OBJECTIVE: To gain a deeper understanding of the lived experiences of patients with COVID-19, regarding rehabilitation, work and social life 6 months after hospital discharge.

DESIGN: An explorative qualitative study with individual interviews.

SUBJECTS: Patients of working age with persistent self-reported symptoms at a 3-month follow-up who had received inpatient hospital care with discharge approximately 6 months previously were purposively sampled.

METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were performed with 10 men and 5 women. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed with inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS: Four themes were identified: "Social support - crucial, but decreased over time", "Varying needs of, and access to, rehabilitation", "Returning to work after COVID-19 - crucial for future prospects" and "An overwhelming experience that essentially changed one's personality".

CONCLUSION: Rehabilitation provided participants with the valuable tools for recovery, giving them hope for future recovery. Support from next of kin was highly valued, creating stronger family bonds. A new meaning and greater appreciation of life was expressed.

OBJECTIVE: To obtain a deeper understanding of the lived experiences of patients with COVID-19, the recovery process and consequences for everyday life 6 months after hospital discharge.

DESIGN: An explorative qualitative study using individual interviews.

SUBJECTS: A purposive sampling was applied to recruit persons who had received inpatient hospital care, were discharged approximately 6 months previously, were of working age and had persistent self-reported symptoms at a 3-month follow-up appointment.

METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 participants (10 men, 5 women), which were then transcribed and analysed with inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS: Three themes were identified: "Status of recovery - two steps forward, one step back", "Remaining symptoms caused limitations in everyday life" and "Strategies for recovery". Participants indicated the recovery process through 6 months after discharge was a challenging road, often involving setbacks. A wide range of persistent, fluctuating, or new symptoms negatively impacted many areas of daily life, with fatigue and lack of energy being especially prominent. Participants used a variety of strategies to cope and recover.

CONCLUSION: This study increases our knowledge of the lived experiences of COVID-19 based individual experiences. Unexpected symptoms in the recovery process were described and not always possible to forecast.

It is not yet fully understood how the patients self-assess their overall health in the early recovery after COVID-19 and if certain patient groups are more prominent in perceived long-time effects of COVID-19. The aim of this study was to describe self-assessed aspects of health in body function, activity and participation 3 months after hospitalization due to COVID-19 and identify difference between groups depending in age, sex and level of hospital care. This cross-sectional study consists of self-assessed aspects of health and recovery in 168 participants (mean age 64 years old, 69% men) previously hospitalized patients due to COVID-19. We have previously published data, from hospital discharge, on this cohort were predominantly the older patients and previous ICU-treated participants were affected. In this study there were differences in between groups. Of the study population 72% perceived fatigue, 64% respiratory difficulties, 37% perceived symptoms of anxiety. Three-months after COVID-19 this cohort was overall still affected. The recovery process is multifaced and the cohort heterogeneous, hence the rehabilitation needs to be highly individualized, and the follow-up of this patient group is of importance regardless of age, sex and previous level of hospital care. 

BACKGROUND: Patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are among the most vulnerable, and they require support to start their recovery. The design of the patient area in the ICU can play a prominent role in both the quality of care and patients' recovery. The lighting environment has the opportunity to restore and strengthen the natural human circadian rhythm and health.

AIM: To evaluate patients' self-reported recovery after being cared for in an ICU room rebuilt according to evidence-based design principles that promote recovery.

METHOD: An intervention was set up in a two-bed patient room including a cycled lighting system. Self-reported recovery was reported at 6 and 12 months after discharge. Data were analyzed using a 2(mechanically ventilated, nonmechanically ventilated) × 2(intervention room, ordinary room) analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and 2(male, women) × 2(intervention room, ordinary room) ANCOVA.

RESULTS: Data from the different rooms showed no significant main effects for recovery after 6 months, p = .21; however, after 12 months, it become significant, p. < .05. This indicated that patient recovery was positively influenced for patients cared for in the intervention room (M = 8.88, SD = 4.07) compared to the ordinary room (M = 10.90, SD = 4.26). There were no interaction effects for gender or if the patients had been mechanically ventilated either at 6 or 12 months' postdischarge.

CONCLUSIONS: A cycled lighting system may improve patient self-reported recovery after ICU care; however, more research on the topic is needed.