Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38616276›Full record

ArticleBMC medicine2024

What is quality in long covid care? Lessons from a national quality improvement collaborative and multi-site ethnography.

Trisha Greenhalgh, Julie L Darbyshire, Cassie Lee, Emma Ladds, Jenny Ceolta-Smith

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05057260 (LOng COvid Multidisciplinary Consortium), which is not on this map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
8.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT05057260 unknown statusnot on this map

LOng COvid Multidisciplinary Consortium: Optimising Treatments and servIces Across the NHS (LOCOMOTION)

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of LeedsRan2022 to 2024Enrolled7,000ConditionsCOVID-19ArmsNo drug invervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 'What Do People With Long Covid Want From Healthcare Services?' A Qualitative Exploration From Lived Experience.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Trust in Transition: Exploring Changing Trust in Vaccination in the Context of Long Covid in the United Kingdom.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  7. Addressing Inequalities in Long Covid Healthcare: A Mixed-Methods Study on Building Inclusive Services.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Muscle weakness post-COVID: a practical guide for primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Using co-design methods to develop new personalised support for people living with Long Covid: The 'LISTEN' intervention.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  18. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Trisha GreenhalghNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Woodstock Rd, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK. trish.greenhalgh@phc.ox.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-2369-8088
Julie L DarbyshireNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Woodstock Rd, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
Cassie LeeImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Emma LaddsNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Woodstock Rd, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
Jenny Ceolta-SmithLOCOMOTION Patient Advisory Group and Lived Experience Representative, London, UK.
University of Oxford · GBImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust · GB

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research COV-LT-0016
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLong covid (post covid-19 condition) is a complex condition with diverse manifestations, uncertain prognosis and wide variation in current approaches to management. There have been calls for formal quality standards to reduce a so-called "postcode lottery" of care. The original aim of this study-to examine the nature of quality in long covid care and reduce unwarranted variation in services-evolved to focus on examining the reasons why standardizing care was so challenging in this condition.

methodsIn 2021-2023, we ran a quality improvement collaborative across 10 UK sites. The dataset reported here was mostly but not entirely qualitative. It included data on the origins and current context of each clinic, interviews with staff and patients, and ethnographic observations at 13 clinics (50 consultations) and 45 multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings (244 patient cases). Data collection and analysis were informed by relevant lenses from clinical care (e.g. evidence-based guidelines), improvement science (e.g. quality improvement cycles) and philosophy of knowledge.

resultsParticipating clinics made progress towards standardizing assessment and management in some topics; some variation remained but this could usually be explained. Clinics had different histories and path dependencies, occupied a different place in their healthcare ecosystem and served a varied caseload including a high proportion of patients with comorbidities. A key mechanism for achieving high-quality long covid care was when local MDTs deliberated on unusual, complex or challenging cases for which evidence-based guidelines provided no easy answers. In such cases, collective learning occurred through idiographic (case-based) reasoning, in which practitioners build lessons from the particular to the general. This contrasts with the nomothetic reasoning implicit in evidence-based guidelines, in which reasoning is assumed to go from the general (e.g. findings of clinical trials) to the particular (management of individual patients).

conclusionNot all variation in long covid services is unwarranted. Largely because long covid's manifestations are so varied and comorbidities common, generic "evidence-based" standards require much individual adaptation. In this complex condition, quality improvement resources may be productively spent supporting MDTs to optimise their case-based learning through interdisciplinary discussion. Quality assessment of a long covid service should include review of a sample of individual cases to assess how guidelines have been interpreted and personalized to meet patients' unique needs. STUDY REGISTRATION: NCT05057260, ISRCTN15022307.

Indexed as

COVID-19Quality ImprovementAnthropology, CulturalClinical Studies as TopicHumansMulticenter Studies as TopicPost-Acute COVID-19 SyndromeBreakthrough collaborativesCovid-19EthnographyIdiographic reasoningImprovement scienceLong covidNomothetic reasoningPost-covid-19 syndromeQuality improvementUnwarranted variationWarranted variation

Identifiers

PMID38616276
PMCPMC11017565
OpenAlexW4394795147

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.