Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Annals of Family Medicine
  • My alerts
Annals of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Follow annalsfm on Twitter
  • Visit annalsfm on Facebook
Research ArticleOriginal Research

Challenges in Receiving Care for Long COVID: A Qualitative Interview Study Among Primary Care Patients About Expectations and Experiences

Elena Gardner, Alex Lockrey, Kirsten L. Stoesser, Jennifer P. Leiser, Jeanette Brown, Bernadette Kiraly and Dominik J. Ose
The Annals of Family Medicine September 2024, 22 (5) 369-374; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.3145
Elena Gardner
1University of Utah Family and Preventative Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah
MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: u1368413@utah.edu
Alex Lockrey
1University of Utah Family and Preventative Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah
BS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kirsten L. Stoesser
1University of Utah Family and Preventative Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jennifer P. Leiser
1University of Utah Family and Preventative Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jeanette Brown
2University of Utah Internal Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah
MD, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bernadette Kiraly
1University of Utah Family and Preventative Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dominik J. Ose
1University of Utah Family and Preventative Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah
3WHZ Westsächsische Hochschule Zwickau, Faculty of Health and Healthcare Sciences, Zwickau, Germany
DrPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND For many patients with post–COVID-19 condition (long COVID), primary care is the first point of interaction with the health care system. In principle, primary care is well situated to manage long COVID. Beyond expressions of disempowerment, however, the patient’s perspective regarding the quality of long COVID care is lacking. Therefore, this study aimed to analyze the expectations and experiences of primary care patients seeking treatment for long COVID.

METHODS A phenomenological approach guided this analysis. Using purposive sampling, we conducted semistructured interviews with English-speaking, adult primary care patients describing symptoms of long COVID. We deidentified and transcribed the recorded interviews. Transcripts were analyzed using inductive qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS This article reports results from 19 interviews (53% female, mean age = 54 years). Patients expected their primary care practitioners (PCPs) to be knowledgeable about long COVID, attentive to their individual condition, and to engage in collaborative processes for treatment. Patients described 2 areas of experiences. First, interactions with clinicians were perceived as positive when clinicians were honest and validating, and negative when patients felt dismissed or discouraged. Second, patients described challenges navigating the fragmented US health care system when coordinating care, treatment and testing, and payment.

CONCLUSION Primary care patients’ experiences seeking care for long COVID are incongruent with their expectations. Patients must overcome barriers at each level of the health care system and are frustrated by the constant challenges. PCPs and other health care professionals might increase congruence with expectations and experiences through listening, validating, and advocating for patients with long COVID.

Annals Early Access article

Key words:
  • primary care issues
  • long COVID
  • COVID-19
  • qualitative methods
  • patient perspective

BACKGROUND

Post–COVID-19 conditions (PCC), or “long COVID,” is an imminent public health emergency. Long COVID has already contributed to an estimated 3,500 American deaths, resulted in around $200 billion in lost wages, and affected at least 16 million working-age adults.1,2 These are conservative estimates, however, as the diagnosis of long COVID remains challenging.3

Long COVID is defined as the continuation or development of new symptoms 3 months after initial SARS-CoV-2 infection, with symptoms lasting at least 2 months with no other explanation.4 Generally, people with long COVID experience a variety of symptoms, including fatigue, shortness of breath, smell and taste disorders, concentration or memory problems, and mental health conditions.5-8 A meta-analysis found that 33% of individuals experienced fatigue, and 22% experienced cognitive impairment 3 months after COVID-19 infection.9 Those and other symptoms are highly prevalent in non-hospitalized patients in primary care.10

Currently, long COVID remains a diagnosis of exclusion; however, the heterogeneity of conditions makes long COVID difficult to identify and diagnose consistently.11,12 Regarding treatment and management, interim guidance for health care professionals suggests holistic, patient-centered management approaches, including symptom monitoring, setting expectations, providing continuous follow-up, establishing partnerships with specialists, and connecting patients to social services.11,13-16 Primary care provides this type of whole-patient care, and is well-situated to manage long COVID.11,17 In primary care, however, the strong overlap of long COVID symptoms with common complaints makes the diagnosis even more challenging.10,18

Beyond patients’ expressions of stigmatization and disempowerment,19 less is known about the patient’s perspective and expectations for the quality of long COVID care overall. Previous qualitative research from outside the United States has suggested that patients struggle to obtain quality health care for long COVID,20-23 but research in the United States is largely missing.24 To improve the understanding of long COVID in the United States, this study aims to analyze the expectations and experiences of primary care patients seeking care for long COVID.

METHODS

Study Design

We used the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ). The study took place at University of Utah health clinics. Due to its exploratory nature, this study adopted a phenomenological framework for the semistructured interviews.25 The University of Utah Institutional Review Board (IRB #139714) exempted this study from review.

Participant Selection

We purposively sampled adult, English-speaking primary care patients from a long COVID triage clinic at the University of Utah. Admission to the clinic requires a referral from a PCP. Nurses at the clinic identified patients who met the inclusion criteria and were interested in being interviewed. Participants received a study cover letter and discussed questions about the study with the interviewer as needed. Participation in the interview was considered consent to be included in the study. Participants did not receive compensation for their contribution.

Data Collection and Analysis

Interview Guide

A literature review identified gaps in knowledge surrounding patient experiences with care for long COVID. Based on the results, the interview guide (Supplemental Appendix) was developed iteratively. It was revised for clarity and content validity based on feedback from clinicians (B.K., K.L.S., J.P.L.) and a researcher with expertise in qualitative methods (D.J.O.). Data on race, ethnicity, gender, occupation, marital status, and infection year were self-reported during the interview.

Conducting Interviews

Mentored and trained by D.J.O., E.G. conducted 20 interviews between 2022 to 2023, in-person or over the telephone. Interviews lasted 20 to 30 minutes. Two participants had a partner present, especially when their symptoms were memory related. The interviews were audio recorded, deidentified, and transcribed verbatim. All data were safely stored on protected computers. One interview was accidentally deleted and was not transcribed. To address rigor, data saturation was reached around interview 15, but an additional 5 interviews were conducted to ensure the full representation of participants’ experiences.26

Data Analysis

Three researchers (E.G., A.L., and D.J.O.) used inductive qualitative content analysis.27,28 Researchers independently reviewed the data, identified themes, and discussed differences until a consensus was reached. We did not review findings with participants.

RESULTS

Participant Characteristics

We contacted 46 patients, and 20 participated in interviews (43% response rate). We analyzed 19 interviews. Participants averaged age 54 years, and 53% were female. Ninety-four percent of participants were White and 89% were non-Hispanic. Most participants were married (74%). Most participants were infected with COVID-19 for the first time in 2020 (32%) or 2021 (47%) (Table 1).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Cohort Description

Patient Expectations

Participants described 2 categories of expectations: those for their clinicians and those for treatment. Major themes included expectations for primary care practitioner (PCP) knowledge, engagement with treatment plans, and collaboration with a care team (Table 2; Supplemental Table 1).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Patient Expectations

Expectations for PCPs

A major theme was the PCP’s knowledge regarding long COVID. Knowledge was demonstrated by answering questions, such as if long COVID is a short or long-term condition. At the same time, some patients recognized that long COVID research is in an early stage and expressed frustrated understanding when PCPs could not give immediate solutions. Patients expected their PCP to take the time to understand their conditions and circumstances, however, and be engaged in their treatment process, especially in the face of a complex condition.

“I expect her to follow up on things […] she made sure all the information was along with the referral […] and I just expect advocacy like that.” (I14:553-563)

Expectations for Treatment

Themes about treatment expectations for long COVID were centered around communication and engagement between members of the care team and the patient. Because of the multi-system effects of long COVID, many patients meet first with their PCP and then are referred to specialty care. During this process, patients expected their clinicians to collaborate with them on possible treatment options, such as complementary medicine (eg, supplements or vitamins) or community resources (eg, peer support). Additionally, patients expected collaboration and communication among the care team, including communication about medications for treatment.

“It’s hard when one doctor puts you on a med that causes you to be tired, and then the next doctor gives you a med to not make you tired … so, a little better communication, a little bit more, um, continuity between appointments and doctors.” (I12:282-289)

Interacting With Clinicians

Patients extensively described their experiences with PCPs and specialists. Major themes included positive experiences like honest and supportive clinicians and negative experiences like dismissal and discouragement (Table 3; Supplemental Table 2).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3.

Interacting With Clinicians

Positive Experiences

Several patients described good quality of care, including their clinicians’ support, active listening, and honesty. In addition, patients with an established PCP relationship felt they received better care because their clinician knew them well. Both patients and clinicians were sometimes frustrated, however, with the need for more information about long COVID. Patients appreciated when the PCP was upfront and honest about their frustration. Some patients viewed the referral to the long COVID specialty clinic as an example of support.

“[The clinician] was a little frustrated because he didn’t have the answers. And that’s obvious. And he was very upfront and honest with me, and that’s why he referred me to the clinic.” (I6:236-239)

Negative Experiences

More frequently, however, patients reported challenges when interacting with clinicians, including specialists. Those ranged from dismissal and discouragement to sometimes questionable treatment decisions. For example, feelings of dismissal often surfaced when clinicians were unwilling to acknowledge the existence or severity of long COVID. Instead of offering validation, patients were told “This is just COVID” (I11:496-499) or “This is all in your head. You are fine” (I19:396-402). Particularly among specialists, it seemed to be challenging to acknowledge long COVID symptoms when diagnostics do not show noticeable results.

“Where I felt more frustrated is where other doctors, like lung specialists or physical therapists […] say, ‘there’s nothing wrong with you. Your organs are fine. Your lungs are fine. There’s nothing more we can do for you.’” (I19:396-402)

Other clinicians acknowledged the symptoms but were discouraging in other ways. For example, they told the patient that they would not recover, that they had to live with it, or linked the long COVID symptoms to other patient characteristics, like being overweight. In the quote below, the clinician exclusively recommends weight loss to manage the patient’s long COVID symptoms.

“I have had everything from, you know, ‘this is as good as you’re gonna be so just live with it.’ I have had the ‘you need to lose weight. That’s the only thing that’s wrong with you.’” (I12:211-224)

In another example, the clinician prescribed an antidepressant after the diagnostic came back without results, and the patient insisted that they still felt terrible. This inappropriate treatment prompted a clinician change.

“They [PCP] took a chest X-ray, said, ‘We don’t see anything.’ They said, you know, ‘try to get some rest. Come back in a week.’ Still felt terrible in a week, went back and saw them. And they said, ‘oh, well, we think you just have had a lot of life changes … here’s some Lexapro’ … and that did not help.” (I9:477-481)

Navigating the Health Care System

The most extensive group of themes related to patient experiences navigating the health system, including challenges regarding access and coordination, diagnosis and treatment, and the cost of care (Table 4; Supplemental Table 3).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 4.

Navigating the Health Care System

Access and Coordination

Challenges with access to care were common themes, both within primary care and with specialists. Patients frequently struggled to access services in time and even occasionally had to go to the emergency department, especially for long COVID symptoms that were not perceived as urgent (eg, memory problems, concentration problems, fatigue) by health care clinicians. For example, a patient felt that they could not access care because their memory problems were not severe enough compared with shortness of breath, even when the patient experienced this situation as a nightmare.

“I get the runaround. […] Do people not realize, like, literally my livelihood depends on me knowing what the hell is going on, and I can’t remember. […] it’s a nightmare. If you don’t have like, breathing problems, they’re just like, ‘oh well.’” (I14:489-500)

With referrals to specialists, patients faced challenges when coordinating care between PCPs and specialists. Participants described follow-up on referrals as difficult. In one case, a participant was trying to coordinate referral to 2 specialists with their PCP and described the experience as burdensome.

“We’re … on MyChart with the nurse from his primary care doctor … they’re questioning, ‘Why do you wanna see a gastroenterologist? Why do you wanna see a neurologist? The doctor has to know before he can refer you.’ … it’s a lot of work.” (I2:427-439)

Diagnosis and Treatment

Participants frequently described barriers to testing and treatment. Almost all patients referred to specialists for diagnosis and treatment experienced long lag times and rescheduled appointments. For example, a patient with difficulty sleeping waited 9 months for a sleep study and another several months before obtaining the needed equipment. Another patient with difficulty sleeping could not undergo sleep apnea testing for a year after seeking care.

“They set it for January. So, it will be a year since I got COVID to actually get that test.” (I1:323-334)

In addition, some patients felt their clinicians were not supportive of non-clinical treatment options (eg, exercise, supplements, or dietary changes), and, overall, treatment options in general.

“The doctor kind of gave a quote/unquote thing… I will—let me just tell you right now, I will not have any magic pills, I will not have any magic potions, and will not be recommending supplements or anything.” (I2:244-252)

Cost of Care

Many patients also question the value of pursuing treatment. Some patients described health care costs amounting to thousands of dollars, and said they no longer have the money to continue pursuing treatment.

“Very recently, I ended up with a bill for like almost 1,400 bucks. That’s my part to pay, right. And before I was paying, you know, 100 here, 200 there, it was like little stuff. […] I’m like, who knows, almost 3,000 in the hole for nothing. […] so, I don’t have the money to do this anymore.” (I10:364-400)

A few patients described the costs they incurred after they could not access primary care services, chose to present in the emergency department instead, and received large bills. In addition, navigating insurance claims for these visits is often a challenge. Several patients described delayed care because of a lack of communication between clinicians and insurance companies. One patient described how their insurance company contacted them for more explanation on what their clinician authorized. They could not explain, however, resulting in delayed care.

DISCUSSION

This study aimed to capture patients’ expectations and experiences navigating health care with long COVID. Patients expect collaboration across the health care system, interdisciplinary knowledge sharing, strong communication between health care professionals, and, in particular, a strong patient-centered approach, focusing on their situation and needs. Unfortunately, their experiences were largely incongruent with their expectations.

Patients described seeking care for long COVID as an arduous task. Patients must find clinicians who are knowledgeable about long COVID and are not dismissive of their symptoms, endure long wait times for treatment and testing, and have enough time, money, and patience to wade through complex systems of referral and authorization. As a result, patients with long COVID perceived having engaged in extremely challenging yet unrewarding tasks of appointments, waiting, and testing, for little or no relief. While many systemic barriers are largely out of clinicians’ control, validation and continuous support from PCPs, alongside coordinated care and communication among the care team, might improve care quality for patients with long COVID.

Patient expectations for general primary care (ie, disease and treatment knowledge, rapport, emotional support) are similar to those for long COVID care.29 In this study and others, patients expect multidisciplinary, holistic services, continuity of care, and clear clinical responsibility.20,24 A novel finding is that patients are motivated to be involved in the collaborative process of knowledge generation and sharing with their PCPs and multidisciplinary care teams to promote long COVID treatment. Further, patient’s experiences did not always align with expectations. Although similar experiences of dismissal or disempowerment from providers are reported in other qualitative and mixed methods studies, the perspective of US primary care patients is not well represented.21,30 This analysis contributes necessary context to the evidence regarding patient experiences with long COVID care in the fragmented US system.

Additionally, other studies have reported the frustration of long COVID patients with standard care approaches and often found accessing care expensive, complex, and exhausting.21,22,24 Comparisons between long COVID and myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), another poorly understood chronic illness with a similar need for improved diagnosis and management techniques, have been made.31

The Institute of Medicine and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (ARHQ) have defined 6 domains for health care quality in the United States: safe, effective, patient-centered, timely, efficient, and equitable.32 This study revealed significant challenges in accessing patient-centered, timely, and efficient health care. An important reason for this situation is the highly fragmented, multi-payer health care system in the United States. Complex conditions like long COVID or other multimorbid chronic diseases depend on collaboration within and between primary care and other levels of care, like emergency and specialist care. Instead, complex conditions frequently expose the weak points of a health care system focused on single diseases and clearly defined procedures.

Strengths and Limitations

This study is one of the first qualitative analyses sampling exclusively primary care patients in the United States. Another strength is that these participants were recruited from a long COVID triage clinic rather than social media sampling.5,20,30,33,34 The population of the long COVID clinic likely includes the most severely affected patients. Responder bias may influence these results, as individuals recruited from this clinic might be more willing to participate in research. The patients interviewed for this study were mainly from a White, non-Hispanic population, and female. Recruiting from the general population could increase understanding of experiences related to gender, race, or disease severity. Asking patients to provide input on the interview guide could improve patient perspectives in future studies. Finally, we did not explore the differences between patients referred to the clinic from clinicians internal to the University health system compared with external clinicians.

CONCLUSION

Primary care patient’s experiences seeking care for long COVID are often incongruent with their expectations. Patients must overcome barriers at each level of the US health care system, from PCP to insurance company, and are frustrated by the constant challenges. Despite the emergence of interim guidelines for PCPs on the management and treatment of long COVID, patients are largely unsatisfied with their care. PCPs and other health care professionals might increase congruence with expectations and experiences through listening, validating, and advocating for patients with long COVID.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the participants in this study for taking the time and energy to be vulnerable with a stranger and speak about their experiences. It was a great honor to share in your stories. We also would like to thank all the nurses and schedulers at the University of Utah long COVID clinic for helping us recruit patients.

Footnotes

  • Conflicts of interest: authors report none.

  • Read or post commentaries in response to this article.

  • Author contributions: All authors made substantial contributions to the design, execution, analysis, and review process for this work. E.G. conducted interviews, analyzed interviews, and wrote the manuscript. A.L. supported the interview analysis and provided feedback on the manuscript. D.J.O., K.L.S., J.P.L., and B.K. designed the study and data collection tools, and provided feedback on the manuscript, as well as offered expertise in primary care. J.B. supported patient recruitment at the long covid clinic and provided expertise and feedback for the manuscript. There was no funding, sponsors, or conflicts of interest for this work.

    Data availability: The data sets generated and analyzed during this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Complete interviews are not publicly available to protect the participants’ privacy.

  • Supplemental materials

  • Received for publication November 22, 2023.
  • Revision received May 3, 2024.
  • Accepted for publication May 7, 2024.
  • © 2024 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Ahmad F,
    2. Anderson R,
    3. Cisewski J,
    4. Sutton P.
    Identification of deaths with post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 from death certificate literal text: United States, January 1, 2020–June 30, 2022. National Center for Health Statistics (US); 2022. doi:10.15620/cdc:121968
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  2. 2.↵
    1. Bach K.
    New data shows long Covid is keeping as many as 4 million people out of work. Brookings. Published Aug 24, 2022. Accessed Feb 8, 2023. https://www.brookings.edu/research/new-data-shows-long-covid-is-keeping-as-many-as-4-million-people-out-of-work/
  3. 3.↵
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
    . Post-COVID conditions. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Published Dec 16, 2022. Accessed Feb 22, 2023. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/long-term-effects/index.html
  4. 4.↵
    1. World Health Organization
    . Post COVID-19 condition (long COVID). Published Dec 7, 2022. Accessed Jul 20, 2023. https://www.who.int/europe/news-room/fact-sheets/item/post-covid-19-condition
  5. 5.↵
    1. Davis HE,
    2. Assaf GS,
    3. McCorkell L, et al.
    Characterizing long COVID in an international cohort: 7 months of symptoms and their impact. EClinicalMedicine. 2021; 38: 101019. doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101019
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.
    1. Sudre CH,
    2. Murray B,
    3. Varsavsky T, et al.
    Attributes and predictors of long COVID. Nat Med. 2021; 27(4): 626-631. doi:10.1038/s41591-021-01292-y
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.
    1. Desgranges F,
    2. Tadini E,
    3. Munting A, et al; the RegCOVID Research Group
    . Post-COVID19 syndrome in outpatients: a cohort Study. J Gen Intern Med. 2022; 37(8): 1943-1952. doi:10.1007/s11606-021-07242-1
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. 8.↵
    1. Nalbandian A,
    2. Sehgal K,
    3. Gupta A, et al.
    Post-acute COVID-19 syndrome. Nat Med. 2021; 27(4): 601-615. doi:10.1038/s41591-021-01283-z
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Ceban F,
    2. Ling S,
    3. Lui LMW, et al.
    Fatigue and cognitive impairment in Post-COVID-19 Syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Brain Behav Immun. 2022; 101: 93-135. doi:10.1016/j.bbi.2021.12.020
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Ose DJ,
    2. Gardner E,
    3. Millar M, et al.
    A cross-sectional and population-based study from primary care on post-COVID-19 conditions in non-hospitalized patients. Commun Med. 2024; 4(1): 1-15. doi:10.1038/s43856-024-00440-y
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  11. 11.↵
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
    . Information for healthcare providers: COVID-19. Published Sep 11, 2023. Accessed Apr 13, 2023. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/clinical-care/post-covid-conditions.html
  12. 12.↵
    1. Yelin D,
    2. Moschopoulos CD,
    3. Margalit I, et al.
    ESCMID rapid guidelines for assessment and management of long COVID. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2022; 28(7): 955-972. doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2022.02.018
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  13. 13.↵
    1. Greenhalgh T,
    2. Sivan M,
    3. Delaney B,
    4. Evans R,
    5. Milne R.
    Long covid—an update for primary care. BMJ. 2022(378): e072117. doi:10.1136/bmj-2022-072117
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  14. 14.
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
    . COVID-19 rapid guideline: managing the long-term effects of COVID-19. NICE Guideline (NG188). Published Nov 11, 2021. Accessed Jul 19, 2023. https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/EQpzKn/section/nYe9Pn
  15. 15.
    1. Shah W,
    2. Hillman T,
    3. Playford ED,
    4. Hishmeh L.
    Managing the long term effects of covid-19: summary of NICE, SIGN, and RCGP rapid guideline. BMJ. 2021; 372(136): n136. doi:10.1136/bmj.n136
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  16. 16.↵
    1. Sisó-Almirall A,
    2. Brito-Zerón P,
    3. Conangla Ferrín L, et al; On Behalf Of The CAMFiC Long Covid-Study Group
    . Long Covid-19: proposed primary care clinical guidelines for diagnosis and disease management. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021; 18(8): 4350. doi:10.3390/ijerph18084350
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Greenhalgh T,
    2. Knight M.
    Long COVID: a primer for family physicians. Am Fam Physician. 2020; 102(12): 716-717.
    OpenUrl
  18. 18.↵
    1. Finley CR,
    2. Chan DS,
    3. Garrison S, et al.
    What are the most common conditions in primary care? Systematic review. Can Fam Physician. 2018; 64(11): 832-840.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. 19.↵
    1. Nikolich JŽ,
    2. Rosen CJ.
    Toward comprehensive care for long Covid. N Engl J Med. 2023; 388(23): 2113-2115. doi:10.1056/NEJMp2304550
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Ladds E,
    2. Rushforth A,
    3. Wieringa S, et al.
    Persistent symptoms after Covid-19: qualitative study of 114 “long Covid” patients and draft quality principles for services. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020; 20(1): 1144. doi:10.1186/s12913-020-06001-y
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Macpherson K,
    2. Cooper K,
    3. Harbour J,
    4. Mahal D,
    5. Miller C,
    6. Nairn M.
    Experiences of living with long COVID and of accessing healthcare services: a qualitative systematic review. BMJ Open. 2022; 12(1): e050979. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050979
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.↵
    1. Loft MI,
    2. Foged EM,
    3. Koreska M.
    An unexpected journey: the lived experiences of patients with long-term cognitive sequelae after recovering from COVID-19. Qual Health Res. 2022; 32(8-9): 1356-1369. doi:10.1177/10497323221099467
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  23. 23.↵
    1. Skilbeck L,
    2. Spanton C,
    3. Paton M.
    Patients’ lived experience and reflections on long COVID: an interpretive phenomenological analysis within an integrated adult primary care psychology NHS service. J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2023; 7(1): 30. doi:10.1186/s41687-023-00570-2
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    1. Bergmans RS,
    2. Chambers-Peeple K,
    3. Aboul-Hassan D, et al.
    Opportunities to improve long COVID care: implications from semi-structured interviews with black patients. Patient. 2022; 15(6): 715-728. doi:10.1007/s40271-022-00594-8
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  25. 25.↵
    1. Teherani A,
    2. Martimianakis T,
    3. Stenfors-Hayes T,
    4. Wadhwa A,
    5. Varpio L.
    Choosing a qualitative research approach. J Grad Med Educ. 2015; 7(4): 669-670. doi:10.4300/JGME-D-15-00414.1
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Morse JM.
    Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative inquiry. Qual Health Res. 2015; 25(9): 1212-1222. doi:10.1177/1049732315588501
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    1. Elo S,
    2. Kyngäs H.
    The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs. 2008; 62(1): 107-115. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Erlingsson C,
    2. Brysiewicz P.
    A hands-on guide to doing content analysis. Afr J Emerg Med. 2017; 7(3): 93-99. doi:10.1016/j.afjem.2017.08.001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Jaworski M,
    2. Rzadkiewicz M,
    3. Adamus M, et al.
    Primary care patients’ expectations regarding medical appointments and their experiences during a visit: does age matter? Patient Prefer Adherence. 2017; 11: 1221-1233. doi:10.2147/PPA.S133390
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  30. 30.↵
    1. McCorkell L,
    2. S Assaf G,
    3. E Davis H,
    4. Wei H,
    5. Akrami A.
    Patient-Led research collaborative: embedding patients in the Long COVID narrative. Pain Rep. 2021; 6(1): e913. doi:10.1097/PR9.0000000000000913
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    1. Wong TL,
    2. Weitzer DJ.
    Long COVID and Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS)-a systemic review and comparison of clinical presentation and symptomatology. Medicina (Kaunas). 2021; 57(5): 418. doi:10.3390/medicina57050418
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. 32.↵
    1. AHRQ
    . Six domains of health care quality. Accessed Jun 28, 2023. https://www.ahrq.gov/talkingquality/measures/six-domains.html
  33. 33.↵
    1. Kingstone T,
    2. Taylor AK,
    3. O’Donnell CA,
    4. Atherton H,
    5. Blane DN,
    6. Chew-Graham CA.
    Finding the “right” GP: a qualitative study of the experiences of people with long-COVID. BJGP Open. 2020; 4(5): bjgpopen20X101143. doi:10.3399/bjgpopen20X101143
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  34. 34.↵
    1. Powell M.
    Living with Covid19 – second review. National Institute for Health Research. Published Mar 16, 2021. https://evidence.nihr.ac.uk/collection/living-with-covid19-second-review/
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Annals of Family Medicine: 22 (5)
The Annals of Family Medicine: 22 (5)
Vol. 22, Issue 5
September/October 2024
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Front Matter (PDF)
  • Plain-Language Summaries
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Annals of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Challenges in Receiving Care for Long COVID: A Qualitative Interview Study Among Primary Care Patients About Expectations and Experiences
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Annals of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Annals of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
10 + 7 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Challenges in Receiving Care for Long COVID: A Qualitative Interview Study Among Primary Care Patients About Expectations and Experiences
Elena Gardner, Alex Lockrey, Kirsten L. Stoesser, Jennifer P. Leiser, Jeanette Brown, Bernadette Kiraly, Dominik J. Ose
The Annals of Family Medicine Sep 2024, 22 (5) 369-374; DOI: 10.1370/afm.3145

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Get Permissions
Share
Challenges in Receiving Care for Long COVID: A Qualitative Interview Study Among Primary Care Patients About Expectations and Experiences
Elena Gardner, Alex Lockrey, Kirsten L. Stoesser, Jennifer P. Leiser, Jeanette Brown, Bernadette Kiraly, Dominik J. Ose
The Annals of Family Medicine Sep 2024, 22 (5) 369-374; DOI: 10.1370/afm.3145
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • BACKGROUND
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSION
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Shared Decision Making Among Racially and/or Ethnically Diverse Populations in Primary Care: A Scoping Review of Barriers and Facilitators
  • Convenience or Continuity: When Are Patients Willing to Wait to See Their Own Doctor?
  • Feasibility and Acceptability of the “About Me” Care Card as a Tool for Engaging Older Adults in Conversations About Cognitive Impairment
Show more Original Research

Similar Articles

Subjects

  • Methods:
    • Qualitative methods
  • Other research types:
    • Health services
  • Other topics:
    • COVID-19
    • Patient perspectives

Keywords

  • primary care issues
  • long COVID
  • COVID-19
  • qualitative methods
  • patient perspective

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Early Access
  • Plain-Language Summaries
  • Multimedia
  • Podcast
  • Articles by Type
  • Articles by Subject
  • Supplements
  • Calls for Papers

Info for

  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • Job Seekers
  • Media

Engage

  • E-mail Alerts
  • e-Letters (Comments)
  • RSS
  • Journal Club
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Subscribe
  • Family Medicine Careers

About

  • About Us
  • Editorial Board & Staff
  • Sponsoring Organizations
  • Copyrights & Permissions
  • Contact Us
  • eLetter/Comments Policy

© 2025 Annals of Family Medicine