Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36756465›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2022

First results from post-COVID inpatient rehabilitation.

Alexa Kupferschmitt, Eike Langheim, Haris Tüter, Franziska Etzrodt, Thomas H Loew, Volker Köllner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. [Immunological aspects and stress regulation in fatigue].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2024
    Review
  14. [S1 guideline long/post-COVID syndrome].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Reporting of pre-existing multiple long-term conditions in physical rehabilitation for long COVID: a scoping review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Alexa KupferschmittDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Eike LangheimDepartment of Cardiology, Rehabilitation Center Seehof, Federal German Pension Agency, Teltow, Germany.
Haris TüterDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Franziska EtzrodtDepartment of Cardiology, Rehabilitation Center Seehof, Federal German Pension Agency, Teltow, Germany.
Thomas H LoewDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Volker KöllnerPsychosomatic Rehabilitation Research Group, Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Center for Internal Medicine and Dermatology Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: COVID-19 is associated with various symptoms and psychological involvement in the long term. In view of the multifactorial triggering and maintenance of the post-COVID syndrome, a multimodal therapy with somatomedical and psychotherapeutic content is expedient. This paper compares the psychological stress of post-COVID patients and their course in rehabilitation to psychosomatic and psychocardiological patients. Method: Observational study with control-groups and clinical, standardized examination: psychological testing (BDI-II, HELATH-49), 6-MWT as somatic parameter, two measurement points (admission, discharge). Sample characteristics, including work related parameters, the general symptom-load and the course of symptoms during rehabilitation are evaluated. Results: At admission in all measures post-COVID patients were significantly affected, but less pronounced than psychosomatic or psychocardiological patients (BDI-II post-COVID = 19.29 ± 9.03, BDI-II psychosomatic = 28.93 ± 12.66, BDI-II psychocardiology = 24.47 ± 10.02). During rehabilitation, in all complaint domains and sub-groups, symptom severity was significantly reduced (effect sizes ranging from Conclusion: Post-COVID patients have a slighter psychological burden as psychocardiological or psychosomatic patients. Although rehabilitation is not curative, post-COVID patients benefit significantly from the interventions and there were no signs of PEM.

Indexed as

inpatient rehabilitationpost-COVID-Syndromepsychocardiologypsychosomatictreatment effect

Identifiers

PMID36756465
PMCPMC9899863

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.