Mental recovery from COVID often takes longer than physical healing, study finds
A new study from UCLA researchers has found that while people with COVID-19 symptoms typically recovered physically within three months, many continued to struggle with mental well-being for up to nine months. Even a year later, one in five participants still reported poor overall health.
Published Tuesday in Open Forum Infectious Diseases, the study tracked more than 1,400 individuals who experienced COVID-like symptoms between December 2020 and August 2022. About 75% of the participants tested positive for the virus. Over a year, researchers surveyed them every three months on key aspects of health-related quality of life, including sleep, fatigue, cognitive function and social engagement.
The findings revealed a significant gap between physical and mental recovery. While most participants regained physical health within the first three months, improvements in mental health — particularly in areas such as anxiety, depression and fatigue — progressed more slowly, with the most noticeable gains occurring between six and nine months after illness.
'The findings showed that health care professionals need to pay more attention to their patients' mental well-being after a COVID-19 infection and provide more resources that will help improve their mental health, in addition to their physical health,' said Lauren Wisk, co-lead author and assistant professor of medicine at UCLA.
Participants fell into four health categories: optimal health, poor mental health, poor physical health and poor overall well-being.
Among those with the worst outcomes, 42% identified as having long COVID — highlighting a strong connection between long COVID and lasting health struggles.
Surprisingly, those who tested positive for COVID were slightly more likely to return to full health than those who tested negative. Researchers suggest this could be due to undiagnosed conditions or false-negative test results.
"Future research should focus on how to improve the treatment models of care for patients who continue to experience COVID-19 symptoms and their impact on patients' quality of life, especially as 1-in-5 patients may continue to suffer over a year after their initial infection, which likely reflects long COVID," Wisk said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
an hour ago
- Business Insider
Novavax Stock (NVAX) Gets a Boost from ‘Robust Immune Responses'
Novavax (NVAX) stock jumped on Wednesday after the vaccine maker released results from a Phase 3 clinical trial of its COVID-19-Influenza Combination (CIC) and stand-alone flu vaccine. The initial cohort results from this study included 'robust immune responses' for the CIC and flu vaccine that were comparable to licensed rivals Nuvaxovid and Fluzone HD. Confident Investing Starts Here: Additionally, Novavax noted that the two vaccines were well tolerated. Almost all of the adverse events, greater than 98%, that were experienced by patients were mild or moderate in severity. The trial includes roughly 2,000 patients aged 65 or older. Novavax stated that it will continue to seek partners to further the development of its CIC and stand-alone flu vaccines. The results from this study provide it with the data it needs for discussions with potential partners. NVAX Stock Movement Today While NVAX stock had soared more than 2% in pre-market trading, the company couldn't maintain those gains. As a result, the stock is only up 0.56% as of Wednesday morning. Investors will also note that shares are down 8.83% year-to-date and 54.6% over the past 12 months. The Phase 3 clinical trial data also failed to attract investor interest today. Trading volume was muted at 1.38 million shares, compared to a three-month daily average of roughly 11.29 million units. Is Novavax Stock a Buy, Sell, or Hold? Turning to Wall Street, the analysts' consensus rating for Novavax is Hold, based on one Buy, two Hold, and a single Sell rating over the past three months. With that comes an average NVAX stock price target of $11.25, representing a potential 55.39% upside for the shares. Spark, TipRanks' AI analyst, highlighted 'strong revenue growth and profitability improvements' but warned of 'negative equity and cash flow challenges.'
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Editorial: Ax to the vax — RFK Jr. continues on his anti-vaccine warpath
It's time for President Donald Trump, despite his own casual relationship with the truth, to stop putting American lives at risk and get rid of his dangerous quack in chief, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. In his latest broadside against science, Kennedy is removing all 17 members of the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices, the CDC's main advisory body, to ostensibly restore 'public trust above any specific pro- or anti-vaccine agenda.' God protect us, as RFK won't. This is how a society becomes undone. Science and reason get stepped on by half-truths and conspiracy theories. Next comes preventable death and disease. The problem is that there is no anti-vaccine side in the legitimate practice of science and medicine. The department's accompanying press release denigrated 'public health ideology' as if the practice of public health wasn't the CDC's only function. Researchers and doctors should be biased in favor of evidence-based therapeutics that save lives. Railing against bias towards vaccines is like a politician condemning researchers biased in favor of seatbelts in cars or keeping lead out of household paint. It's idiotic. We understand that the Make America Healthy Again movement Kennedy leads is all about questioning medical and nutritional practice. On a really abstract level, we are in agreement that no scientific truisms should be entirely above questioning — such a perspective would be anti-science. But there is a specific and long-standing methodology for actually answering those questions, and it is not debate club or who can most incite crowds of followers. It is the scientific method, under which hypotheses can be rigorously tested in ways that are replicable and based on clear and clearly laid out evidence. In that arena — really the only arena that actually matters when it comes to public health — the safety and efficacy of vaccines has been conclusively established. There is no additional discussion necessary or appropriate, particularly when it comes to immunizations that have now been standard-issue for decades and have by all measures radically decreased illness and mortality where they've been successfully deployed. The measles vaccine will always be better for individuals and public health than getting the measles. The same is true for polio, tetanus, COVID and all else. Preying on public skepticism of the pharmaceutical and health industries to hawk alternative approaches that are often unregulated and don't work is damaging it enough. Yet a true believer like RFK is more dangerous, especially now that he stands at the pinnacle of our nation's public health bureaucracy, a position that allows him to substantively impose his own anti-science view on an unsuspecting public and take the choice away from the American people. If RFK's new picks for ACIP — which the secretary falsely promised Sen. Bill Cassidy he wouldn't touch during his confirmation process — step back from recommending various crucial vaccines, this could substantially prevent even those who want to make the informed decision to receive inoculations or have their children vaccinated from being able to do so. As much as Kennedy and his followers emphasize the need for people to be able to make individual choices about their health, they seem hell-bent on taking that choice away entirely, especially given that insurance is not required to cover vaccines that are not CDC-recommended. We wonder what RFK will have to say for himself as once-eradicated diseases begin cutting through the U.S. population again. Is there anything that will get him to veer off this disastrous course? If the answer is no, and we suspect it is, then he must be removed before he can further damage public health. _____
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
WHO: New coronavirus variant seen only sporadically in Germany
The new coronavirus variant spreading globally, especially in parts of Asia, has not taken hold in Germany, according to the World Health Organization. The variant, known as NB.1.8.1, was first detected in January and has been classified by the WHO as a "variant under monitoring." In Germany, the variant was first detected at the end of March and has so far only appeared sporadically, according to the country's public health agency, the Robert Koch Institute (RKI). "No trend can be derived here; current Covid case numbers are low, and correspondingly less sequencing is being conducted," the institute stated. University of Basel biophysicist Richard Neher said whether this variant "will establish itself [in Germany] depends on how other variants evolve. It is quite possible that NB.1.8.1 will prevail, but it is likely to be relatively insignificant." In the most recent reporting week, which ended on June 8, the RKI recorded 698 Covid cases - a slight increase - but the institute noted this is off a very low base. Many infections are likely going undetected due to limited testing. Slight increase in virus load in wastewater Wastewater monitoring also showed a slight increase in SARS-CoV-2 levels over the past four weeks – albeit still at a low level. The new NB.1.8.1 strain is derived from the XDV.1.5 lineage dominant in East Asia, according to biophysicist Neher. The state-run Chinese news agency Xinhua, citing the National Administration of Disease Control and Prevention, reported that the new strain had become China's dominant variant by the end of May. "The variant is increasing in frequency compared to other variants," Neher noted. NB.1.8.1 is therefore more transmissible in the sense that an infection generates more secondary infections than other strains. No evidence of more severe cases There is no evidence that NB.1.8.1 causes more severe illness, Chinese authorities have said. This aligns with the WHO's assessment that, despite rising case and hospitalization numbers in countries where the variant is widespread, there is currently no indication that it causes more serious illness than other circulating variants. Covid-19 vaccines currently approved are expected to protect against severe illness caused by NB.1.8.1, the WHO said.
