Background: In October 2022, it was estimated 2.3 million people in the United Kingdom have self‐reported Long Covid (LC). Many people have reported not receiving adequate healthcare support. There is a lack of research which provides an in‐depth exploration of the barriers faced by people with LC in accessing healthcare support. It is important to understand these barriers to provide better support, care and advice for those experiencing LC.Objective: To understand the barriers faced in accessing primary, secondary and specialist healthcare support for people with LC.Design and Participation: 40 interviews were conducted with people living with LC in Bradford alongside 12 interviews with healthcare professionals (HCPs) providing LC support in Bradford healthcare settings. Interviews were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.Results: People living with LC had a large degree of difficulty in accessing healthcare services for LC support. We categorized the healthcare access experiences of participants into five main types: (1) being unable to access primary care, (2) accessing primary care but receiving (perceived) inadequate support, (3) extreme persistence, (4) alternatives to mainstream health care and (5) positive experiences. There was a severe lack of access to specialist LC services. Ethnic minority participants faced a further barrier of mistrust and fear of services deterring them from accessing support. HCPs discussed systemic barriers to delivering services. Experiences were embedded in macrostructural issues further exacerbated by the pandemic.Conclusion: To better support people with LC, the barriers faced in accessing healthcare support must be addressed. Of significance, improvements to general practitioner access are required; especially as GPs are the first line of support for people living with LC.Patient and Public Involvement: A patient and public involvement group is engaged at regular intervals in the project.

Identity loss and (re)construction forms a central debate in sociology of chronic illness. Living with chronic/persistent health conditions may raise questions about how disruptions can touch upon and further threaten the very roots of existence, by which people reflexively perceive a coherent and stable sense of ‘being‐in‐the‐world’. Whilst medical sociologists have shown interest in ‘existential loss’ in chronic illness, this question remains largely underexplored. Adopting a qualitative study on Long COVID (LC) as an example, this article illuminates existential identity loss as a deeply painful experience of losing body as a fundamental medium to retain continuity and consistency of one’s narratively constructed identity. Interviews with 80 LC sufferers in the UK revealed that living with persistent and often uncertain symptoms and disruptions can cause the loss of biographical resources and resilience, making it difficult to reflexively understand their own being within the world. Their dynamic responses to LC also highlighted how sufferers’ longing for a narratively coherent self can profoundly shape the ongoing construction of their identity in chronic health conditions. These insights into the complicated and often hard‐to‐express existential pain of identity loss can also nurture more holistic understandings of and support for LC and chronic illness more broadly.

This study sought to explore qualitatively experiences of existential loneliness (EL) in 80 older people living in retirement communities across the United Kingdom and Australia. Qualitative semi-structured interviews permitted in-depth exploration of issues such as biographical narrative, close relationships, loss, feelings of loneliness and retirement living. It was our intention to conduct a large-scale, deep-listening exercise that would provide further clues about EL in older people and the circumstances that give rise to such feelings. Data provided rich insight into older people's inner lives. Core themes identified loss of close attachments, lack of physical touch and intimacy, deterioration of health and body, and lack of an emotional language through which to express EL as central to older people's experiences. Furthermore, there was a suggestion that the move to retirement living was for many people inextricably connected to their experience of EL. Our data further support and extend the notion that EL can be thought of as a gradual sense of separation from the world and that ageing intensifies a myriad of social, emotional and physical circumstances that prompt its emergence. This sense of existential isolation need not be thought of as exclusive to those experiencing extreme frailty or who face death imminently – our data pointed to a clear and gradual emergence of EL throughout later life.

Background: Increasing evidence has suggested that a person-centred approach (PCA) is beneficial not only for improving care outcomes but also for mitigating the pressure on public health systems. However, policy implementation gaps have prevented the translation of this complex framework into useful practical, ethical and moral stances for end-of-life care (EOLC). This article aims to explore the meaning and implications of person-centredness in EOLC policy discourses. Methods: By perceiving policy documents as a medium embodied with socio-political and cultural norms, we analysed how PCA in EOLC is constructed within specific socio-cultural contexts and the implications of these contexts on resultant care. Focusing on England and Japan, we conducted a critical policy analysis to examine and compare key policy and legal documents released between 2000 and 2019 in these two post-industrial and socio-culturally distinctive countries. Results: Our analysis found that the PCA is mobilised in policy discourses primarily through three interconnected dimensions: individual, relational and existential. While acknowledging that both countries have developed varied policy and legal mechanisms to emphasise holistic and integrated care with respect to these three dimensions, we also identified significant gaps in the pol icies both within and between England and Japan. They include ambiguity in defining patients’ best interests, fragmented support for social and family care and the neglect of existential needs. Conclusions: This cross-cultural analysis has revealed the complex nature of discourses around PCA in English and Japanese EOLC policies, which often concentrate on the multifaceted aspects of experiences as one approaches the end of life. Despite this, we argue that a more holistic construction of PCA is needed in EOLC policies not only in England and Japan but also more broadly, to encapsulate the richness of end-of-life experiences.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has presented significant challenges to the already over-stretched healthcare system in the United Kingdom (UK). These challenges are particularly pronounced for people living with the novel condition of Long COVID (LC) as they often face persistent and fluctuating symptoms, encountering prolonged uncertainty when seeking medical support. Despite a growing understanding of the healthcare challenges associated with LC, existing qualitative studies have predominantly focused on individual experiences rather than examining the structural aspects of healthcare. Methods: A longitudinal qualitative study with 80 participants and 12 healthcare practitioners was conducted in the UK to explore the healthcare experiences of those with LC. In total, 178 interviews (with attrition) were collected across two rounds, from November 2021 to March 2022, and from June to October 2022. Results: Embracing a person-centred framework that recognises and nurtures interconnected individual, relational, and existential needs, we investigated healthcare experiences related to LC across primary, secondary, and specialist integrated care. Using this perspective, we identified three overarching themes. Theme 1 addresses the persistent hurdle of accessing primary care as the initial point of contact for LC healthcare; Theme 2 underscores the complexity of navigating secondary care; and Theme 3 encapsulates the distinctive challenges of developing LC integrated care. These themes are interlinked, as people with LC often had to navigate or struggle between the various systems, with practitioners seeking to collaborate across the breadth of their professional responsibilities. Conclusion: From a person-centred approach, we were able to identify the needs of those affected by lasting LC symptoms and comprehend how health services intricately influence these needs. The focus on healthcare systems also captures the nuanced impact that continuing healthcare struggles can have on people’s identity. As such, our findings provide evidence to inform a more effective and sustainable delivery of person-centred care for people with LC across various healthcare settings and over time.