Back

Evaluating Long-Term Autonomic Dysfunction and Functional Impacts of Long COVID: A Follow-Up Study

Eastin, E.; Machnik, J.; Larsen, N.; Seliger, J.; Geng, L. N.; Bonilla, H.; Yang, P.; Stiles, L.; Miglis, M. G.

2024-10-16 infectious diseases
10.1101/2024.10.11.24315277 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundThe longitudinal prevalence and autonomic symptom burden in Long COVID patients is not well-established. ObjectiveAssess the duration and severity of autonomic dysfunction in adults with Long COVID and evaluate its impact on function and quality of life. DesignA follow-up survey of a subset of participants from a cross-sectional online survey of adults with Long COVID. Multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of moderate to severe autonomic dysfunction. Participants526 adults (ages 20-65) with a history of Long COVID Main measuresThe Composite Autonomic Symptom 31 (COMPASS-31) score, the RAND 36-Item Health Survey, the prevalence of new postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), and predictors of autonomic dysfunction, including POTS Key results71.9% of Long COVID patients had a COMPASS-31 score >20, suggestive of moderate to severe autonomic dysfunction. The median symptom duration was 36 [30-40] months, reaching up to 3.5 years after SARS-CoV-2 infection. 37.5% of Long COVID patients could no longer work or had to drop out of school due to their Long COVID illness. 40.5% were newly diagnosed with POTS following SARS-CoV-2 infection. ConclusionsEvidence of persistent moderate to severe autonomic dysfunction was seen in 71.9% of Long COVID patients in our study, with a 36-month median symptom duration, suggesting that enduring autonomic dysfunction is highly prevalent in the Long COVID population. Moderate to severe autonomic dysfunction was significantly correlated with impaired function and capacity, highlighting the need to address POTS and other manifestations of autonomic dysfunction as a key component of Long COVID management.

Matching journals

The top 13 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.