pandemic in history, online Covid communities and ‘citizen science’ have played a leading role in advancing our understanding of Long Covid. As patient-led research of this grassroots Covid community, a team approach to thematic analysis was undertaken of 66 patient stories submitted online to covid19-recovery.org at the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic between April and September 2020.

Results: The overriding theme of the analysis highlights the complexities and challenges of living with Long Covid. Our distinct themes were identified: the life-changing impact of the condition, the importance of validation and how, for many, seeking alternatives was felt to be their only option.

Conclusions: Long Covid does not easily fit into the dominant evidence-based practice and the biomedical model of health, which rely on objective indicators of the disease process. Patient testimonies are vital to understanding and treating Long Covid, yet patients are frequently disbelieved, and their testimonies are not taken seriously leading to stigma and epistemic injustice, which introduces a lack of trust into the therapeutic relationship.

Patient contribution: The research was undertaken in partnership with our consumer representative(s) and all findings and subsequent recommendations have been coproduced.

Source: Ireson J, Taylor A, Richardson E, Greenfield B, Jones G. Exploring invisibility and epistemic injustice in Long Covid-A citizen science qualitative analysis of patient stories from an online Covid community. Health Expect. 2022 May 12. doi: 10.1111/hex.13518. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35557480. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hex.13518 (Full text)

Intimate partner violence and women living with episodic disabilities: a scoping review protocol

Abstract:

Background: Violence towards women with disabilities is most commonly perpetrated by current or former intimate partners and more than half of disabled women experience intimate partner violence in their lifetime. Disabilities differ by presence, type, and complexity, yet are commonly researched collectively. A more nuanced understanding of the relationship between intimate partner violence and episodic disability is required to better support women living with these concurrent challenges. The objective of this scoping review is to investigate and synthesize the literature reporting on intimate partner violence for women living with an episodic disability to identify key concepts and knowledge gaps on this topic. Ultimately, this review aims to improve health services for this stigmatized group of women with episodic disabilities.

Methods: This scoping review will consider all studies that focus on women (18 years of age or older) who have experienced intimate partner violence and have an episodic disability. Episodic disabilities will include multiple sclerosis, chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, lupus, or rheumatoid arthritis. The broad review question is what is known about intimate partner violence within the context of women living with an episodic disability? Databases to be searched include MEDLINE (OVID), CINAHL, Embase, PsychInfo, and Scopus with no limits on language or time frame. Joanna Briggs Institute methodology will guide this scoping review to address the review questions outlined in the protocol. For papers that meet the inclusion criteria, data will be extracted, and findings will be presented in tables and narrative form. A PRISMA table will be included to enhance the transparency of the process. A descriptive qualitative approach to analysis will be conducted following Braun and Clarke’s reflexive thematic analysis. The findings of the scoping review will be presented through a thematic narrative.

Discussion: Findings from this review will be used to identify important priorities for future research based on knowledge gaps and inform both health care practices and health and social interventions for women living with intimate partner violence and episodic disabilities.

Source: Campbell KA, Ford-Gilboe M, Stanley M, MacKinnon K. Intimate partner violence and women living with episodic disabilities: a scoping review protocol. Syst Rev. 2022 May 18;11(1):97. doi: 10.1186/s13643-022-01972-x. PMID: 35585642. https://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13643-022-01972-x  (Full text)

“Like before, but not exactly”: the Qualy-REACT qualitative inquiry into the lived experience of long COVID

Abstract:

Background: Post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) affect millions of individuals worldwide. Rehabilitation interventions could support individuals during the recovery phase of COVID-19, but a comprehensive understanding of this new disease and its associated needs is crucial. This qualitative study investigated the experience of individuals who had been hospitalized for COVID-19, focusing on those needs and difficulties they perceived as most urgent.

Methods: This naturalistic qualitative study was part of a single-center mix-method cross-sectional study (REACT) conducted in Italy during the first peak of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. The qualitative data collection took place through a telephone interview conducted 3 months after hospital discharge. The experience of individuals discharged after hospitalization for COVID-19 was investigated through the main research question – “Tell me, how has it been going since you were discharged?”. Two secondary questions investigated symptoms, activities, and participation. Data were recorded and transcribed verbatim within 48 h. An empirical phenomenological approach was used by the researchers, who independently analyzed the data and, through consensus, developed an interpretative model to answer the research question. Translation occurred after data was analyzed.

Results: During the first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, 784 individuals with COVID-19 were discharged from the hospitals of the Local Health Authority of the Province of Reggio Emilia (Italy); 446 were excluded due to the presence of acute or chronic conditions causing disability other than COVID-19 (n. 339), inability to participate in the study procedures (n. 56), insufficient medical documentation to allow for screening (n. 21), discharge to residential facilities (n. 25), and pregnancy (n. 5). Overall, 150 individuals consented to participate in the REACT study, and 56 individuals (60.7% male, average age 62.8 years ±11.8) were interviewed in June-July 2020, up to data saturation. Persistent symptoms, feelings of isolation, fear and stigma, emotional distress, a fatalistic attitude, and return to (adapted) life course were the key themes that characterized the participants’ experience after hospital discharge.

Conclusions: The experience as narrated by the participants in this study confirms the persistence of symptoms described in PASC and highlights the sense of isolation and psychological distress. These phenomena may trigger a vicious circle, but the participants also reported adaptation processes that allowed them to gradually return to their life course. Whether all individuals are able to rapidly activate these mechanisms and whether rehabilitation can help to break this vicious circle by improving residual symptoms remain to be seen.

Source: Schiavi M, Fugazzaro S, Bertolini A, Denti M, Mainini C, Accogli MA, Bedogni G, Ghizzoni D, Esseroukh O, Gualdi C, Costi S. “Like before, but not exactly”: the Qualy-REACT qualitative inquiry into the lived experience of long COVID. BMC Public Health. 2022 Mar 28;22(1):599. doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-13035-w. PMID: 35346138; PMCID: PMC8960224. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8960224/ (Full text)

The Journey Towards Becoming Diagnosed with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome – Patients’ Experiences

Abstract:

Background: Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome is a disease that negatively affects patients’ quality of life. Previous research has shown that these patients are commonly not taken seriously when seeking medical attention.

Aim: The aim was to examine the experiences of patients with ME/CFS regarding their interaction with Swedish primary healthcare professionals.

Method: The study used a qualitative and exploratory design, taking place in a specialist clinic in Sweden. Data consisted of interviews with 13 patients with ME/CFS, which were analysed using content analysis.

Findings: For patients, it was Feeling truly connected during the period before they received a diagnosis. Time is an important factor, and in the phase from initial symptoms to diagnosis, Knowledge is power.

Conclusion: Patients with ME/CFS were met with different levels of knowledge and interest from healthcare professionals. These challenges might be related to the relative unawareness and lack of knowledge of the disease and the underlying cultural scepticism still present.

Source: Bo Christer Bertilson., et al. “The Journey Towards Becoming Diagnosed with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome – Patients’ Experiences”. EC Neurology 14.2 (2022): 49-56.  https://www.ecronicon.com/ecne/pdf/ECNE-14-01012.pdf (Full text as PDF file)

Long Covid at the crossroads: Comparisons and lessons from the treatment of patients with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS)

Abstract:

Whilst parallels have been drawn between Long Covid and myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), there is a well-documented history of negative stereotyping and marginalisation of patients with ME/CFS. A socio-politically oriented comparison of scientific, clinical and societal responses to Long Covid and ME/CFS is thus important to prevent similar harms arising among Long Covid patients. We identify four reasons for injustices in the treatment of ME/CFS patients, and discuss the risk of Long Covid following a similar trajectory. We conclude with policy and practice recommendations to help prevent such injustices arising again, including consideration of critical reflexivity in medical education.

Source: Hunt J, Blease C, Geraghty KJ. Long Covid at the crossroads: Comparisons and lessons from the treatment of patients with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). J Health Psychol. 2022 Mar 27:13591053221084494. doi: 10.1177/13591053221084494. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35341334. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35341334/