The Relationship Between Long Covid Symptoms and Vaccination Status in COVID-19 Survivors

IF 2.1 4区医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice Pub Date : 2025-02-03 DOI:10.1111/jep.70004

Furkan Öztürk, Canan Emiroğlu, Cenk Aypak

{"title":"The Relationship Between Long Covid Symptoms and Vaccination Status in COVID-19 Survivors","authors":"Furkan Öztürk, Canan Emiroğlu, Cenk Aypak","doi":"10.1111/jep.70004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>The positive effects of vaccination status on the course of Long COVID symptoms have not been fully elucidated. Our aim is to determine the most common Long COVID symptoms in patients monitored in the COVID-19 follow-up clinic and to examine whether there is a difference between the recovery rates of those who are vaccinated and those who are not vaccinated.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>Between December 1, 2020 and April 30, 2022, prospectively collected data of 916 patients who were admitted to the COVID-19 follow-up outpatient clinic of a tertiary hospital for the first time were evaluated as a retrospective cohort in this study. The frequencies of the ten most common symptoms in the first and last examinations of 478 patients with Long COVID symptoms were determined, and their recovery was compared. Patients were divided into two groups according to their vaccination status. The values showing the recovery rates obtained for these two groups were compared between themselves again.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The average age of the patients in the study group was 54.43 ± 11.71 years, and 255 (53.3%) were male. The median follow-up period was 10 months. 84.7% of patients had received at least one dose of vaccine. Statistically significant results were found for improvement in all ten symptoms in vaccinated patients compared to the never-vaccinated group. There was no statistically significant difference between the CoronaVac, BNT162b2, and heterologous (CoronaVac+ BNT162b2) vaccine groups. Factors affecting recovery for the three most common symptoms (dyspnea, fatigue, forgetfulness) were examined with univariate logistic regression analysis, and only vaccination or non-vaccination was found to be a significant risk factor.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>This study showed that receiving vaccination may be effective in improving Long COVID symptoms. Although there were no statistically significant differences between the inactive vaccine CoronaVac, the mRNA vaccine BNT162b2, and the heterologous (CoronaVac+ BNT162b2) vaccine in terms of reducing Long COVID symptoms, higher recovery rates were detected in those who received the mRNA vaccine BNT162b2.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jep.70004","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The positive effects of vaccination status on the course of Long COVID symptoms have not been fully elucidated. Our aim is to determine the most common Long COVID symptoms in patients monitored in the COVID-19 follow-up clinic and to examine whether there is a difference between the recovery rates of those who are vaccinated and those who are not vaccinated.

Method

Between December 1, 2020 and April 30, 2022, prospectively collected data of 916 patients who were admitted to the COVID-19 follow-up outpatient clinic of a tertiary hospital for the first time were evaluated as a retrospective cohort in this study. The frequencies of the ten most common symptoms in the first and last examinations of 478 patients with Long COVID symptoms were determined, and their recovery was compared. Patients were divided into two groups according to their vaccination status. The values showing the recovery rates obtained for these two groups were compared between themselves again.

Results

The average age of the patients in the study group was 54.43 ± 11.71 years, and 255 (53.3%) were male. The median follow-up period was 10 months. 84.7% of patients had received at least one dose of vaccine. Statistically significant results were found for improvement in all ten symptoms in vaccinated patients compared to the never-vaccinated group. There was no statistically significant difference between the CoronaVac, BNT162b2, and heterologous (CoronaVac+ BNT162b2) vaccine groups. Factors affecting recovery for the three most common symptoms (dyspnea, fatigue, forgetfulness) were examined with univariate logistic regression analysis, and only vaccination or non-vaccination was found to be a significant risk factor.

Conclusion

This study showed that receiving vaccination may be effective in improving Long COVID symptoms. Although there were no statistically significant differences between the inactive vaccine CoronaVac, the mRNA vaccine BNT162b2, and the heterologous (CoronaVac+ BNT162b2) vaccine in terms of reducing Long COVID symptoms, higher recovery rates were detected in those who received the mRNA vaccine BNT162b2.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice 医学-卫生保健

CiteScore

4.80

自引率

4.20%

发文量

143

审稿时长

3-8 weeks

期刊介绍： The Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice aims to promote the evaluation and development of clinical practice across medicine, nursing and the allied health professions. All aspects of health services research and public health policy analysis and debate are of interest to the Journal whether studied from a population-based or individual patient-centred perspective. Of particular interest to the Journal are submissions on all aspects of clinical effectiveness and efficiency including evidence-based medicine, clinical practice guidelines, clinical decision making, clinical services organisation, implementation and delivery, health economic evaluation, health process and outcome measurement and new or improved methods (conceptual and statistical) for systematic inquiry into clinical practice. Papers may take a classical quantitative or qualitative approach to investigation (or may utilise both techniques) or may take the form of learned essays, structured/systematic reviews and critiques.