ArticleBMC health services research2026
Opportunities and barriers in care for patients with post COVID-19 condition: a Delphi study among healthcare workers.
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPost COVID-19 condition (PCC) presents complex, long-term health challenges, yet evidence-based treatments and well-organized care pathways remain limited, creating uncertainty for healthcare professionals. This study aimed to identify healthcare workers’ (HCWs) perspectives on prerequisites, barriers and strategies for improving care for patients with PCC in the Netherlands.
methodsAn online Delphi study was conducted between October 2023 and June 2024, comprising two questionnaire rounds among Dutch HCWs directly or indirectly involved in PCC care. Questionnaire themes were informed by prior research and expert input. Responses were analyzed descriptively, and feasibility ratings were assessed on a 10-point scale.
resultsA total of 270 HCWs participated in round one, of whom 169 (63%) completed round two. Most participants worked in primary care and were directly involved in PCC care. One-third of HCWs reported insufficient treatment options and 25% indicated that PCC care is poorly organized. Key prerequisites included evidence-based treatment options (57%), interprofessional collaboration (34%) and scientific research (31%). Major barriers were lack of specialized PCC treatment centers (38%), limited recognition of PCC (27%) and absence of medication and treatments (25%). Broadening the professional knowledgebase and establishing specialized PCC treatment centers were ranked as top strategies to improve PCC care and were considered feasible. HCWs rated their own PCC knowledge higher than PCC knowledge of their peers (7.8 versus 5.8/10) but acknowledged gaps, particularly in treatment options and biomedical aspects. High workload and lack of capacity and time (49%), and lack of reimbursement for interprofessional consultations (43%) were major barriers for multidisciplinary collaboration.
conclusionsPCC care in the Netherlands faces significant organizational and knowledge-related challenges. Strengthening collaboration across care domains and levels, alongside targeted long-term investments in research, education, and specialized care pathways are essential to improve care quality and address identified prerequisites and barriers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
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 Socratic graph.