Article Text

Download PDFPDF
COPD assessment test for the evaluation of COVID-19 symptoms
  1. Enya Daynes1,2,
  2. Charlotte Gerlis1,
  3. Samuel Briggs-Price1,
  4. Paul Jones3,
  5. Sally J Singh1,2
  1. 1 CERS, NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre Respiratory Diseases, Leicester, East Midlands, UK
  2. 2 Department of Respiratory Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, Leicestershire, UK
  3. 3 Institute of Infection and Immunology, University of London, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Enya Daynes, CERS, NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre Respiratory Diseases, Leicester LE3 9QP, East Midlands, UK; enya.daynes{at}uhl-tr.nhs.uk

Abstract

There is evidence to demonstrate the ongoing symptoms of COVID-19; however, there are currently no agreed outcomes to assess these symptoms. This study examined the use of the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) assessment test (CAT) for patients recovering from COVID-19. 131 patients who were admitted with COVID-19 were followed up over the phone to assess symptoms. The median (IQR) CAT score was 10 (5–16). Cough, phlegm and chest tightness domains were within range for healthy people, but there was evidence of significant breathlessness, loss of energy, and activity and sleep disturbance. The CAT is a useful tool to assess symptoms of COVID-19 recovery.

  • pulmonary rehabilitation
  • respiratory infection

This article is made freely available for use in accordance with BMJ’s website terms and conditions for the duration of the covid-19 pandemic or until otherwise determined by BMJ. You may use, download and print the article for any lawful, non-commercial purpose (including text and data mining) provided that all copyright notices and trade marks are retained.

https://bmj.com/coronavirus/usage

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Twitter @EnyaDaynesPT

  • Contributors ED and SJS developed the protocol. ED, CG and SB-P contributed to the data collection. The data analysis was completed by ED with support from PJ and SJS. All authors contributed to the manuscript.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests PJ is an employee of GSK.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Ethics approval It is a substudy of the Training to Improve Dyspnoea Study (ISRCTN ISRCTN45695543) and gained ethical approval in May 2020 (REC number 17/EM/0156).

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.