Brehon, KatelynMiciak, MaxiHung, PamChen, Shu-PingPerreault, KadijaHudon, AnneWieler, MargueriteHunter, SimoneHoddinott, LanceHall, MarkChurchill, KatieBrown, Darren A.Brown, Cary A.Bostick, GeoffreySkolnik, KateLam, GraceWeatherald, JasonGross, Douglas P.2023-12-192023-12-192023-12-12BMC Health Services Research. 2023 Dec 12;23(1):1396https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-10288-yhttps://hdl.handle.net/1880/117771https://doi.org/10.11575/PRISM/42614Abstract Background Understanding of Long COVID has advanced through patient-led initiatives. However, research about barriers to accessing Long COVID services is limited. This study aimed to better understand the need for, access to, and quality of, Long COVID services. We explored health needs and experiences of services, including ability of services to address needs. Methods Our study was informed by the Levesque et al.’s (2013) “conceptual framework of access to health care.” We used Interpretive Description, a qualitative approach partly aimed at informing clinical decisions. We recruited participants across five settings. Participants engaged in one-time, semi-structured, virtual interviews. Interviews were transcribed verbatim. We used reflexive thematic analysis. Best practice to ensure methodological rigour was employed. Results Three key themes were generated from 56 interviews. The first theme illustrated the rollercoaster-like nature of participants’ Long COVID symptoms and the resulting impact on function and health. The second theme highlighted participants’ attempts to access Long COVID services. Guidance received from healthcare professionals and self-advocacy impacted initial access. When navigating Long COVID services within the broader system, participants encountered barriers to access around stigma; appointment logistics; testing and ‘normal’ results; and financial precarity and affordability of services. The third theme illuminated common factors participants liked and disliked about Long COVID services. We framed each sub-theme as the key lesson (stemming from all likes and dislikes) that, if acted upon, the health system can use to improve the quality of Long COVID services. This provides tangible ways to improve the system based directly on what we heard from participants. Conclusion With Long COVID services continuously evolving, our findings can inform decision makers within the health system to better understand the lived experiences of Long COVID and tailor services and policies appropriately.Journal Article2023-12-19enThe Author(s)