Gomez-Bravo Raquel, León-Herrera Sandra, Guisado-Clavero Marina, Gefaell Ileana, Wostmann Xenia, Wössner Nathalie, Vinker Shlomo, Vassallo La Ferla Francesca, Kırkoç Üçüncü Erva, Tsigarovski Georgi, Torzsa Péter, Suija Kadri, Stepanović Aleksander, Sentker Theresa, Segernäs Anna, Seifert Bohumil, Sánchez-Castro Marta, Schneider Jochen G, Repovská Anna, Petrazzuoli Ferdinando, Petek Davorina, Perjes Abel, Parodi López Naldy, Neves Ana Luisa, Nessler Katarzyna, Muris Jean, Mortsiefer Achim, Moreels Sarah, Meister Tatjana, Mäntyselkä Pekka, Murauskienė Liubovė, Lingner Heidrun, Krztoń-Królewiecka Anna, Kostic Milena, Çimen Korkmaz Büsra, Knezevic Snezana, Kazakos Stylianos, Karathanos Vasilis, Shushman Ivanna, Ilkov Oksana, Hoffmann Kathryn, Heleno Bruno, Hanževački Miroslav, Gjorgjievski Dragan, Frese Thomas, Fournier Marta, Fitzgerald Louise, Feldmane Sabīne, Dotsenko Marina, Domeyer Philip-Richard, Croucher Daniel, Cerny Vojtech, Burgers Jako S, Brutskaya-Stempkovskaya Elena, Busneag Carmen Iliana, Buono Nicola, Bensemmane Sherihane, Bayen Sabine, Bakola Maria, Assenova Radost, Adler Limor, Ares-Blanco Sara, Astier Peña María Pilar
CHNP, Rehaklinik, Ettelbruck, Luxembourg.
Research Group Self-Regulation and Health, Institute for Health and Behaviour, Department of Behavioural and Cognitive Sciences, Faculty of Humanities, Education, and Social Sciences, Luxembourg University, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Eur J Gen Pract. 2025 Dec;31(1):2535618. doi: 10.1080/13814788.2025.2535618. Epub 2025 Sep 1.
The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted global healthcare systems, leading to challenges in managing Long COVID. Variations in definitions and diagnostic criteria across Europe hinder recognition and treatment efforts. This study aims to analyse and compare the definitions of Long COVID used in 34 European countries.
A retrospective descriptive study was conducted involving key informants from 34 European countries, utilising an online questionnaire to gather data on Long COVID definitions. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were employed to assess the variability of definitions and challenges in managing Long COVID.
The study found significant variation in Long COVID definitions among the participating countries; the most frequent definition was the other definition (n: 17, 50.0%), followed by the World Health Organisation's definition (n: 16, 47.0%) and the CDC definition (n: 11, 32.3%). Half of the countries reported using multiple definitions simultaneously, indicating a lack of standardisation. Qualitative analyses highlighted challenges such as difficulties in standardising terminology, variability in clinical criteria, and issues with implementing diagnostic codes.
The findings underscore the need for a unified, yet adaptable, definition of Long COVID. Such a definition would support general practitioners (GPs) by simplifying diagnostic processes, improving continuity of care, and facilitating equitable patient access to multidisciplinary resources. The current lack of consensus complicates patient care, data collection, and resource allocation, impacting health policy development. Future efforts should focus on achieving agreement on definitions to ensure equitable treatment and effective healthcare responses to Long COVID.
新冠疫情对全球医疗系统产生了重大影响，给长期新冠的管理带来了挑战。欧洲各地定义和诊断标准的差异阻碍了识别和治疗工作。本研究旨在分析和比较34个欧洲国家使用的长期新冠的定义。
开展了一项回顾性描述性研究，涉及34个欧洲国家的关键信息提供者，通过在线问卷收集有关长期新冠定义的数据。采用定量和定性分析来评估定义的可变性以及长期新冠管理中的挑战。
研究发现，参与国之间长期新冠的定义存在显著差异；最常见的定义是其他定义（n = 17，50.0%），其次是世界卫生组织的定义（n = 16，47.0%）和美国疾病控制与预防中心的定义（n = 11，32.3%）。一半的国家报告同时使用多种定义，这表明缺乏标准化。定性分析突出了一些挑战，如术语标准化困难、临床标准的可变性以及实施诊断编码的问题。
研究结果强调需要一个统一但具有适应性的长期新冠定义。这样的定义将通过简化诊断流程、改善护理连续性以及促进患者公平获取多学科资源来支持全科医生。目前缺乏共识使患者护理、数据收集和资源分配变得复杂，影响了卫生政策的制定。未来的努力应集中在就定义达成一致，以确保对长期新冠的公平治疗和有效的医疗应对。
