Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37344767›Full record

SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2023

Clinical effectiveness of rehabilitation in ambulatory care for patients with persisting symptoms after COVID-19: a systematic review.

Hannelore Dillen, Geertruida Bekkering, Sofie Gijsbers, Yannick Vande Weygaerde, Maarten Van Herck, Sarah Haesevoets, David A G Bos, Ann Li, Wim Janssens, Rik Gosselink and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
9.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Assessment and management of post-COVID-19 pulmonary complications: a rapid review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Post-COVID Rehabilitation Outcomes: A Comparative Cohort Study.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

12 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.

Hannelore DillenEPI-Centre, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, 7 Kapucijnenvoer, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. hannelore.dillen@kuleuven.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3242-2318
Geertruida BekkeringAcademic Centre for General Practice, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, 7 Kapucijnenvoer, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Sofie Gijsbers, post-COVID community, Belgium.
Yannick Vande WeygaerdeDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, 10 Corneel Heymanslaan, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Maarten Van HerckREVAL-Rehabilitation Research Center, Biomedical Research Institute (BIOMED), Faculty of Rehabilitation Sciences, Hasselt University, Agoralaan Building A, 3590, Diepenbeek, Belgium.
Sarah HaesevoetsREVAL-Rehabilitation Research Center, Biomedical Research Institute (BIOMED), Faculty of Rehabilitation Sciences, Hasselt University, Agoralaan Building A, 3590, Diepenbeek, Belgium.
David A G BosEPI-Centre, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, 7 Kapucijnenvoer, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Ann Li, post-COVID community, Belgium.
Wim JanssensDepartment of Respiratory Diseases, KU Leuven University Hospitals Leuven, 49 Herestraat, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Rik GosselinkDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, Research Group for Rehabilitation in Internal Disorders, KU Leuven, 101 Tervuursevest, 3001, Leuven, Belgium.
Thierry TroostersDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, Research Group for Rehabilitation in Internal Disorders, KU Leuven, 101 Tervuursevest, 3001, Leuven, Belgium.
Jan Y VerbakelEPI-Centre, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, 7 Kapucijnenvoer, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
KU Leuven · BENvidia (United Kingdom) · GBDepartment of Public Health · USGhent University Hospital · BEHasselt University · BEMaastricht University Medical Centre · NLOxford BioMedica (United Kingdom) · GBRode Kruis-Vlaanderen · BE

Funding

Belgische Federale Overheidsdiensten 2021-2022Belgische Federale Overheidsdiensten QPG-3D1907-VERBAKEL/TROOSTERS/GOSSELINK-FOD-COVID
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLingering symptoms after acute COVID-19 present a major challenge to ambulatory care services. Since there are reservations regarding their optimal management, we aimed to collate all available evidence on the effects of rehabilitation treatments applicable in ambulatory care for these patients.

methodsOn 9 May 2022, we systematically searched articles in COVID-19 collections, Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycArticles, PEDro, and EuropePMC. References were eligible if they reported on the clinical effectiveness of a rehabilitation therapy applicable in ambulatory care for adult patients with persisting symptoms continuing 4 weeks after the onset of COVID-19. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the CASP cohort study checklist and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Summary of Findings tables were constructed and the certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE framework.

resultsWe included 38 studies comprising 2,790 participants. Physical training and breathing exercises may reduce fatigue, dyspnoea, and chest pain and may improve physical capacity and quality of life, but the evidence is very weak (based on 6 RCTs and 12 cohort studies). The evidence underpinning the effect of nutritional supplements on fatigue, dyspnoea, muscle pain, sensory function, psychological well-being, quality of life, and functional capacity is very poor (based on 4 RCTs). Also, the evidence-base is very weak about the effect of olfactory training on sensory function and quality of life (based on 4 RCTs and 3 cohort studies). Multidisciplinary treatment may have beneficial effects on fatigue, dyspnoea, physical capacity, pulmonary function, quality of life, return to daily life activities, and functional capacity, but the evidence is very weak (based on 5 cohort studies). The certainty of evidence is very low due to study limitations, inconsistency, indirectness, and imprecision.

conclusionsPhysical training, breathing exercises, olfactory training and multidisciplinary treatment can be effective rehabilitation therapies for patients with persisting symptoms after COVID-19, still with high uncertainty regarding these effects. These findings can guide ambulatory care practitioners to treat these patients and should be incorporated in clinical practice guidelines. High-quality studies are needed to confirm our hypotheses and should report on adverse events.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdultAmbulatory CareCohort StudiesDyspneaFatigueHumansQuality of LifeTreatment OutcomeAmbulatory careCOVID-19Post-acute COVID-19 syndromeRehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID37344767
PMCPMC10283248
OpenAlexW4381598388

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.