Patient experiences of remote consulting with chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis and fibromyalgia: a qualitative study

Abstract:

Background: Remote and digital consulting in primary care has rapidly expanded since March 2020. It is important to understand patient experiences, particularly for those living with complex long-term conditions, to identify how care can best be delivered, including within the remote space.

Aim: To explore the experiences of people living with chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) and fibromyalgia when consulting remotely in primary care.

Design & setting: Semi-structured interviews with patients living with CFS/ME and fibromyalgia in general practice in England.

Method: Semi-structured interviews were carried out with 13 participants. The interviews were transcribed and analysed thematically according to a Foucauldian theoretical framework.

Results: All participants highlighted needing to feel believed by clinicians. Many reported difficulties with telephone and online consulting owing to the lack of physical communication. Positive outcomes were reported when there was a good relationship with a clinician. Continuity in care and recognising the complexity of these conditions were also considered important.

Conclusion: This study allowed people living with CFS/ME and fibromyalgia to describe their experiences when consulting remotely. Participants highlighted needing to feel listened to and felt they benefited from an ongoing relationship with a clinician although this was difficult to achieve when consulting remotely. Some advantages of remote consulting were reported, particularly when symptoms were troublesome. Flexible access systems, with a range of consultation modalities or preferred clinician(s) availability, could improve healthcare encounters, particularly given the increased use of remote consulting in primary care.

Source: Leach H, Eccles A, Chew-Graham CA, Atherton H. Patient experiences of remote consulting with chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis and fibromyalgia: a qualitative study. BJGP Open. 2025 Apr 24;9(1):BJGPO.2024.0079. doi: 10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0079. PMID: 39191480; PMCID: PMC12137999. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12137999/ (Full text)

Reframing beliefs about their illness does not lead to recovery of tube-fed patients with very severe ME/CFS. Analysis of the BMJ article by Miller et al

Abstract:

The narrative which is presented by Miller et al. as new, has dominated the field of ME/CFS for the last 35 years. It has been tested by numerous studies and has been found to be ineffective and harmful, as concluded by for example NICE in 2021. Additionally, it does not lead to objective improvement and it has a negative instead of a positive effect on work and disability status.

What has happened over the last 35 years is that severely ill patients have been ridiculed, gaslit and ignored by the medical profession. These patients have lost hope in the part of the medical profession which has been instrumental in doing and promoting that. They have not lost hope to recover and they are all hoping to get effective pharmacological treatments sooner rather than later as changing their mindset does not lead to recovery. And if it does, then the diagnosis of ME/CFS was simply wrong.

Source: Vink, Mark and Vink-Niese, Friso, Reframing beliefs about their illness does not lead to recovery of tube-fed patients with very severe ME/CFS. Analysis of the BMJ article by Miller et al. (June 06, 2025). No., Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5284667 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5284667 (Full text available as PDF file)

Ignored, dismissed, and minimized: Understanding the harmful consequences of invalidation in health care-A systematic meta-synthesis of qualitative research

Abstract:

The upsurge in the prevalence of contested, ambiguous, and difficult-to-diagnose illnesses presents challenges for clinicians who too often respond by invalidating patients’ symptoms. Although numerous qualitative studies have reported the effects of invalidation on patients’ psychological and behavioral outcomes, this body of research has not been systematically reviewed. Informed by Linehan’s (1993) conceptualization of invalidation, this systematic review elucidated the negative consequences, of symptom invalidation, or the dismissal or minimization of a person’s experiences with illness.

We reviewed 151 qualitative reports representing 11,307 individuals with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, endometriosis, fibromyalgia syndrome, Gulf War syndrome, irritable bowel syndrome, long COVID, multiple chemical sensitivity, myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome, systemic lupus erythematosus, and vulvodynia.

Consistent with Linehan’s theorizing, thematic analysis identified four broad classes of consequences: induced emotional states and beliefs (e.g., shame, suicidality), induced health care emotional states and beliefs (e.g., health care-related anxiety and trauma), induced health care behavior (e.g., health care system avoidance), and diagnostic delay.

Informed by these findings, we developed a novel conceptual model explaining how symptom invalidation leads to these consequences and thereby undermines health outcomes. Future work should explore the proposed conceptual model and identify theoretically informed interventions and policies aimed at preventing symptom invalidation to improve psychological, behavioral, and health outcomes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

Source: Bontempo AC, Bontempo JM, Duberstein PR. Ignored, dismissed, and minimized: Understanding the harmful consequences of invalidation in health care-A systematic meta-synthesis of qualitative research. Psychol Bull. 2025 Apr;151(4):399-427. doi: 10.1037/bul0000473. PMID: 40310228. https://psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/2026-10154-001.html (Full text)

Awareness and Perception of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Among Pain Specialists: A Questionnaire-Based Study

Abstract:

Background: This study aims to explore the perceptions and clinical approaches of pain management specialists toward myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), a condition characterized by persistent fatigue, widespread pain, unrefreshing sleep, and autonomic dysfunction. Given the challenges in diagnosis and management, pain specialists may play a pivotal role in symptom relief. By identifying variations in evaluation and treatment practices, this study seeks to enhance the recognition of ME/CFS and improve its clinical management within pain medicine.

Material and methods: The questionnaire was distributed in printed form to 250 pain specialists in Turkey. Given the limited number of pain physicians in the country, the study aimed to encompass all actively practicing specialists. The survey included four demographic questions, eight true-false questions, 12 multiple-choice questions, and four rating-scale questions. Data were collected anonymously. Data were analyzed using Statistical Product and Service Solutions (SPSS, version 27.0; IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Armonk, NY), with descriptive statistics and chi-square (χ²) tests applied to examine the relationships between awareness levels and attitudinal variables.

Results: In Turkey, 106 pain medicine physicians (42.4%) participated in the study. The average age was 40.6±8.52 years. Among the participants, 39.6% had previously heard of myalgic encephalomyelitis. Physicians were inclined to first ask the question, “Do you think you get enough sleep at night?” when evaluating these patients, with a rate of 63.2%. The majority of participants (65.9%) stated that they “occasionally” or “rarely” considered the relationship between fatigue and orthostatic intolerance. Additionally, 37.7% believed that this disease is a subtype of depression. The statement, “chronic fatigue decreases with intense aerobic exercise,” was agreed upon by 50.9% of participants. This controversial statement was particularly more common among those who were unaware of ME/CFS’s alternative name (p=0.009) and those who did not take dysautonomic disorders into account (p=0.048). When considering an ME/CFS diagnosis, physicians most frequently referred patients to the physical medicine and rehabilitation department (32.1%). Those who preferred not to refer patients to any department (12.3%) tended to find it appropriate for a patient to seek consultation at a pain medicine clinic due to widespread body pain and fatigue (χ2=11.405, p=0.044).

Conclusion: This study is the first questionnaire-based research assessing pain physicians’ awareness and attitudes toward ME/CFS. By highlighting their perspectives on its evaluation and management, our findings may improve recognition and clinical approaches to ME/CFS. Future research should focus on education and standardized guidelines to enhance patient care.

Source: Uygun GG, Gözükızıl ST, Bilen A. Awareness and Perception of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Among Pain Specialists: A Questionnaire-Based Study. Cureus. 2025 Mar 23;17(3):e81030. doi: 10.7759/cureus.81030. PMID: 40264626; PMCID: PMC12013460. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12013460/ (Full text)

Pediatric Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS): A Diagnostic and Communication Case Study for Health Care Providers in Training

Abstract:

Introduction: Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) is a chronic, complex illness. No diagnostic tests exist; illness evaluation relies on medical history, physical exam, and laboratory tests. While more is known about ME/CFS in adults, it can affect children and adolescents as a chronic condition.

Methods: We implemented an ME/CFS pediatric educational activity (diagnosis, management, and communication) with medical, physician assistant, and nursing students at one university and with medical students at a second university. Pretests, two videos and slides, and posttests were completed in approximately 40 minutes. Evaluation included quantitative and qualitative measures for knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, confidence, and clinical information about ME/CFS.

Results: The first group included 31 students who reported low familiarity and clinical exposure to ME/CFS. At posttest, 25 students (81%) recognized ME/CFS as a medical condition compared to seven (23%) at pretest. Using 0-5 scales, mean pretest-to-posttest ability to diagnose increased from 1.0 to 3.5, and confidence to communicate increased from 1.4 to 3.9. The second group, including 26 students pretest and 19 posttest, also reported low familiarity and clinical exposure The posttest showed increased self-rated ability to diagnose (pretest M: 0.6, posttest M: 3.3) and confidence to communicate (pretest M: 1.4, posttest M: 3.7). Qualitative feedback for this group showed understanding of pediatric ME/CFS symptoms, management, and communication.

Discussion: This educational activity increased knowledge of ME/CFS as self-reported ability to make a diagnosis and increased confidence to communicate about pediatric ME/CFS. Participating students showed changes in attitudes towards ME/CFS as a medical condition.

Source: Brimmer DJ, Lin JS, Selinger HA, Issa A, Fall EA, Unger ER. Pediatric Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS): A Diagnostic and Communication Case Study for Health Care Providers in Training. MedEdPORTAL. 2025 Mar 14;21:11507. doi: 10.15766/mep_2374-8265.11507. PMID: 40092054; PMCID: PMC11906784. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11906784/ (Full text)

Medical students highlight the importance of medical education, kindness, compassion and belief when learning about patients with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract:

‘Imagine my surprise to discover ME/CFS is definitely not rare, but inexplicably and infuriatingly unacknowledged’. Fifth year medical student, Scotland.
Earlier this year, medical students at Scottish medical schools were invited to take part in an essay competition, 500 words on the topic of ‘What is your most important learning point about myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS)?’ This edition proudly features the first prize winning essay of the competition which was funded by the Scottish Government’s education project; Learn About ME.1
ME/CFS affects at least 280,000 people in the UK, including approximately 23,000 in Scotland. It is a neurological disease with multisystem symptoms, often triggered by a virus. People with ME/CFS may be left bedbound or housebound with a significantly reduced quality of life.2 Yet many healthcare professionals do not know how to diagnose or manage this devastating disease, nor do they know how, or what, to teach our next generation of doctors.3
People with ME/CFS, and a subset of those with long COVID, experience symptoms including post-exertional malaise (PEM), unrefreshing sleep, profound fatigue, brain fog and orthostatic intolerance.4
Patients can also present with sore throats, muscle aches, disrupted sleep, changes in bowel habit, joint and bone pain, problems with multitasking and short-term memory, word-finding difficulties, headaches, changes in smell and taste, tinnitus, disrupted menses, breathlessness, dizziness, skin rashes and hair loss.4
Research into underlying mechanisms has revealed key defects: an abnormal response to repeat exercise, gait and strength abnormalities, immune system dysfunction, neuroinflammation, altered blood cell morphology and clotting, problems with cellular-energy delivery, microbial gut dysbiosis and changes in metabolomics.5
The lack of medical education on this topic and resulting weak clinical knowledge of ME/CFS has resulted in delays to diagnosis, multiple clinic referrals and a huge cost to every taxpayer. ME/CFS costs the UK an estimated £3.3 billion a year6 and long COVID clinics cost millions, with funding being extended for this chronic condition. Yet Scottish services are struggling to find healthcare practitioners to deliver this care or worse, offering potentially harmful patient support workshops that are directly in conflict with the NICE (NG206) 2021 ME/CFS guidelines such as the highly criticised ‘Lightning Process’.7 Medical education on ME/CFS and post-acute infectious disease is urgently needed for earlier recognition and better management.
One student described the experience and delay in diagnosis for two of their family members: ‘. . .these young women were discarded as victims of teenage laziness or anxiety. They had to fight to gain support from their GP (General Practitioner) and their diagnosis took several second opinions and ultimately years’.
Outdated treatment using graded exercise, shown to harm ME/CFS patients, has been rebranded as ‘activity management’ in some services and offered to both ME/CFS and long COVID patients. Another medical student displayed incredible insight in recognising the deficiency of the current system, which relies largely on patient self-help: ‘the burden being placed on the patient to improve their condition through mental work’.
The key feature of ME/CFS is PEM. The most important thing to learn about PEM is that even trivial activity (whether physical, mental or emotional) can exacerbate symptoms, and that this exacerbation or flare can be delayed. A person with ME/CFS who can sit upright for five minutes on a given day could be too ill to sit up at all the next day due to PEM.8
A traditional rehabilitation programme led by a physiotherapist might include graded activity or exercise. For a non-ME/CFS person following a sports injury, orthopaedic surgery or intensive care, gently increasing activity for just a few minutes, or a few steps at a time is ideal. However, for ME/CFS patients, this approach could be incredibly harmful. People with ME/CFS need to conserve their energy and pace themselves to avoid a flare in symptoms.4
People who are only mildly affected still experience a major negative impact on their ability to work. They have very little energy for socialising, hobbies and housework. For those moderately affected, basic activities of normal daily living such as preparing food, washing and dressing can cause symptom exacerbation. Very severely affected individuals, who are often bedbound, can experience PEM from simply turning in bed, speaking and digesting food.9
ME/CFS also has a major impact on family members’ quality of life.2 Nearly a third of medical students responding commented on the impact on quality of life as being one of the most important things to learn about this disease.
Several students wrote about a family member, or friend, whom they knew with ME/CFS. Sadly, it was a recurring theme that the medical students explained they had not been taught about ME/CFS at medical school. One commented: ‘Alas, the only time in the last four years I have encountered the term ME/CFS at medical school was as a differential diagnosis for fibromyalgia’.
It is vital that this topic features more prominently in the medical curriculum, and in our medical textbooks, to avoid patient harm due to delayed or mis-diagnosis and mismanagement. There is a lot we can offer ME/CFS patients: an early and accurate diagnosis, medication for symptom control, practical support with disability applications and mobility aids, but above all, these medical students have reminded us that ME/CFS patients should be treated with kindness, compassion and belief.10
Source: Muirhead NL. Medical students highlight the importance of medical education, kindness, compassion and belief when learning about patients with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome. J R Coll Physicians Edinb. 2024 May 27:14782715241255977. doi: 10.1177/14782715241255977. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 38798174. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14782715241255977 (Full text)

‘You don’t want to get better’: the outdated treatment of ME/CFS patients is a national scandal

By George Monbiot

It’s the greatest medical scandal of the 21st century. For decades, patients with ME/CFS (myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome) have been told they can make themselves better by changing their attitudes. This devastating condition, which afflicts about 250,000 people in the UK, was psychologised by many doctors and scientists, adding to the burden of a terrible physiological illness.

Long after this approach was debunked in scientific literature, clinicians who championed it have refused to let go. They continue to influence healthcare systems, governments and health insurers. And patients still suffer as a result.

Read the full article in The Guardian HERE.

What is the impact of long-term COVID-19 on workers in healthcare settings? A rapid systematic review of current evidence

Abstract:

Background: Long COVID is a devastating, long-term, debilitating illness which disproportionately affects healthcare workers, due to the nature of their work. There is currently limited evidence specific to healthcare workers about the experience of living with Long COVID, or its prevalence, pattern of recovery or impact on healthcare.

Objective: Our objective was to assess the effects of Long COVID among healthcare workers and its impact on health status, working lives, personal circumstances, and use of health service resources.

Methods: We conducted a systematic rapid review according to current methodological standards and reported it in adherence to the PRISMA 2020 and ENTREQ statements.

Results: We searched relevant electronic databases and identified 3770 articles of which two studies providing qualitative evidence and 28 survey studies providing quantitative evidence were eligible. Thematic analysis of the two qualitative studies identified five themes: uncertainty about symptoms, difficulty accessing services, importance of being listened to and supported, patient versus professional identity and suggestions to improve communication and services for people with Long COVID. Common long-term symptoms in the survey studies included fatigue, headache, loss of taste and/or smell, breathlessness, dyspnoea, difficulty concentrating, depression and anxiety.

Conclusion: Healthcare workers struggled with their dual identity (patient/doctor) and felt dismissed or not taken seriously by their doctors. Our findings are in line with those in the literature showing that there are barriers to healthcare professionals accessing healthcare and highlighting the challenges of receiving care due to their professional role. A more representative approach in Long COVID research is needed to reflect the diverse nature of healthcare staff and their occupations. This rapid review was conducted using robust methods with the codicil that the pace of research into Long COVID may mean relevant evidence was not identified.

Source: Cruickshank M, Brazzelli M, Manson P, Torrance N, Grant A. What is the impact of long-term COVID-19 on workers in healthcare settings? A rapid systematic review of current evidence. PLoS One. 2024 Mar 5;19(3):e0299743. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0299743. PMID: 38442116; PMCID: PMC10914278. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10914278/ (Full text)

Patient Experiences Navigating Care Coordination For Long COVID: A Qualitative Study

Abstract:

Background: Little is known about how to best evaluate, diagnose, and treat long COVID, which presents challenges for patients as they seek care.

Objective: Understand experiences of patients as they navigate care for long COVID.

Design: Qualitative study involving interviews with patients about topics related to seeking and receiving care for long COVID.

Participants: Eligible patients were at least 18 years of age, spoke English, self-identified as functioning well prior to COVID infection, and reported long COVID symptoms continued to impact their lives at 3 months or more after a COVID infection.

Approach: Patients were recruited from a post-COVID recovery clinic at an academic medical center from August to September 2022. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis.

Key results: Participants (n=21) reported experiences related to elements of care coordination: access to care, evaluation, treatment, and ongoing care concerns. Some patients noted access to care was facilitated by having providers that listened to and validated their symptoms; other patients reported feeling their access to care was hindered by providers who did not believe or understand their symptoms. Patients reported confusion around how to communicate their symptoms when being evaluated for long COVID, and they expressed frustration with receiving test results that were normal or diagnoses that were not directly attributed to long COVID. Patients acknowledged that clinicians are still learning how to treat long COVID, and they voiced appreciation for providers who are willing to try new treatment approaches. Patients expressed ongoing care concerns, including feeling there is nothing more that can be done, and questioned long-term impacts on their aging and life expectancy.

Conclusions: Our findings shed light on challenges faced by patients with long COVID as they seek care. Healthcare systems and providers should consider these challenges when developing strategies to improve care coordination for patients with long COVID.

Source: MacEwan SR, Rahurkar S, Tarver WL, Forward C, Eramo JL, Teuschler L, Gaughan AA, Rush LJ, Stanwick S, McConnell E, Schamess A, McAlearney AS. Patient Experiences Navigating Care Coordination For Long COVID: A Qualitative Study. J Gen Intern Med. 2024 Feb 2. doi: 10.1007/s11606-024-08622-z. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 38308155. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-024-08622-z (Full text)

“None of us are lying”: an interpretive description of the search for legitimacy and the journey to access quality health services by individuals living with Long COVI

Abstract:

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.

Source: Brehon K, Miciak M, Hung P, Chen SP, Perreault K, Hudon A, Wieler M, Hunter S, Hoddinott L, Hall M, Churchill K, Brown DA, Brown CA, Bostick G, Skolnik K, Lam G, Weatherald J, Gross DP. “None of us are lying”: an interpretive description of the search for legitimacy and the journey to access quality health services by individuals living with Long COVID. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 Dec 12;23(1):1396. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-10288-y. PMID: 38087299; PMCID: PMC10714615. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10714615/ (Full text)