Author:
Walker Alex J,MacKenna Brian,Inglesby Peter,Tomlinson Laurie,Rentsch Christopher T,Curtis Helen J,Morton Caroline E,Morley Jessica,Mehrkar Amir,Bacon Seb,Hickman George,Bates Chris,Croker Richard,Evans David,Ward Tom,Cockburn Jonathan,Davy Simon,Bhaskaran Krishnan,Schultze Anna,Williamson Elizabeth J,Hulme William J,McDonald Helen I,Mathur Rohini,Eggo Rosalind M,Wing Kevin,Wong Angel YS,Forbes Harriet,Tazare John,Parry John,Hester Frank,Harper Sam,O’Hanlon Shaun,Eavis Alex,Jarvis Richard,Avramov Dima,Griffiths Paul,Fowles Aaron,Parkes Nasreen,Douglas Ian J,Evans Stephen JW,Smeeth Liam,Goldacre Ben,
Abstract
BackgroundLong COVID describes new or persistent symptoms at least 4 weeks after onset of acute COVID-19. Clinical codes to describe this phenomenon were recently created.AimTo describe the use of long-COVID codes, and variation of use by general practice, demographic variables, and over time.Design and settingPopulation-based cohort study in English primary care.MethodWorking on behalf of NHS England, OpenSAFELY data were used encompassing 96% of the English population between 1 February 2020 and 25 May 2021. The proportion of people with a recorded code for long COVID was measured overall and by demographic factors, electronic health record software system (EMIS or TPP), and week.ResultsLong COVID was recorded for 23 273 people. Coding was unevenly distributed among practices, with 26.7% of practices having never used the codes. Regional variation ranged between 20.3 per 100 000 people for East of England (95% confidence interval [CI] = 19.3 to 21.4) and 55.6 per 100 000 people in London (95% CI = 54.1 to 57.1). Coding was higher among females (52.1, 95% CI = 51.3 to 52.9) than males (28.1, 95% CI = 27.5 to 28.7), and higher among practices using EMIS (53.7, 95% CI = 52.9 to 54.4) than those using TPP (20.9, 95% CI = 20.3 to 21.4).ConclusionCurrent recording of long COVID in primary care is very low, and variable between practices. This may reflect patients not presenting; clinicians and patients holding different diagnostic thresholds; or challenges with the design and communication of diagnostic codes. Increased awareness of diagnostic codes is recommended to facilitate research and planning of services, and also surveys with qualitative work to better evaluate clinicians’ understanding of the diagnosis.
Publisher
Royal College of General Practitioners
Reference19 articles.
1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (2020) COVID-19 rapid guideline: managing the long-term effects of COVID-19 NG188, https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng188 (accessed 19 Jul 2021).
2. Domingo FR Waddell LA Cheung AM (2021) Prevalence of long-term effects in individuals diagnosed with COVID-19: a living systematic review. medRxiv, DOI: http://doi.org/10.1101/2021.06.03.21258317.
3. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (2020) COVID-19 rapid guideline: managing the long-term effects of COVID-19 1 Identifying people with ongoing symptomatic COVID-19 or post-COVID-19 syndrome NG188, https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng188/chapter/1-Identifying-people-withongoing-symptomatic-COVID-19-or-post-COVID-19-syndrome (accessed 19 Jul 2021).
4. NHS Digital (2020) COVID-19 information standards: COVID-19 SNOMED CT codes by groups 20201221v1.0. https://hscic.kahootz.com/connect.ti/COVID19_info_sharing/view?objectId=67227941 (accessed 19 Jul 2021).
5. National Institute for Health Research (2021) Living with Covid19 — Second review, https://evidence.nihr.ac.uk/themedreview/living-with-covid19-secondreview (accessed 8 July 2021).