Opinion: New government must halt NDP changes to ‘lifeline’ of care for people with long COVID

On Sept. 24, two days after the provincial election was called, the Medical Services Commission signed off on changes that restrict virtual “group medical visits” to 30 patients, down from 50, effective Nov. 1. Patient advocates have noted that this change will reduce access to care for people with many chronic health conditions. It also directly contradicts the recommendations from our research with people with long COVID.

With a new provincial government set to take its seat in the legislature, an immediate task of the new minister of health should be to review and revise the proposed changes to ensure they do not restrict patient care.

Over the past four years, we have engaged with people with long COVID to better understand barriers to health care. An estimated 36 per cent of people worldwide develop long COVID after a COVID infection, and B.C. Centre for Disease Control data from 2022 identified over 327,000 people with long COVID in B.C. Our survey, conducted in 2025 with 621 people with long COVID across Canada, found that 60 per cent of B.C.-based respondents accessed group medical visits, with many noting this was the only form of care available to them.

Group medical visits provide information on treatment options, connect patients with specialists and allied health workers, and provide peer support. Yet, 47 per cent of all respondents in our survey reported waitlists prevented them from accessing virtual care. Planned changes to group medical visits will increase wait times.

Virtual care is often preferred by people with long COVID because it reduces the risk of “post-exertional malaise” — the delayed exacerbation of symptoms following activity — which can be triggered by travelling or sensory inputs. Staying home also reduces risk of reinfection with COVID or exposure to other infectious diseases, which can worsen long COVID symptoms. Eighty per cent of survey respondents said virtual care is as effective as in-person, 46 per cent said it reduces post-exertional malaise, 37 per cent said it reduces travel time, and 36 per cent said it reduces time around unmasked people.

Further, virtual care is a necessity for those based in rural and remote areas of B.C. People with long COVID who participated in our research described virtual care as “lifesaving,” “a lifeline,” “essential” and “vital.”

One finding from focus groups we conducted on virtual care was that when people with long COVID can’t access virtual or primary care, they end up in urgent and emergency care, where health-care providers are not only already overwhelmed, but ill-equipped to deal with complications related to chronic conditions like long COVID. We have now initiated research aiming to develop long COVID resources for emergency department and urgent care providers, but wouldn’t it be better if people with long COVID didn’t have to seek urgent and emergency care in the first place?